Author Topic: why does jeremy need a bike.  (Read 3259 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #15 on: June 30, 2014, 05:38:PM »
Besides, it was Julie who first mentioned the bicycle. She said that an early plan was for JB to drug the family and then return on foot or by bicycle to burn the house down.

JB confirmed the bicycle was at his house, but it was for Julie's use. I wonder if Julie denied this was the case in court?  :-\





It was also Julie who got sleeping pills on prescription,on the pretext ? that she was stressed out with her studies and couldn't sleep.

Online nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17252
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #16 on: June 30, 2014, 05:48:PM »
as he dosent need a bike under the prosecution scenario it makes pc Wilkinsons timed bike ride seem even more strange.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #17 on: June 30, 2014, 06:07:PM »
Everyone agrees Jeremy could not drive there. He might be seen or heard.

Walking 6 miles is a long way. The longer he is outside, the more chance there is of being seen.  Why not ride ?

Riding back from WHF gives him more time to clean up & get himself together. Before phoning the police.

The bike was brought to Jeremy's cottage 3 days before the massacre. Coincidence ?
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #18 on: June 30, 2014, 06:13:PM »
Grahame think it is Adam and steve who tend to mention the bike :'(
That is why I said "some".

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #19 on: June 30, 2014, 06:17:PM »
Everyone agrees Jeremy could not drive there. He might be seen or heard.

Walking 6 miles is a long way. The longer he is outside, the more chance there is of being seen.  Why not ride ?

Riding back from WHF gives him more time to clean up & get himself together. Before phoning the police.

The bike was brought to Jeremy's cottage 3 days before the massacre. Coincidence ?
Yes I think it could be a coincidence. And as we have established, time was not a factor. He could have killed them all before he left for home after supper. No one would have been any the wiser. Why must the time be 3am. Even you sais that it could have been very early in the morning. In any case someone is more conspicuous on a bike riding along a sea wall surely?

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #20 on: June 30, 2014, 06:29:PM »
Yes I think it could be a coincidence. And as we have established, time was not a factor. He could have killed them all before he left for home after supper. No one would have been any the wiser. Why must the time be 3am. Even you sais that it could have been very early in the morning. In any case someone is more conspicuous on a bike riding along a sea wall surely?

Perhaps it was one of the 'curious coincidences' the judge was referring to.

The judge did ask the jury to consider why Jeremy would bring the bike for Julie when their relationship was coming to a close.

Jeremy could not kill everyone at supper. They were awake and in the kitchen. Jeremy spoke to Julie at 10am. Telling her 'tonights the night' Four of the people were shot in bed, probably between 2am - 3am. The perfect time to carry out an execution.

I suppose he could have killed them a bit later. It depends what time they get up. Farmers are early starters. Six year olds can be hyperactive and wake early as well. It also gets light early in the morning at that time of year, so more chance of being seen. To me 2am -3am was the perfect time.
« Last Edit: June 30, 2014, 06:31:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #21 on: June 30, 2014, 06:56:PM »
Perhaps it was one of the 'curious coincidences' the judge was referring to.

The judge did ask the jury to consider why Jeremy would bring the bike for Julie when their relationship was coming to a close.

Jeremy could not kill everyone at supper. They were awake and in the kitchen. Jeremy spoke to Julie at 10am. Telling her 'tonights the night' Four of the people were shot in bed, probably between 2am - 3am. The perfect time to carry out an execution.

I suppose he could have killed them a bit later. It depends what time they get up. Farmers are early starters. Six year olds can be hyperactive and wake early as well. It also gets light early in the morning at that time of year, so more chance of being seen. To me 2am -3am was the perfect time.
He could have of course asked about one more curious coincidence. Why if the relationship was coming to a close would he tell her everything about a murder he had committed.
You know Adam judges aren't some kind of infallible pope. Indeed that judge had put him in such a position where he could have been blackmailed. Have you aever read about Madam Whiplash where she refers to a "Ducky Drake".
Now I'm not saying that he was compromised in any way. But he was certainly in such a position where he could have been.

In any case I don't agree with him. He's only a man and a fallible one at that. It most certainly was not a curious coincidence. You can call anything a curious coincidence. In fact was it not a curious coincidence that Mugford told the judge before the trial that no such deal had been made between her and the NOTW. Then the very next week after the trial her story, plus a provocative picture of her appeared in the NOTW. Now that is what I call a curious coincidence. ;)

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #22 on: June 30, 2014, 07:07:PM »
You mean the relatives had saucy pictures of the judge ?

Jeremy had been telling Julie for months of his plans. It is in her WS.

There is no record in the court transcripts in Wilkes's book of the judge asking Julie about her NOTW deal. Did he ask Jeremy about his NOTW deal ? Jeremy has tried and failed to negate Julie's testimony.

'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #23 on: June 30, 2014, 07:17:PM »
Everyone agrees Jeremy could not drive there. He might be seen or heard.

Not everyone.

Jeremy might very well have been afraid of being seen or heard and thus opted to use the bike but it is unlikely he would have been seen or heard at that hour so he coudl have used the car and I would have used a car.

Jeremy's neighbors never heard him drive to WHF to meet police though we know for a fact he did.  They slept through him starting his car and driving away.  Other than police no one saw him make the drive to WHF and police saw him only because he was on the side of the road waiting for them to pass or he would have beat them there and no one would have seen him make the journey.

People do not usually get out of bed or even off the couch to go look at a car passing by on the street.

People do not usually pay attention to passing cars unless they expect a visitor.

People who do see a car usually end up seeing it by simply accident as they happen to be outside or looking out a window by chance.

