What Makes Supporters Believe Jeremy is Innocent?

[guest154]

OK What is your take on Draw-back in the silencer. What is your take on the possibility of the silencer being planted or not used in the shooting of Sheila? Fowler who is an gun expert has said in his opinion that the silencer was not used to shoot Sheila. So what is your take on that Mat?

Drawback. I think that you got confused with what was analysis and what was HOLLY'S OPINION on the red forum. But I didn't say anything to you at the time because I knew it would come across as rude and be blown into a huge deal, I don't think you understood what you posted.
I do believe blood got into the silencer and it was attached during the murders. Although I also consider it being planted a possibility. I don't think we know the full story of the silencer, but Bamber does and that is why he still pursues it where as everything else he has dropped over time, he knows that they haven't got the silencer theory correct.
None of this will be a shock to people that actually read my posts and talk to me as I have said it all before.

The CCRC called Fowlers words “speculation” and incapable of forming a ground of appeal - but you ignore this.

As I've just explained to Mat,IF the next submission should fail,and I've every confidence that it WON'T, then depending on whether there happens to be ANY forensic evidence,then yes,I'll continue to support him. As proven forensic evidence is a certainty in bagging a killer. Until then,just leave me be.

Why would/should the next submission fail ? I can't see it myself with the new evidence they've got.

There is no new evidence. What new has come up in the last 30 years? More information on Sheilas medical condition doesn't change anything that happened on the night of the murders. There is enough forensic evidence LACKING on Sheila that should be there that isn't.

Lately I've learned about the extent of the damage done to Neville, Sheila could not have done that and then looked as she did.

[Caroline]

As I've just explained to Mat,IF the next submission should fail,and I've every confidence that it WON'T, then depending on whether there happens to be ANY forensic evidence,then yes,I'll continue to support him. As proven forensic evidence is a certainty in bagging a killer. Until then,just leave me be.

Why would/should the next submission fail ? I can't see it myself with the new evidence they've got.

I've heard all that before Lookout "We have new evidence and it's 100% solid - We know they lied, we've got the proof of who did what and when, it won't be long now and I'll be free". We shall see.
I

[lookout]

Thanks for that Lookout, but you have said many times that you thought he was innocent from day one. What was it 'initially' that made you think he was innocent?

I've said all along that I hold on to certain views which I'm NOT prepared to say on here.

[Caroline]

I've said all along that I hold on to certain views which I'm NOT prepared to say on here.

I think you've mentioned them before but I won't ask you to post them again.

[Adam]

You know what you can do with your stance/changes.

I appreciate you are interested in the case. We all are. Changing stance will not mean you cannot still discuss it on here. 

April, Susan and Caroline still discuss the case after changing stance. Jan, Jackie, Grahame and Mike will still discuss the case when they also change stance to guilty.

[lookout]

There is a lot of forensic evidence against him. Which has been posted on here. You just ignore it and say there is none.

There is also a lot of circumstantial evidence. A motive, opportunity and no alibi.

Where is this LOT of FORENSIC evidence,because I'm blowed if I've seen any ??

I'm NOT interested in circumstantial evidence .The motive for this killing was NOT money ! It was NOT an opportunistic killing,and no alibi doesn't indicate a murderer.

[lookout]

I appreciate you are interested in the case. We all are. Changing stance will not mean you cannot still discuss it on here. 

April, Susan and Caroline still discuss the case after changing stance. Jan, Jackie, Grahame and Mike will still discuss the case when they also change stance to guilty.

DO NOT preach to the converted.

[Patti]

Drawback. I think that you got confused with what was analysis and what was HOLLY'S OPINION on the red forum. But I didn't say anything to you at the time because I knew it would come across as rude and be blown into a huge deal, I don't think you understood what you posted.
I do believe blood got into the silencer and it was attached during the murders. Although I also consider it being planted a possibility. I don't think we know the full story of the silencer, but Bamber does and that is why he still pursues it where as everything else he has dropped over time, he knows that they haven't got the silencer theory correct.
None of this will be a shock to people that actually read my posts and talk to me as I have said it all before.

The CCRC called Fowlers words “speculation” and incapable of forming a ground of appeal - but you ignore this.


