Author Topic: do the fingerprints really prove anything.  (Read 9578 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tyler

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2395
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #60 on: September 26, 2014, 07:34:PM »
Please provide the evidence that Neville was referring to Jeremy when he 'allegedly' said to RWB 'I must never turn my back on that young man' And you do realise that this came from a book and not a statement don't you?

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #61 on: September 26, 2014, 07:40:PM »
Yea, he was such a good farmer his father told a friend and the housekeeper that he was afraid to turn his back to his beloved Jeremy.

Don't put the blame on Mugford for the drug dealing, Jerry was doing it long before she popped in on the action.  Maybe she didn't report him as a murderer because he wasn't one at that stage.  She came through in the end though and turned Queens Evidence.




It certainly wasn't Jeremy that his father was referring to,,but like every other comment which was made,it fitted the scenario because there was bugger-all else to find in the way of evidence.

Mugford was an adult not a child,so she knew what she was doing alright. Bully for her,Queens Evidence ? Through doing Pinocchio impressions ! And having been ENCOURAGED with big bucks,who wouldn't ? Only those with the morals of a tom-cat.

Mr. Gee

  • Guest
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #62 on: September 26, 2014, 07:41:PM »
Yea, he was such a good farmer his father told a friend and the housekeeper that he was afraid to turn his back to his beloved Jeremy.

Don't put the blame on Mugford for the drug dealing, Jerry was doing it long before she popped in on the action.  Maybe she didn't report him as a murderer because he wasn't one at that stage.  She came through in the end though and turned Queens Evidence.
I wonder where all this hate in you comes from. Were you abused as a child?

Mr. Gee

  • Guest
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #63 on: September 26, 2014, 07:42:PM »
Please provide the evidence that Neville was referring to Jeremy when he 'allegedly' said to RWB 'I must never turn my back on that young man' And you do realise that this came from a book and not a statement don't you?
It was hearsay anyway tyler. It was passed to one other person before it became public knowledge. RWB was quoting an alleged saying of Nevill.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2014, 07:43:PM by Mr. Gee »

John

  • Guest
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #64 on: September 26, 2014, 08:39:PM »
It was hearsay anyway tyler. It was passed to one other person before it became public knowledge. RWB was quoting an alleged saying of Nevill.

The farm secretary's comments weren't hearsay, did you not watch the latest TV program?
« Last Edit: September 26, 2014, 08:39:PM by John »

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #65 on: September 26, 2014, 08:42:PM »
The farm secretary's comments weren't hearsay, did you not watch the latest TV program?

To be fair John, think Babs got a little carried away - her revelation that she saw the silencer (complete with blood) was a little hard to swallow given that it took her almost 30 years to reveal it :).
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #66 on: September 26, 2014, 08:43:PM »
The farm secretary's comments weren't hearsay, did you not watch the latest TV program?






Someone was pulling her strings.Did you not detect the hesitation ?  ::) It's what I'd call ham-acting !

This is the same woman who ran from Jones because he wanted statements from her. Didn't sound too willing then.

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #67 on: September 26, 2014, 08:43:PM »
"I mustn´t turn my back on that young man" sounds to me like a father talking about his lazy son rather than being afraid to be shot and killed by him.
I would think that Nevill would ban Jeremy from the farm altogether if he had such thoughts! He would install alarms, sleep with a ready firearm at his side and lock the rest up.

Sorry, but I believe this is one of the myths, which keeps being repeated, but doesn´t mean or prove anything.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2014, 08:44:PM by Alias »

John

  • Guest
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #68 on: September 26, 2014, 08:49:PM »
"I mustn´t turn my back on that young man" sounds to me like a father talking about his lazy son rather than being afraid to be shot and killed by him.
I would think that Nevill would ban Jeremy from the farm altogether if he had such thoughts! He would install alarms, sleep with a ready firearm at his side and lock the rest up.

Sorry, but I believe this is one of the myths, which keeps being repeated, but doesn´t mean or prove anything.

I don't think Nevill really knew what sort of a psychopath he was dealing with until he awoke that fateful morning to find Jerry standing over him with a rifle.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2014, 08:50:PM by John »

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #69 on: September 26, 2014, 08:52:PM »
Psychopath now ? Shouldn't he be in Broadmoor then ??

John

  • Guest
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #70 on: September 26, 2014, 08:57:PM »
Psychopath now ? Shouldn't he be in Broadmoor then ??

Don't you know that psychopaths become less of a risk in later years?

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #71 on: September 26, 2014, 09:03:PM »
I don't think Nevill really knew what sort of a psychopath he was dealing with until he awoke that fateful morning to find Jerry standing over him with a rifle.

But aren´t you saying he was afraid Jeremy might kill him? That would have given him a hint!  ;)

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #72 on: September 26, 2014, 09:17:PM »
Psychopath now ? Shouldn't he be in Broadmoor then ??

Psychopaths aren't classed as 'insane'.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #73 on: September 26, 2014, 09:20:PM »
Don't you know that psychopaths become less of a risk in later years?





I wouldn't bet on it,would you ?

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: do the fingerprints really prove anything.
« Reply #74 on: September 26, 2014, 09:22:PM »
Psychopaths aren't classed as 'insane'.






Well they aren't normal,that's for sure.