Facts

[susan]

Colin writes that he cannot judge Jeremy for having killed, because if he hadn´t killed June he would have himself!!

I can never get over this - Colin is convinced Jeremy killed the whole family, including his sons, for Gods sake, but he is talking about June!!!!
I don´t understand Colin, but there were some strong feelings there concerning June, probably also from Sheila´s side.

Alias I remember Colin spoke very strongly about his dislike for June especially the way she was with Sheila and he said she was not the person local people thought she was nice generous and kind. It was sad to read this and as I said earlier Colin had very little to say wrong about Jeremy in the book. Think Colin was quite confused about the whole case until later on and he saw things differently.

[Jan]

a friend of mine who is a retired old bailey judge , told me that the hardest thing to get over to a jury is that you can aquit a guilty man as its up to the prosecution to prove guilt. Despite what side of the fence you stand on jeremy banners guilt was not and has not ever been proven beyond reasonable doubt. In today's world of advances in DNA techniques only a NOT GUILTY verdict would be returned if this case was to go for re trial. That's fact and no one can say otherwise. I'm extremely open minded in this case and am very knowledgable in it so am open to persuasion if someone can definitely show me where the guilt is proven!!

Well Keepers - did you get the answers you expected?

[Adam]

Well Keepers - did you get the answers you expected?

Jan you must stop supporting Jeremy.

If the crime happened today, there is no doubt Jeremy would have been found guilty. Crime scene protocols are a lot more strict and the blood DNA would have been more conclusive.

Taff was the main problem. Any decent man in charge would change direction a lot sooner.

[Jan]

Jan you must stop supporting Jeremy.

If the crime happened today, there is no doubt Jeremy would have been found guilty. Crime scene protocols are a lot more strict and the blood DNA would have been more conclusive.

Taff was the main problem. Any decent man in charge would change direction a lot sooner.

shut up Adam- and yes that was personal. Its a free country or are you not aware of that either.

[lookout]

Professor Bernard Knight had said,I quote," It's practically inconceivable that Jeremy could have committed the murders at all;and a large part of Jeremy's infamy comes from the cold and meticulous nature he used in planning and executing the murders. Julie's unsubstantiated claim that he was " pissed off "and it's " tonight or never ",doesn't wash ",unquote.



Most people helping police with their inquiries don't receive compensation-----------------Julie did !!

[Caroline]

Professor Bernard Knight had said,I quote," It's practically inconceivable that Jeremy could have committed the murders at all;and a large part of Jeremy's infamy comes from the cold and meticulous nature he used in planning and executing the murders. Julie's unsubstantiated claim that he was " pissed off "and it's " tonight or never ",doesn't wash ",unquote.



Most people helping police with their inquiries don't receive compensation-----------------Julie did !!

That's Bernard Knight's opinion and he's entitled to it, however, it means nothing as far as whether he's actually guilty or not.

What compensation did Julie receive? You're not talking about the NOTW deal are you? That's not compensation.

[lookout]

Why did it take 32 visits for JM to make just to say " He did it ?" Nothing hard about saying those 3 words-----------------------is there ?

[lookout]

That's Bernard Knight's opinion and he's entitled to it, however, it means nothing as far as whether he's actually guilty or not.

What compensation did Julie receive? You're not talking about the NOTW deal are you? That's not compensation.

At the suggestion of EP,it WAS a form of compensation,something she wouldn't have done under her own volition. Or WOULD she ??

[Jane]

Why did it take 32 visits for JM to make just to say " He did it ?" Nothing hard about saying those 3 words-----------------------is there ?

Lookout, whether or not it IS the case, you give the impression that, if you thought it necessary, you would shop your own children in to the police without a moment's hesitation or a backward glance and wash your hands of them  -I'm interested that you have failed to act so quickly regarding your friend's daughter- it takes some of us a little longer to reach that point and some of us, like Julie, perhaps, will need either encouragement or incentive.

[Caroline]

At the suggestion of EP,it WAS a form of compensation,something she wouldn't have done under her own volition. Or WOULD she ??

Where have you got that from? Julie said she was hounded by the press and sought a solicitor who advised her to take the best offer - after the deal was sealed, the others would leave her alone. Nothing to do with EP and it certainly wasn't compensation.

[lookout]

Lookout, whether or not it IS the case, you give the impression that, if you thought it necessary, you would shop your own children in to the police without a moment's hesitation or a backward glance and wash your hands of them  -I'm interested that you have failed to act so quickly regarding your friend's daughter- it takes some of us a little longer to reach that point and some of us, like Julie, perhaps, will need either encouragement or incentive.

Yes,I would wash my hands if one of my family was involved in criminal activities,providing I'd been through their crime with a fine tooth-comb,which RESULTED in their guilt. Yes,I would. I have an " in-built guard " against anyone having one over on me.

As for my friend's daughter,as long as she doesn't trouble ME,personally,then leave well alone. If she showed aggression toward me,then YES,I'd " shop her " without hesitation.

[Caroline]

Yes,I would wash my hands if one of my family was involved in criminal activities,providing I'd been through their crime with a fine tooth-comb,which RESULTED in their guilt. Yes,I would. I have an " in-built guard " against anyone having one over on me.

As for my friend's daughter,as long as she doesn't trouble ME,personally,then leave well alone. If she showed aggression toward me,then YES,I'd " shop her " without hesitation.

Isn't that what JM did? Jeremy didn't hurt her personally so .......?

[lookout]

Isn't that what JM did? Jeremy didn't hurt her personally so .......?

Entirely different scenario. JM lied--------------I don't !

[Caroline]

Entirely different scenario. JM lied--------------I don't !

That's your opinion.

[Alias]

Where have you got that from? Julie said she was hounded by the press and sought a solicitor who advised her to take the best offer - after the deal was sealed, the others would leave her alone. Nothing to do with EP and it certainly wasn't compensation.

I read long ago in some unfinished online book (don´t remember the author, perhaps someone else has a better memory), that Julie did receive compensation for her 32 sessions with the EP. I think everyone has this right - wages lost because of the time spent with police during an investigation. I think you don´t get that money automatically, but have to apply for it. It was claimed that Julie did.