New video on the bike:

[Caroline]

Nearly everyone involved has reneged on evidence when you go through everything,as what they've said initially doesn't tally with what was received at trial.
When you read about " Bambers Application for Prerogative Pardon 2005 " ( Home Office ) it's not something that you can turn a blind eye to.

Why not? He didn't get one!

[guest154]

Why not? He didn't get one!

Exactly. I'd imagine many criminals make these kind of requests for pardon - lets not paint over the fact it was obviously REJECTED.

[Caroline]

Exactly. I'd imagine many criminals make these kind of requests for pardon - lets not paint over the fact it was obviously REJECTED.

It was worth a shot but rejected fairly quickly 

[Jan]

I haven't seen their video about the phones? It must be a new one? But I am suspicious whenever the official site makes a claim because of the little tricks that they have pulled in the past so if they are posting a discrepancy in something Ainsley said I hope they post both his statements that show the discrepancy and that they don't just SAY there is one.

The phone situation in WHF that night is alarming.

Are you saying you don't think the official site lies?  Or posts misleading information?    There was no love lost between the last defence team and OCT - got to be a reason for that.

I am on holiday for 2 weeks soon - so after tonight when I don't reply, don't think I've ran off!! 

No not at all - I was genuinely asking if anyone knew about this claim

I am trying to find out as I type.

[guest154]

No not at all - I was genuinely asking if anyone knew about this claim

I am trying to find out as I type.

Ah, I really don't know what the claim is. Perhaps Caroline or Scip will look into it. They will do a better job than I will. 

[Jan]

oh no I might have to do an Adam and  start a  thread

[guest154]

oh no I might have to do an Adam and  start a  thread

If you do that... you know what to say in the future don't you? When someone else brings up the telephones??

(THREAD ALREADY CREATED)

[Jan]

If you do that... you know what to say in the future don't you? When someone else brings up the telephones??

(THREAD ALREADY CREATED)

    shouldn't you be packing?

[lookout]

Why not? He didn't get one!

Try reading it first before you pass comment.

[Caroline]

Try reading it first before you pass comment.

Are you saying he did get a pardon? I'll read it if you post a link - I'm not looking for it though.

[lookout]

Are you saying he did get a pardon? I'll read it if you post a link - I'm not looking for it though.

Suit yourself.

[guest154]

Are you saying he did get a pardon? I'll read it if you post a link - I'm not looking for it though.

It looks if it was the arguments from the last submissions.

In a letter to Mr Clarke last month, his solicitors wrote: "Under those circumstances, it would be wholly wrong and inequitable for Jeremy Bamber to remain a single day longer in custody when there is this specific doubt.

"In all the circumstances, we take the view that the appropriate course is for the Secretary of State for the Home Department in the exercise of his prerogative powers to grant a pardon."

So it was just the arugements that were used in the last appeal that went on to be rejected by the CCRC and held up by the judicial review.

[lookout]

Written by the criminal law group Paul Martin & co.of Essex.

[guest154]

Actually, let me correct myself. It wasn't the last submissions. It was before that...

Legal adviser Giovanni di Stefano is still awaiting a decision from the Criminal Cases Review Commission on whether a fresh appeal will be granted.

 

[guest154]

http://news.sky.com/story/372393/jailed-killer-bamber-calls-for-a-pardon

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-362613/Killer-Bamber-appeals-pardon.html