Hello from Darren

[reesio10]

Hello everyone,

My name is Darren, I am 34 years old and work in IT.

I have been interested in this case amongst others for a good few years now. Every now and again I come back to this and re-read the evidence and check the latest with goings on with appeals etc. For what it is worth, my opinion is that Jeremy is innocent, or at the very least is not guilty beyond reasonable doubt. I say this because the key evidence (please correct me) was the silencer and Julie Mugford's testimony. I have seen the recent information to cast some real serious doubt on the silencer, and how someone who had a deal in place to receive £25k to sell her story can be a reliable witness is baffling (maybe illegal!?) Add this to the phone calls made to the Police from both Nevill & Jeremy, the extended wait outside while there was a discussion with someone from within the farm, the noise's of movement when the police first entered the house, the blood still being wet from Sheila's wound (and the lack of livor mortis) no evidence of Jeremy at the scene of the crime either and the house being bolted from the inside. There were some comments about Jeremy's behaviour after the murders, but who can really say how anyone would deal with grief until it is you in that situation? These are some thoughts from the top of my head, I am really looking to learn more so please do correct me if anything I have said above it incorrect.

I look forward to reading some of the current conversations and opinions

Darren 

[maggie]

Hello everyone,

My name is Darren, I am 34 years old and work in IT.

I have been interested in this case amongst others for a good few years now. Every now and again I come back to this and re-read the evidence and check the latest with goings on with appeals etc. For what it is worth, my opinion is that Jeremy is innocent, or at the very least is not guilty beyond reasonable doubt. I say this because the key evidence (please correct me) was the silencer and Julie Mugford's testimony. I have seen the recent information to cast some real serious doubt on the silencer, and how someone who had a deal in place to receive £25k to sell her story can be a reliable witness is baffling (maybe illegal!?) Add this to the phone calls made to the Police from both Nevill & Jeremy, the extended wait outside while there was a discussion with someone from within the farm, the noise's of movement when the police first entered the house, the blood still being wet from Sheila's wound (and the lack of livor mortis) no evidence of Jeremy at the scene of the crime either and the house being bolted from the inside. There were some comments about Jeremy's behaviour after the murders, but who can really say how anyone would deal with grief until it is you in that situation? These are some thoughts from the top of my head, I am really looking to learn more so please do correct me if anything I have said above it incorrect.

I look forward to reading some of the current conversations and opinions

Darren 

Hi Darren, welcome to the forum.

[lookout]

Good morning Darren. Welcome to this bowel-gripping forum.

[guest154]

Welcome Darren!

[Caroline]

Welcome Darren 

[Steve_uk]

Hello Darren. You are correct in that the evidence is circumstantial and the jury in 1986 didn't hear the full story,but if you search this site in the Statements and Transcripts section and the numerous threads you might change your mind over time.

[reesio10]

Hi Steve,

Definitely, that is part of why I wanted to join a forum such as this as I wanted to know the whole story!

Thanks for the warm welcome everyone 

Darren

[Adam]

You obviously have not been reading this forum for very long.

Even hardcore supporters who had supported Jeremy for 30 or corresponded with him have changed stance to guilty. Others have stopped posting.

You're reasons have been gone over with several times. But there is a mountain of other reasons.

Anyway, I trust you know the crime scene evidence. So feel free to tell me how Sheila committed the massacre.

[Adam]

Hello Darren. You are correct in that the evidence is circumstantial and the jury in 1986 didn't hear the full story,but if you search this site in the Statements and Transcripts section and the numerous threads you might change your mind over time.

Come on Steve. You know there is a mountain of forensic evidence.

[Adam]

Hello everyone,

My name is Darren, I am 34 years old and work in IT.

I have been interested in this case amongst others for a good few years now. Every now and again I come back to this and re-read the evidence and check the latest with goings on with appeals etc. For what it is worth, my opinion is that Jeremy is innocent, or at the very least is not guilty beyond reasonable doubt. I say this because the key evidence (please correct me) was the silencer and Julie Mugford's testimony. I have seen the recent information to cast some real serious doubt on the silencer, and how someone who had a deal in place to receive £25k to sell her story can be a reliable witness is baffling (maybe illegal!?) Add this to the phone calls made to the Police from both Nevill & Jeremy, the extended wait outside while there was a discussion with someone from within the farm, the noise's of movement when the police first entered the house, the blood still being wet from Sheila's wound (and the lack of livor mortis) no evidence of Jeremy at the scene of the crime either and the house being bolted from the inside. There were some comments about Jeremy's behaviour after the murders, but who can really say how anyone would deal with grief until it is you in that situation? These are some thoughts from the top of my head, I am really looking to learn more so please do correct me if anything I have said above it incorrect.

I look forward to reading some of the current conversations and opinions

Darren 

Sorry, welcome.

I just read this post again. And chuckled.

Conversations in the house, Neville calling the police 😊😊😊

I am sure Scipio will be welcoming you soon.

[Steve_uk]

Come on Steve. You know there is a mountain of forensic evidence.

There isn't really because the White House was Jeremy's second home and any forensic evidence which could have been garnered was compromised by Police.

[Adam]

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6372.msg282028.html#msg282028

[Steve_uk]

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6372.msg282028.html#msg282028

It might be apposite to requote #1 and #2 here..

[David1819]

Come on Steve. You know there is a mountain of forensic evidence.

Adam, A sound moderator 'discovered' by his cousins who had a £1,000,000 incentive to convict him is by no means a 'mountain' a forensic evidence.

In the Judge at the trial instructed the Jury that they can find Jeremy Bamber guilty on the evidence of the sound moderator or Mugfords testimony. what ever 'mountain' of forensics your thinking of oviously did not convince the Judge it was conclusive

[Steve_uk]

Adam, A sound moderator 'discovered' by his cousins who had a £1,000,000 incentive to convict him is by no means a 'mountain' a forensic evidence.

In the Judge at the trial instructed the Jury that they can find Jeremy Bamber guilty on the evidence of the sound moderator or Mugfords testimony. what ever 'mountain' of forensics your thinking of oviously did not convince the Judge it was conclusive

Hi David I agree with you on the sound moderator which has always seemed to me unreliable but Mr. Justice Drake advised the jury to treat Julie's evidence "with a great deal of caution".