The campaign against Jeremy Bamber

[scipio_usmc]

I did, but as I've already mentioned them, what's the point? Most people know if they were interested enough. However, once you have doubts, you begin to look at things in a different way. The only thing that doesn't seem to fit, is the silencer.

Doesn't fit where? 

There was a reason for Jeremy to use it and no logical reason that he would decide not to and there is physical evidence which says that he did use it.

[maggie]

I know. I did say that he actually had a breakdown upon entering the house, so I am not saying he was indifferent - the opposite. 

I know you know Alias, wasn't telling you as know you are well aware how grief affects us all differently. 

[lookout]

Hi Lookout, soz, had to take the dog out - no, I think that's the only one I haven't read. Is it any good?

Oh gosh,you're allowed to take the dog out,poor thing I bet it was cross-legged.

The book gives more detail as regards the children growing up.In fact Claire doesn't hold back in her commentary of when both were teenagers/young adults.
It's not a bad read really,and she too did her research both with all the leading participants as well as Jeremy himself.

[Caroline]

Doesn't fit where? 

There was a reason for Jeremy to use it and no logical reason that he would decide not to and there is physical evidence which says that he did use it.

Look, you believe it, I don't - I have already said why and you won't convince me otherwise. I don't believe it was used, the witness statements conflict with each other and we have only just recently had Babs Wilson pipe up and say she saw it. What? It took her almost 30years to remember she saw the silencer and the blood? Really? 

[Caroline]

Oh gosh,you're allowed to take the dog out,poor thing I bet it was cross-legged.

The book gives more detail as regards the children growing up.In fact Claire doesn't hold back in her commentary of when both were teenagers/young adults.
It's not a bad read really,and she too did her research both with all the leading participants as well as Jeremy himself.

I'll have a look for it - last time I look on Amazon, they wanted an arm and a leg for it. I'll have another look

[Caroline]

I saw it on Amazon for just over a quid a few weeks ago.

Bloody hell!! There is one for £179.00?? I'll wait 

[scipio_usmc]

Look, you believe it, I don't - I have already said why and you won't convince me otherwise. I don't believe it was used, the witness statements conflict with each other and we have only just recently had Babs Wilson pipe up and say she saw it. What? It took her almost 30years to remember she saw the silencer and the blood? Really? 

Yeah but your reasoning is illogical, not supported by a shred of evidence and even conflicts with your own theory of police not planting evidence unless they were convinced he was guilty.  The blood was at the police station for 15 hours maybe before being sent to HQ and then on to the lab. There is no evidence at all to even suggest this blood was tampered with but worse yet you are suggesting police took it to plant before they were convinced of his guilt and before they knew whether there would be solid evidence or not to estbalish his guilt. 

Your position is on no better footing than any of Mike's unsupported claims. 

[Alias]

Bloody hell!! There is one for £179.00?? I'll wait 

Their prices go UP and DOWN!! Check in regularly, you might get lucky like me with Colin´s book! 1 pence! Can´t believe they shipped it over here at that price!

[Caroline]

Take my advice. Don't by it if it's an arm and a leg. (1) Without a leg you will have nowhere to rest it on. (2) Without an arm you won't be able to turn the pages.

 

[Caroline]

Their prices go UP and DOWN!! Check in regularly, you might get lucky like me with Colin´s book! 1 pence! Can´t believe they shipped it over here at that price!

I got Wilkes's book really cheap but £179.00 for Claire Powell's book? Is it illuminated in gold leaf by an ancient order of monks? 

[lookout]

I'll have a look for it - last time I look on Amazon, they wanted an arm and a leg for it. I'll have another look

I didn't pay that much. It's an old hard-backed library one ( Calderdale Library ) a couple of quid.

[Alias]

Caroline, you can get it used from 15.16 pounds at Amazon.uk.

[Caroline]

Caroline, you can get it used from 15.16 pounds at Amazon.uk.

Yes, I saw that one too but I want it for 1p like you! 

[maggie]

Yes, I saw that one too but I want it for 1p like you! 

Deffo saw it just over a quid a while back, should have bought it. Thought it was too pricey 

[Martin]

Quote from: mat on Yesterday at 06:46 PM

I thought I'd seen you twice say you'd post a topic with your reasons for
guilt - I thought you had said you would post it a few days ago - either that or I've been seeing things

I've already said why I think he may be guilty. If you mean you're waiting for me to reply to Scipio's essay, I won't be doing that - he believes one thing, I believe another but we share some opinions on other things. There was a whole thread dedicated to why I believe he may be guilty which included the wallet incident and he evasiveness. Didn't you read it? I sure you commented on it? I'm still not sure either way but I do lean towards guilty.

"I've already said why I think he may be guilty."

No, you have not! I am being accused of “harassing” you because I take great exception to somebody pushing the pro guilt message without giving any substantial reasons to support it. And you keep doing that.

I don’t believe that Mat is stupid. I think that, if you really had given your reasons for thinking that Bamber is guilty, he would at least have noticed it. Remember that you reject the evidence used to convict him, so logically, you require something to take it's place.

As far as I’m concerned you are a propagandist. Your basic modus operandi is to just keep repeating an unsupported assertion.

“I think he's guilty, but that he was framed.”

That naturally begs the question WHY do you think he is guilty? All you’ve managed to come up with so far is Jeremy knowing how much was in his father’s wallet.


The Last Trailer

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5565.msg243191.html#msg243191

Your scenario The Last Trailer does not contain any reference to evidence of  Bamber’s guilt. It is just a made up story which has Jeremy make the a call from Whitehouse Farm to his answering machine. Very clever! I suppose it allows you to add another slogan to your list

“Even if there was a call, that does not prove he is innocent.”

So, even if it can be proven that the silencer evidence was faked and that the phone call did take place, you and your friend Nick still have a fall back position in place, which allows you to continue  poisoning the well.

Did the relatives put pressure on the police?

Speaking for myself I don’t believe that your change of position has anything to do with the evidence, but that it is one made for some other reason. The way that you now steadfastly defend the relatives against the accusation that they “badgered” the police into pursuing Jeremy is to me a strong indication of where you might really be coming from. Until quite recently, you supported that view and have even used that word yourself.

What I don’t like is seeing you getting away with fooling good people. Some of them think that there is something mysterious behind your new guilty stance, as if you were aware of some piece of evidence which they are unaware of. Or, that you have, recently, thought of something which for some reason you must withhold for the time being. I just don't buy it.


They don’t like me for not respecting your right to keep your reasons to yourself. They think that I should just leave you alone. But you are not a child. You are a psychologist and, if I may say so, a very skilful one.

I maintain that it is legitimate to press you for reasons as long as you continue to make unsupported assertions which, as such, amount to nothing more than anti Bamber propaganda. This is not the girl guides. Try telling that to your friends.