Undisputed facts

[tonyb]

But i do agree with Mike. JB probably didn't get a fair trial etc etc and I do hope he is retried, not released or this endless bickering will go on forever.

[Kaldin]

Look we know the police moved Sheila's body because THEY SAID THEY DID so why keep arguing about it.
There seems to be a lot of chasing tails on this forum these days and it is getting tedious.

I agree. No wonder some people delete themselves. Round and round it goes with no evidence, just speculation and cherry picking to suit some new weird theory.

------------------------

Yes, I agree that the prosecutions theories are and were weird...

They convicted JB on speculation and theories - but it will be their undoing...

No, the jury convicted Jeremy Bamber ...

..................

They convicted him, based upon lies, false evidence and fabricated truths...

I doubt that the same jury would have convicted him today, if the prosecution led with the same evidence, and all the new material which has been gleaned over the past 25 years was presented to cast doubt on crucial; features of the prosecution case...

The silencer evidence would be out, along with the blood evidence and the paint evidence - there would not be anything credible upon which the prosecution could hope to achieve a conviction for these murders...

One thing is certain and that is that JB did not receive a fair trial, and at the end of the day, be it as a result of this application to the CCRC or the next one, if there has to be another application, and one day these convictions will be overturned...

It wouldn't even get to court...

Well the judges at the 2002 appeal looked at the silencer evidence, the blood evidence, and the new DNA evidence and decided that the jury would have come to the same conclusion - guilty as charged. The paint evidence wasn't discussed then of course but if that's all there is, I don't see much change to be honest.

[mike tesko]

But i do agree with Mike. JB probably didn't get a fair trial etc etc and I do hope he is retried, not released or this endless bickering will go on forever.

-----------------------

Well, I should think it should be obvious to almost everybody that JB did not get a fair trial, and like anybody else, he deserved to have one...

[mike tesko]

Look we know the police moved Sheila's body because THEY SAID THEY DID so why keep arguing about it.
There seems to be a lot of chasing tails on this forum these days and it is getting tedious.

I agree. No wonder some people delete themselves. Round and round it goes with no evidence, just speculation and cherry picking to suit some new weird theory.

------------------------

Yes, I agree that the prosecutions theories are and were weird...

They convicted JB on speculation and theories - but it will be their undoing...

No, the jury convicted Jeremy Bamber ...

..................

They convicted him, based upon lies, false evidence and fabricated truths...

I doubt that the same jury would have convicted him today, if the prosecution led with the same evidence, and all the new material which has been gleaned over the past 25 years was presented to cast doubt on crucial; features of the prosecution case...

The silencer evidence would be out, along with the blood evidence and the paint evidence - there would not be anything credible upon which the prosecution could hope to achieve a conviction for these murders...

One thing is certain and that is that JB did not receive a fair trial, and at the end of the day, be it as a result of this application to the CCRC or the next one, if there has to be another application, and one day these convictions will be overturned...

It wouldn't even get to court...

Well the judges at the 2002 appeal looked at the silencer evidence, the blood evidence, and the new DNA evidence and decided that the jury would have come to the same conclusion - guilty as charged. The paint evidence wasn't discussed then of course but if that's all there is, I don't see much change to be honest.

------------------

The wrong silencer was tested for DNA - blood and paint was not found inside that (DRB/1) silencer, because that silencer did not get sent to the lab' until a long time after the blood and the paint had already been found in the other one (DB/1)...

Please try to get the facts right...

[Kaldin]

Look we know the police moved Sheila's body because THEY SAID THEY DID so why keep arguing about it.
There seems to be a lot of chasing tails on this forum these days and it is getting tedious.

I agree. No wonder some people delete themselves. Round and round it goes with no evidence, just speculation and cherry picking to suit some new weird theory.

------------------------

Yes, I agree that the prosecutions theories are and were weird...

They convicted JB on speculation and theories - but it will be their undoing...

No, the jury convicted Jeremy Bamber ...

..................

They convicted him, based upon lies, false evidence and fabricated truths...

I doubt that the same jury would have convicted him today, if the prosecution led with the same evidence, and all the new material which has been gleaned over the past 25 years was presented to cast doubt on crucial; features of the prosecution case...

The silencer evidence would be out, along with the blood evidence and the paint evidence - there would not be anything credible upon which the prosecution could hope to achieve a conviction for these murders...

