0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Its only opinion because I don't have the experience of other posters on here and I only look at documents not books.I find JM evidence not convincing - because of the N.O.W farce and the bank manager statement . She was capable of telling lies because her OS was so different . And I don't believe that any girl of her age would ID those twins with the police and not take the opportunity to shop JB then , especially as in her statement she said on the night she knew he had done it.I don't find the motive convincing enough to carry out such a terrible crime .I don't believe If he was so cunning and had planned for so long that he would tell Julie / put the silencer back in the box for the police to find / appeared to be so arrogant afterwardsThe police logs are so ambiguous in so many ways and on so many occasions I find it hard to know what to believe.No-one has proved to me that NB could not have made the call before SC actually started shooting No one has proved he could not be beaten after he had been shot.A lot of the character assassination and accusations about what JB said are not actually backed up by the written statements that were written in the immediate days after the crime .I think JB was arrogant because he knew he was innocent and he police were idiots.He seemed pleased when the police said they could prove the times of the calls .Why if he had planned he crime would he make up the call ? It does not make sense - it is way too complicated and I don't think he seems that intelligent.The assumptions about how he would act at the funeral are a load of tosh as far as I am concerned - No one person is the same as how they act when in shock and grief.I dint know how to say this without sounding callous - but the shots to the twins were so determined and in that way they do tie up with the evil thoughts SC had about themI do believe the opinions on here about her illness and I don't think even now we have seen the full picture .Colin Caffell originally thought she was capable.I don't comment on the ballistics or forensics because I think the EP messed them all up so it is like a huge tangled web.the evidence That DB reported the silencer on 10th Sept , not august.The fresh blood from SC wounds.The fact that EP will not release the paperwork from the original case.Run out of breath now
Sure about what, Jeremy's conviction or the destruction of evidence being a mistake?I only thought Bamber would innocent, or at least I wasn't sure. For the first year or so I did lean more towards innocence. But when you look past all the spin of the defence teams and the dreadful official website - you see there isn't much there, certianly nothing new in almost 3 decades. I believe the JM evidence, I believe the silencer- and I don't believe that a phone call was made that night.There is a lot of complex evidence in the case, but the simplest and most important is the phone call from Ralph. If that didn't happen - that one phone call - then nothing Bamber says can be true.And I believe that the phonecall wasn't made. The testimony Scipio was talking about in another topic only strenghtened my opinion that the phone call wasn't made.Let me ask you - what stands out for you as alarming proof Bamber is innocent?
Was the BT operative able to tell whether Jeremy called WHF after Nevilles alledged call ? If he did not, then Jeremy lied again. A bad lie as well.
what are you on about??? It was the police who told him they could prove the calls - THEY LIED!
The rifle in the window------------there one minute,,gone the next. Yes,,,it flew through the air and landed on Sheilas' chest !
He's asking about the testimonie from the BT Operator, was the operator asked if Jeremy tired to make a call to WHF AFTER the call from WHF was cut off. I don't remember him being asked that, no. Scipio may be able to enlighten us.
I thought that it was generally accepted that the calls could not be proved - otherwise it would be case shut wouldn't it . Unless there is evidence on the original files.
In which case, the engineer would say "The calls aren't listed/saved/itemised" which would still be interesting to see.
Bamber did complain to either the PCA or the IPCC back in the mid 90's. Essex police were reprimanded for destroying evidence, what that means I don't know but I doubt any heads rolled because it's my understanding that it was a mistake by Essex police and that the evidence had already been destroyed. It's not like a court ruled the evidence shouldn't be destroyed on a Monday morning, and then on a Monday afternoon Essex police ran and destroyed evidence.
