The Murders at White House Farm - By Carol Ann Lee (A Taster!)

[Caroline]

Years later,I'd say it'd been forgotten.

No years later he thought he could hoodwink the GP into believing a call from Nevill took place and so needed to shift the times! 

[lookout]

No years later he thought he could hoodwink the GP into believing a call from Nevill took place and so needed to shift the times! 

That's only what you want to believe,as I'd be the same if I thought him guilty.I'd be carefully scrutinising every last little thing. I understand your eagerness and determination to pin this crime on him. Though he hasn't got away with it,has he 

[Caroline]

That's only what you want to believe,as I'd be the same if I thought him guilty.I'd be carefully scrutinising every last little thing. I understand your eagerness and determination to pin this crime on him. Though he hasn't got away with it,has he 

Pin it on him? Unless it escaped your notice Lookout - someone got there before me and NO! He hasn't gotten away with it - nor will he.

[lookout]

Pin it on him? Unless it escaped your notice Lookout - someone got there before me and NO! He hasn't gotten away with it - nor will he.

Like I said,he's not got away with it,so why the continued determination that he stays put where he's been for the last 30 years when in your eyes he's where he belongs ? I really can't see the logic. What more do you want ?

[guest154]

Like I said,he's not got away with it,so why the continued determination that he stays put where he's been for the last 30 years when in your eyes he's where he belongs ? I really can't see the logic. What more do you want ?

I'd like the lies he spews out to stop, and those of some of his supporters. And the continued degradation of his victims to stop.

But none of that will happen.

Like I said,he's not got away with it,so why the continued determination that he stays put where he's been for the last 30 years when in your eyes he's where he belongs ? I really can't see the logic. What more do you want ?

There are people like yourself still out there willing to do/say ANYTHING to make sure that he does get away with this crime, even though you have not one shred of innocence. It's easy to slap guilters with the "why bother" arguement but Caroline debating a case she is interested in is more logical to me than what supporters do.

[lookout]

It's NOT a case of seeing him getting away with anything  It's a matter of seeing fair play,something that MOST ( apart from yourself ) would wish to see.
Even 3/4 years ago,Mick Gradwell who writes for the LEP had to admit that an appeal should be in place after the mess of the investigation.

[Jane]

It's NOT a case of seeing him getting away with anything  It's a matter of seeing fair play,something that MOST ( apart from yourself ) would wish to see.
Even 3/4 years ago,Mick Gradwell who writes for the LEP had to admit that an appeal should be in place after the mess of the investigation.

Is Mick Gradwell campaigning on Jeremy's behalf now?

[guest154]

It's a matter of seeing fair play,something that MOST ( apart from yourself ) would wish to see.

I am happy with the evidence Lookout, I think it is concrete and that his appeals have been more than fair.

Telling fibs about autopsy reports ISN'T fair play Lookout, you're in no position to lecture anyone on fairness in this case.

[lookout]

Is Mick Gradwell campaigning on Jeremy's behalf now?

Not necessarily,he doesn't have to be,but he admits that the trial was an unfair one.

[lookout]

I am happy with the evidence Lookout, I think it is concrete and that his appeals have been more than fair.

Telling fibs about autopsy reports ISN'T fair play Lookout, you're in no position to lecture anyone on fairness in this case.

So what you have to say,goes above what a top cop has to say ? I see.

[Jane]

Not necessarily,he doesn't have to be,but he admits that the trial was an unfair one.

But not convinced enough to stand up and be counted?

[guest154]

As usual Lookout doesn't quite post the truth.


This is what he ACTUALLY says.
"I think the case would benefit from a new forensic examination of the remaining exhibits and photographs - particularly in relation to the analysis of the patterns of blood-splattering, which could provide additional and useful evidence.

What I find most frustrating is that, had modern DNA techniques and itemised billing for telephone calls been available in 1985, many of the doubts about this troubling case would have been laid to rest a long time "

[lookout]

As usual Lookout doesn't quite post the truth.


This is what he ACTUALLY says.
"I think the case would benefit from a new forensic examination of the remaining exhibits and photographs - particularly in relation to the analysis of the patterns of blood-splattering, which could provide additional and useful evidence.

What I find most frustrating is that, had modern DNA techniques and itemised billing for telephone calls been available in 1985, many of the doubts about this troubling case would have been laid to rest a long time "

What I read included the appeal.

[lookout]

 What you purposely omitted was the bit where he said " the trial jury weren't provided with accurate evidence which may result in a re-trial ",as he'd mentioned that new photographs shown since appeared to show some re-staging during original investigations and that scratch marks on the Aga had not been there or made during the incident.

[lookout]

Selective,as per.