Any other examples of jilted woman testifying against former lovers ?

[Jane]

I think its pretty obvious that it is true - hell hath no fury like a woman scorned

Adam clearly hasn't experienced it..........................or much else either, judging by his thought processes.

[susan]

Adam IMO Julie making a statement to EP about Jeremy Bamber's guilt was not really anything to do with her being a woman scorned.  She was saving her own neck as she knew her chances of becoming the next Mrs. Bamber had gone and she did not want a criminal record she obviously knew more about his plans than she was admitting to so this was a good way out for her and to make a few pounds as well.  Simple.

[Adam]

April, discuss the thread please. Rather than making personal digs.

And please give me examples of (apparent) jilted lovers testifying against former lovers in court cases.

[Adam]

Adam IMO Julie making a statement to EP about Jeremy Bamber's guilt was not really anything to do with her being a woman scorned.  She was saving her own neck as she knew her chances of becoming the next Mrs. Bamber had gone and she did not want a criminal record she obviously knew more about his plans than she was admitting to so this was a good way out for her and to make a few pounds as well.  Simple.

I will say this one more time to you.

The police knew nothing about Susan Battersby's 1984  minor cheque book fraud. Or Jeremy's caravan break in.

Julie told the police about Jeremy's caravan break in straight away.

The police found out about Susan Battersby's 1984 minor cheque book fraud after she had completed her WS.

Anyway, the thread question. Can someone please give me some examples. It would benefit Jeremy.

[Jane]

She gets a lot of criticism on here. She has to as her WS and testimony is so damning.

But at the end of the day Jeremy's one reason why she testified is dreadfully weak.

My view is she reacted perfectly normally in the situation. Approaching the police after 30 days (thread already created) and telling them what she knew.

Simple.

Your views on what constitutes being "perfectly normal" appear to be at odds, not only with the rest of the forum, but as the forum is merely a microcosm of the rest of the world, it's likely they'd be at odds there, too. personally, I fail to see much which can be described as being "normal" in most of her actions. Spending nearly two years with a man who wants to murder his family. Providing him with sleeping pills to facilitate it. Wanting to go in to one of the victims to ask her what had happened. Wanting to have a second look at the twin victims. Posing, semi clad for a scummy tabloid whilst revealing she'd "enjoyed  sex like never before." "PERFECTLY NORMAL" I think June came VERY close to the truth.

[Jane]

April, discuss the thread please. Rather than making personal digs.

And please give me examples of (apparent) jilted lovers testifying against former lovers in court cases.

Adam, I think that in certain papers they're probably to be found on a regular basis, however, they're NOT the sort of papers I read, and why should their appearance in papers be so important anyway?

[Adam]

Your views on what constitutes being "perfectly normal" appear to be at odds, not only with the rest of the forum, but as the forum is merely a microcosm of the rest of the world, it's likely they'd be at odds there, too. personally, I fail to see much which can be described as being "normal" in most of her actions. Spending nearly two years with a man who wants to murder his family. Providing him with sleeping pills to facilitate it. Wanting to go in to one of the victims to ask her what had happened. Wanting to have a second look at the twin victims. Posing, semi clad for a scummy tabloid whilst revealing she'd "enjoyed  sex like never before." "PERFECTLY NORMAL" I think June came VERY close to the truth.

No one is perfect.

Jeremy had a NOTW deal and tried to sell nude pictures of Sheila to the sun.

She did not believe Jeremy would do anything. He was hardly a big time gangster. More a small time farmer.

Her reaction afterwards is normal to me. But appreciate after 29 years you are finding it hard to accept Jeremy is guilty. Although the mountain of forensic and circumstantial evidence has been around for years.

[lookout]

Your views on what constitutes being "perfectly normal" appear to be at odds, not only with the rest of the forum, but as the forum is merely a microcosm of the rest of the world, it's likely they'd be at odds there, too. personally, I fail to see much which can be described as being "normal" in most of her actions. Spending nearly two years with a man who wants to murder his family. Providing him with sleeping pills to facilitate it. Wanting to go in to one of the victims to ask her what had happened. Wanting to have a second look at the twin victims. Posing, semi clad for a scummy tabloid whilst revealing she'd "enjoyed  sex like never before." "PERFECTLY NORMAL" I think June came VERY close to the truth.

Because poor June was " churchified " her vocabulary would have been restrictive,but had I been the caller,there'd have been some more choice and juicy comments made towards JM.

