POLL: What will the CCRC Verdict be?

[Hartley]

Irrespective of your opinions whether Jeremy is guilty or innocent, and irrespective of whether you think he deserves a retrial, what do you think the CCRC will decide?

[Kaldin]

I think it will go to appeal - unless Jeremy is relying too much on that police log which doesn't show that Nevill called the police. 

[Janet (Formerly known as Takeshi)]

I am still reading about this case but from what I have read so far I honestly have to say I still haven't made my mind up whether I think Bamber is guilty or nor guilty. However, I do believe the original trial was probably unfair. I would like to see his leave to appeal granted but sadly I have to say I think it unlikely that this will happen.

[Kaldin]

If anyone has any information which they think would make a difference, they should reveal it now. There's no point waiting until the CCRC have refused an appeal.

[Roch]

I've got a feeling it wont go to appeal.  I'm suspicious of due process in this particular case.  I think EP have been awarded sufficient time and space to out-manouvre the CCRC.  But I wonder whether Bamber's team would then attempt to leak evidence via the media, on a larger scale than previously and in more detail, for example a documentary?  But what if there were then legal counter-measures attempted, to prevent this from happening?  I'm not sure if that's a likely scenario.  I think that it would be playing in to Bamber's teams' hands, as it could be used by his team to imply the 'state' were attempting suppress something from the public.  All I can see here is an ugly argument spilling over in to public domain via the back door, if the provisional decision is upheld.

[Kaldin]

If there's no appeal is that the end of the line or can he just go on and on appealing?

[ngb1066]

As things stand now, on the information which is in the public domain, I believe it is unlikely that the CCRC will refer the case to the Court of Appeal for a second time.  The CCRC provisional decision means that Jeremy's team have to come up with some powerful arguments, where necessary backed up with further scientific evidence, to persuade the CCRC to alter their provisional view. On the other hand the additional evidence which Mike Tesko has suggested has recently been found may mean that fresh material is being placed before the CCRC.  If this is credible evidence which undermines a key part of the prosecution's case at trial that will alter the position strongly in Jeremy's favour.  I suspect that if Jeremy's team have this additional evidence they will go public with it in advance of the CCRC final decision.  It would not do them any harm to do so and they revealed the Suthurst evidence in advance of the CCRC's provisional decision so I can see no reason why they would not do that again now.  So far there has been no indication of any major new development on Jeremy's "official" website but it may be the case that the new evidence, if it exists, is first being tested and evaluated.  I suspect we will not know the outcome of this for some time.

 

[ngb1066]

If there's no appeal is that the end of the line or can he just go on and on appealing?

There is no limit to the number of times an application can be made to the CCRC.  If new evidence is uncovered at any time, Jeremy's team can make fresh submissions in order to persuade the CCRC to refer the case to the Court of Appeal.  Even if the CCRC refer the case back to the Court of Appeal this time and the appeal is rejected, further applications can be made to the CCRC in the future if new evidence is obtained.  It is clear that if Jeremy is not succesful this time he will continue with his efforts to secure an appeal and overturn his conviction.  As has been pointed out before, he has nothing to lose and in addition he is assisted by supporters like Mike Tesko who firmly believe in Jeremy's innocence.

[Kaldin]

Jeremy campaigners are no doubt disappointed that the CCRC decided not to refer Jeremy's case for appeal, but that doesn't necessarily mean the CCRC are against him. It might be that they feel he has a case but he doesn't as yet have enough to back it up and if they had sent the case for appeal he would have failed again. Don't forget that the CCRC thought he had a good case in 2002 and yet the appeal judges did not agree with them.

Perhaps they have told him what he needs to produce in order to have a better chance this time, and that's why they gave him another 90 days?

[ngb1066]

Jeremy campaigners are no doubt disappointed that the CCRC decided not to refer Jeremy's case for appeal, but that doesn't necessarily mean the CCRC are against him. It might be that they feel he has a case but he doesn't as yet have enough to back it up and if they had sent the case for appeal he would have failed again. Don't forget that the CCRC thought he had a good case in 2002 and yet the appeal judges did not agree with them.

Perhaps they have told him what he needs to produce in order to have a better chance this time, and that's why they gave him another 90 days?

Kaldin

You could well be right on this.  On the other hand I suspect that if the CCRC had simply wanted to encourage JB's team to focus on their stronger points and produce additional material in support of those points they would have notified them of that and given an opportunity for more work to be done.  As it is by making a public announcement of their provisional decision not to refer the case to the Court of Appeal they have to an extent boxed themselves into a corner. There will have to be some powerful additional evidence in support of one or more of the submissions made on behalf of JB, or some completely new evidence.  Mike Tesko is confident that there is completely new evidence but at this stage we have very limited knowledge of that.  I note that the latest update dated 8th April on JB's "official" website makes no reference to the discovery of this new evidence which is perhaps a little surprising in view of the fact that they went public with the key material submitted to the CCRC before the CCRC made the announcement about their provisional decision.  I fear we are going to have to be patient!