Julie Mugford and the Stolen Cheque Books

[JackiePreece]

Are details on this forum about the stolen cheque book and what was purchased with them?

Was Jeremy ever accused of theft before the caravan park robbery and how long after the cheque book fraud did the caravan robbery take place

I believe it was probably Julies idea as she already had a history of theft and deception

[lookout]

I rather think that it was the robbery at the caravan park which was Jeremys' first and only conviction as this is what the police used in order to arrest him for the murders.Nothing else was listed.

Once held for questioning about the robbery,he was then interrogated about the murders.

[JackiePreece]

Thats what I think Lookout

[grahameb]

I rather think that it was the robbery at the caravan park which was Jeremys' first and only conviction as this is what the police used in order to arrest him for the murders.Nothing else was listed.

Once held for questioning about the robbery,he was then interrogated about the murders.

Strange they never arrested Muggy for the burglary as well? Oh I forgot she was the prosecution's star witness. Silly me.

[Adam]

Julie testified that June did not approve of Jeremy's relationship with Julie.

June offered to buy Julie a property in Essex or London. Julie was offended and rejected the offer. But I thought Julie was a gold digger ?

Julie was a teenager when she met Jeremy. Both working at Sloppy Joe's I believe, in low paid jobs.  If she was looking for a meal ticket, Jeremy was not the answer.

Things changed slightly over the next couple of years. Jeremy being given a cottage, car,  free petrol and a job. However he was only given a farmers wage for working long hours. Not exactly glamorous for Julie.

Rather than live off Jeremy, Julie lived in digs in Lewisham. Working towards being a teacher. Something she is now. A respected one as well.

She had no choice but to act as lookout when Jeremy robbed the caravan site. A year earlier she was involved in Susan Battersby's minor cheque book fraud. Done more for laugh than to live a life of luxury. Teenagers, tut.

After the massacre and in a state of shock she stayed with Jeremy for one month.  Often because Jeremy asked her to. But they soon spilt, Julie was not dragged off Jeremy, despite his new found fortune   

When approaching the police, she had no idea the NOTW would approach her. But they did, as well as approach Jeremy.

Julie also did have to approach the police. They knew nothing about Susan Battersby's minor cheque book fraud and Jeremy's caravan break in.

Julie testified that the break up was gradual and mutual process. Jeremy also said the relationship had been in decline for several months.

Does everyone agree the perception of Julie as a gold digger is wrong ?

[Alias]

Julie testified that June did not approve of Jeremy's relationship with Julie.

June offered to buy Julie a property in Essex or London. Julie was offended and rejected the offer. But I thought Julie was a gold digger ?

Julie was a teenager when she met Jeremy. Both working at Sloppy Joe's I believe, in low paid jobs.  If she was looking for a meal ticket, Jeremy was not the answer.

Things changed slightly over the next couple of years. Jeremy being given a cottage, car,  free petrol and a job. However he was only given a farmers wage for working long hours. Not exactly glamorous for Julie.

Rather than live off Jeremy, Julie lived in digs in Lewisham. Working towards being a teacher. Something she is now. A respected one as well.

She had no choice but to act as lookout when Jeremy robbed the caravan site. A year earlier she was involved in Susan Battersby's minor cheque book fraud. Done more for laugh than to live a life of luxury. Teenagers, tut.

After the massacre and in a state of shock she stayed with Jeremy for one month.  Often because Jeremy asked her to. But they soon spilt, Julie was not dragged off Jeremy, despite his new found fortune   

When approaching the police, she had no idea the NOTW would approach her. But they did, as well as approach Jeremy.

Julie also did have to approach the police. They knew nothing about Susan Battersby's minor cheque book fraud and Jeremy's caravan break in.

Julie testified that the break up was gradual and mutual process. Jeremy also said the relationship had been in decline for several months.

Does everyone agree the perception of Julie as a gold digger is wrong ?

Why didn´t she have a choice?

You keep saying it was Susan´s - it was mainly Julie´s. Her idea. She had to talk a very reluctant Susan into it (over several days). Julie forged Susan´s signature. It was not minor - or are you saying that the caravan burglary was minor too, it was pretty much the same amount?
Susan threw the "goods" they got out of the fraud in the garbage, she felt that bad about it. Julie "doesn´t remember what she did with the stolen items, probably gave some of it to Salvation Army" (<----BS!)

Don´t forget about the drug dealing and the very probably ACCESSORY TO MURDER. Yea, yea, very respectable! 

[scipio_usmc]

Are details on this forum about the stolen cheque book and what was purchased with them?

Was Jeremy ever accused of theft before the caravan park robbery and how long after the cheque book fraud did the caravan robbery take place

I believe it was probably Julies idea as she already had a history of theft and deception

Poor squeaky clean drug grower Jeremy was tricked into Robbing the caravan site by his rotten girlfriend...

How long does it take you to make up such stupid things? 

[Jane]

Julie testified that June did not approve of Jeremy's relationship with Julie.