People conversing loudly is usually what gets people to look out a window and notice oh they are leaving or oh they arrived.   

The chance of anyone seeing Jeremy drive away or arrive back home would be minimial and the chance of someone along the path being able to identify his car in the dark would be nil.

The chance of someone he knows being out at that hour to be driving on the same path and thus to encounter and also recognize him would be small as well.

Thus Jeremy could indeed have driven there.  The fact he told Julie he planned to use a bike and that he took his mother's bike to use is what suggests he used  abike.

But the last minute he could have potentially decided to use a car and to have scrapped the bike plan. The notion he can't have used a car is wrong.

Walking 6 miles is a long way. The longer he is outside, the more chance there is of being seen.  Why not ride ?

Riding back from WHF gives him more time to clean up & get himself together. Before phoning the police.

The bike was brought to Jeremy's cottage 3 days before the massacre. Coincidence ?

Walking would be the least chance of being seen because in the dark you could not only hide if you see the lights of a car approaching the chance of anyone recognizing you even if they see you is slim.  The time and effort involved in a 6 mile walk is why 1 would not want to do it.

The bike is good because JUST IN CASE a neighbor comes home very late and actually notices your car missing and remembers to tell police that can be damaging.  To avoid some unlikely freak occurrence where someone actually notices your car gone you would prefer a bike.

He clearly planned to use the bike but whether he went through with the plan or just decided "ah screw it I'll use the car" we will never know.

Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #24 on: June 30, 2014, 07:28:PM »
Bob Miller in the CTSB video, said it would be too risky driving.

However he said no one would have seen Jeremy 'in a month of Sunday's' if he had cycled along the sea wall.

Were there not CCTV/speed cameras along the driving route ?

Have you got a source that no one heard Jeremy drive to WHF to see the police ? Thank you.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #25 on: June 30, 2014, 07:33:PM »
CCTV in a rural area in 1985? - I could be wrong, but that sounds extremely unlikely! Besides, we would have heard about it.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #26 on: June 30, 2014, 07:37:PM »
CCTV in a rural area in 1985? - I could be wrong, but that sounds extremely unlikely! Besides, we would have heard about it.

The journey was on busy roads. Mikes youtube video will show you.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #27 on: June 30, 2014, 07:41:PM »
Bob Miller in the CTSB video, said it would be too risky driving.

However he said no one would have seen Jeremy 'in a month of Sunday's' if he had cycled along the sea wall.

Were there not CCTV/speed cameras along the driving route ?

Have you got a source that no one heard Jeremy drive to WHF to see the police ? Thank you.

Bob Miller's opinion is proven wrong by simply looking at the fact that Jeremy DID ACTUALLY drive to WHF in the middle of the night and yet NO ONE saw him do it other than police who would not have been on the roads but for his call.  If any other people were on the roads that night when he drove there then they either:

1) didn't recognize him or his car (either because of the dark or they didn't know him so paid no attention)

2) didn't live in the area so were not among the 500 people living in the area who were questioned by police

Jeremy might have considered it risky but objectively speaking it wasn't very risky at all.  People are rarely if ever seen driving to or from a scene of a crime at all let alone at night.  It is more common for  criminals to get ticketed for illegal parking or a moving traffic infraction (and thus proving they were out at the time of the murders not home like they claimed) then for a witness to be able to say they saw the criminal leaving/coming home/driving around.

The claim that a car could not be used because he would definitely have been seen on the road is simply wrong.
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #28 on: June 30, 2014, 07:48:PM »
Bob Miller in the CTSB video, said it would be too risky driving.

However he said no one would have seen Jeremy 'in a month of Sunday's' if he had cycled along the sea wall.

Were there not CCTV/speed cameras along the driving route ?

Have you got a source that no one heard Jeremy drive to WHF to see the police ? Thank you.

The police supposedly questioned 500 people to see if at any time of night anyo of them knew of Jeremy being on the road, leaving his house or going to his house and they found no witnesses at all.

Far from being shocking that is the norm because people don't usually pay attention to passing cars at night and unles sthere is a commotion pay no mind to the comings and goinggs of neighbors especially once they go to bed.

Furthermore, unless someone has a rare distinctive car that no one else has you can't even tell if a friend is in a car or not when the car passes by yours in the opposite direction.   
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: why does jeremy need a bike.
« Reply #29 on: June 30, 2014, 07:52:PM »
Bob Miller's opinion is proven wrong by simply looking at the fact that Jeremy DID ACTUALLY drive to WHF in the middle of the night and yet NO ONE saw him do it other than police who would not have been on the roads but for his call.  If any other people were on the roads that night when he drove there then they either:

1) didn't recognize him or his car (either because of the dark or they didn't know him so paid no attention)

2) didn't live in the area so were not among the 500 people living in the area who were questioned by police

Jeremy might have considered it risky but objectively speaking it wasn't very risky at all.  People are rarely if ever seen driving to or from a scene of a crime at all let alone at night.  It is more common for  criminals to get ticketed for illegal parking or a moving traffic infraction (and thus proving they were out at the time of the murders not home like they claimed) then for a witness to be able to say they saw the criminal leaving/coming home/driving around.

The claim that a car could not be used because he would definitely have been seen on the road is simply wrong.

No one saw Jeremy drive to WHF after he phoned the police ? Why an earth would the police need to investigate that ? Everyone knew he drove there.

I did not say he would definitely be seen. There is a chance he would be heard or seen.

Were there not speed cameras or CCTV in 1985 ?

Anyway do you have a source please. And a source from my last post request.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.