June Bamber, did not attend bible class evening before she was killed...

[Adam]

Ha Ha - no it was not . It was because you were rude and repetitive. And sarcastic.

You are the rude one. I have had to report you several times.

You like to play the victim. Telling everyone you are putting me on ignore or taking a break from the forum. Why ? It's all too much for you. Because my posts highlight guilt in you're beloved Jeremy.

I praise you're tenacity in fighting a hurricane with an umbrella and am always saying 'very well done Jan' when you tackle my comprehensive posts. 

I admired you're curve ball in trying to deny something by claiming my 13 sources were not 'Primary' sources. (Although several actually were). Talk about determined.

Although it seems you got upset when I created the 'Primary Sources' thread. I just wanted confirmation of what one is after you brought up the term.  Other posters kindly confirmed for me.

Hopefully you will agree to closure on the lockable from outside window. Fighting it is a poor use of time in Bamber's campaign for freedom.

[Adam]

People say?

Not all of us had said that - because we are not mind readers .

I said I thought he might change his "plan" of faking the call and standing next to the officers who could have broken in to save the twins at any moment and establish the time of death . He could have left it until the morning because the call did not establish an alibi anyway. It would have given him time to get his potential  cover story about the two shots  sorted and do a bit of research - when he would have found that with an automatic rifle it could have happened and two shot suicides are not uncommon.

Also I still think the necessity for two shots would have been a "flaw" in his plan as far as he was concerned so he would have been panicking about what  to say when they found that. And yet strangely the police did not seem to mention it until Sept?

Out of interest do we know if any of the family were told about the two shots before Jeremys arrest?

I know Julie did not seem to know.

That is correct. Not everyone has said that.

Well he left it until 3.36am. The raid team entering WHF several hours later. I suspect Bamber suspected Essex plod would not go diving through windows.

I do not think he was too concerned about two shots. It was a weak rifle. One shot was his plan. But he needed two. He told Julie he was 'watertight' & it was an 'open and shut case'. Thinking he was smart enough to cover everything.

[Alias]

I don't recall you ever changing. You support Bamber as much as posters who outwardly support him.

I know you felt vulnerable after three supporters changed stance. But you need to stick to you're beliefs. Rather than suddenly  coming out and saying you are 'undecided'.

I stick to my beliefs although when I joined the board was nearly all pro Bamber. I got a lot of abuse as Bamber was being under attack from me on what used to be a pro Bamber forum.  By me following the evidence. Supporters focusing on me was a way to deflect attention from the evidence.

Several supporters who rarely post PM'd me saying they agreed with my posts. They probably rarely posted as they knew they would get abuse. People on another forum also praised my posts.

If someone had  strong beliefs it should be possible for someone to argue their case and be proud of their beliefs.

Must be because you don´t pay attention - not my problem!

Good Gawd, you take things out of the air, don´t you! "Vulnerable", HAHAHA, I don´t care if people change their stance, I really don´t, honest. What I care about is if people take on a condescending attitude because they think they know better, that annoys me to no end! Apart from that, everyone can think whatever they want about this case, including you, I really don´t care!


I repeat, Adam, and if you let this nonsense out one more time, I will report you for it: I have been undecided since the very first time I heard of this case, which was about three years prior to you joining this board. I take offense in you repeating this over and over and over again,

[Adam]

Must be because you don´t pay attention - not my problem!

Good Gawd, you take things out of the air, don´t you! "Vulnerable", HAHAHA, I don´t care if people change their stance, I really don´t, honest. What I care about is if people take on a condescending attitude because they think they know better, that annoys me to no end! Apart from that, everyone can think whatever they want about this case, including you, I really don´t care!


I repeat, Adam, and if you let this nonsense out one more time, I will report you for it: I have been undecided since the very first time I heard of this case, which was about three years prior to you joining this board. I take offense in you repeating this over and over and over again,

What's all the colour about.

Well I only remember you announcing you were undecided after three posters changed stance.

However you will be the first to agree you post as a supporter. Even yesterday you said most days you believe Jeremy innocent. As you were not happy with Sheila's body position and don't believe Bamber would attempt a murder/suicide after shooting Sheila twice.

[Alias]

What's all the colour about.

Well I only remember you announcing you were undecided after three posters changed stance.

However you will be the first to agree you post as a supporter. Even yesterday you said most days you believe Jeremy innocent. As you were not happy with Sheila's body position and don't believe Bamber would attempt a murder/suicide after shooting Sheila twice.

To show you exactly which part of your post I am addressing. A service for you. I am nice like that!

[lookout]

What's all the colour about.

Well I only remember you announcing you were undecided after three posters changed stance.

However you will be the first to agree you post as a supporter. Even yesterday you said most days you believe Jeremy innocent. As you were not happy with Sheila's body position and don't believe Bamber would attempt a murder/suicide after shooting Sheila twice.

