The Threat.

[guest7363]

I think he did say that the silencer evidence was dodgy though and that is a MOJ - But I agree if that was done just to get a guilty man then there is a moral and legal dilemma.

personally I would not want JB released on a technicality,

Hi Jan he must have come up with something, because 2013 he was sure Bamber was innocent and stated he was in touch with him on a weekly basis?

[Jan]

Reading this thread back, it sound 'fanatical'.

The thread or the posters? Or the letter?

[Patti]

Mr Harrison said he began researching the case suspecting there may have been a miscarriage of justice but has since come to the conclusion that the police got the right man. Its just like another well known writer did, like a lot of people on this forum did, researched the case and realised that Bamber was guilty.

Hi Reader Hope I've got the right man this time. 

If PH has come to conclusion that Jeremy had not received a fair trial or that he had found new evidence,, why does he say that there is a legal issue? Surely, what he should be saying is that due to my inaccuracies at the onset, my book has been delayed due to re-writes.   

[guest154]

why do you call him Reader??  Reader is a MOD here.

[Jan]

Hi Jan he must have come up with something, because 2013 he was sure Bamber was innocent and stated he was in touch with him on a weekly basis?

I think he said that  he was talking and getting on with JB as recently as 2014 actually. I never saw him say JB was innocent only that he thought there definitely was a MOJ because of the silencer and other evidence that was presented.

[Patti]

Hi Reader Hope I've got the right man this time. 

If PH has come to conclusion that Jeremy had not received a fair trial or that he had found new evidence,, why does he say that there is a legal issue in publishing his book? Surely, what he should be saying is that due to my inaccuracies at the onset, my book has been delayed due to re-writes.   

[nugnug]

and he did say it was held up for legal reasons dident he.

[guest7363]

Hi Reader Hope I've got the right man this time. 

If PH has come to conclusion that Jeremy had not received a fair trial or that he had found new evidence,, why does he say that there is a legal issue? Surely, what he should be saying is that due to my inaccuracies at the onset, my book has been delayed due to re-writes.   

Are you on the wine again Patti? You could be right Patti there could be several issues, when doing research something crops up and it takes a different line something similar happened with me?

[Caroline]

The thread or the posters? Or the letter?

Both! No one knows who wrote the letter ONLY those involved!!

[Patti]

Are you on the wine again Patti? You could be right Patti there could be several issues, when doing research something crops up and it takes a different line something similar happened with me?

I am....................

[Patti]

and he did say it was held up for legal reasons dident he.

yes Nugs he did.............

[nugnug]

Both! No one knows who wrote the letter ONLY those involved!!

caroline as you know him have you ever thought of asking to see the whole letter.

[Jan]

Both! No one knows who wrote the letter ONLY those involved!!

yes , that is why I think the consensus is not to make any more accusations.

[guest7363]

yes Nugs he did.............

Someone also hacked into his computer could that have put things back?

[nugnug]

but he dident say that he said legal reasons.