June offered to buy Julie a property in Essex or London. Julie was offended and rejected the offer. But I thought Julie was a gold digger ?

Julie was a teenager when she met Jeremy. Both working at Sloppy Joe's I believe, in low paid jobs.  If she was looking for a meal ticket, Jeremy was not the answer.

Things changed slightly over the next couple of years. Jeremy being given a cottage, car,  free petrol and a job. However he was only given a farmers wage for working long hours. Not exactly glamorous for Julie.

Rather than live off Jeremy, Julie lived in digs in Lewisham. Working towards being a teacher. Something she is now. A respected one as well.

She had no choice but to act as lookout when Jeremy robbed the caravan site. A year earlier she was involved in Susan Battersby's minor cheque book fraud. Done more for laugh than to live a life of luxury. Teenagers, tut.

After the massacre and in a state of shock she stayed with Jeremy for one month.  Often because Jeremy asked her to. But they soon spilt, Julie was not dragged off Jeremy, despite his new found fortune   

When approaching the police, she had no idea the NOTW would approach her. But they did, as well as approach Jeremy.

Julie also did have to approach the police. They knew nothing about Susan Battersby's minor cheque book fraud and Jeremy's caravan break in.

Julie testified that the break up was gradual and mutual process. Jeremy also said the relationship had been in decline for several months.

Does everyone agree the perception of Julie as a gold digger is wrong ?

As a matter of interest, have you worked out how long it would have taken Julie to get from Goldhanger ti Goldsmith College using public transport?

 Have you any proof that it was ever suggested she should live with Jeremy on a permanent basis?

Are you suggesting Jeremy FORCED Julie to stand guard for him.

You don 't need reminding that Julie admitted the cheque book fraud was her idea and she accomplished it using her FRIEND, Susan Battersby's cheque book and forging her signature which goes some way beyond being a teenage prank.

[scipio_usmc]

As a matter of interest, have you worked out how long it would have taken Julie to get from Goldhanger ti Goldsmith College using public transport?

 Have you any proof that it was ever suggested she should live with Jeremy on a permanent basis?

Are you suggesting Jeremy FORCED Julie to stand guard for him.

You don 't need reminding that Julie admitted the cheque book fraud was her idea and she accomplished it using her FRIEND, Susan Battersby's cheque book and forging her signature which goes some way beyond being a teenage prank.

There is a plethora of evidence that June was opposed to people living together unmarried, which Christianity considers a sin and until very recently was frowned on by society as a whole (also opposed to premarital sex), and thus that they wanted to find a place for her to live separate from Jeremy and that is also why they welcomed the idea of Julie and Jeremy marrying.   

How much of it was because of appearance sake and how much because of religion is anyone's guess and not particularly relevant.

Julie and Susan made it sound like a prank done to impress Jeremy and it seems credible.

Those trying to pretend Jeremy was squeaky clean and so forth are just embarrassing themselves and tryin gto pretend that nothing Julie says is credible because of the checkbook robbery are the same peopel saying Jeremy should be trusted despite being caught lying repeatedly and even want to pretend some lies were not lies.

WHy is it that you always try to defend Jeremy so vigiorously and Jeremy supporters even when the claims are so absurd like the nonsense about Julie causing Jeremy to commit the Caravan robbery?

Do you intentionally like to sabotage your own credibility?

[Alias]

There is a plethora of evidence that June was opposed to people living together unmarried, which Christianity considers a sin and until very recently was frowned on by society as a whole (also opposed to premarital sex), and thus that they wanted to find a place for her to live separate from Jeremy and that is also why they welcomed the idea of Julie and Jeremy marrying.   

How much of it was because of appearance sake and how much because of religion is anyone's guess and not particularly relevant.

Julie and Susan made it sound like a prank done to impress Jeremy and it seems credible.

Those trying to pretend Jeremy was squeaky clean and so forth are just embarrassing themselves and tryin gto pretend that nothing Julie says is credible because of the checkbook robbery are the same peopel saying Jeremy should be trusted despite being caught lying repeatedly and even want to pretend some lies were not lies.

WHy is it that you always try to defend Jeremy so vigiorously and Jeremy supporters even when the claims are so absurd like the nonsense about Julie causing Jeremy to commit the Caravan robbery?

Do you intentionally like to sabotage your own credibility?

That is convenient for you to claim, but I am not buying that. It shows Julie as a person who does not own up to her own wrongdoings, but wipes them off on others. If you read her statements thoroughly (also the one from 2002), you clearly see that that is a pattern with her.
But ANYTHING to blacken Jeremy - even a fraud he had nothing to do with. That is bias. Do you intentionally like to make yourself look biased?

[Jane]

As a matter of interest, have you worked out how long it would have taken Julie to get from Goldhanger ti Goldsmith College using public transport?

 Have you any proof that it was ever suggested she should live with Jeremy on a permanent basis?

Are you suggesting Jeremy FORCED Julie to stand guard for him.

You don 't need reminding that Julie admitted the cheque book fraud was her idea and she accomplished it using her FRIEND, Susan Battersby's cheque book and forging her signature which goes some way beyond being a teenage prank.