What does it matter ? Get on with the debate and stop causing ructions.

[Adam]

To show you exactly which part of your post I am addressing. A service for you. I am nice like that!

Thank you. I am nice to.

[Jan]

You are the rude one. I have had to report you several times.

You like to play the victim. Telling everyone you are putting me on ignore or taking a break from the forum. Why ? It's all too much for you. Because my posts highlight guilt in you're beloved Jeremy.

I praise you're tenacity in fighting a hurricane with an umbrella and am always saying 'very well done Jan' when you tackle my comprehensive posts. 

I admired you're curve ball in trying to deny something by claiming my 13 sources were not 'Primary' sources. (Although several actually were). Talk about determined.

Although it seems you got upset when I created the 'Primary Sources' thread. I just wanted confirmation of what one is after you brought up the term.  Other posters kindly confirmed for me.

Hopefully you will agree to closure on the lockable from outside window. Fighting it is a poor use of time in Bamber's campaign for freedom.

Adam- I have never played the victim - trust me if you met me you would know that is completely untrue.

Your posts in my opinion are not comprehensive - they are mostly assumption.

I am not fighting, I am discussing and at least I do look at possibilities from both sides.

I have done some practical things to try and get to the truth - and if that is a waste of time that is down to the home office and EP - not me.

[Jan]

Not sure why they would be? The two shots is something ONLY the killer would know, not sure why EP didn't try to use this to their advantage BUT then again, EP CID 1985 weren't what you would call 'on the ball'.

"
It seemed that the family were "in the know" about quite a lot of things and details gradually seemed to leak out over the weeks. But I get the feeling that if anyone had known about the two shots Jeremy would have known as well? And as far as I recall he seemed / or acted (: surprised when told in the interview in Sept.

So we know Julie quite clearly told Anne there was only one shot to Sheila and I guess that is all that she saw because otherwise she would have blurted out to Jeremy.

It just seems a bit strange that all details of how the rest of the family died was out in the open - but this perhaps seems to have been  kept quiet. I wonder when the family found out - because in their minds it would have re-inforced their theory.

[scipio_usmc]

This is a very strange topic.  If there were some concern that the murders happened prior to her going to her class then I could see the relevance of her missing it to help establish the timing.

Quite obviously she forgot about it because she was busy with guests. When women are busy cooking and entertaining guests they often forget about other things because they are so busy catering to their guests it is especially true of grandmothers.  This is just a red herring it is amazing that there are so many posts in this thread.

[Alias]

This is a very strange topic.  If there were some concern that the murders happened prior to her going to her class then I could see the relevance of her missing it to help establish the timing.

Quite obviously she forgot about it because she was busy with guests. When women are busy cooking and entertaining guests they often forget about other things because they are so busy catering to their guests it is especially true of grandmothers.  This is just a red herring it is amazing that there are so many posts in this thread.

 

Yep, many posts, and now one from you too! 

[Caroline]

This is a very strange topic.  If there were some concern that the murders happened prior to her going to her class then I could see the relevance of her missing it to help establish the timing.

Quite obviously she forgot about it because she was busy with guests. When women are busy cooking and entertaining guests they often forget about other things because they are so busy catering to their guests it is especially true of grandmothers.  This is just a red herring it is amazing that there are so many posts in this thread.

I agree, she just gave it a miss and forgot she was supposed to pick someone up.

[Adam]

"
It seemed that the family were "in the know" about quite a lot of things and details gradually seemed to leak out over the weeks. But I get the feeling that if anyone had known about the two shots Jeremy would have known as well? And as far as I recall he seemed / or acted (: surprised when told in the interview in Sept.

So we know Julie quite clearly told Anne there was only one shot to Sheila and I guess that is all that she saw because otherwise she would have blurted out to Jeremy.

It just seems a bit strange that all details of how the rest of the family died was out in the open - but this perhaps seems to have been  kept quiet. I wonder when the family found out - because in their minds it would have re-inforced their theory.

He did seem surprised.

Suggesting it was dog. Then saying Neville may have said 'she' rather than 'Sheila'.

[Mr. Gee]

This is a very strange topic.  If there were some concern that the murders happened prior to her going to her class then I could see the relevance of her missing it to help establish the timing.

Quite obviously she forgot about it because she was busy with guests. When women are busy cooking and entertaining guests they often forget about other things because they are so busy catering to their guests it is especially true of grandmothers.  This is just a red herring it is amazing that there are so many posts in this thread.

Which of course you have just added to Of course you are very familiar with red herrings aren't you, since you hang on to so many of them including the silencer evidence so called and Mugford's testimony

[Mr. Gee]

I agree, she just gave it a miss and forgot she was supposed to pick someone up.

Did she? I haven't heard about that?