What REALLY Convinces You That Jeremy Is Innocent/Guilty?

[grahameb]

How Lookouts mind works, I do not know, but I attach no significance to the word used and have no knowledge whether it was usually, occasionally or never used to refer to a firearm.

Do you know how the family these days refer to their firearms Hartley?

[No-Bits]

Do you know how the family these days refer to their firearms Hartley?

People go on gun shoots.

[grahameb]

People go on gun shoots.

Hmm. Probably referring to shotguns I should think?

[No-Bits]

Hmm. Probably referring to shotguns I should think?

No idea, you get gun shops, gunsmiths, gun boots, gun dogs and a Gunga Din. 

I don't think the use of the word 'gun' is particularly unusual. 

[lookout]

 Hark at Harters with his Gunga Din.

 Would " armoury " be the collective word ?

[No-Bits]

Hark at Harters with his Gunga Din.

 Would " armoury " be the collective word ?

Not for a gun dog surely?   

[Adam]

Here is what convinces me that Jeremy is guilty.

1) Julie Mugford says that Jeremy had contemplated killing his family for some time. She said that he told her the very evening before the murders that tonight is the night and followed up with other phone calls to keep her in the loop of the progress he was making. Relatedly Ann Eaton said Jeremy told her that soon her would be co-owner of the cravan site with her and would run things differently than Nevill.

2) Evidence exists that corroborates Julie's claims.  For one thing Jeremy did in fact phone her that evening before the murders, he also phoned her 2 times over the course of the morning of the murders.  The phone call not only woke her up but all of her roomates.  In fact one of her roomates answered.  One rooomate thinks the call came around 3:15AM but when pressed said it could have been as late as 3:30 she was the least sure of the bunch.  The other 3 placed the call around 3AM including one adamant about looking at the clock so their time is more credible considering these 3 basically agree.

A) What valid reason could he have for phoning her at 3AM thereby waking her up? Jeremy called her before he called the police.  If he was truly concerned about his family why would he phone her instead of doing the 3 minute drive to check things out or to call police?  Calling her instead of going and before calling police demonstrates a lack of concern on his part. At the time he made this call he insists he didn't know what was going on at WHF.  He insists his father called him saying Shiela was in a rage and got hold of a gun come quick to help disarm her then the phone went dead. He supposedly woke Julie up to tell her guess what my dad woke me up saying Shiela is running around the house with a gun. What would someone in Julie's position ask next?  She would ask what happened. He would have to respond I don't know I didn't go to investigate so have no idea what happened. Why would he wake her up to tell her he had no idea what happened?  The normal thing to do is to wait until he knows what happened if anything before calling her and if he still didn't know once it was a decent hour maybe then at that point to call to indicate what was going on and how he was waiting to find out. His tale that he called to tell her about the call but had no idea what if anything happened makes no sense.   

B) Before police entered and found the bodies jeremy phoned Julie a second time, at 6AM.  He told her not to go to work because police would need to speak with her about the tragedy.  Police had not yet discovered the bodies so how could he know they were dead and thus that Julie would be needed for questioning?  Moreover, since they still had not found out anything why would he call her again?  The natural thing to do would be to call when he found out what happened not to again wake everyone to say he knew nothing yet.   This is more corroboration that Julie's story is true.  His account makes no sense. He also was caught lying about this.  He denied telling Julie not to go to work and to wait for him or police to pick her up.  How would she know to stay home and wait for police to pick her up unless he did in fact tell her such?  She would have gone to work otherwise.  The fact she didn't go ot work and waited for police to get her (which they did) is evidence her account is true and he was lying.

Calling Julie period makes no sense.  The only reason he would call her is to tell her that he killed his family because he was so excited and needed to share his joy with someone.  That is exactly why she says he called her. The second time was not only to share his excitement but also to get Julie to help him in his charade blaming Sheila.  Her claims make sense and are supported by evidence. His claims make no sense and clearly he lied about various aspects.

C) If Julie were going to make up lies to implicate Jeremy then she would have made up the lie he told her he shot them.  The story she told is not what a scorned woman framing her boyfriend would say but rather comports with her boyfriend admitting part of the truth to her but blaming it on someone he hired because he didn’t want her to know how cold blooded he truly is.  Moreover, if she were going to makeup the hitman story why name someone who would be able to prove his innocence?  At minimum you don't name the hitman so police can't rule the claim out.

