Author Topic: Familiar Portrait?  (Read 19191 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #285 on: May 22, 2015, 07:47:PM »






They seemed to have listed everything else via the eyes and ears of RWB. Funny how he didn't press for that as a criminal offence along with the " homosexual activities " JB was alleged to be having with BC.
Collecting pornographic pictures of his sister would have been right up RWB's street to add to the other flimsy" evidence" he'd collected.

the pictures were NOT illegal.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #286 on: May 22, 2015, 07:48:PM »

Lookout, are you truly missing the point here or simply trying to deflect from it? If this had come up, as it has now, when I believed Jeremy was innocent, the very least I could have said was that it wasn't one of his finest moments.  I would NOT have been trying to blame others for making it possible for the pictures to exist.

Only one person at fault here and that's Jeremy, there is no passing the buck or making excuses - it was despicable!
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #287 on: May 22, 2015, 07:52:PM »
I didn't 'start' writing to him, he wrote to me after I simply wished him well. However, if it's anyone's business, it was before. You think because I asked about the pictures it must mean I thought he was guilty? Well if so, your detective work is way off! We were discussing the photographs on her at the time, so I asked him. Least have have the courage to ask him relevant case related questions instead of blowing smoke like he's a celebrity.

I don´t think I treat JB as a celebrity!!!  :o
I don´t want to have any contact with him, I don´t know whether he is a mass murderer.

No, you are way off about my "detective work", nothing along the lines you think. I was wondering what your thoughts were, as a then "supporter", on the alleged attempt to sell those photos. What excuses did you make for this was actually what I was wondering.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #288 on: May 22, 2015, 07:56:PM »
Only one person at fault here and that's Jeremy, there is no passing the buck or making excuses - it was despicable!


You're right Caroline. Which EVER way we examine this, and from what EVER angle, the simply is NO excusing his actions here -uncaring, unfeeling, insensitive, greedy beyond belief and as you say, despicable.

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #289 on: May 22, 2015, 08:02:PM »
If he really did all those very stupid things, he must have been on drugs. I cannot believe anyone who otherwise functions somewhat normally would be up to antics like that after either killing his whole family or losing them at the hand of his sister. It is so out there that it is hard to fathom.
He must have lived in a haze of a drug induced fantasy world.

Has Brett Collins said anything about anything at all concerning Jeremy and the murders? He seems to have vanished under the radar - a bit like Julie Mugford. I find it a bit odd.

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7614
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #290 on: May 22, 2015, 08:21:PM »
If he really did all those very stupid things, he must have been on drugs. I cannot believe anyone who otherwise functions somewhat normally would be up to antics like that after either killing his whole family or losing them at the hand of his sister. It is so out there that it is hard to fathom.
He must have lived in a haze of a drug induced fantasy world.

Or be a psychopath - no drugs needed
« Last Edit: May 22, 2015, 08:22:PM by stephanie »
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #291 on: May 22, 2015, 08:28:PM »
Or be a psychopath - no drugs needed

Brett Collins was allegedly in on this, wasn´t it his suggestion? Then he too is a psychopath. And Julie, if Jeremy is indeed guilty, then she knew more than she lets on, it is clear, so she is a psychopath too. Three psychopaths.
I think a logical conclusion is that they lived in a drug induced fantasy world, but of course I could be wrong, just speculating because the whole thing is so outlandish.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #292 on: May 22, 2015, 08:39:PM »
Brett Collins was allegedly in on this, wasn´t it his suggestion? Then he too is a psychopath. And Julie, if Jeremy is indeed guilty, then she knew more than she lets on, it is clear, so she is a psychopath too. Three psychopaths.
I think a logical conclusion is that they lived in a drug induced fantasy world, but of course I could be wrong, just speculating because the whole thing is so outlandish.


 Most psychopaths don't kill and there is a strong chance that we all know/have known/will know one or two during our lives. Also there isn't a law against being one. As for them living in a drug induced fantasy world, perhaps it's as well Jeremy only did minimal farm work or the furrows may have taken on very odd shapes. I also wonder how Julie managed to do a Masters in a drug induced haze.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13780
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #293 on: May 22, 2015, 08:40:PM »
Brett Collins was allegedly in on this, wasn´t it his suggestion? Then he too is a psychopath. And Julie, if Jeremy is indeed guilty, then she knew more than she lets on, it is clear, so she is a psychopath too. Three psychopaths.
I think a logical conclusion is that they lived in a drug induced fantasy world, but of course I could be wrong, just speculating because the whole thing is so outlandish.


