Anthony Pargeters Lies

[lookout]

What i wrote is fully accurate- both about the the libel claims and the fact Graham asked the same thing 10 times since i have been here each time ignoring the answer.

Accurate my eye.Who do you think you're kidding ? Sorry,but you can't pull the wool over OUR eyes here,so your " accuracy " doesn't count for anything so far as we're concerned.

[Alias]

Thanks, Patti.

[scipio_usmc]

Accurate my eye.Who do you think you're kidding ? Sorry,but you can't pull the wool over OUR eyes here,so your " accuracy " doesn't count for anything so far as we're concerned.

Try proving me wrong. You can't because I am full accurate.  You do what you do best which is ignore the truth, ignore facts and just pretend things are as you wish they were.

[Mr. Gee]

As seems to always be the case with Patti she was wrong.

I wonder whether Graham suffers from memory loss because no matter how many times an issue is explained to him he forgets and asks the same questions over again.

The libel was established because at the time the article was written the newspaper misrepresented that AP admitted his weapon was at WHF on the night of the murders and thus suggested it might ight have been used.

At the time the article was published the newspaper knew or should have known that AP stated his weapon was removed from WHF during his last visit that preceded the murders so was not at WHF and that he stated for the several months he had left it at WHF he had taken the bolt home with him so the gun was inoperable and could not be used by anyone.

The newspaper thus knew or should have known their claim that AP admitted his gun was at WHF at the time of the murders was false. The newspaper made a claim in print with a reckless disregard for the truth.

Yes I remember that. But just cannot see that he was libelled? It doesn't suggest that he did the crime. It doesn't make sense for him to take them to court that's all?

[Jane]

What i wrote is fully accurate- both about the the libel claims and the fact Graham asked the same thing 10 times since i have been here each time ignoring the answer.

Accuracy ISN'T courtesy. If you don't like a posters tone when they respond you have the ignore option. Personally I think you prefer to make an argument and in your own words you think it's fun to watch people squirm.

[Mr. Gee]

What i wrote is fully accurate- both about the the libel claims and the fact Graham asked the same thing 10 times since i have been here each time ignoring the answer.

Come on, it was only 9 times.

[lookout]

Accuracy ISN'T courtesy. If you don't like a posters tone when they respond you have the ignore option. Personally I think you prefer to make an argument and in your own words you think it's fun to watch people squirm.

Who's squirming,April ? Not me that's for sure.

[scipio_usmc]

Yes I remember that. But just cannot see that he was libelled? It doesn't suggest that he did the crime. It doesn't make sense for him to take them to court that's all?

They lied about what he said.  It would be bad enough if he claimed the gun was there despite having no evidence to rely on for the suggestion but they falsely asserted he admitted his gun was there. 

His gun being there and being involved potentially implicates him either helping to carry out the murders directly or potentially leaving it there so the murderer can use the gun so being an accomplice. That is what is going to go through the minds of readers and indeed people here have alleged such things.

Those complaining about AP suing seem to be demonstrating their bias.  Anyone against Jeremy they attack for any reason imaginable.

The libel suit has nothing at all to do with the murders so why does it keep coming up?  To attack AP.

 

[Alias]

Who's squirming,April ? Not me that's for sure.

Neither am I.
Funny how a lawyer has to invent in his head that some strangers on the intenet are sqirming. Takes all kinds!

[Mr. Gee]

They lied about what he said.  It would be bad enough if he claimed the gun was there despite having no evidence to rely on for the suggestion but they falsely asserted he admitted his gun was there. 

His gun being there and being involved potentially implicates him either helping to carry out the murders directly or potentially leaving it there so the murderer can use the gun so being an accomplice. That is what is going to go through the minds of readers and indeed people here have alleged such things.

Those complaining about AP suing seem to be demonstrating their bias.  Anyone against Jeremy they attack for any reason imaginable.

The libel suit has nothing at all to do with the murders so why does it keep coming up?  To attack AP.

I'm not attacking Pargeter at all. In my opinion to say the rifle was there in no way implicates him in the murders. If it were my rifle I certainly wouldn't bother to sue the paper. It's rather silly if you ask me. But having said that I do find it rather odd that the very week before the murders he decides to take the gun home after leaving it at the farm all year?

[Jane]

Neither am I.
Funny how a lawyer has to invent in his head that some strangers on the intenet are sqirming. Takes all kinds!

Clearly he takes pathetic pleasure in believing you to be.

[Alias]

Clearly he takes pathetic pleasure in believing you to be.

I hope he can find a way to fill his life with something a tad more meaningful. 

[nugnug]

Yes I remember that. But just cannot see that he was libelled? It doesn't suggest that he did the crime. It doesn't make sense for him to take them to court that's all?

maybe he just thought it was easy money.

[Jan]

They lied about what he said.  It would be bad enough if he claimed the gun was there despite having no evidence to rely on for the suggestion but they falsely asserted he admitted his gun was there. 

His gun being there and being involved potentially implicates him either helping to carry out the murders directly or potentially leaving it there so the murderer can use the gun so being an accomplice. That is what is going to go through the minds of readers and indeed people here have alleged such things.

Those complaining about AP suing seem to be demonstrating their bias.  Anyone against Jeremy they attack for any reason imaginable.

The libel suit has nothing at all to do with the murders so why does it keep coming up?  To attack AP.

Of course it is to do with the murders.

We were not complaining . £40000  is a lot of money in the 80s.,when during the trial he did not say his gun was there and he did not say it was not. The paper was not accusing him of murder or using the gun? We were just asking the question why it was such a lot of money .

can you show me a statement before the trial where he said he had taken his gun home and it was NOT at WHF?

So get your facts right about what we are querying.

[scipio_usmc]

I'm not attacking Pargeter at all. In my opinion to say the rifle was there in no way implicates him in the murders. If it were my rifle I certainly wouldn't bother to sue the paper. It's rather silly if you ask me. But having said that I do find it rather odd that the very week before the murders he decides to take the gun home after leaving it at the farm all year?

He left the gun there because it was winter and he would not be using it. He took it home in part because he got a new scope he wanted to attach to it and thus play with it. He might have taken it anyway since it was the only time he left the rifle there and had intended to use it regardless of the new scope. The more curious quesiton is why he bothered to leave it there at all since he never usually did so.  Jus tleaivng it there because he didn't need it for winter is not a good enough reason. If you intend to use it there again in a few months or had no room for it when he was leaving in December 1984 then tha tis a reason.  He didn't really bother to detail why though he decided to leave it for the first time.

Had he left it there the first time right before the murders and it had the bolt and might have been used int he murders then a hell of  alot more questions would have been in order because the suspicion would be there that it was left for use in the murders.