Another Freudian Slip?

[maggie]

That doesn't make it fact/true. We only have her word for it.

Well exactly but her testament at trial was one of two mainstays of the guilty verdict so if she made it up, what else did she make up?

[Stephanie]

And he still didn't get it right,eh,Maggie ? Leaving all kinds of clues.

Hence his subsequent arrest, conviction and life meaning life sentence. 

[Stephanie]

Well exactly but her testament at trial was one of two mainstays of the guilty verdict so if she made it up, what else did she make up?

That doesn't mean she wasn't a credible witness. Unless JB confesses and gives details we may never know.

[Jane]

And he still didn't get it right,eh,Maggie ? Leaving all kinds of clues.

Well, no, but then his sense of his own supremacy wasn't matched by the reality of it.

[Stephanie]

I am familiar with another case where a witness for the prosecution lied under oath. His evidence, had he have told the truth, would have made no difference to the eventual decision by the jury imo. It didn't help the accused in the grand scale of things and without the accused admitting it to be true it was merely supposition anyway.

[susan]

There is a possibility but that would have taken a lot of planning someone had to drive his car home and then he had to get back to the cottage to drive the car back  bit unlikely I think suse.

Maggie it has been suggested that he drove his car home phoned Julie parked his car up legged it back through the fields to the trailer then took that back to WHF  and he was to stay over after he committed the murders he set the scene out through the window and back to his cottage through the fields which he would know very well then waited phoned Julie and told her about the alleged call from his Dad then phoned the police then back in his car to the farm.

[Stephanie]

Well exactly but her testament at trial was one of two mainstays of the guilty verdict so if she made it up, what else did she make up?

Furthermore the trial was to establish whether JB were guilty or not. Establishing whether he had planned it or not would have been secondary. The jury may not have believed JM when she suggested he had told her he had planned it a year before, they may have ignored this point but still arrived at the same verdict, having believed everything else.

[maggie]

Maggie it has been suggested that he drove his car home phoned Julie parked his car up legged it back through the fields to the trailer then took that back to WHF  and he was to stay over after he committed the murders he set the scene out through the window and back to his cottage through the fields which he would know very well then waited phoned Julie and told her about the alleged call from his Dad then phoned the police then back in his car to the farm.

I know that's the belief but its a hell of a lot of dashing about, I find it hard to believe but it may have happened.

[Alias]

Maggie it has been suggested that he drove his car home phoned Julie parked his car up legged it back through the fields to the trailer then took that back to WHF  and he was to stay over after he committed the murders he set the scene out through the window and back to his cottage through the fields which he would know very well then waited phoned Julie and told her about the alleged call from his Dad then phoned the police then back in his car to the farm.

The Bambers and Sheila would have noticed that he took his car home - when he said he wanted to stay the night, that must have seemed odd to them.
I really am not buying into this. Five minutes away in a car: there would have been no reason to sleep over at the farm.

[Alias]

BTW, nice to see you back, Roch, it has been ages! 

[susan]

The Bambers and Sheila would have noticed that he took his car home - when he said he wanted to stay the night, that must have seemed odd to them.
I really am not buying into this. Five minutes away in a car: there would have been no reason to sleep over at the farm.

I did wonder how far the car was parked away from the house and when Ralph went to walk his dogs he would notice the car was gone and that would have been strange.  Alias I honestly don't know how or when he got into the house   I honestly don't think we will ever know the truth.

[Caroline]

I know that's the belief but its a hell of a lot of dashing about, I find it hard to believe but it may have happened.

Is it? It's a short drive home and as the crow flies from GH to WHF, it does't look that far and if the trailer was already in the field, he had that to drive the rest of the way.

[Alias]

I did wonder how far the car was parked away from the house and when Ralph went to walk his dogs he would notice the car was gone and that would have been strange.  Alias I honestly don't know how or when he got into the house   I honestly don't think we will ever know the truth.

Neither do I - and that is frustrating!

[maggie]

Furthermore the trial was to establish whether JB were guilty or not. Establishing whether he had planned it or not would have been secondary. The jury may not have believed JM when she suggested he had told her he had planned it a year before, they may have ignored this point but still arrived at the same verdict.

Establishing whether he had planned it or not was obviously not the point of the trial but it is quite important, surely as the main witness was under oath and therefore believed to be telling the truth on every other point, we therefore need to believe her when she said he planned it for a year and spoke about it all the time?

[susan]

I know that's the belief but its a hell of a lot of dashing about, I find it hard to believe but it may have happened.

Maggie I am now finding it hard to believe when I think it through guess it is back to the window