Surely The Timings Are Incorrect?

[susan]

Caroline I had doubts about him being innocent months ago and your posts  helped to confirmed my doubts along with some of harters posts  I notice Jackie is always telling Scipio and Adam that their posts are rubbish but none of the posters who think he is guilty resort to such rudeness no need for it we are all grown up and should be able to debate in a civilised manner and remain dignified.  I have noticed that the odd post Jackie posts about the case are received on the forum in a pleasant manner by other members.

[nugnug]

I see Jackie as the same kind that writes to Ian Huntley, the yorkshire ripper, Charles Manson, Charles Bronson.... middle aged (at best) single women who seem to see their contact with the someone inside as a badge of pride.

The only difference is that Jackie can hide behind the fact that Bamber claims innocence in order for her contact not to seem as strange as it acutally is. I'm unsure if they truly believes in innocence, or simply doesn't care because I've never seen her post any form of understanding on any aspect of the case.

It seems she uses it as a sort of social status.

and your all complaining about her making personal coments the words pot kettele and black springs to mind.

[scipio_usmc]

Caroline I had doubts about him being innocent months ago and your posts  helped to confirmed my doubts along with some of harters posts  I notice Jackie is always telling Scipio and Adam that their posts are rubbish but none of the posters who think he is guilty resort to such rudeness no need for it we are all grown up and should be able to debate in a civilised manner and remain dignified.  I have noticed that the odd post Jackie posts about the case are received on the forum in a pleasant manner by other members.

The problem is that she can't back up her claims tha tour posts are rubbish.  She makes claims unsupported claims.  I don't care about the rude factor but simply that she is making bogus dismissals. 

I don't just say she or Mike or whoever is wrong I discuss how and why and refer to the evidence that establishes such.

As a practical matter Jackie's knowledge of the facts of the case is absolutely pitiful.  It is astonishing someone can be so involved and not be aware of the most basic facts.     

[JackiePreece]

Thanks Nugs

Skip, Adam, Mat, Caroline, Susan are all one of a kind

The forum isn't a popularity contest and if I was the last one on this forum who believed Jeremy was innocent I wouldn't care. If I believe there has been a great injustice I will fight for things to be put right

As most people know I have over 2000 followers on twitter of mainly legal people and news people and they are certainly NOT of the same opinion of Caroline and her mob

I don't even know Jeremy that well but I have done more research on him than anyone that believes he is guilty

The facts are

He loved farming
He loved his family
He loved his life
He got on well with his sister
He has no history of violence
He had no money worries

Just an ordinary young man

There's a lot more to come out in this case, I know that for sure

[Jan]

I see Jackie as the same kind that writes to Ian Huntley, the yorkshire ripper, Charles Manson, Charles Bronson.... middle aged (at best) single women who seem to see their contact with the someone inside as a badge of pride.

The only difference is that Jackie can hide behind the fact that Bamber claims innocence in order for her contact not to seem as strange as it acutally is. I'm unsure if they truly believes in innocence, or simply doesn't care because I've never seen her post any form of understanding on any aspect of the case.

It seems she uses it as a sort of social status.

Mat - I think that is  a very personal post - my parents always taught me two wrongs don't make a right.

[Alias]

Mat - I think that is  a very personal post - my parents always taught me two wrongs don't make a right.

Mat likes the drama - just an observation. 

[JackiePreece]

Mat - I think that is  a very personal post - my parents always taught me two wrongs don't make a right.

Mat sent me a threatening pm the first day he was on the forum so I am used to his behaviour

[susan]

Jackie even when I was posting on this forum as Jeremy Bamber innocent I could never please you and the reason being personal on your part as I was a great friend of Bridget's and you were not due to issues off the forum which you constantly brought on to the forum and now it would appear because I now think he is guilty I should not be described as being part of anyone's mob.  I have never been disrespectful to you in any shape or form and really cannot understand your attitude toward me but I can live with it as I am not on here to become popular but just to talk about the case and remain respectful to all parties.

[lookout]

Mat sent me a threatening pm the first day he was on the forum so I am used to his behaviour

He didn't send me one,but I too am used to his behaviour. Something wrong with folk like that.I've actually nursed them !! It's known as being paranoid.

[petey]

Thanks Nugs

Skip, Adam, Mat, Caroline, Susan are all one of a kind

The forum isn't a popularity contest and if I was the last one on this forum who believed Jeremy was innocent I wouldn't care. If I believe there has been a great injustice I will fight for things to be put right

As most people know I have over 2000 followers on twitter of mainly legal people and news people and they are certainly NOT of the same opinion of Caroline and her mob

I don't even know Jeremy that well but I have done more research on him than anyone that believes he is guilty

The facts are

He loved farming
He loved his family
He loved his life
He got on well with his sister
He has no history of violence
He had no money worries

Just an ordinary young man

There's a lot more to come out in this case, I know that for sure

Out of interest who do you define as 'legal people.' Do you mean by this solicitors? barristers? judges?paralegals? legal execs? students? legal secretaries?

I have spoken to numerous colleagues and associates throughout the legal profession, including criminal practitioners. Firstly, very few have the time available to get to the requisite level of understanding to give an informed opinion regarding jb's guilt or innocence. Secondly, the vast majority of those who proffer an opinion lean towards guilt.

However, the common argument used is that although there is a belief that jb is guilty, whether the prosecution reached sufficient level of proof for guilt beyond reasonable doubt, is very much up for debate.

[JackiePreece]

No judges, solicitors, barristers and loads of law students and probably every newspaper
Where are you on this Petey?

[Jane]

Out of interest who do you define as 'legal people.' Do you mean by this solicitors? barristers? judges?paralegals? legal execs? students? legal secretaries?

I have spoken to numerous colleagues and associates throughout the legal profession, including criminal practitioners. Firstly, very few have the time available to get to the requisite level of understanding to give an informed opinion regarding jb's guilt or innocence. Secondly, the vast majority of those who proffer an opinion lean towards guilt.

However, the common argument used is that although there is a belief that jb is guilty, whether the prosecution reached sufficient level of proof for guilt beyond reasonable doubt, is very much up for debate.

Hence the reason that after 30 years the case is STILL, by the interested few, hotly debated.

[petey]

No judges, solicitors, barristers and loads of law students and probably every newspaper
Where are you on this Petey?

To be fair I probably don't know the case in sufficient detail to give an informed decision as there are so many documents / witness statements I haven't had access to or haven't had time to read.

When I first covered the case during my law degree I though he was innocent and when I first joined this forum I prob thought him about 70% innocent.

As time has passed my belief in his innocence has diminished and I say with the caveat that I haven't seen anywhere near enough documents to give an informed opinion, that I am now erring slightly towards guilt.

Notwithstanding this, the investigation was flawed, jb's initial defence team let him down and from what I have seen I'm not convinced the prosecution reached the required threshold to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

However, I also haven't seen anything credible on this forum or heard of anything credible to overturn his conviction.

[nugnug]

when lawyers offer to work for nothing on a case they must be pretty convinced of innocence.

[petey]

when lawyers offer to work for nothing on a case they must be pretty convinced of innocence.

That is simply not true