Author Topic: Why would he?  (Read 10624 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #120 on: August 02, 2014, 10:06:AM »
Adam  I don't think MM was ever hired for anything he was just a plumber who liked his women.  Scipio said Jeremy had not seen him for a year.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #121 on: August 02, 2014, 10:30:AM »
I agree. Other people are questioning MM alibi.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #122 on: August 02, 2014, 11:36:AM »
If MM did it, Jeremy would not be daft enough to ring the police.

He would stay in London with Julie and claim he was taking authorised annual leave. Being nowhere near the scene when the bodies were found or when the massacre could have happened.

Julie also said Jeremy did not have £2,000 to pay.

Jeremy would not hire MM. He was not a hit man for hire, or some sort of tough guy. To expect him to suddenly massacre a family is unrealistic.  There is every chance he would back down at the last minute or during the massacre. Jeremy wouldn't.

Actually, Jeremy had exactly £2,000 in his account at the time of the murders but I agree that it would be difficult for Jeremy to find a local man willing to kill two children for 2 grand. I believe that Jeremy purposely told Julie a C&B story so as to discredit her if she ever went to the police. He was simply confident (or arrogant) enough to think he would be believed.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #123 on: August 02, 2014, 11:44:AM »
There are lots of reasons why Jeremy would tell Julie he was involved. Thread already created.

There are also lots of reasons why he would use a proxy. It is clear MM had nothing to do with the massacre.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #124 on: August 02, 2014, 11:48:AM »
Yes, there are lots of them on the forum!!!  ;D
When I was young I was always taught never to say them or you. But rather to say We or us. ;D So probably being a man of good manners you probably meant to say, "Yes, there are lots of us on the forum"!!!  ;D

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #125 on: August 02, 2014, 11:51:AM »
I actually don't like that show or the spinoffs. I was a fan of the various Law and Order series and CSI, particularly CSI NY which the SOBs cancelled- CBS cancels most of the shows I like such as Numbers and  Without a Trace but Blue Blood's has been renewed at least...
Yes I like those shows as well. But I don't really find the time to watch many of them.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #126 on: August 02, 2014, 11:53:AM »
If MM did it, Jeremy would not be daft enough to ring the police.

He would stay in London with Julie and claim he was taking authorised annual leave. Being nowhere near the scene when the bodies were found or when the massacre could have happened.

Julie also said Jeremy did not have £2,000 to pay.

Jeremy would not hire MM. He was not a hit man for hire, or some sort of tough guy. To expect him to suddenly massacre a family is unrealistic.  There is every chance he would back down at the last minute or during the massacre. Jeremy wouldn't.
Exactly What I think. The whole silly story of the hitman was a complete fabrication by Muggy. ;) It's a pity she didn't think things through.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #127 on: August 02, 2014, 11:55:AM »
Actually, Jeremy had exactly £2,000 in his account at the time of the murders but I agree that it would be difficult for Jeremy to find a local man willing to kill two children for 2 grand. I believe that Jeremy purposely told Julie a C&B story so as to discredit her if she ever went to the police. He was simply confident (or arrogant) enough to think he would be believed.
Caroline the clue is " in his account". ;)

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #128 on: August 02, 2014, 11:56:AM »
Hi Grahame  give me a clue don't get the answer you gave Caroline :'(

Offline jon

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1437
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #129 on: August 02, 2014, 11:59:AM »
Actually, Jeremy had exactly £2,000 in his account at the time of the murders but I agree that it would be difficult for Jeremy to find a local man willing to kill two children for 2 grand. I believe that Jeremy purposely told Julie a C&B story so as to discredit her if she ever went to the police. He was simply confident (or arrogant) enough to think he would be believed.
Quote from: Adam on December 24, 2013, 01:45:PM
There is no evidence Mugford lied. Ever.

Oh yes there is!!

You have come a long way since you said this Caroline !!
« Last Edit: August 02, 2014, 11:59:AM by jon »

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #130 on: August 02, 2014, 12:03:PM »
Hi Grahame  give me a clue don't get the answer you gave Caroline :'(
Susan the money was "in his account". In other words he didn't pay anyone to muder his family.

Offline jon

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1437
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #131 on: August 02, 2014, 12:06:PM »
Quote from: Adam on December 24, 2013, 01:45:PM
There is no evidence Mugford lied. Ever.

Oh yes there is!!

You have come a long way since you said this Caroline !!

And this ,


Well, I guess that's arguable but I do think Rivlin made a good job of discrediting Mugford, even the judge (who I feel was biased in favour of the prosecution because he didn't understand the blood in the silencer evidence!!), warned the jury about talking anything she said as gospel. Rivlin pointed out that when the defence asked her questions, she became weepy and emotional and it was difficult to get an answer from her but when questioned by the prosecution she was composed and answered with no problem!! (Rather telling I think!!).



No-Bits

  • Guest
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #132 on: August 02, 2014, 12:08:PM »
Caroline the clue is " in his account". ;)

What clue? She was responding to a post indicating that Jeremy didn't £2,  by saying he actually had that amount in his account.

That was all.  :-\

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #133 on: August 02, 2014, 12:08:PM »
Quote from: Adam on December 24, 2013, 01:45:PM
There is no evidence Mugford lied. Ever.

Oh yes there is!!

You have come a long way since you said this Caroline !!
The evidence that Muggy lied are the lies she told about almost everything she claimed Jeremy told her. The problem is that although it was she who lied the opposition are intent of thinking that it was Jeremy who lied and not her.
That to me is very strange as those who lie are usually accountable for their own lies. Unfortunately instead of Muggy, Jeremy gets blamed for her lies. Very odd logic if you ask me, especially as there is absolutely nothing to back up a word she said as they were allegedly said in private.
What amazes me of course is how can anyone be so dumb so as to be taken in by this woman?

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Why would he?
« Reply #134 on: August 02, 2014, 12:10:PM »
And this ,


Well, I guess that's arguable but I do think Rivlin made a good job of discrediting Mugford, even the judge (who I feel was biased in favour of the prosecution because he didn't understand the blood in the silencer evidence!!), warned the jury about talking anything she said as gospel. Rivlin pointed out that when the defence asked her questions, she became weepy and emotional and it was difficult to get an answer from her but when questioned by the prosecution she was composed and answered with no problem!! (Rather telling I think!!).
Jeremy's counsel apparently according to Adam were also taken in by Muggy's lies. The only level headed one among the cops was Taff Jones who didn't believe a word of her testimony.