Deviant. Paul Harrison's book.

[lookout]

My word,it really matters to you that everyone goes to guilty,doesn't it ? What does it matter which way people vote ??

[nugnug]

FGS can someone spell out to a certain poster what "forensic evidence putting someone at the scene of the crime at the time of the crime" means.

I cant take it any longer .

I may have to bury him under the mountain of forensic evidence - but that would not work - because there is NONE

burying under a montain sounds good.

[Jane]

I am afraid the forensic evidence makes Jeremy guilty.

He was already on very thin ice as there was only two suspects.

I could probably find more forensic evidence. Today I mentioned Sheila's legs being pulled after she died. Which an expert for the 2002 confirmed happened.

But for now, 31 examples is more than enough.

Jan has followed Lookout and decided not to contest the forensic evidence. Just claim it does not exist. Then bring up useless issues like hand swaps and claim it is a MOJ with nothing to back this up. At least she is no longer saying Jeremy is innocent. Leave that to Lookout and Mike.

Jeremy virtually made himself guilty by telling the story of how Sheila had gone mad and had got hold of a gun, after which it was reasonable to assume, that with all the family being dead and Sheila being found with a gun in her hand/laying across her body, she was guilty. Once it became established that she hadn't/couldn't have done it, it was reasonable enough to assume that if SHE hadn't, the teller of the story HAD.

[Adam]

Jeremy virtually made himself guilty by telling the story of how Sheila had gone mad and had got hold of a gun, after which it was reasonable to assume, that with all the family being dead and Sheila being found with a gun in her hand/laying across her body, she was guilty. Once it became established that she hadn't/couldn't have done it, it was reasonable enough to assume that if SHE hadn't, the teller of the story HAD.

I agree.

Why do two or three people still contest that Jeremy is guilty ?

There is a mountain of forensic evidence. And a mountain of circumstantial evidence. A lot more than for other cases where convictions have been obtained.

There was also a motive, opportunity and no alibi.

All seems creepy that people support him just because he protests his innocence. 

[nugnug]

was paul harrision really in weekly contact with jeremy for 8 years can anyone confirm this.

[scipio_usmc]

was paul harrision really in weekly contact with jeremy for 8 years can anyone confirm this.

What's the difference?

[nugnug]

well thats what paul harrison cliams but like a lot of his other cliams im scpetical of weather its true or not.

[David1819]

was paul harrision really in weekly contact with jeremy for 8 years can anyone confirm this.

Write to Jeremy and ask

[nugnug]

as a rule i aviod writing to prisnoners i think it can cloud your judgement.

[scipio_usmc]

well thats what paul harrison cliams but like a lot of his other cliams im scpetical of weather its true or not.

Anyone can email Jeremy that is no feat. 

[nugnug]

well i can do that but i was hoping somebody here would know.

[scipio_usmc]

well i can do that but i was hoping somebody here would know.

Only 2 people know whether it is true or not- Jeremy and Harrison.

[Caroline]

well thats what paul harrison cliams but like a lot of his other cliams im scpetical of weather its true or not.

Jeremy told me that PH was 'one of the good guys' so must have had a pretty good reason for thinking so.

[nugnug]

i asume hes changed his mind about that now.

[lookout]

Jeremy told me that PH was 'one of the good guys' so must have had a pretty good reason for thinking so.

So Jeremy obviously hasn't learned that face-value doesn't count when judging someone.
Did Jeremy know he indirectly got the blame from PH through a supporter for that " threat " last year ?