3) Jeremy called Julie before calling police. Calling her period is highly suspicious but it is even worse that he called her before the police.  That demonstrates no concern at all for his family.  Many things he did demonstrate a complete lack of concern for his family.

A) Calling Julie first

B) Waiting quite a while after getting off the phone with Julie to call police

C) Instead of calling 999 he wasted time to looking up the numbers of police stations.  He gave inconsistent accounts of why he didn't dial 999.   He said that he was not sure anything was really wrong so didn't know if it was an emergency.  Yet he contradicted this claim when he stated he was scared Nevill was trying to sucker him there so Sheila would kill him too. Why would Nevill do that? How could he even know they were being killed? He is giving away that he knew they were dead before he called the police. If he was that worried then he should have called 999.

Moreover, even if he was suspicious that he was being set up he could have safely spied from outside the house. He could have driven there in 3 minutes, investigated whether something was actually wrong and if so could have gone back home to call police.  Had he done so he still could have dialed 999 sooner than he actually did.  In a matter of 15 minutes he could have driven there and back, spent 6 minutes to investigate and still would have 3 minutes left to call police upon arriving home.  That still would have been faster than him calling at 3:26.  We have no idea what he was doing as he was wasting time between calling Julie and police.  Moreover, why would he be so scared of Sheila when he never saw Sheila touch a gun and she probably didn't even know how to use one?

D) Not going to investigate at all either before or after the phone calls despite living 3 minutes away and instead making police go there before he would go. Being too scared to go spy from the outside before police arrived makes no sense. The police were unarmed and were could not defend him if someone came out to attack.  He had no problem hanging around outside for hours with them anyway without fear of being ambushed.  Quite clearly he could have safely spied without them.  It is obvious he wanted police to be aware he wasn't there until after them.  Why was he so anxious for police to see him arrive?  The only reason that makes any sense is he didn't want them to know he had anything to do with the murders. He didn't want police to say well he was on the scene when we arrived so that they could say maybe he had entered before police arrived and had some part in what occurred. There is no rational reason whatsoever for him not parking near WHF where he ultimately parked and not waiting there for police but instead waiting on the side of the road for the cops to pass him and then proceeding to WHF.  This is a major red flag.   

E) He waited with police for close to 4 hours outside the house. He didn't suggest police go inside to try to save his family. He didn't tell them he would go in if they didn't.  He never showed any concern for his family at all during this wait.     

F) In fact he helped engineer the wait. There was a spare key hidden on the property which police could have used to sneak inside.  Jeremy never mentioned this key because he didn't want police to enter right away. The longer the passage of time the more difficult to establish the times of death. Moreover, revealing the key would reveal he could have snuck in and out.  Instead he didn't tell them about the key so they would have to break in. The noise from breaking in would alert an armed person to their presence thus risking their health because they would not have the element of surprise.  He also lied suggesting he saw someone walking around at the window where Sheila's body was found.  That also gave them reason to pause but also reason to think it was Sheila he saw and that she died last so obviously was the killer and not Jeremy.  Either her body was intentionally shot near the window for him to make such claim or he simply made it up on the spot because he knew that is where her body was. 

G)Much more significantly though, Jeremy lied to police about Sheila firing every gun in the house and being proficient with them all. There is no doubt this claim was a lie, he later admitted he never saw her touch a weapon as an adult. This lie was to make police fear going inside and also so they would believe she had the technical ability to carry out the murders. Why would he have lied like this if he had no been the killer?  He also later lied by claiming Sheila had gone shooting with Nevill and his cousin.  The cousin denied ever going shooting with her.  Eventually Jeremy ended up admitting he never knew her to touch a gun as an adult. These lies are major red flags.

4) The killer unplugged and hid the kitchen phone and plugged the bedroom phone in the kitchen so that the victims would not be able to use the phone to ID the killer before dying. If Sheila intended to commit murder suicide then she would have no need to plan such in advance. Particularly if she did so in a rage and had not planned anything as is claimed. Such a move is indicative of planning in advance by a killer who intended to escape liability not commit suicide. It thus is what Jeremy would have done if he committed the murders.

5) Nevill was wounded before he reached the kitchen and such wounds according to the pathologist would have prevented Nevill from speaking.  Thus he would have been unable to make the call Jeremy claims he made.  If Nevill had reached the phone and dialed he would have gotten blood on the phone and Jeremy would not have been able to understand him because his lip had been shot off, voicebox had been severed and his jaw shattered.