[Adam]

Adam, I think that in certain papers they're probably to be found on a regular basis, however, they're NOT the sort of papers I read, and why should their appearance in papers be so important anyway?

So no one has any examples.

Julie is the only (apparently) jilted lover who testified against an innocent former lover in court. Ruining his life and getting him convicted of killing his family.

[Jan]

I will say this one more time to you.

The police knew nothing about Susan Battersby's 1984  minor cheque book fraud. Or Jeremy's caravan break in.

Julie told the police about Jeremy's caravan break in straight away.

The police found out about Susan Battersby's 1984 minor cheque book fraud after she had completed her WS.

Anyway, the thread question. Can someone please give me some examples. It would benefit Jeremy.

Adam don't be rude.

Julie  said in her own statements when he was telling her the plans she knew he meant it and it upset her - so you are wrong

Unless you have seen her 32 statements you don't know at what stage she told the police about the fraud/drug involvement /burglary. They may have just asked her do you have anything that may preclude you from being a good witness.

It has also been said Liz tried very hard to get her to go to the police and she refused. - so unless we can find her statement I am certainly not going to rely on your book

[Jane]

No one is perfect.

Jeremy had a NOTW deal and tried to sell nude pictures of Sheila to the sun.

She did not believe Jeremy would do anything. He was hardly a big time gangster. More a small time farmer.

Her reaction afterwards is normal to me. But appreciate after 29 years you are finding it hard to accept Jeremy is guilty. Although the mountain of forensic and circumstantial evidence has been around for years.

So your only  -pathetic- reason you can give for her sluttish and self serving behaviour is to say that "no one is perfect"?!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jeremy DIDN'T sell his story and if those pictures of Sheila HAD been on offer, the Sun would UNDOUBTEDLY have bought them.

You aren't in the position to know what she thought Jeremy would do and whilst he may only have been a "small time farmer" in your eyes, I imagine Julie saw him very differently.

Actually Adam, since believing Jeremy to be guilty, I find myself believing that Julie was FAR more involved that I'd previously believed her to be.

[Adam]

Adam don't be rude.

Julie  said in her own statements when he was telling her the plans she knew he meant it and it upset her - so you are wrong

Unless you have seen her 32 statements you don't know at what stage she told the police about the fraud/drug involvement /burglary. They may have just asked her do you have anything that may preclude you from being a good witness.

It has also been said Liz tried very hard to get her to go to the police and she refused. - so unless we can find her statement I am certainly not going to rely on your book

Liz must have been convinced with what Julie said.

Feel free to show me her 32 statements. Otherwise there is nothing to discuss.

Anyway. The thread question.

[Jan]

Liz must have been convinced with what Julie said.

Feel free to show me her 32 statements. Otherwise there is nothing to discuss.

Anyway. The thread question.

Adam - I am saying you don't have proof of what happened unless you have seen them - and as it seems you have not then stop posting things as Fact.

Reference the thread - it will only help Jeremy in your eyes , and to be honest I am sure there are too many cases of women scorned /jilted testifying against former lovers to list. As it wont prove anything I certainly am not going to waste my time in order for you to distract from the answers that you don't like.

[Patti]

So your only  -pathetic- reason you can give for her sluttish and self serving behaviour is to say that "no one is perfect"?!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jeremy DIDN'T sell his story and if those pictures of Sheila HAD been on offer, the Sun would UNDOUBTEDLY have bought them.

You aren't in the position to know what she thought Jeremy would do and whilst he may only have been a "small time farmer" in your eyes, I imagine Julie saw him very differently.

Actually Adam, since believing Jeremy to be guilty, I find myself believing that Julie was FAR more involved that I'd previously believed her to be.

Hi April

Can I ask why you think Jeremy is guilty? or could you tell me in private. I would be interested in your reasons....

[Adam]

So your only  -pathetic- reason you can give for her sluttish and self serving behaviour is to say that "no one is perfect"?!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jeremy DIDN'T sell his story and if those pictures of Sheila HAD been on offer, the Sun would UNDOUBTEDLY have bought them.

You aren't in the position to know what she thought Jeremy would do and whilst he may only have been a "small time farmer" in your eyes, I imagine Julie saw him very differently.

Actually Adam, since believing Jeremy to be guilty, I find myself believing that Julie was FAR more involved that I'd previously believed her to be.

You're the pathetic one. Jeremy is innocent. Ha ha. Pathetic.

It was front page news in the Sun about what Jeremy tried to sell.

How was she more involved ? Did she commit the crime with him and get a helicopter back to New Cross ? Maybe MM was the pilot.