There is no new evidence. What new has come up in the last 30 years? More information on Sheilas medical condition doesn't change anything that happened on the night of the murders. There is enough forensic evidence LACKING on Sheila that should be there that isn't.

Lately I've learned about the extent of the damage done to Neville, Sheila could not have done that and then looked as she did.

Well if you consider that the silencer was planted you must also consider that there were no blood in the silencer and what the court was told in 1996 was false thus meaning that Jeremy is locked up under falsified evidence.

I was not confused about drawback at all. Holly backed up what she said with links...

[lookout]

It is very surprising that Lookout does not accept the police, relatives, experts, Julie, submitted evidence, the courts, appeal courts and CCRC in this case.

For obvious reasons !! Can I ask you to mind your own business !!??

[guest154]

Well if you consider that the silencer was planted you must also consider that there were no blood in the silencer and what the court was told in 1996 was false thus meaning that Jeremy is locked up under falsified evidence.

I was not confused about drawback at all. Holly backed up what she said with links...

I consider we don't know the full story on the silencer -  maybe it was off when Sheila was shot - I don't know - but Bamber knows and that is why he clings to it.
I don't expect the police to be able to put together exactly what happened that night, they were not there.

[lookout]

Drawback. I think that you got confused with what was analysis and what was HOLLY'S OPINION on the red forum. But I didn't say anything to you at the time because I knew it would come across as rude and be blown into a huge deal, I don't think you understood what you posted.
I do believe blood got into the silencer and it was attached during the murders. Although I also consider it being planted a possibility. I don't think we know the full story of the silencer, but Bamber does and that is why he still pursues it where as everything else he has dropped over time, he knows that they haven't got the silencer theory correct.
None of this will be a shock to people that actually read my posts and talk to me as I have said it all before.

The CCRC called Fowlers words “speculation” and incapable of forming a ground of appeal - but you ignore this.


. What new has come up in the last 30 years? More information on Sheilas medical condition doesn't change anything that happened on the night of the murders. There is enough forensic evidence LACKING on Sheila that should be there that isn't.

Lately I've learned about the extent of the damage done to Neville, Sheila could not have done that and then looked as she did.

"There is no new evidence"---------------REALLY ?? That's what you think,or would like to think.

[Alias]

Good idea for a thread, Caroline 
Honestly, when I saw this thread this morning I thought I would log on tonight and see debate. Debate from the staunch supporters as to why they continue to support Bamber. But no, 10 pages and there isn't one arguement presented as to why a CONVICTED child killer is getting this support. Other than they believe the police case against him was flawed, but NO evidence is put forward to show this.  It's just a belief, not based on anything they can present.

The best case put forward (which in itself is poor, flawed and baseless) is lack of forensice evidence on Bamber!! What about the LACK of forensic on Sheila? This is glaringly ignored.

In 2015 there is no reason to support Jeremy Bamber, he is clearly guilty. Staunch supporters still support but can not say why. I think a lot of it is about losing face, people don't want to admit they are wrong, people feel uncomfortable about supporting a child killer online for so long and don't want to admit this is something they have unwittingly done.

WTF!
This is almost Adamish!

[Caroline]

Well if you consider that the silencer was planted you must also consider that there were no blood in the silencer and what the court was told in 1996 was false thus meaning that Jeremy is locked up under falsified evidence.

I was not confused about drawback at all. Holly backed up what she said with links...

No blood in the silencer means the whole lab lied and that's hardly likely - there had to be blood in the silencer, but how it got there is the question.

[guest154]

WTF!
This is almost Adamish!

A pop at Adam? That's very Alias-ish!!!!

I don't want to take over this topic though,  I GENUINELY am interested in supporters putting forward why they support Bamber. Or even guilters saying what parts of the case, if any, actually bug them and leave them with questions.

No blood in the silencer means the whole lab lied and that's hardly likely - there had to be blood in the silencer, but how it got there is the question.

Exactly, I don't believe the lab/police/family all concocted this big conspiracy. There was blood in the silencer.

[lookout]

WTF!
This is almost Adamish!

Must be joined at the hip.