6) If by some miracle he could have spoken clearly why would he call Jeremy instead of 999?  His wife was shot and dying and he was shot.  They needed medical attention.  Why would he call Jeremy?   Aside from the fact that the evidence proves he was shot before reaching the kitchen and being anywhere near the phone, if he hadn't yet been shot then why would he call Jeremy to disarm Sheila?  Nevill was much larger than Sheila, he could have done anything Jeremy could have.  Only Nevill was there to disarm her whereas Jeremy might not have even answered the phone.  The pohone was downstairs in his house so he had to hope Jeremy woudl wake up and still wait long enough for Jeremy to wake up then reach the phone.  Then Jeremy would need to dress and drive there and figure out  away in the locked house.  So he chose to risk being shot while he was on the phone to call someone who might not answer who might arrive 15 minutes later instead of trying to disarm her himself and doesn't even ask for an ambulance to be sent of mention being shot? 

Moreover, she didn't get along with Jeremy that well while she did get along with her father. So the person most likely able to calm her down would be Nevill.  Calling Jeremy makes no sense whether he had been wounded yet or not. But the evidence establishes he was wounded before reaching the kitchen and never reached the phone at all. Since the call is made up that means Jeremy had to be the killer because otherwise he would not have been aware of a problem he would have been sleeping peacefully instead of alerting police.     

7)More evidence the call was a lie is that the phone was left off the hook.  He claimed the phone went dead which means someone at WHF had to hang the phone up abruptly.  But a telephone agent testified at trial that a call was placed to Jeremy's and that after it was answered it was hung up at Goldhanger and that cleared the line on his end but the phone at WHF was never hung up and remained off the hook from the time the call was made until police hung it up.  The line was never hung up at WHF so never cleared on that end. Thus it had not been hung up like he claimed.  The click he claimed he heard at it was hung up is impossible and another lie.  He had to leave the phone off the hook in order to pick up the phone at his place.  He dialed, left the phone off the hook so it kept ringing at his place and eventually answered.  Because no one was alive at WHF to hang it up so it remained off the hook. He hung it up on his end and after 1-2 minutes his line cleared and he was able to dial out.  After he hung up he probably changed his clothes or washed up and in the intervening period his line cleared and he had no idea his line would have needed 1-2 minutes to clear before he could have used it to dial out.  So he had no idea his claim he immediately dialed would have been impossible. 

He changed his account about this too. Once it was pointed out that the phone had not been hung up he changed to claiming he heard struggling so hung up and immediately called police.  Again though he couldn't immediately call police, he would have to have waited for the line to clear.  Moreover he didn't call for quite some time as discussed above.  Worse yet if he heard the struggle why didn't he say that all along?  He had no reason for these lies unless he was the killer.

The suppressor had Sheila's blood type inside. This means the suppressor was used to shoot her.  She would not have been able to reach the trigger to shoot herself with the suppressor attached nor after she was dead could she remove the suppressor and place it in the closet.  That proves she can't have killed herself.  The pathologist testified that her fatal wound was of  a nature it would almost certainly produce back spatter.  There was none in the rifle but was in the suppressor so obviously it had been used to deliver that fatal shot.

There were not merely blood chips inside that could have been planted or accidentally transferred.  The blood actually soaked onto the baffles and dried.  The prosecution removed all visible chips and yet the defense found Sheila’s blood type on the first 8 baffles. Microscopic traces remained and they were substantial enough to be tested successfully by the defense.  This proves the blood was deposited while wet and was sprayed there thus consistent with back spatter. It wasn't dripped it was a stream of blood that had exhibited a spray pattern.  There is no way for blood to accidentally spray inside the only way for it to get inside in the manner observed by the defense would be if someone looked up Sheila's blood type, secured wet blood and found a device such as an atomizer that would spray the blood inside.  Not spray it in every direction like perfume though something with more of a stream though with enough spray to hit 8 baffles instead of stopping at 1 or 2.  Perhaps there are sprayers that can mimic such but what is the chance that someone actually went through the effort and figured out how to do it?  Someone planting blood would probably take dry blood and tossing it inside or maybe taking a dropper and making some drip inside.  Is there any evidence someone actually planted it by spraying it inside?  No, none.  Is there a reasonable likelihood that all the other evidence such as Nevill being unable to speak and all Jeremy's lies were flukes and that someone actually planted the blood?  Not in my eyes.  Being a reasonable, logical person I don't buy that someone involved in the case knew exactly how to plant the blood with a spray tool so no one would be able to prove it had been planted.

