How would you react ?

[maggie]

I think some posters don't understand the concept of being objective. When posters compare something from their own  lives you can't help sense they are being guided by their own emotions as opposed to logic and reasoning.

It depends how the experience is used because one thing is true, we can learn most from our own experience if we are willing to do so. Imo using an example of such an experience to reinforce an argument is quite acceptable as long as this is done in an objective way. 

True enough we all do have a tendency to project our own experiences onto all our opinions, it's human nature which helps us form relationships....... and break them.  We do need to be aware of this tendency and not fall into the trap of promoting our own opinions or interpreting others opinions from our own emotional experiences knowingly or more often, unknowingly.imo

[maggie]

I understand perfectly the concept of being objective. I'm just saying at that same age and at that time, I didn't call 999.
Had I recieved the same call Jeremy did, I would have acted in the exact same way and I would say that whether I thought he was innocent or guilty.

Hi SaraT, thanks for that, I argue from having also had a similar experience, fortunately with a different outcome, although that night is still remembered with a blackness and dread in my mind.
I agree the argument is not about supporting JB but is a much broader fact that human beings choose fight or flight or a mixture of both under extreme pressure and due to this their actions in hindsight may seem irrational.
How many people look back and question their own behaviour in such situations.
As for JB regretting not phoning 999..... I would suggest, whether he's innocent or guilty, he knows it wouldn't have changed anything.

[Patti]

You are just projecting.  You have tunnel vision not me.  Saying someone could be lying is not enough to establish they are which is necessary to disregard something.  You want us to believe the family and Jeremy lied in their statements and that Sheila actually had fired guns before and had an interest in them.  You want to ignore logic and pretend that because she grew up on a farm she would know how to operate all guns of any kind even though the family hadn't even owned a semi-auto until a few months before the murders.

Being objective means taking the evidence as it is found not ignoring it and that is what you do you put on blinders then absurdly suggest anyone who doesn't wear the blinders you wear are biased.  That is classic projection.

We are trying to assess the situation JEREMY claims existed to see if his supposed reaction is one that is credible.  His own claims are that she was not known to have any interest in guns or to have fired any to his knowledge.  To put ourselves in his place means putting ourselves in the exact position he claimed existed with a sister who had mental problems but the problems were controlled, she wasn't violent towards the family in the past...

You don't want to do that because you know Jeremy's actions are indefensible.  That reveals who has the bias in this instance.

People who are biased make poor advocates precisely because they can't see the evidence in the light an objective party sees the evidence and is thus unable to try refuting that evidence competently.

OK then.  If I was to get 10 women and give them each a rifle a magazine and some bullets and asked them to load the magazine and fire a shot, what would you think the outcome would be? It is a simple test.  Would you think those 10 women would fail? Of course you do because you do not wish to believe that women could be intelligent enough to load and fire a weapon that according to experts a child would be able to use. 

[Caroline]

I understand perfectly the concept of being objective. I'm just saying at that same age and at that time, I didn't call 999.
Had I recieved the same call Jeremy did, I would have acted in the exact same way and I would say that whether I thought he was innocent or guilty.

Had someone gone crazy? Did they have a gun? Did they sound panicked and terrified? Did they request that you go over there? Did the phone go dead?

[SaraT]

Had someone gone crazy? Did they have a gun? Did they sound panicked and terrified? Did they request that you go over there? Did the phone go dead?

No, none of those things happened of course. It doesn't change my point.

[Caroline]

No, none of those things happened of course. It doesn't change my point.

It does indeed matter, we have no idea what the situation was in your case but Jeremy's case was an obvious instance where 999 was required. It was at 3am, his father sounded panicked/terrified, his sister had a gun and had gone crazy - the phone then goes dead. I can't believe people are still making excuses on this point but it takes all sorts!

If there was video/CCT footage of Jeremy leaving the scene, people here would still make excuses.

[SaraT]

It does indeed matter, we have no idea what the situation was in your case but Jeremy's case was an obvious instance where 999 was required. It was at 3am, his father sounded panicked/terrified, his sister had a gun and had gone crazy - the phone then goes dead. I can't believe people are still making excuses on this point but it takes all sorts!

If there was video/CCT footage of Jeremy leaving the scene, people here would still make excuses.

I didn't say it didn't matter I said it didn't change my point, which was I would have been frightened and would have dithered and would have telephoned the local station. I'm not making excuses nor am I talking about any other aspect of the case. I am answering the original question which was 'how would you react'

[Caroline]

I didn't say it didn't matter I said it didn't change my point, which was I would have been frightened and would have dithered and would have telephoned the local station. I'm not making excuses nor am I talking about any other aspect of the case. I am answering the original question which was 'how would you react'

yeah.

[Stephanie]

I understand perfectly the concept of being objective. I'm just saying at that same age and at that time, I didn't call 999.
Had I recieved the same call Jeremy did, I would have acted in the exact same way and I would say that whether I thought he was innocent or guilty.

Then you are being subjective...

[Stephanie]

It depends how the experience is used because one thing is true, we can learn most from our own experience if we are willing to do so. Imo using an example of such an experience to reinforce an argument is quite acceptable as long as this is done in an objective way. 

True enough we all do have a tendency to project our own experiences onto all our opinions, it's human nature which helps us form relationships....... and break them.  We do need to be aware of this tendency and not fall into the trap of promoting our own opinions or interpreting others opinions from our own emotional experiences knowingly or more often, unknowingly.imo

You are also being subjective. I am looking at this case from all angles, not just at this alleged phone call - which considering all the other facts, I don't believe happened. I don't believe NB phoned anyone.

[Stephanie]

Hi SaraT, thanks for that, I argue from having also had a similar experience, fortunately with a different outcome, although that night is still remembered with a blackness and dread in my mind.
I agree the argument is not about supporting JB but is a much broader fact that human beings choose fight or flight or a mixture of both under extreme pressure and due to this their actions in hindsight may seem irrational.
How many people look back and question their own behaviour in such situations.
As for JB regretting not phoning 999..... I would suggest, whether he's innocent or guilty, he knows it wouldn't have changed anything.

Being objective is not using bias or basing your argument on your past experiences.

[SaraT]

Then you are being subjective...

Yes I am being subjective, I answered that particular question based on what I would do. How I would react.
Which was the question asked

[Stephanie]

Yes I am being subjective, I answered that particular question based on what I would do. How I would react.
Which was the question asked

Then you weren't being objective.

[maggie]

Being objective is not using bias or basing your argument on your past experiences.

I do know what objective is you don't understand what I am saying. You can use an experience in a way which is not 'influenced by emotional or personal prejuces' ...... objective, well I can.

[Stephanie]

I do know what objective is.

You're not being objective, you have been subjective. And I'm really not sure what 'forming relationships' has to do with the decisions if a mass murderer 30 years ago.