I saw that on the news (am in London now). Problem is EP (against court orders) destroyed all physical evidence in the Bamber case back in 1996 (right when forensic DNA was gaining ground....), so nothing will be cleared up there, will it?!
Harters called this an interesting case. It is. Only unsolved cases are interesting - this is basically an unsolved case.
Who cares about a solved case?
How many times will Jeremy supporters keep perpetuation a myth by claiming there was a court order to preserve the evidence? There wasn't any court order what was violated was police imposed guidelines that evidence will be preseved in cases with open appeal. Time and again I have challenged you and others making this claim to support it with evidence but you can't because there was no such court order.
The cop who destroyed the evidence had no idea the appeal was still considered open. There was no active appeal going on. There was allegedly 2 years of communications between Jeremy's lawyers and the Home Office and it is argued these letters suffice to constitute the appeal being active. The cop who destroyed the evidence had no way to know about these letters though.
Why is the myth about a court order being violate dimportant? Because the reality is tha tther eis the evidence destroyed had no ability at all to help Jeremy. The notion there was some evidence that if DNA tested could have disproved the moderator evidence and proved Sheila was the shooter is complete nonsense.
Your suggestion that they intentionally got rid of the evidence despite a court order to prevent DNA from being used to free him is incorrect.
So too is it nonsense to call this an unsolved case. It is a solved case. Ther eis not one shred of evidence ot support Jeremy's innocence. Those who argue he is innocent have no leg to stand us thus resort to nonsense about how he was framed and bogus claims about how police destroyed evidence against court order to conceal the truth. Only biased people assert such lies and nonsense.
Jack the Ripper is interesting because of the brutal nature of the crimes. Other crimes like Son of Sam that are equally famous though they were solved. The failure of Jack the Ripper being solved simply opened the door to fiction authors to make up all sorts of things about the ripper case that they otherwise could not have done.
Just the supposed DNA doesn't establish weather ther eoculd have been an innocent DNA transfer or the results have been confirmed so the supposed unmasking is anything but certian at this point. But it doesn't mattr anyway most of us don't care. The identity is much more significant at the time of the murders and several decades thereafter. Unmasking the killer after eveyrone who was alive during the murders are dead doesn't mean much because no one really cares or is affected. If Jack the Ripper were confirmed to be on eof the suspects that would at least be of some note though limited. but finding out it was a nobody means little, who really cares...
The largest attention this case got was when the press was busy reporting claims suggesting Jerey was innocent and going to win his appeal. Upon losing it is obvious that he is guilty and the hype was all just hype. Obvious to all except people too biased to face reality and you fall into that camp.