9) In addition the paint on the suppressor had to be planted for him to be innocent.  Some had to take the suppressor, scrape it against the mantle and hope that police would be able to figure out that is where the paint came from and hope they would be able to prove the paint matched conclusively.  Moreover why would they bother if they planted blood already?

10) Jeremy's claims about leaving the rifle out make no sense either.  According to witnesses he didn’t use the rifle much if ever, he didn’t like to kill animals or hunt.  He seemed to agree with this initially.  He said he had not used it the week before the murders.  He changed his story though once the last living person known to have used it stated the gun was put away with the suppressor still on it and that is also how he found it in the closet and that is the usual way it is stored.  (Recall Jeremy also lied about it not fitting in the closet with the suppressor on)  To try to refute the claim Jeremy changed his story and said he used it multiple times the week prior to the murders and that sometimes it had the suppressor attached when he took it from the closet and other times it didn’t.  He claimed it was used with and without the suppressor.  His claims make no sense though.  It makes no sense to remove the sights and suppressor and use the gun to shoot animals without such accessories.  Thus his first story and that of his cousin seem to be the truth while his revisionist accounts are lies that make no sense.  He made up a tale of seeing rabbits while it was dark out and attempting to shoot them without the suppressor though they react fast to the sound of a shot and you would want to use the suppressor.   It was supposedly after dinner as they sat in the kitchen that he supposedly saw them by the barn, doe she have hawk vision?  Why did he make up this tale about getting the gun out and leaving it and the ammunition out?  Well he wanted everyone to believe that Sheila went crazy and the weapon just happened to be in front of her as she went crazy.  His frame was not that she preplanned things but that she went crazy. So in his mind she would be unlikely to go seek out the gun so he made up the tale of it being left under her nose.  In support of his frame after the murders he took a box of ammo and left it in the kitchen.  He claimed he placed this box there along with the weapon and that the box was still where he left it.  He said this is the ammo she used because it had been full or only missing a couple of rounds but now was only half full. He thus suggested she ran back to the kitchen to keep reloading.  Why?  Because Sheila had no pockets to carry extra ammo.  If she had moved the box she would not have placed it back in the same spot later so obviously she supposedly didn’t move it. He didn’t bother to count the rounds. There were 30 in the box so only 20 missing.  Even if the box had been full there should only be 25 rounds left. The killer can’t have just used this box but had to get at least some ammo from the ammo carrier in the closet.  Why would the killer use 20 rounds from the box in the kitchen and take 5 rounds from the ammo carrier in the closet?  That makes no sense. If the killer saw the ammo carrier it would be worn and the killer would then not need to keep running to the kitchen to reload.  Taking 5 rounds only from it instead of wearing the bandolier makes no sense at all.  The killer obviously used the ammo carrier and suppressor then put both side by side in a box in the closet after the murders.  The tale about the rabbits was to pretend the gun and ammo had been left out when it had not been and also to pretend the gun didn’t have the suppressor attached during the murders.  The only reason to need a cover story is because Jeremy was guilty. Only a guilty person needs to frame someone to avoid liability.         
 
On top of all Jeremy’s lies and the other evidence pointing to his guilt, there is a complete lack of evidence that Sheila fired a weapon, knew how to load, unload and fire the murder weapon, or would have done so. 

It always makes me laugh when people claim there is no evidence against Jeremy but is against Sheila.  What evidence is there against Sheila?  She had no GSR on her hands or clothes.  No one had seen her ever handle let alone fire a weapon.  The only person to claim she fired a weapon was Jeremy and he claimed it was when she was a child, even he said she hadn’t done so as an adult. (Thus he lied when he told police waiting outside WHF hat she fired all the weapons in the house and was proficient with them)  The killer would have wounds of some sort from the rifle stock breaking as the killer was wielding it and would have some kind of abrasions from delivering blows that broke Nevill’s nose.  The killer would likely have Nevill’s blood from beating Nevill severely.  The only blood on her body was her own and she had no wounds of any kind.  She even had bare feet and yet no blood or cuts from the kitchen floor that had blood and broken glass. 

What evidence is there against her?  None at all.  IN contrast there is evidence against Jeremy.

Her mental illness was managed and she had no signs of relapsing.  Her past relapses were because she stoppe dhe rmedication or was taking drugs.  This time she was getting injected so could not skip her medicaiton and it was extremely strong medication. There is nothign to indicate why she would wake up at 3Am and be set off and attakc anyone in their beds. 

