Colin said he would have killed June

[Jan]

It appears to me that in scippys world - you are ignorant if you think JB might be innocent. You are ignorant if you think he is guilty. You are ignorant if you have an opinion or alternative view. You are ignorant basically if you dare to think.

Well I think the height of ignorance is bad manners and not considering the feelings and opinions of others .

[scipio_usmc]

Heheheheeeee YES!!!¬ I'm being a big kid and I don't care. Girls, I think you might like this. I can't find ANYTHING which says SHEILA soaked the boys' clothes............................BUT!!!!! Wait for it!!!!..................... "It had been JUNE'S habit to soak exceptionally dirty clothes before washing them" She's not talking about knickers stained by a menstrual mishap, She's talking about little boys' dirty trousers. NOT my words! NOT I making assumptions! NOT my ignorance! Yah Boo SUCKS, Scipio.

The housekeeper said she would not soak them in the kitchen.  That is something wait for it- that only happened when Sheila was over which is why the housekeeper assumed Sheila was the one who would soak things in the kitchen. 

[Caroline]

There's another system for the French "a" whereby you use Alt+0225 but if you do that here the page just disappears with the whole of your thread. Some member here more competent than myself will be able to give the reason why.

á - like this? It should work, it just worked for me.

[Steve_uk]

á - like this? It should work, it just worked for me.

Oh good. Yes it's working for me now.

[nugnug]

It appears to me that in scippys world - you are ignorant if you think JB might be innocent. You are ignorant if you think he is guilty. You are ignorant if you have an opinion or alternative view. You are ignorant basically if you dare to think.

Well I think the height of ignorance is bad manners and not considering the feelings and opinions of others .

the highth of ignorance is thinking you know everything luckly all but 2 posters admit they dont,

[Caroline]

The housekeeper said she would not soak them in the kitchen.  That is something wait for it- that only happened when Sheila was over which is why the housekeeper assumed Sheila was the one who would soak things in the kitchen.

Is there a reference for the housekeepers statement?

[scipio_usmc]

Is there a reference for the housekeepers statement?

I only saved a small snippet when we were debating the buckets months ago.  Mike posted it somewhere but it was in the middle of a thread I think and no one had the foresight to add it to the archive index, oops...

I believe that she said when June soaked clothes in them she left it by the washing machine or the sink in the back kitchen.  Sheila was the one who soaked things in the kitchen

[Jane]

I only saved a small snippet when we were debating the buckets months ago.  Mike posted it somewhere but it was in the middle of a thread I think and no one had the foresight to add it to the archive index, oops...

I believe that she said when June soaked clothes in them she left it by the washing machine or the sink in the back kitchen.  Sheila was the one who soaked things in the kitchen

So you have found a line saying that June's knickers had never been seen soaking in the kitchen. I should think NOT, indeed. MOST inappropriate.........................but I wasn't speaking of knickers, June's or Sheila's, I was speaking about the boy's dirty trousers -still small enough to be soaked in buckets- or rather,YOU were. You were using it -that SHEILA had soaked them- as a way of pointing out that I was making assumptions about her state of mind and her relationship with her mother. For one accusing another of making assumptions about weeks of certain behaviours and a life times relationship, YOU are making assumptions based one one -POSSIBLE- act.

Just to set the record straight, Sheila's good friend Tora, says of her, that she had become so unkempt she smelled!!!! She had holes in her tights. Here hair wasn't washed. Her make up was a mess IF she bothered to wear it. I could go on..................This is a girl who seemed to define herself by her looks. A girl who asked, constantly, "Do I look pretty?" A girl to whom it mattered what others thought of her.

At the party, she ignored -all(?)- the children. Took no notice of their games. One of the twins climbed onto her lap. She made no attempt at interaction. Three days later, her mother says "She has no interest in anything including the children"........................but it seems that NONE of them knew what they were talking about, who were with her, because the Great All Knowing Scipio decrees that she wasn't depressed and the POSSIBLE act of soaking her children's trousers  -let's not forget that over the three days she was there, ONE person saw her skipping with the children-  denotes that there was nothing wrong with her mothering skills.

I believe she was depressed -her life circumstances suggest there was every reason for her to be so-  but I don't believe she was responsible for anyone's deaths.You appear to be saying/ believe she was overdosed with one med and/or underdosed with another. Sounds more to me like someone who is keeping their options open and determined to win an argument at any cost. Ethics seem not to apply.

[scipio_usmc]

So you have found a line saying that June's knickers had never been seen soaking in the kitchen. I should think NOT, indeed. MOST inappropriate.........................but I wasn't speaking of knickers, June's or Sheila's, I was speaking about the boy's dirty trousers -still small enough to be soaked in buckets- or rather,YOU were. You were using it -that SHEILA had soaked them- as a way of pointing out that I was making assumptions about her state of mind and her relationship with her mother. For one accusing another of making assumptions about weeks of certain behaviours and a life times relationship, YOU are making assumptions based one one -POSSIBLE- act.

Just to set the record straight, Sheila's good friend Tora, says of her, that she had become so unkempt she smelled!!!! She had holes in her tights. Here hair wasn't washed. Her make up was a mess IF she bothered to wear it. I could go on..................This is a girl who seemed to define herself by her looks. A girl who asked, constantly, "Do I look pretty?" A girl to whom it mattered what others thought of her.

