What REALLY Convinces You That Jeremy Is Innocent/Guilty?

[Jane]

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 that Julie having mental health problems to tell such serious lies.

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

1. Yes, it's questionable that without Julie's evidence there'd have been a trial.

2. If it's the truth, its' weakness or strength is irrelevant.

3. I feel certain that Julie knew whether or not Jeremy had jilted her.

4. No, lying isn't mandetory after being jilted but might colour ones views of the jilter.

5. Jeremy may not have been the favourite chocolate in the box but it doesn't make him guilty.

6. Is it NECESSARY for one to have a mental illness to make one a liar!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

7. That would rather depend on what she was threatened with/promised.

[Neil]

1. Yes, it's questionable that without Julie's evidence there'd have been a trial.

2. If it's the truth, its' weakness or strength is irrelevant.

3. I feel certain that Julie knew whether or not Jeremy had jilted her.

4. No, lying isn't mandetory after being jilted but might colour ones views of the jilter.

5. Jeremy may not have been the favourite chocolate in the box but it doesn't make him guilty.

6. Is it NECESSARY for one to have a mental illness to make one a liar!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

7. That would rather depend on what she was threatened with/promised.

I, personally, have for a long time, completely discounted Julie's evidence.

[Jane]

I, personally, have for a long time, completely discounted Julie's evidence.

Neil, for reasons as long as your arm, MOST of us have :D :D :D

[Adam]

Sadly the courts cannot discount a witness.

Even the defence said Julies WS had a ring of truth to it.

The jury not believing Jeremys claim that Julie lied because he 'apparently'  jilted her. Although Jeremy had 7 hours in the witness box to try to persuade them. I bet Jeremy never used the word 'apparently' either.

[Jane]

Sadly the courts cannot discount a witness.

Even the defence said Julies WS had a ring of truth to it.

The jury not believing Jeremys claim that Julie lied because he 'apparently'  jilted her. Although Jeremy had 7 hours in the witness box to try to persuade them. I bet Jeremy never used the word 'apparently' either.

All of which is more of a feeble observation than a valid argument. You give the impression that Jeremy's guilt or innocence is of no moment. It seems to be all about point scoring.

[scipio_usmc]

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.

The supposed phone call she overheard was tacky but not the source of their breakup.  They had already broken up by the time he asked out an old girlfriend in front of her.  In this case it seems that the murders disturbed her to the point that their relationship broke down over it.  She was in the process of saying goodbye when he called this other woman so that can't have been the source of the break up.     

When peopel break up they sometimes do things to spite one another but is the the kind of person who would spite him by making up such a tale and would simply overhearing him flirt with another girl after they broke up warrant her to do something so severe?

The relevant inquiry is to look for corroboration and what makes sense.

They didn't have a bad breakup where one or the other instantly cut off contact with the other.  It was a progression where they salw less of eachother over time and went separate ways but still said goodbye and still were together saying goodbye.  This is not the situation where one says I never want to see you again and they simply cease all contact.  Her explanation of the cooling down being because of she felt bad over the murders makes sense.  No alternative explanation for the breakup was put forward by Jeremy.  The claim the breakup was because he overheard the flirting is false, the flirting was after they broke up. 

It doesn't make sense to lie about someone being involved in murders to get back at someone for flirting in her presence, but the most likely thing to make up in such circumstances would be to say he told her he did it.  Not to say he told her a hitman did it and that he even gave the hit man's name.  That is counter productive because police could instantly check if the alleged hitman has an alibi or not and thus could easily rule out the claim and it won't cause the desired harm.  At minimum such a made up claim would not name a hitman and just claim an unspecified hitman.   Again though the most common lie to tell in such circumstances would be tha the admitted he did it not ake up a hitman claim.

The level of detail she provides as far as the various times he talked about wanting to kill his faily is also significant.  It is hard to make up such level of detail without a lot of thought and planning to come up with such.  The claims are all credible not amazingly crazy claims.  Her account seems credible.

There are details to corroborate her claims such as Ann Eaton saying her told her that he would be co-owner of the caravan site with her soon and the very details of the murder which point to Sheila not being the killer but rather someone else and that someoen else had to be Jeremy based on the made up phone call and fact he is the one who insisted it had to be Sheila.

A lot of things go into weighing credibility.

