The fake random stranger option.

[susan]

Jan of course if I were Jeremy Bamber and innocent I would cling to anything I could to try and help and I would want him to do so.  The worse thing IMO is for an innocent man to be sent to prison for life for a crime he did not commit.  However, I have been reading posts on the phone call issues mostly made by Caroline in which she has stated the two logs are one of the same and secondly Jeremy Bamber has given so many different accounts of the actual timings of the calls one has to question how accurate the timings are.  IMO he had a very unfair trial and perhaps in view of this he should be granted a retrial.  I do not suffer from tunnel vision and I am open to be convinced if I have it all wrong. 

[lookout]

I wonder why Grahame is so abusive. I do not abuse him.

We have different views on a discussion forum. So civilised discussion should take place. Not personal and offensive abuse.

It may time he had a long or permanent ban. Otherwise other posters will also think they can be abusive. I even had to report the most docile & and least expressive posters on here, Nugs & April recently.

FGS-----------I think you're a woman !!

[Jane]

Adam.. I think a lot of members of this forum would prefer the approach that if you've got something to say or ask about, you try and find a pre-existing relevant thread to do so.  It's worked in the past for many of us.  Constantly creating new threads is unneccesary.  Maybe you dont realise it but on this approach to using the forum, it's time for closure?

Roch, I wish you better luck, with that suggestion, than has previously been had. ie it's been ignored

[Adam]

Jan of course if I were Jeremy Bamber and innocent I would cling to anything I could to try and help and I would want him to do so.  The worse thing IMO is for an innocent man to be sent to prison for life for a crime he did not commit.  However, I have been reading posts on the phone call issues mostly made by Caroline in which she has stated the two logs are one of the same and secondly Jeremy Bamber has given so many different accounts of the actual timings of the calls one has to question how accurate the timings are.  IMO he had a very unfair trial and perhaps in view of this he should be granted a retrial.  I do not suffer from tunnel vision and I am open to be convinced if I have it all wrong.

Why was his trial unfair ?

I have asked this before from you and created a thread several months ago.

Be interested to know.

A re trial is not an option.

[Jan]

Jan of course if I were Jeremy Bamber and innocent I would cling to anything I could to try and help and I would want him to do so.  The worse thing IMO is for an innocent man to be sent to prison for life for a crime he did not commit.  However, I have been reading posts on the phone call issues mostly made by Caroline in which she has stated the two logs are one of the same and secondly Jeremy Bamber has given so many different accounts of the actual timings of the calls one has to question how accurate the timings are.  IMO he had a very unfair trial and perhaps in view of this he should be granted a retrial.  I do not suffer from tunnel vision and I am open to be convinced if I have it all wrong.

I agree Susan in that I am not entirely convinced about the logs proving what Jeremy thinks they do.

However If I was him I also think I would be claiming that the call existed - because of course it would free him if it did.

But if the call did exist then it would mean that

1) the officers with Jeremy on the night were not aware of the call ( hence why they did not say something)
2) There must have been a cover up organised right from day one - which means something did go wrong. Because otherwise the police would have told the family about the call to shut them up.

Which is partly why I am not sure it happened.

[Jane]

I wonder why Grahame is so abusive. I do not abuse him.

We have different views on a discussion forum. So civilised discussion should take place. Not personal and offensive abuse.

It may time he had a long or permanent ban. Otherwise other posters will also think they can be abusive. I even had to report the most docile & and least expressive posters on here, Nugs & April recently.

Adam, when you learn the art of discussion -civilized or otherwise- I feel certain members will be very happy to share in that discussion with you. Thus far, all you have managed to do is preach with a closed mind and people find your approach offensive.

You have been asked on numerous occasions to desist from this behaviour and your refusal to do so has earned you three bans. To my knowledge you are the only poster for whom a ban has been requested by members.

I don't think I can say it more clearly. If you find it not expressive enough, TOUGH.

[Jane]

FGS-----------I think you're a woman !!

OI!! Stop insulting women!!!!!!

[lookout]

FGS-----------I think you're a woman !!

And you know me,don't you " Adam ?"

[Jane]

I agree Susan in that I am not entirely convinced about the logs proving what Jeremy thinks they do.

However If I was him I also think I would be claiming that the call existed - because of course it would free him if it did.

But if the call did exist then it would mean that

1) the officers with Jeremy on the night were not aware of the call ( hence why they did not say something)
2) There must have been a cover up organised right from day one - which means something did go wrong. Because otherwise the police would have told the family about the call to shut them up.

Which is partly why I am not sure it happened.

And why would they DELIBERATELY frame an innocent man -from day one- when  they had a ready made and indisputable perpetrator?

[susan]

Jan whilst I can see where you are coming from had the call taken place and the police knew I am sure they would have informed the relatives of its existence to get them off their backs as they did become quite a nuisance to Taff Jones in and out of his office.

[Adam]

I agree Susan in that I am not entirely convinced about the logs proving what Jeremy thinks they do.

However If I was him I also think I would be claiming that the call existed - because of course it would free him if it did.

But if the call did exist then it would mean that

1) the officers with Jeremy on the night were not aware of the call ( hence why they did not say something)
2) There must have been a cover up organised right from day one - which means something did go wrong. Because otherwise the police would have told the family about the call to shut them up.

Which is partly why I am not sure it happened.

If the police were covering up from day one then why charge Bamber after one month ? Bringing everything up again.

[Jan]

Jan whilst I can see where you are coming from had the call taken place and the police knew I am sure they would have informed the relatives of its existence to get them off their backs as they did become quite a nuisance to Taff Jones in and out of his office.

I think we are coming from the same angle.

If they did make a huge error it would seem it would be easier to close it down as a murder suicide .

So unless there was a full pact just to stick to one story - and then it would have looked odd if the news about the second call had come out a month later then I also can not see a reason for hiding the call.

BTW  if Adam is quoting my posts at all remind him not to bother . I made it quite clear I am ignoring him for a while after his recent sarcastic posts and his lack  of discussion about anything .

[susan]

Adam I genuinely believe that the police did think Sheila committed the murders then whatever happened they changed their minds and the rest is history.  IMO no concrete evidence exists for an innocent stance or a guilty one it is just our own personal thoughts on the events.

[lookout]

OI!! Stop insulting women!!!!!!

April,I think I'm getting " warmer ". 

[Jane]

Well you requested my last ban after I responded to Nugs's savage and unfounded attack when I was offline. That was not surprising as you only post to or about me.

My other ban was after Harters created a poll on me. Caroline then abused me and I was banned after responding.

My other ban was when I injected humour onto the board. Suggesting a poster sent a letter and made a quick getaway on her mobility scooter.

If I used the words Grahame uses everyday, in one post I would get a long term ban

And unless you start taking some responsibility for your OWN behaviour and stop blaming others for your bans, there are likely to be more.