One thing is certain and that is that JB did not receive a fair trial, and at the end of the day, be it as a result of this application to the CCRC or the next one, if there has to be another application, and one day these convictions will be overturned...

It wouldn't even get to court...

Well the judges at the 2002 appeal looked at the silencer evidence, the blood evidence, and the new DNA evidence and decided that the jury would have come to the same conclusion - guilty as charged. The paint evidence wasn't discussed then of course but if that's all there is, I don't see much change to be honest.

------------------

The wrong silencer was tested for DNA - blood and paint was not found inside that (DRB/1) silencer, because that silencer did not get sent to the lab' until a long time after the blood and the paint had already been found in the other one (DB/1)...

Please try to get the facts right...

My facts are right - I've read the appeal. Have you?

[Kaldin]

To my mind, the only way an appeal could succeed is if one of the officers who was present at the scene comes forward and states that they know the body was moved - as in they saw it being moved, or if one of them says that they saw Sheila in the kitchen, or they know for a fact that blood was planted in the silencer. That's not likely to happen is it? Everything I've seen on here which has been put forward as evidence can be explained away.

There was even someone on here claiming to be "Ron Cook" but he disappeared pretty sharpish. 

[mike tesko]

Look we know the police moved Sheila's body because THEY SAID THEY DID so why keep arguing about it.
There seems to be a lot of chasing tails on this forum these days and it is getting tedious.

I agree. No wonder some people delete themselves. Round and round it goes with no evidence, just speculation and cherry picking to suit some new weird theory.

------------------------

Yes, I agree that the prosecutions theories are and were weird...

They convicted JB on speculation and theories - but it will be their undoing...

No, the jury convicted Jeremy Bamber ...

..................

They convicted him, based upon lies, false evidence and fabricated truths...

I doubt that the same jury would have convicted him today, if the prosecution led with the same evidence, and all the new material which has been gleaned over the past 25 years was presented to cast doubt on crucial; features of the prosecution case...

The silencer evidence would be out, along with the blood evidence and the paint evidence - there would not be anything credible upon which the prosecution could hope to achieve a conviction for these murders...

One thing is certain and that is that JB did not receive a fair trial, and at the end of the day, be it as a result of this application to the CCRC or the next one, if there has to be another application, and one day these convictions will be overturned...

It wouldn't even get to court...

Well the judges at the 2002 appeal looked at the silencer evidence, the blood evidence, and the new DNA evidence and decided that the jury would have come to the same conclusion - guilty as charged. The paint evidence wasn't discussed then of course but if that's all there is, I don't see much change to be honest.

------------------

The wrong silencer was tested for DNA - blood and paint was not found inside that (DRB/1) silencer, because that silencer did not get sent to the lab' until a long time after the blood and the paint had already been found in the other one (DB/1)...

Please try to get the facts right...

My facts are right - I've read the appeal. Have you?

-----------------

You can read the appeal judgement as many times as you like, it doesn't prove anything, in the same way that it didn't mean anything in other similar cases like the Birmingham six, the Guildford four, and all the other miscarriages of justice there has been over the years, where appeals have been lost, before they were eventually won...

Relying upon the appeal judgement doesn't mean nothing...

There will come a time when the court of appeal will have to listen, or risk bringing the criminal justice system into disrepute - and when it gets to that stage, it will be possible to bend the ears of the judges...

That moment in this case, is looming large...

[Kaldin]

You can read the appeal judgement as many times as you like, it doesn't prove anything, in the same way that it didn't mean anything in other similar cases like the Birmingham six, the Guildford four, and all the other miscarriages of justice there has been over the years, where appeals have been lost, before they were eventually won...

Relying upon the appeal judgement doesn't mean nothing...

There will come a time when the court of appeal will have to listen, or risk bringing the criminal justice system into disrepute - and when it gets to that stage, it will be possible to bend the ears of the judges...

That moment in this case, is looming large...

You can dispute the appeal document all you like but the fact is that the judges found nothing in any of those claims (all 16 of them) to suggest that the trial had not been fair or that there was anything wrong with the evidence which convicted Jeremy.

If you're hiding evidence that could make a difference, then that's up to you, but what's been presented here so far does not make the conviction unsafe in my opinion.

[mike tesko]

You can read the appeal judgement as many times as you like, it doesn't prove anything, in the same way that it didn't mean anything in other similar cases like the Birmingham six, the Guildford four, and all the other miscarriages of justice there has been over the years, where appeals have been lost, before they were eventually won...