Her claims were part of the overall puzzle.

[Jan]

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.

Adam - you have to remember that Julie was definitely capable of telling lies - because her original statement and her subsequent statements ( after many inteviews) were completely different.

So one of those statements was NOT the truth. If the first statement was not true - then that was a serious lie because a dangerous killer was on the loose- if the later statements were a lie then that was serious as well because it meant an innocent man would go to prison?

And if she knew about his intent to kill and she said at the time of the murders "I knew he had done it" and said nothing until a month after then  IMO she was an accessory.

JB has only one thing in his statements that changed or was confused  - and that was because the police told him they could prove the timings of his calls and he believed them -
Also remember the confusion of the police clock being wrong and the friends of JM  clocks being wrong??? what was all that about?

 

[Alias]

Scipio, their break up wasn´t quite as dispassionate as you indicate. Julie stabbed a teddy bear, which was a gift from Brett Collins, and she tried to smother Jeremy. She also threw things at him, both at home and in public.
She sounds like quite a passionate, even histrionic kind of person.

[Jane]

Scipio, their break up wasn´t quite as dispassionate as you indicate. Julie stabbed a teddy bear, which was a gift from Brett Collins, and she tried to smother Jeremy. She also threw things at him, both at home and in public.
She sounds like quite a passionate, even histrionic kind of person...................................

......................In fact several of us suspected HPD. The reasons for thinking so stack up.

[Jan]

Scipio, their break up wasn´t quite as dispassionate as you indicate. Julie stabbed a teddy bear, which was a gift from Brett Collins, and she tried to smother Jeremy. She also threw things at him, both at home and in public.
She sounds like quite a passionate, even histrionic kind of person.

Yes she admitted she could have killed him with that pillow.Not really a sensible thing to say in a newspaper interview.

[scipio_usmc]

Adam - you have to remember that Julie was definitely capable of telling lies - because her original statement and her subsequent statements ( after many inteviews) were completely different.

So one of those statements was NOT the truth. If the first statement was not true - then that was a serious lie because a dangerous killer was on the loose- if the later statements were a lie then that was serious as well because it meant an innocent man would go to prison?

And if she knew about his intent to kill and she said at the time of the murders "I knew he had done it" and said nothing until a month after then  IMO she was an accessory.

JB has only one thing in his statements that changed or was confused  - and that was because the police told him they could prove the timings of his calls and he believed them -
Also remember the confusion of the police clock being wrong and the friends of JM  clocks being wrong??? what was all that about?

Indeed she was capable of telling lies but so was Jeremy.

You seem to ignore that he was caught in many lies. 

His claims related to the alleged phone call from Nevill was a mess. At various times he changed between claiming the line went dead and the phone simply being dropped and him hearing scuffling on the other end and then hanging up himself. Other times he said it was disconnected and he immediately called back but the line was busy.  The telephone company agent though testified the phone wa sneve rhung up at WHF and that the call was ended by being hung up at Goldhanger.  moreover he testified that it would take 1-2 minutes for the line at Jeremy's to clear he could not immediately dial anyone.  So there is evidence he lied.  Worse though is that Nevill woudl not have been able to speak and even if he could he would have stated he and June had been shot and neede dmedical help and would have been more likely to dial 999 because his son could not provide medical help and might not even answer the phone his phone was downstairs so he might not even wake up to hear it.

Jeremy told police outside the house that Shela had fired all weapons in the house and was proficient with them.  Late rhe maintained Julie had gone shooting with Nevill and Anthony.  After Anthony denied this he changed his story and maintianed the same thing as the rest of the family- no one saw her even touch a gun or show interest in guns let alone fire any gun.  How did he account for the change?  he simply pretended he never claimed anything to the contrary and denied telling police she had used all guns in the house.  He also lied about the murder weapon not fitting in the closet with the scope and suppressor attached. Moreover, he changed his story about use of the gun the week prior to the murders.  He originally told police he had not touched it until the night of the murders.  After Anthony told them that he had pu tit away with the scope and suppressor attached and tha tis how he had found it and that is how it was always used and stored Jeremy kicked into damage control and claimed he had used it multiple times after Anthony had used it, sometimes the suppressor and scope were attached other times they were not.  Why did he tell origially tell police he had not used it?  The family and farm workers contradicted his claims that he used the gun to shoot varmints.  They said he didn't like to shoot animals and they didn't know him to use the gun in question.  They said he didn't show much interest in guns or shooting.  So tying to suggest his claims did not waver and ther eis no evidence of him lying ever is not accurate.

