0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
This is a tactic of supporters. When a primary source says something bad about him, they then ask for proof that that person is not lying. Such as Fielding who is filmed speaking about his meeting with Bamber. It is now up to the guilters to prove he is not lying !
Example of the kind of drivel The Sun published in 1985.http://i.imgur.com/STJZC4q.jpg
To be fair supporters would firstly try to justify an action which put Jeremy in a bad light. Such as blaming Julie for making Jeremy do the caravan break in. But when an action is indefensible, the primary source/s is not telling the truth.
To be fair supporters would firstly try to justify an action which put Jeremy in a bad light. Such as blaming Julie for making Jeremy do the caravan break in. But when an action is indefensible, the primary source/s are not telling the truth.
Ignoring the first part of your quote about which nobody was actually talking about, if the primary source is The Sun then no I don't believe they tell the truth. They will stop at nothing to sell newspapers.
Or like you blaming Jeremy and Susan Battersby for that cheque fraud. That said, I don´t like that break in, it puts Jeremy in a very bad light. One reason I am on the fence about him - it was a far cry from murder, but he had overstepped a boundary.
I never blamed SB. I just call it 'Susan Battersby's 1984 minor cheque book fraud'. It was her cheque book. It was 1984. It was minor, Nick Leeson's fraud a few years later brought down a bank.
It is actually worse for Julie that it was Susan´s cheque book. She admits she used several days talking Susan into it.... then she used days practicing a fake signature.Fraud is never minor.
Have you got a source that she 'used several days' persuading SB.
Yes, it is in Julie´s statement somewhere. You are not going to make me look for it now!
