The Week of the Murders

[nugnug]

I disagreed with you at the weekend over Julie being forced to tell lies by the police.

The police had nothing on her and she approached the police herself, Liz Rimmington inviting Stan Jones over. Julie being in the room.

I created a thread yesterday explaining why Julie did not not speak for 30 days. Another issue people are always criticising her for. I welcome you're opinion on the thread.

if you aprouch the police yourself you don't get arrested.

[Adam]

if you aprouch the police yourself you don't get arrested.

Have you got a source showing she was arrested please ?

The police knew nothing about Jeremy's caravan break in. Or Susan Battersby's 1984 minor cheque book fraud. She was in New Cross when the massacre happened. Jeremy had not been arrested.

So why was Julie arrested ?

[nugnug]

what do you think held in custody means.

[Adam]

what do you think held in custody means.

I don't know.

But she approached the police. Then told them what she knew, creating a WS and then testifying.

Stan Jones went to visit Liz Rimmington and Julie after Liz rang him.

She may have been held in custody weeks later for a short time after the police found out about Susan Battersby's 1984 minor cheque book fraud. That was after she had completed her WS.

[Caroline]

Adam I did not put you on ignore because you highlighted Jeremys guilt .

Harters you  say that people should be thicker skinned - then why have forum rules at all?

If a post breaks the rules then It should be pointed out.

People ahould be able to debate without being rude and personal , and calling posters liars or dis-honest is IMO out of order and against the rules.

I also agree but when there is only one mod online, they can't be expected to see every comment. We do our best to make sure there are limited disruptions and hand out warnings and bans when required. We don't hand them out very often and only when we're left with little alternative, however, we still get criticised and most often we simply can't win.

There is a lot of rudeness on both sides but members are often selective in their complaints. Sorry if that seems harsh but it's the way things have become lately. I've taken a lot of crap from some surprising quarters but such is life. If members feel they have something to add to the mod team, they can always request to join.

[No-Bits]

Harters you  say that people should be thicker skinned - then why have forum rules at all?

If a post breaks the rules then It should be pointed out.

People ahould be able to debate without being rude and personal , and calling posters liars or dis-honest is IMO out of order and against the rules.

I don't think that there are enough hours in the day for the volunteering mods and admins to 'nanny' everybody.

Yes I think people whinge and whine a bit too much, in the normal scheme of things it is often the person whining about something which they themselves have also been guilty of (I am not suggesting that is the case with Alias).

If everybody who broke the rules was banned, then I don't think there would be many members left, plus I agree with the view that certain 'rule breaking posts' actually reflect badly on the poster rather than the intended target and therefore there is no harm in them staying up.

Without any rules, this place wouldn't work. The more serious breaches appear (to me) to get dealt with appropriately.

Regardless, of all of that, this is only my opinion. Feel free to approach NGB & Caroline with your complaints if you think it is necessary.

[nugnug]

well it seems to have stooped now anyway.

[ngb1066]

I don't know.

But she approached the police. Then told them what she knew, creating a WS and then testifying.

Stan Jones went to visit Liz Rimmington and Julie after Liz rang him.

She may have been held in custody weeks later for a short time after the police found out about Susan Battersby's 1984 minor cheque book fraud. That was after she had completed her WS.

She was held in custody immediately.

[nugnug]

wich is not what is done to to witness who are willingly coperating.