the raid team enter whf 2 hours after daylight.

[lookout]

Why? 

He'd have remained under the sheets.   

[susan]

Hello lookout

think Jeremy thought the phone calls would be his alibi just my thoughts of course I have no proof one way or other as we say in Yorkshire.

[No-Bits]

He'd have remained under the sheets.

What, pretending to be a ghost? 

[lookout]

Hello lookout

think Jeremy thought the phone calls would be his alibi just my thoughts of course I have no proof one way or other as we say in Yorkshire.

Hi Susan,,they don't always need alibis. Jeremy relied on the fact that he was telling the truth,regardless of the phone debacle. I have known of past cases where there'd been no alibi ( I must try and find one as an example )
 Prejudicial evidence by the judge got Jeremy convicted,as a jury is more likely to take notice of what he says rather than what the case is about,indepth. This is why the trial was so unfair,along with the venue too.

[grahameb]

Hi Susan,,they don't always need alibis. Jeremy relied on the fact that he was telling the truth,regardless of the phone debacle. I have known of past cases where there'd been no alibi ( I must try and find one as an example )
 Prejudicial evidence by the judge got Jeremy convicted,as a jury is more likely to take notice of what he says rather than what the case is about,indepth. This is why the trial was so unfair,along with the venue too.

An alibi presupposes that a person is guilty and therefore has to find something to cover themselves in case they are questioned about it. Jeremy had none of this. It rather is an indication of innocence rather than guilt. Because a guilty man would have made sure he had an airtight "alibi". Jeremy had none and neither did he ever say that the phonecall was an alibi.

[lookout]

 I can bet that the courtroom was mainly full of people who disliked Jeremy,which wouldn't bode well with the whole outcome anyway. That in itself would have affected the summing up.

[Jane]

An alibi presupposes that a person is guilty and therefore has to find something to cover themselves in case they are questioned about it. Jeremy had none of this. It rather is an indication of innocence rather than guilt. Because a guilty man would have made sure he had an airtight "alibi". Jeremy had none and neither did he ever say that the phonecall was an alibi.

I would agree entirely that a guilty person requires an airtight alibi, but here's the problem; it depends very largely on how far thinking/intelligent is the guilty person and how he sees the level of intelligence of the MOST intelligent person he's trying to convince. The less bright he is, the less he'll be able to judge what questions another person might ask because he only has, as a yardstick, the questions HE would ask.

[No-Bits]

I would agree entirely that a guilty person requires an airtight alibi, but here's the problem; it depends very largely on how far thinking/intelligent is the guilty person and how he sees the level of intelligence of the MOST intelligent person he's trying to convince. The less bright he is, the less he'll be able to judge what questions another person might ask because he only has, as a yardstick, the questions HE would ask.

By definition,  a guilty person can't have an alibi.

A guilty person can trick people in to believing they have one, but they can't 'actually' have one.

Jeremy didn't have an alibi.

[Jane]

By definition,  a guilty person can't have an alibi.

A guilty person can trick people in to believing they have one, but they can't 'actually' have one.

Jeremy didn't have an alibi.

Pedant!!!!! :D

[nugnug]

he did produce an albi but then if you are innocent you cant chose what your albi is.

if single man stays in on a certan night there will nobody to see him.

[nugnug]

If you hire someone to kill someone because you personally can't do it then you are less scary then if you did it yourself especially if you coudl kill small children like that.

ive never heard so much crap in all my life.

the fact he paid someone wouldn't make any difference what so ever.

somone who pays somone who pays someone else is just as scary and just as evil as somone who did it themselves.

[grahameb]

I can bet that the courtroom was mainly full of people who disliked Jeremy,which wouldn't bode well with the whole outcome anyway. That in itself would have affected the summing up.

It was a local trial (Chelmsford) He was denied the option of moving the trial out of the borough.

[grahameb]

By definition,  a guilty person can't have an alibi.

A guilty person can trick people in to believing they have one, but they can't 'actually' have one.

Jeremy didn't have an alibi.

You obviously mean that by definition an "innocent" person need not have an alibi. Quite simply because he is innocent.
A guilty person on the other hand because he had been thinking this over and planning it for a whole year would make sure he had an alibi.

[nugnug]

an innocent. person does not think they will need an albi a guilty person knows they will.

[No-Bits]

You obviously mean that by definition an "innocent" person need not have an alibi. Quite simply because he is innocent.
A guilty person on the other hand because he had been thinking this over and planning it for a whole year would make sure he had an alibi.

No I don't. If JB is guilty, then he can't have an alibi, no matter how long he's had to plan, he can't be in two places at the same time.