What REALLY Convinces You That Jeremy Is Innocent/Guilty?

[Adam]

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.

Agree with that, but didn't Julie hit Jeremy or smash something after hearing Jeremy ask another woman out. Seems like an over reaction if they had already split up.

[Jane]

Agree with that, but didn't Julie hit Jeremy or smash something after hearing Jeremy ask another woman out. Seems like an over reaction if they had already split up.

Possible Adam, but on one occasion they were walking round a supermarket.

[Caroline]

Possible Adam, but on one occasion they were walking round a supermarket.

She also threw an ornamental box at him when he planned to see another woman.

[Jane]

She also threw an ornamental box at him when he planned to see another woman.

A very volatile lady, our Julie.

[Jan]

It was Peter Eaton.

Thank you Caroline

[scipio_usmc]

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.

Do you know where a copy of the supposed interview can be found where she speaks about this.  I heard it reported she threatened to stab a teddy bear Jeremy gave her among other things but have not seen a statement tha tproves she said any such thing.

At any rate, she seems to have been ticked off that he broke off the engagement which happened quite a while before the family was killed.  Their romance was dying down before th emurders but afterwards fell apart rather fast.

Some wonder if he was sleeping with Collins and bi and I am among those.  At any rate the bigger issue is whether what she claims is credible or likely to be made up.

His account of why he called her at 3AM and 6Am makes little sense the acocunt she gives does.

The details are things are to make up on the spot the level of detail is significant and there are tidbits like the girlfriend telling her Jeremy said he was the only one who knows what happened.

A big thing for me is that the story that Jeremy told her it was a hitman so he would not seem like a cold blooded killer makes sense.  If she wanted to ge thim in trouble the thing to make up is that he did it, she knew he had no alibi so just say he told her he did it.  It makes no sense to make up a hitman especially not to name said hitman so police could quickly rule it out.

There is a great deal to corroborate her claims and give it credibility.  That is the most important thing to look at.       

[grahameb]

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.

You are the only person that I have read that. Where did you get that information from and have you checked on it to see if they really did say that?

[scipio_usmc]

Forgot to mention the TWO clocks in completely different locations, which the police relied on to make their timeline fit - both of the clocks showed the wrong time to make the magical timeline fit. What kind of "evidence" is THAT?!

What evidence do you have of 2 clocks set the wrong time?

At best there is evidence to suggest 1 clock might have been set 10 minutes off but it just as easily could be that the clock was right but misread or misrecorded.

[lookout]

1) There was the police clock

2) The clock where JM was staying.

[Jan]

Scipio you said the following

"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.
"

If he had planned the murders for so long and in such detail and she knew all about it then he can not have been the cunning planning murderer that we think he was, because:

Why would he tell his girlfriend - who could tell the police at any time? Or recorded his plans or threats?
Why would he use a sound moderator ( there was more than one in the house btw) When there was no need to - it was an old house with thick walls (and according to everyone it would only have taken him a few minutes to pick everyone off)
Why then after using the sound moderator would he put it in a box in the cupboard with a hair and blood on it. 
Why would he admit to getting in and out of the house by the windows ( BTW he said there was no window that could be locked from the outside and the police never proved that there was)
Why bother with the phone call at all - the farmworkers would have found the bodies in the morning and there would have been no idea of T.O.D ( not that there was anyway )
Why would he have appeared to be so cocky and sure of himself during the questioning in Sept? I think personally that because he knew he was innocent the thought the police were being totally stupid ( not a good attitude though , did him no favours)
Why in fact would he risk a lifetime of jail when he was due probably to inherit a large amount of money from an elderly relative?
So he was either very clever to think he had committed the perfect crime - or stupid to tell anyone at all.

If you read JM news of the world interview she states he never admitted he did it - which contradicts her statement about her feelings on the night of the murder.

Sorry I am not convinced about her testimony - she may have done it because the police convinced her he was guilty and with her "help" they could nail him . In other words she was doing her public duty , but I can not see he would have told her all his plans.IMO

[Alias]

What evidence do you have of 2 clocks set the wrong time?

At best there is evidence to suggest 1 clock might have been set 10 minutes off but it just as easily could be that the clock was right but misread or misrecorded.

Two clocks were ten minutes off, one at the police station and the one of Julie´s roommate (don´t remember her name.)

About Julie talking about the stabbing of the teddy bear, which was a gift for her from Brett Collins, it is in her "diary". It is in the archives on this site.
I don´t have time to go through it right now - dinner is on the way, but you can find it there.

About the hitman - what you say makes sense. I can see that it is a little off that Julie would have come up with that. Still, she could have. Hadn´t MM been dating one of her friends - did the girls want to get back at both Jeremy and MM?

[grahameb]

1) There was the police clock

2) The clock where JM was staying.

JM changed her mind about the time a few times.

[lookout]

 It just shows you all the different versions being banded about.I'd read that the teddy was a present from Jeremy.

[Jan]

What evidence do you have of 2 clocks set the wrong time?

At best there is evidence to suggest 1 clock might have been set 10 minutes off but it just as easily could be that the clock was right but misread or misrecorded.

There are court statements on here from the police officers involved - One said the clock was always correct - the other one said it was not ( I can find them if you want)

Also a statement from an officer who "looked" at the clock in the flat at a later visit - because the original statements said (JM) that Jeremy phoned her about 3.30 .

I will post them f you give me time to find them

[Jane]

Do you know where a copy of the supposed interview can be found where she speaks about this.  I heard it reported she threatened to stab a teddy bear Jeremy gave her among other things but have not seen a statement tha tproves she said any such thing.

At any rate, she seems to have been ticked off that he broke off the engagement which happened quite a while before the family was killed.  Their romance was dying down before th emurders but afterwards fell apart rather fast.

Some wonder if he was sleeping with Collins and bi and I am among those.  At any rate the bigger issue is whether what she claims is credible or likely to be made up.

His account of why he called her at 3AM and 6Am makes little sense the acocunt she gives does.

The details are things are to make up on the spot the level of detail is significant and there are tidbits like the girlfriend telling her Jeremy said he was the only one who knows what happened.

A big thing for me is that the story that Jeremy told her it was a hitman so he would not seem like a cold blooded killer makes sense.  If she wanted to ge thim in trouble the thing to make up is that he did it, she knew he had no alibi so just say he told her he did it.  It makes no sense to make up a hitman especially not to name said hitman so police could quickly rule it out.

There is a great deal to corroborate her claims and give it credibility.  That is the most important thing to look at.     

Scipio, you'll find most things you want in Archives and Witness Statements.

They were never engaged other than what I suspect was in Julie;s dreams.

Yes, he was possibly bi.

He may have wanted emotional backup/to be told what to do. The police told him to call someone close.

I find it significant that much of what Julie SAYS he said happens when there are no witnesses present.

Why would he name a hitman she knows and can therefore check the story.