Why did the police frame Jeremy ?

[Mr. Gee]

Not any longer.  There was until the late 1970s the right for the defence to challenge up to 7 jurors without cause, subsequently reduced to 4, then removed completely.  It was a very retrograde step in my opinion.

I hadn't realised that the case I sat on was so long ago? Because the defense counsel then challenged one person.

[Caroline]

I know I've mentioned it a few times, but nobody seems able to answer this question. How can anybody believe Julie Mugford's story of Jeremy's confession when it contains a description of Sheila's body on the bed with a bible on her chest and other details which correspond exactly to the description which the policeman gave to Ann Eaton? That should be seen as proof that she lied. Coincidences are possible but not realistic when it comes to a set of exact details. 

You said that Bamber would be likely to be re convicted if there were a retrial, but on what evidence?  You seem to suggest that there is a lot of evidence, but I can't see it in your posts interesting though they are.

By the way, I have read Julie Mugford's statements and also those of Ann Eaton. You can correct me if I'm wrong when I say that Julie's description of Sheila's body which she said Jeremy gave her follows exactly that given to Ann Eaton by that cop.

Because Jeremy obviously didn't tell her everything and she simply filled in bit she got from elsewhere - simple!

[Mr. Gee]

Because Jeremy obviously didn't tell her everything and she simply filled in bit she got from elsewhere - simple!

Also Mugford said that Jeremy never actually confessed to her that he had done the murder.

[Patti]

Also Mugford said that Jeremy never actually confessed to her that he had done the murder.

She also said that he told her " I could not have done it" 

[Dan Straker]

Because Jeremy obviously didn't tell her everything and she simply filled in bit she got from elsewhere - simple!

You have to be kidding! By any standards, such big lies discredit a witness completely.  Is this what you call a “wind up”? 

[Jane]

Also Mugford said that Jeremy never actually confessed to her that he had done the murder.

But Grahame, there's a WS here -which I THINK Jan provided- in which it CLEARLY states that he DID.

[Caroline]

You have to be kidding! By any standards, such big lies discredit a witness completely.  Is this what you call a “wind up”? 

No, but if you had bothered to read what I initially said, I said I didn't believe everything she said. Bottom line, I think Jeremy is guilty and I have made it clear why. Sorry if that offends you (whoever you are), but I'm not concerned about that one iota. If you wish to debate then do so but don't start off by trying to wind me up because I really can't be arsed with BS anymore. Lose the attitude and you might get more out of people!!

[Patti]

No, but if you had bothered to read what I initially said, I said I didn't believe everything she said. Bottom line, I think Jeremy is guilty and I have made it clear why. Sorry if that offends you (whoever you are), but I'm not concerned about that one iota. If you wish to debate then do so but don't start off by trying to wind me up because I really can't be arsed with BS anymore. Lose the attitude and you might get more out of people!!

Quote from: Dan Straker on Today at 12:33 PM
You have to be kidding! By any standards, such big lies discredit a witness completely.  Is this what you call a “wind up”? 

No, but if you had bothered to read what I initially said, I said I didn't believe everything she said. Bottom line, I think Jeremy is guilty and I have made it clear why. Sorry if that offends you (whoever you are), but I'm not concerned about that one iota. If you wish to debate then do so but don't start off by trying to wind me up because I really can't be arsed with BS anymore. Lose the attitude and you might get more out of people!!


Can we have a more diplomatic approach please.  Thank you.

[Dan Straker]

No, but if you had bothered to read what I initially said, I said I didn't believe everything she said. Bottom line, I think Jeremy is guilty and I have made it clear why. Sorry if that offends you (whoever you are), but I'm not concerned about that one iota. If you wish to debate then do so but don't start off by trying to wind me up because I really can't be arsed with BS anymore. Lose the attitude and you might get more out of people!!

I think it's just ***** to admit that Julie Mugford lied in the most important part of her evidence and still say that you trust her as a witness.

I think you're the one with an attitude problem.

 

[Mr. Gee]

But Grahame, there's a WS here -which I THINK Jan provided- in which it CLEARLY states that he DID.

Well I believe that that is what Mugford said?

[Caroline]

Quote from: Dan Straker on Today at 12:33 PM
You have to be kidding! By any standards, such big lies discredit a witness completely.  Is this what you call a “wind up”? 

No, but if you had bothered to read what I initially said, I said I didn't believe everything she said. Bottom line, I think Jeremy is guilty and I have made it clear why. Sorry if that offends you (whoever you are), but I'm not concerned about that one iota. If you wish to debate then do so but don't start off by trying to wind me up because I really can't be arsed with BS anymore. Lose the attitude and you might get more out of people!!


Can we have a more diplomatic approach please.  Thank you.[/b]

Who are you aiming that at?

[Caroline]

I think it's just stupid to admit that Julie Mugford lied in the most important part of her evidence and still say that you trust her as a witness.

I think you're the one with an attitude problem.

I should care what you think because? Please also point me to a post where I said I trust JM as a witness?

[lookout]

Just reading Bob Millers pocketbook where he stated that Sheila was found on the far side of the bed ?with a .22 rifle by her right side. Appears gunshot wound/s to her neck. Bible laying alongside.

 Also that one of the boys had a large bruising in between his eyes ( bless the little chap )

[Jane]

Just reading Bob Millers pocketbook where he stated that Sheila was found on the far side of the bed ?with a .22 rifle by her right side. Appears gunshot wound/s to her neck. Bible laying alongside.

 Also that one of the boys had a large bruising in between his eyes ( bless the little chap )

I imagine it isn't impossible that bullet wounds cause bruising.

[lookout]

Just reading Bob Millers pocketbook where he stated that Sheila was found on the far side of the bed ?with a .22 rifle by her right side. Appears gunshot wound/s to her neck. Bible laying alongside.

 Also that one of the boys had a large bruising in between his eyes ( bless the little chap )

So if this is how Sheila was found,as described by Bob Miller,why show pics of the rifle on top of her body,and in some instances the Bible was also said to have been found on her chest ?