At the party, she ignored -all(?)- the children. Took no notice of their games. One of the twins climbed onto her lap. She made no attempt at interaction. Three days later, her mother says "She has no interest in anything including the children"........................but it seems that NONE of them knew what they were talking about, who were with her, because the Great All Knowing Scipio decrees that she wasn't depressed and the POSSIBLE act of soaking her children's trousers  -let's not forget that over the three days she was there, ONE person saw her skipping with the children-  denotes that there was nothing wrong with her mothering skills.

I believe she was depressed -her life circumstances suggest there was every reason for her to be so-  but I don't believe she was responsible for anyone's deaths.You appear to be saying/ believe she was overdosed with one med and/or underdosed with another. Sounds more to me like someone who is keeping their options open and determined to win an argument at any cost. Ethics seem not to apply.

No I saved a line about the knickers to post because that was what was being discussed.  Jeremy supporters argued that June would not allow buckets of clothes to be left soaking in the kitchen and thus Sheila must have done it after the murders.  I posted the snippet to show that the housekeeper observed buckets with Sheila's clothing being left in the kitchen in the past so that disproved the claim June would not allow Sheila to place such buckets in the kitchen. Therefore it is possible the buckets were placed there before the murders and not moved by June.

The statement contained more information about the buckets but I didn't save it because it wasn't relevant to the point I was making.  Part of what I didn't save discussed how June would leave buckets with clothes being soaked in the back kitchen sink or on the floor next to the washing machine.

[Jane]

No I saved a line about the knickers to post because that was what was being discussed.  Jeremy supporters argued that June would not allow buckets of clothes to be left soaking in the kitchen and thus Sheila must have done it after the murders.  I posted the snippet to show that the housekeeper observed buckets with Sheila's clothing being left in the kitchen in the past so that disproved the claim June would not allow Sheila to place such buckets in the kitchen. Therefore it is possible the buckets were placed there before the murders and not moved by June.

The statement contained more information about the buckets but I didn't save it because it wasn't relevant to the point I was making.  Part of what I didn't save discussed how June would leave buckets with clothes being soaked in the back kitchen sink or on the floor next to the washing machine.

Yes, I see from post 142 that you introduced panties into a conversation in which neither Jan, Maggie nor I had mentioned them. You then used the fact that -according to you, but without substantiation- Sheila had put the boys' trousers into soak as proof of her interest in them, after which I found details of JUNE'S habit of soaking very soiled clothes prior to putting them in the washing machine.............................................however, the original conversation had been about Sheila's psychological and emotional state,and that, having looked at her relationship with June -or perhaps I should change that to June's relationship with her- PLUS listening to what was said by her friends, male and female, her ex husband, her consultant, Freddie, even Jeremy!!!! I believe her to have been depressed, because she was displaying what, in my understanding, are classic symptoms, and for daring to employ the intelligence learned from the job I was trained for, from your position of apparently knowing much more than I, you called me IGNORANT

[Jan]

No I saved a line about the knickers to post because that was what was being discussed.  Jeremy supporters argued that June would not allow buckets of clothes to be left soaking in the kitchen and thus Sheila must have done it after the murders.  I posted the snippet to show that the housekeeper observed buckets with Sheila's clothing being left in the kitchen in the past so that disproved the claim June would not allow Sheila to place such buckets in the kitchen. Therefore it is possible the buckets were placed there before the murders and not moved by June.

The statement contained more information about the buckets but I didn't save it because it wasn't relevant to the point I was making. Part of what I didn't save discussed how June would leave buckets with clothes being soaked in the back kitchen sink or on the floor next to the washing machine.

So what you have just written actually does indicate that it could have been june that soaked the boys clothes? She may have just changed her mind about where to put the buckets.

I found it odd that Sheila or June would leave the clothes soaking - but I also find it odd that Sheila would leave sanitary items even packaging around the house - Most women would not like their parents finding those items - It does seem she was acting strangely.

But whatever the truth I think you made an assumption that Sheila put her sons clothes into soak . June  could quite easily been tidying up after her.

[maggie]

So what you have just written actually does indicate that it could have been june that soaked the boys clothes?

I found it odd that Sheila or June would leave the clothes soaking - but I also find it odd that Sheila would leave sanitary items even packaging around the house - Most women would not like their parents finding those items - It does seem she was acting strangely.

But whatever the truth I think you made an assumption that Sheila put her sons clothes into soak . June  could quite easily been tidying up after her.

I agree this does seem to have been an assumption on scipio's part which is interesting as he usually deals in hard facts
I have a memory of reading that the buckets were in fact not in the kitchen but in the laundry by the washing machine and had maybe been moved to the kitchen at some time after the murders..... which would mean June may have soaked the clothes.

[Jan]

I agree this does seem to have been an assumption on scipio's part which is interesting as he usually deals in hard facts
I have a memory of reading that the buckets were in fact not in the kitchen but in the laundry by the washing machine and had maybe been moved to the kitchen at some time after the murders..... which would mean June may have soaked the clothes.

I don't think I have seen them in the kitchen photos - and surely they would have got knocked over in the "alleged " fight.

[Caroline]

I don't think I have seen them in the kitchen photos - and surely they would have got knocked over in the "alleged " fight.

They were in the kitchen.

[maggie]

I don't think I have seen them in the kitchen photos - and surely they would have got knocked over in the "alleged " fight.

Have just looked in the archives and there are2 buckets near the little oven where the phone was supposed to have been hidden, we don't know if they are clothes buckets or cleaning buckets but a you say anyone would expect any buckets in the kitchen would have been kicked over during the violent confrontation in the kitchen.  I wish I could remember who told me or where I read the buckets were moved into the kitchen.