For her to be guilty her medicine had to stop working suddenly, she had to have planned in advance that she would kill them and therefore hid the phone, hoped to find a way to get away with the crime and not go to jail so removed the bedroom phone, she had to be pretending to be docile but was really waiting to explode.  She pretended to go to sleep but stayed awake as they slept.  Around 3AM she figured they would be asleep so went and got the rifle from where Jeremy claims to have left it.  She then got the suppressor, attached it to the gun, took 5-8 bullets from the ammo carrier and placed them in the kitchen in the box of ammo and then went up to the master bedroom to kill her parents.  June was disabled but Nevill was not, he managed to flee to the kitchen.  Despite his jaw being shattered and voicebox a miracle enabled him to speak and another miracle prevented his blood from dripping onto the phone.  Instead of calling for medical help so their wounds could be treated he calls Jeremy, doesn’t tell them they need medical treatment and instead tells him to come over to help disarm her before she can shoot anyone.  The phone call is cut off even though it was not hung up and the cord was not cut.  Sheila beats this big man to a pulp so severely she breaks the rifle stock without getting so much as a hair out of place.  They struggle together but she doesn’t get a scratch because she is being protected by a magical force.  The same force prevents her from getting any blood, GSR or other evidence on her body or clothing.   She even wraps her body around the rifle as she fires twice without any GSR landing on her gown or hands. Immediately prior to this she decides to kill herself but finds out she can’t with the suppressor attached so she removes it.  She decides to bring it downstairs and place it in the closet where she found it instead of leaving it next to her yet still leaves the box of shells in the kitchen. She then shoots herself and again magic strikes as there is not a drop of back spatter in the rifle even though it is a virtual certainty it would result. Moreover after delivering the fatal shot she manages to fire a second shot by magic.  Even though the recoil would send the gun up the gun instead goes down as if the laws of physics cease to apply on the night of the murders (which would conveniently explain some of the other magical happenings too) so this second shot ends up lower than the fatal shot. 

Jeremy senses a trap so doesn’t go and instead calls Julie to wake her up to tell her about Nevill’s claim as if it is a trip and he needs to share a good laugh with her about it.  He eventually calls police. He refuses to go or offer any assistance unless police take him there with them.  After they arrive he shows up and they BS around for almost 4 hours.  He is telepathic and senses the family is dead so calls Julie again and tells her not to go to work he will have cops pick her up to come support his story. Cops go in and find her and the family dead as Jeremy had sensed.  Julie lies to frame him.  Unknown persons take the suppressor, scrape it against the mantle so it gets paint on it then looks up Sheila’s blood type in the medical file, obtains blood of that type from somewhere and sprays blood inside in order to all police to argue the suppressor was used when Sheila was shot thus suggesting she was murdered not a suicide victim.  Why would they need to plant the paint though, the blood evidence would be much more compelling.

I don’t believe in magic so I am certain that Jeremy did it.   

If Jeremy had not been telling Julie all the things he had and had gone to sleep and pretended he knew nothing then even with the evidence that suggests Sheila was framed that would not be enough to prove he is the one who did the framing.  Telling Julie what he wanted to do and had done presented a strong witness against him.  In addition to the call boxed his defense team in big time to the point they were forced to admit at trial it was either him or Sheila.  Most of the evidence proves it wasn't Sheila but not who actually did it.  These two things establish the person who did it was him as opposed to his lawyers being able to claim it was someone else who framed Sheila.

   

Julie wrote her WS with Stan Jones. Then defended it in court. She has never retracted a word of it.

Jeremy was asked by the police & courts why Julie said those things. Both times he only gave one reason. Because he jilted her.

I created a thread on whether Jeremy did actually jilt Julie. As well as a thread of whether a scorned woman is just as likely to tell the truth.

Jeremys supporters say Julie heard Jeremy ask another girl out on the phone. Did Jeremy do this deliberatly ? Or was it a mistake & Julie was not supposed to hear ?  Only Jeremy will know. He certainly did not jilt her outright and was keen to spend time with her after the massacre. Keeping her sweet with jaunts around the country & nice meals.

[Adam]

Other people have said Julie was pressurised into writing a WS by the police.

This is incorrect. She approached the police via Liz Rimmington. The police had no idea about the caravan break in or Susan Battersbys 1984 cheque book fraud.

So Jeremy is right, there is only one reason for Julie to lie. But first people have to agree he did jilt her. And jilt her badly.

