Why has Jeremy failed to get released on a technicality ?

[Adam]

My last two threads have come up with some interesting conclusions.

Jeremy certainly did not plan to phone the police. Ideally Neville, June, Daniel & Nicholas would have been shot & killed while asleep. Sheila woken up & got out of bed, before being shot & killed with one bullet. Having to fire so many bullets & a 6.4 farmer getting downstairs was certainly not part of the plan. Jeremy improvised, moving the phones & then phoning the police. The chaos inside would support his claim of a rampaging Sheila having a major psychotic episode.

Jeremys phone call to the police was very damaging to him. But something he did not have time to consider on the night.  Jeremy & his OS have never said what Sheila could have been doing when Neville phoned him. Even his most loyal supporters recently refused point blank to answer this simple question. Or gave totally implausible explanations. The most popular answer being that Sheila was charging around outside with a shot gun. Neville calmed her down so well, he allowed Sheila to sit at the kitchen table with a rifle. With Sheila calm, Neville bizarrely then deciding to make his 'crazy' call to Jeremy before Sheila overpowers a fully fit Neville to get upstairs.

Hopefully this thread will explain why Jeremy got convicted and has failed to get released on a technicality. He had the best defence available at trial,  with David Napley at the helm. Jeremy has been appealing constantly since conviction 29 years ago. He claims the police are still holding important documents although he has apparently millions of documents in his cell. Lawyers are constantly working with him, together with his own blog & a small amount of supporters assisting him on his Official Site. However three appeals have failed.

According to Jeremys supporters, lots of key witnesses changed their statements, lied under oath, falseified documents, changed their minds or were simply unreliable people, criminals,  jilted former lovers or interested in financial gain.  All looking to frame Jeremy.  The Official site has the police & raid team lying from the start, saying that only one person was in the kitchen, when there were two. The silencer went around the houses, getting contaminated, although not sure how the police or relatives could get Sheila's, June's & Nevilles blood inside.

So after 29 years, why has Jeremy failed to get released on a technicality ?

[Roch]

Well Jeremy Bamber is hardly likely to retain bloodied exhibits for the purpose of contaminating a silencer. Nor is he likely to use bloodied deposits at the scene, for the same purpose.

[susan]

Adam a small amount of supporters you got that wrong.  The rest of your post makes no sense at all and I could not even make the slightest effort to respond to any of the nonsense you have posted.  Your scenario's don't even make sense.  As I have said manytimes you are on this forum to discredit Jeremy Bamber and any one associated with him including this forum.  Fortunately nobody takes any notice of you so you are wasting your time.  Take up another hobby like hill walking or Morris Dancing

[Jane]

I very much doubt that any conclusions we may have arrived at will tally with yours.

There seems little point in trawling through and answering your over simplified and juvenile post in order to provide you with the opportunity of calling it implausible.

With an A level under your belt and the possibility of only just being old enough to vote and drive, you may take the view that anyone would want freedom at all/ANY cost. Release on a technicality ISN'T granting FREEDOM and an innocent person would still have the guilty verdict hanging over them. It doesn't mean there won't have been times when Jeremy wouldn't have cared and given ANYTHING to get out.

As for those persons who resorted to duplicity, I'm certain you know, from your own frequent employment of it, how difficult it is to prove, and the more time that passes, the more difficult it becomes. HOW does one prove something was/wasn't said? HOW does one prove another's feelings? The failure, on the part of Jeremy's defence, to ask the next, OBVIOUS question, did little, IMO, to help Jeremy and if what they gave him was the best they could offer, I would have hated to be on the receiving end of their worst, but at the end of the day, for them, it was just another job and a case of some you win, some you looses.

[grahameb]

Why has Jeremy failed to get released on a technicality? Probably because he is only relying on the truth to come out as to why he's in prison in the first place?

[lookout]

As Grahame said,,Jeremy won't accept being released on a technicality.He is the type who is determined to get to the truth if it means staying where he is. He's doing the right thing to see this MOJ through.

[Adam]

Wasn't his first appeal based on the judges unfair summing up ?

That sounds like a technicality to me.

[susan]

lookout I think Jeremy Bamber should accept release then prove his innocence or just get on with his life

[Adam]

lookout I think Jeremy Bamber should accept release then prove his innocence or just get on with his life

That is what he has been trying to do for 29 years.

He was disinherited upon conviction. Would he inherit again if released on a technicality ? If so he would have the finances to continue with his campaign. Continuing this on the outside will be much easier than in prison.

[susan]

Wow Adam we agree 

[lookout]

lookout I think Jeremy Bamber should accept release then prove his innocence or just get on with his life

Susan,,I'm not sure that the law allows any continuation of a case once released on a technicality.We'll have to have ngb to explain this one.

[Adam]

Susan,,I'm not sure that the law allows any continuation of a case once released on a technicality.We'll have to have ngb to explain this one.

That is a bit unfair isn't it ?

Once released you are a free man. It is up to that person what they do.

[Adam]

Jeremy will certainly accept getting released on a technicality & has been trying for 29 years.

If he is innocent, & even if he isn't, why has he failed ? Most people on this forum say it was a corupt case.

[grahameb]

That is a bit unfair isn't it ?

Once released you are a free man. It is up to that person what they do.

Well apparently the prosecution can find new evidence that proves that he did the crime and appeal for a retrial. That is where the modern laws have superceeded the Magna Carta which stated that a man cannot be tried for the same crime twice.

[grahameb]

Jeremy will certainly accept getting released on a technicality & has been trying for 29 years.

If he is innocent, & even if he isn't, why has he failed ? Most people on this forum say it was a corupt case.

To be fair that could be applied to any moj. Just ask the Birmingham six and see how many years it took to clear them and to acknowledge that police corruption that sent them to prison in the first place. It is an interesting case and in some ways mirrors JB's case. I personally would like to see police corruption exposed in every moj and it appears that police corruption is always a factor in every moj.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Six