There is a plethora of evidence that June was opposed to people living together unmarried, which Christianity considers a sin and until very recently was frowned on by society as a whole (also opposed to premarital sex), and thus that they wanted to find a place for her to live separate from Jeremy and that is also why they welcomed the idea of Julie and Jeremy marrying.   

How much of it was because of appearance sake and how much because of religion is anyone's guess and not particularly relevant.

Julie and Susan made it sound like a prank done to impress Jeremy and it seems credible.

Those trying to pretend Jeremy was squeaky clean and so forth are just embarrassing themselves and tryin gto pretend that nothing Julie says is credible because of the checkbook robbery are the same peopel saying Jeremy should be trusted despite being caught lying repeatedly and even want to pretend some lies were not lies.

WHy is it that you always try to defend Jeremy so vigiorously and Jeremy supporters even when the claims are so absurd like the nonsense about Julie causing Jeremy to commit the Caravan robbery?

Do you intentionally like to sabotage your own credibility?

Why are you answering points I haven't raised?

I didn't bring June and her beliefs in to the post because I didn't think it relevant.

Perhaps you can tell me how long it would have taken Julie to travel by public transport from Goldhanger to Goldsmith College.

It really matters not a JOT what Julie and Susan made their jolly SOUND like. They broke the law which USUALLY doesn't take into consideration that it was a prank carried out to impress a boyfriend.

I don't recall ever having VIGOUROUSLY defended Jeremy. Please try to differentiate between us in stead of labeling us idiots and liars.

[Caroline]

That is convenient for you to claim, but I am not buying that. It shows Julie as a person who does not own up to her own wrongdoings, but wipes them off on others. If you read her statements thoroughly (also the one from 2002), you clearly see that that is a pattern with her.
But ANYTHING to blacken Jeremy - even a fraud he had nothing to do with. That is bias. Do you intentionally like to make yourself look biased?

I totally agree, the bank fraud was (by her own admission) the idea of Julie Mugford - it actually shows that she can be quite manipulative, in that she talked Susan into using HER cheque book. Her mention of Jeremy was simply to make sure Jeremy's name was never far from the negative aspects in her life. I might think Jeremy is probably guilty, BUT when something is OFF it's no good trying to make it smell sweet and mentioning Jeremy in the cheque book fraud stinks!!

[scipio_usmc]

That is convenient for you to claim, but I am not buying that. It shows Julie as a person who does not own up to her own wrongdoings, but wipes them off on others. If you read her statements thoroughly (also the one from 2002), you clearly see that that is a pattern with her.
But ANYTHING to blacken Jeremy - even a fraud he had nothing to do with. That is bias. Do you intentionally like to make yourself look biased?

It's not bias, the claim that Jeremy teased her about being squeaky clean ad trying to get her involved in criminal activities is credible.  Explain why it is not credible and that instead you believe she was out to just profit economicially- what did she buy- oh things for Jeremy to impress him with what she had done...

In the meantime I don't cite this issue to establish he is dirty and thus likely guilty.  Rather biased peopel liek yourself and the other Bamberettes as the red baord clals you try anythign to say nothing Julie says should be trusted and we should believe she lied in total and try pretending that is the main evidence against Jeremy not the true heart of the case which is that ther eis no way Sheila could have killed everyone else or killed herself and thus Jeremy did it and simply tried to frame her.

 

[Adam]

As a matter of interest, have you worked out how long it would have taken Julie to get from Goldhanger ti Goldsmith College using public transport?

 Have you any proof that it was ever suggested she should live with Jeremy on a permanent basis?

Are you suggesting Jeremy FORCED Julie to stand guard for him.

You don 't need reminding that Julie admitted the cheque book fraud was her idea and she accomplished it using her FRIEND, Susan Battersby's cheque book and forging her signature which goes some way beyond being a teenage prank.

Julie testified that June offered to buy her a property in London or Essex. Is there proof. No. Only a testimony. June cannot confirm or deny. Sheila shot her 8 times after June invited her over for a free holiday.

Susan Battersby's WS does not say she was forced into using her own cheque book. She does not even say it was Julies idea.

Jeremy took Julie to the caravan site and told her to wait outside as a lookout. Jeremy would only be a few minutes.

[scipio_usmc]

I totally agree, the bank fraud was (by her own admission) the idea of Julie Mugford - it actually shows that she can be quite manipulative, in that she talked Susan into using HER cheque book. Her mention of Jeremy was simply to make sure Jeremy's name was never far from the negative aspects in her life. I might think Jeremy is probably guilty, BUT when something is OFF it's no good trying to make it smell sweet and mentioning Jeremy in the cheque book fraud stinks!!

Susuan claims she decided on her own at a later date what the hell and to do it for kicks.

The same manipulation you describe from Julie to Susan is what Julie describes from Jeremy.

It certainly sounds like peer pressure combined with getting kicks to me not some major crime effort where Julie wanted some material object badly and resorted to crime to get it.