[Jane]

Julie wrote her WS with Stan Jones. Then defended it in court. She has never retracted a word of it.

Jeremy was asked by the police & courts why Julie said those things. Both times he only gave one reason. Because he jilted her.

I created a thread on whether Jeremy did actually jilt Julie. As well as a thread of whether a scorned woman is just as likely to tell the truth.

Jeremys supporters say Julie heard Jeremy ask another girl out on the phone. Did Jeremy do this deliberatly ? Or was it a mistake & Julie was not supposed to hear ?  Only Jeremy will know. He certainly did not jilt her outright and was keen to spend time with her after the massacre. Keeping her sweet with jaunts around the country & nice meals.

Adam, you have been told on many occasions that it matters not one iota whether you or we think Jeremy jilted Julie. What matters is, did Julie FEEL herself jilted by Jeremy. As for how you believe he did it, there is more than one way to skin a rabbit and perhaps Jeremy preferred the softly softly approach.

[Jane]

Other people have said Julie was pressurised into writing a WS by the police.

This is incorrect. She approached the police via Liz Rimmington. The police had no idea about the caravan break in or Susan Battersbys 1984 cheque book fraud.

So Jeremy is right, there is only one reason for Julie to lie. But first people have to agree he did jilt her. And jilt her badly.

Are you actually saying that in order for Jeremy to be right WE have to agree that he jilted her BADLY!!! DUHHHH

[Adam]

Adam, you have been told on many occasions that it matters not one iota whether you or we think Jeremy jilted Julie. What matters is, did Julie FEEL herself jilted by Jeremy. As for how you believe he did it, there is more than one way to skin a rabbit and perhaps Jeremy preferred the softly softly approach.

Looking at it on from the outside. It is inconclusive whether Jeremy jilted Julie.

Jeremy was keen for Julie to attend WHF on the massacre day. Julie was reluctant to attend the funeral or spend too much time with Brett. But was persuaded to by Jeremy. 

Reading Julies WS it does not seem she was too bothered. After finding out of Jeremys involvement. It was probably a relief, confideing to friends & then the police.

If Julie has only said these things (& they are lies) because she felt she was jilted, she must be one crazy, vindictive & confident woman.

However there is still the slim possibility she has only said these things because she felt she was badly jilted. But they are still true. A woman scorned....

[Jane]

Looking at it on from the outside. It is inconclusive whether Jeremy jilted Julie.

Jeremy was keen for Julie to attend WHF on the massacre day. Julie was reluctant to attend the funeral or spend too much time with Brett. But was persuaded to by Jeremy. 

Reading Julies WS it does not seem she was too bothered. After finding out of Jeremys involvement. It was probably a relief, confideing to friends & then the police.

If Julie has only said these things (& they are lies) because she felt she was jilted, she must be one crazy, vindictive & confident woman.

However there is still the slim possibility she has only said these things because she felt she was badly jilted. But they are still true. A woman scorned....

Adam, whatever it is that you've been doing during your absence it clearly wasn't genning up on human psychology. :D :D :D :D

[Adam]

Well Julie was the main prosecution witness.

Jeremys one reason why Julie lied is very weak -

It is not conclusive Jeremy jilted Julie.

If Julie was jilted, that does not automatically mean she will tell such serious lies.

Other people have said similar things to Julie. Such as Mary Mugford, James Richards, Ann Eaton & Robert Boutflour.

There is no evidence of Julie having mental health problems to tell such serious lies.

If she was jilted, she is just as likely to tell the truth.

[grahameb]

No idea, you get gun shops, gunsmiths, gun boots, gun dogs and a Gunga Din. 

I don't think the use of the word 'gun' is particularly unusual. 

And gunnea pigs.

[grahameb]

Julie wrote her WS with Stan Jones. Then defended it in court. She has never retracted a word of it.

Jeremy was asked by the police & courts why Julie said those things. Both times he only gave one reason. Because he jilted her.

I created a thread on whether Jeremy did actually jilt Julie. As well as a thread of whether a scorned woman is just as likely to tell the truth.

Jeremys supporters say Julie heard Jeremy ask another girl out on the phone. Did Jeremy do this deliberatly ? Or was it a mistake & Julie was not supposed to hear ?  Only Jeremy will know. He certainly did not jilt her outright and was keen to spend time with her after the massacre. Keeping her sweet with jaunts around the country & nice meals.

If she's lying and did retract it shed be in hot s**t for sure. So the best policy for her would be to keep quiet.