   

[Jan]

Actually there are statements from family members that state they had seen Sheila use guns - then the police crossed them through and put no. ( they are in the archives)

In his statements with the police ( the first ones ) he did not say he had seen her use guns - but that she had gone out with his father on shoots and obviously she would have seen guns being used all the time.

There were also things floating around that said he called his sister a "nutter" - but if you read the statement from the policeman that was with him - he actually used the medical term for her illness , not those words .

the calls - have you read his second statement in full in the Sept? You will see it is the police telling him the sequence of calls and yes he did get confused , but he was pleased because he thought they could check all the timings and he thought that would prove what he had said was true-

[lookout]

 I don't recall Jeremy telling any lies,,he was too busy fighting for the truth.
 It wasn't forthcoming from others who were more than prepared to twist the truth in order to get a conviction.

[Caroline]

Actually there are statements from family members that state they had seen Sheila use guns - then the police crossed them through and put no. ( they are in the archives)

In his statements with the police ( the first ones ) he did not say he had seen her use guns - but that she had gone out with his father on shoots and obviously she would have seen guns being used all the time.

There were also things floating around that said he called his sister a "nutter" - but if you read the statement from the policeman that was with him - he actually used the medical term for her illness , not those words .

the calls - have you read his second statement in full in the Sept? You will see it is the police telling him the sequence of calls and yes he did get confused , but he was pleased because he thought they could check all the timings and he thought that would prove what he had said was true-

It was Peter Eaton.

[Jane]

Indeed she was capable of telling lies but so was Jeremy.

You seem to ignore that he was caught in many lies. 

His claims related to the alleged phone call from Nevill was a mess. At various times he changed between claiming the line went dead and the phone simply being dropped and him hearing scuffling on the other end and then hanging up himself. Other times he said it was disconnected and he immediately called back but the line was busy.  The telephone company agent though testified the phone wa sneve rhung up at WHF and that the call was ended by being hung up at Goldhanger.  moreover he testified that it would take 1-2 minutes for the line at Jeremy's to clear he could not immediately dial anyone.  So there is evidence he lied.  Worse though is that Nevill woudl not have been able to speak and even if he could he would have stated he and June had been shot and neede dmedical help and would have been more likely to dial 999 because his son could not provide medical help and might not even answer the phone his phone was downstairs so he might not even wake up to hear it.

Jeremy told police outside the house that Shela had fired all weapons in the house and was proficient with them.  Late rhe maintained Julie had gone shooting with Nevill and Anthony.  After Anthony denied this he changed his story and maintianed the same thing as the rest of the family- no one saw her even touch a gun or show interest in guns let alone fire any gun.  How did he account for the change?  he simply pretended he never claimed anything to the contrary and denied telling police she had used all guns in the house.  He also lied about the murder weapon not fitting in the closet with the scope and suppressor attached. Moreover, he changed his story about use of the gun the week prior to the murders.  He originally told police he had not touched it until the night of the murders.  After Anthony told them that he had pu tit away with the scope and suppressor attached and tha tis how he had found it and that is how it was always used and stored Jeremy kicked into damage control and claimed he had used it multiple times after Anthony had used it, sometimes the suppressor and scope were attached other times they were not.  Why did he tell origially tell police he had not used it?  The family and farm workers contradicted his claims that he used the gun to shoot varmints.  They said he didn't like to shoot animals and they didn't know him to use the gun in question.  They said he didn't show much interest in guns or shooting.  So tying to suggest his claims did not waver and ther eis no evidence of him lying ever is not accurate.

   

Scorpio, it makes no sense to me whatsoever to suggest that Nevill couldn't have made a call with a smashed jaw and shattered TRACHEA no less!!!! Who in their right mind would ever think he would, but he COULD have made a call before any shots had been fired if Sheila's behaviour was beyond him to cope with. If she was just sitting, gun in her arms, rocking slightly, but flinching, perhaps mumbling if he approached her to remove it. The words "Sheila's go mad and has the gun" seem very appropriate.