If it was driven by a drug induced fantasy world then it would be far more sloppy and reckless, The three of them would just go in wreak havoc kill everyone then leave, no phone call no police no covering up.

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17250
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #294 on: May 22, 2015, 08:42:PM »
the pictures were NOT illegal.

we havent seen them we dont know weather they were or they wernt,

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13780
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #295 on: May 22, 2015, 08:44:PM »
Or be a psychopath - no drugs needed

Jeremy worryingly only reaches 14 out of 22 on the scale of evil, Imagine being a 22!

1 - Those who have killed in self-defense, and who do not show traces of psychopathy

2 - Jealous lovers who committed murder; although egocentric or immature, they are not psychopaths

3 - Willing companions of killers: aberrant personality, impulse-ridden, with some antisocial traits

 4 - Those who have killed in self-defense, but had been extremely provocative toward the victim for that to happen.

 5 - Traumatized, desperate persons who killed abusive relatives or other people, but who show remorse for their crime and are not psychopaths

 6 - Impetuous, hotheaded murderers, yet without marked psychopathic traits

 7 - Highly narcissistic, but not distinctly psychopathic persons—some with a psychotic core—who kill persons next to them, with jealousy as an underlying motive

 8 - Non-psychopathic persons with smoldering rage, and who kill when the rage is ignited.

 9 - Jealous lovers with marked psychopathic features.

 10 - Killers of people "in the way", such as witnesses. Extremely egocentric, but not distinctly psychopathic

 11 - Psychopathic killers of people "in the way", such as close friends or even family members.

 12 - Power-hungry psychopaths who kill when they are "cornered".

 13 - Psychopathic murderers with inadequate, rageful personalities, rage being the reason of their killings.

14 - Ruthlessly self-centered psychopathic schemers who kill to benefit themselves

15 - Psychopathic cold-blooded spree killers or multiple murderers.

 16 - Psychopaths committing multiple vicious acts, with repeated acts of extreme violence

 17 - Sexually perverse serial murderers: Rape is the primary motive and the victim is killed to hide evidence.

 18 - Psychopathic torture-murderers, where murder is the primary motive, and the victim is killed after a torture that was not prolonged

 19 - Psychopaths driven to terrorism, subjugation, intimidation, and rape, but who are short of murder

 20 - Psychopathic torture-murderers, where torture is the primary motive, but in persons with distinct psychoses (such as schizophrenia).

 21 - Psychopaths who do not kill their victims, but do subject them to extreme torture

 22 - Psychopathic torture-murderers, where torture is the primary motive. In most cases, the crime has a sexual motivating factor

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #296 on: May 22, 2015, 08:51:PM »

If it was driven by a drug induced fantasy world then it would be far more sloppy and reckless, The three of them would just go in wreak havoc kill everyone then leave, no phone call no police no covering up.

The thing is, if Jeremy did this, there actually are a lot of sloppy and reckless actions you have to accept. One being him putting a bloodied silencer into the gun cupboard another the attempt to sell those pictures.

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17250
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #297 on: May 22, 2015, 08:57:PM »

Caroline, I have yet to come across anyone of those who knew him pre murders who supports the description Lookout paints of him. Come to think of it, I've yet to meet anyone who knew June to describe her the way Lookout does.

have you met anyone who knew him though.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #298 on: May 22, 2015, 09:00:PM »
I don´t think I treat JB as a celebrity!!!  :o
I don´t want to have any contact with him, I don´t know whether he is a mass murderer.

No, you are way off about my "detective work", nothing along the lines you think. I was wondering what your thoughts were, as a then "supporter", on the alleged attempt to sell those photos. What excuses did you make for this was actually what I was wondering.

I didn't say YOU treated him like a celebrity - there are those who do though.

I probably defended him when I thought he was innocent - however, when he didn't answer the question, I thought he probably did try to sell the pictures. It's one of the niggles that went towards me changing my mind about him. However, at that point, I hadn't seen the documentary where the reporter recalls the meeting. There is no doubt in my mind that he tried to sell them and he has never denied it, even though I gave him the opportunity.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Familiar Portrait?
« Reply #299 on: May 22, 2015, 09:01:PM »
Or be a psychopath - no drugs needed

Spot on!
Few people have the imagination for reality