Relying upon the appeal judgement doesn't mean nothing...

There will come a time when the court of appeal will have to listen, or risk bringing the criminal justice system into disrepute - and when it gets to that stage, it will be possible to bend the ears of the judges...

That moment in this case, is looming large...

You can dispute the appeal document all you like but the fact is that the judges found nothing in any of those claims (all 16 of them) to suggest that the trial had not been fair or that there was anything wrong with the evidence which convicted Jeremy.

If you're hiding evidence that could make a difference, then that's up to you, but what's been presented here so far does not make the conviction unsafe in my opinion.

-----------------
Well, actually that is not strictly true, because no evidence was produced at the appeal to try and back up any of those claims, those 16 points were raised in the defense opening address to the court, but no evidence was introduced at any stage of the appeal, so how can anyone say that such evidence if it existed at all, was rejected - you have to introduce evidence into the proceedings before it can be rejected...

Please explain in plain English how any evidence that was not introduced has been or could have been rejected?

What kind of a justice system rejects evidence that was not even put to the court?

[Hartley]

Play on words.

Mike you know what the grounds of appeal were and how they were responded to.

[Kaldin]

You can read the appeal judgement as many times as you like, it doesn't prove anything, in the same way that it didn't mean anything in other similar cases like the Birmingham six, the Guildford four, and all the other miscarriages of justice there has been over the years, where appeals have been lost, before they were eventually won...

Relying upon the appeal judgement doesn't mean nothing...

There will come a time when the court of appeal will have to listen, or risk bringing the criminal justice system into disrepute - and when it gets to that stage, it will be possible to bend the ears of the judges...

That moment in this case, is looming large...

You can dispute the appeal document all you like but the fact is that the judges found nothing in any of those claims (all 16 of them) to suggest that the trial had not been fair or that there was anything wrong with the evidence which convicted Jeremy.

If you're hiding evidence that could make a difference, then that's up to you, but what's been presented here so far does not make the conviction unsafe in my opinion.

-----------------
Well, actually that is not strictly true, because no evidence was produced at the appeal to try and back up any of those claims, those 16 points were raised in the defense opening address to the court, but no evidence was introduced at any stage of the appeal, so how can anyone say that such evidence if it existed at all, was rejected - you have to introduce evidence into the proceedings before it can be rejected...

Please explain in plain English how any evidence that was not introduced has been or could have been rejected?

What kind of a justice system rejects evidence that was not even put to the court?

New DNA evidence was the main reason the CCRC referred the case back to the appeal court. The DNA evidence was produced, and it made no difference.

[mike tesko]

Play on words.

Mike you know what the grounds of appeal were and how they were responded to.

----------------

No, its not a play on words, these 16 points were made at the opening of the appeal in 2002, but no evidence was adduced to back any of those arguments up, which does not entitle the court of appeal to reject the evidence that was not called, simply because those 16 points were made at the opening address to the court. If no evidence was actually adduced at the appeal with regards to those 16 points, but such evidence existed, it does not entitle the court to reject the evidence that does exist to support such arguments and grounds, if such evidence existed but which was not introduced?

[Alias]

You can see that the fingers and shape of SC'as left hand appears to have been holding something, like the barrel of a gun - but her fingerprints were not found on the end of the guns barrel that was photographed upon her body - does anybody have any idea why?

Well, that is strange. If Sheila had shot herself, obviously her fingerprints would be on the barrel of the gun - she´d have had to hold it there to be able to aim properly.
If Jeremy (or a hit-man) staged a suicide, he/the hit-man would have made sure that her fingerprints were there. You just WOULD do that. You put the Bible in place, you arrange the body - you wouldn´t likely forget that, I think.
So this is tricky!

[simong]

Not only did this hitman not have his/her own weapon. This trained assassin used a rifle indoors (not an ideal weapon of choice) and was so skilled in the dark arts that they required 25 shots to accomplish their mission.

When i imagine a hitman, i conjure images of a secret service assassin a la a James Bond film swishing through the room with grace in a tuxedo and leaving the scene like the man in the milk tray adverts on a speedboat or by abseiling from a great height.

It could be possible there is a hired killer involved but imagine them in a clown outfit amid the farcical scenes of a carry on film.

[shonapugs]

Really, Si???