30 Years have now passed and Jeremy's supporters have failed to free him.
The forensics point to him in all directions despite the police errors and inconsistencies. Therefore you must find the only potential evidence that could free him (if it exists)
The Following is pivotal
1) Find smoking gun evidence of a police conspiracy
1a) Ensure the police and co conspirators in the police force confess to the conspiracy
1b) Gather enough police testimony that the conspiracy theory is a conspiracy fact
2) Find smoking gun evidence of gross misconduct and incompetence of the expert witnesses
2a) For example collaborating with the police conspiracy
2b) Being to incompetent to notice the police conspiracy
3) Find smoking gun evidence of extended family conspiracy to set him up
3a) Such as audio recordings or data interpreted from telephone calls (Spying/Hacking not advised)
3b) Evidence of police incompetence to not notice the conspiracy of a set up.
Once you have obtained all from the list above you can then proceed to final part of the To Do List
4) Arrange Jeremy's release and freedom party
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For non supporters you just have to wait and see if anything is produced and ticked off the list.
These are some of the things people acting as his advocate must do in order to get him freed. Advocates are people who actually get off their duff and do something to aid him in some manner.
Most advocates are not interested in looking through evidence to help him submit legal briefs. They are only interested in swaying public support. They either think enough public support will result in enough pressure to free him or they simply think so long as he is going to spend his life behind bars it helps him if a lot of people think he is innocent so they try to convince people he is innocent.
Many here deny being advocates they say they simply are posting their opinion tha the is innocent. They have not done a very good job though of justifying such beliefs and when challenged at the end of the day say they have the right to believe anything they want. This is a strawman though because no one is disputing their right to believe what they want the debate is over whether their position is supported by credible evidence.
Any have what amounts to blind faith in Jeremy and a lot of that comes from these people having distrust in the law so willing to believe Jeremy was framed even though there is no evidence of such. It's ultimately up to each person whether to face reality or not or whether to have blind faith, it is not something that others can force someone to do.
This is why there is a stalemate of sorts which results in things repeating over and over.
Realistically the only way Jeremy will get a new trial is if Julie were to come forward saying she lied or a cop or lab worker came forward claiming evidence was doctored. That's the only way of the wrongdoing that is alleged actually being proven the existing evidence doesn't provide any basis at all to establish such. If one wants to have blind faith and hold out such hope it is something that might be hurting them but will not hurt others. The problem is when people misrepresent evidence exists to prove his guilt and end up fooling others who believe such without properly researching. I got involved because I believe the propaganda by Jeremy supporters little did I know I would discover the claim there were 3 different moderators collected was false and that there was such a simple explanation of why a single moderator had the prefix changed 2 times. Little did I know...
It took reading the documents and posts here and on the red board and COA decision to actually understand the facts and evidence used to convict Jeremy because so many distortions were flying around. From a legal standpoint the following would be needed to secure a new trial for Jeremy:
1) Proof Julie lied which realistically would require her coming forward to admit it
or
2) Proof that undercuts the moderator which would require:
A1) Proof Sheila's fatal wound wasn't a contact wound
or
A2) Proof that despite being a contact wound Sheila's fatal wound was in a location that would not have been virtually certain to result in drawback
or
A3) Proof that drawback had been found in the muzzle of the Anschutz but its finding had been concealed
AND
B) Proof that the blood was planted in the moderator
With Julie recanting the Courts would likely vacate the conviction and make the government decide whether to retry.
Similarly proving the blood was planted in the moderator and that blood either was in the Anschutz or would not have necessarily gotten in the Anschutz if the moderator had not been used would be sufficient to get a court to vacate the judgment and let the government decide whether it wanted to retry the case.
While some supporters pretend we are already at this state and that such evidence exists the reality is that it doesn't. If there had been some large conspiracy as would have been necessary then someone would have cracked by now or some evidence found by this point. It sees like his defenders have unrealistic false hope of such surfacing.
Even if one has such hope one should admit that currently this evidence is lacking and that at the moment nothing can be done through the system to help Jeremy. Only if such evidence were to surface would there be a basis to try filing with the CCRC.
That means there is no new news or evidence to evaluate and the debate pretty much dead. To try to keep debate alive some rehash the same claims of yesteryear. Otherwise the site would have to fully evolve and move on to something else aside from JB to survive. There are other sections but limited discussion takes place on other cases and offtopic.
