Colin said he would have killed June

[Caroline]

And where is your proof that a pair of men's slippers belonged to Sheila. I've already said that I don't believe she'd have bought slippers with her -but you've chosen to ignore that- she may not even have owned slippers.

If there is anything pathetic here, it HAS to be a grown man who thinks he knows more about female attire than do women.

Scip knows more about EVERYTHING!! 

[scipio_usmc]

And where is your proof that a pair of men's slippers belonged to Sheila. I've already said that I don't believe she'd have bought slippers with her -but you've chosen to ignore that- she may not even have owned slippers.

If there is anything pathetic here, it HAS to be a grown man who thinks he knows more about female attire than do women.

The presumption is they are Sheila's because were in Sheila's room in a location where she would have taken them off while undressing.  She put her items on the bed while standing int he very area where the shoes were supporting that is where she kicked them off. Ann Eaton confirmed they were hers.  That's sufficient.

What evidence do you have to counter this?  None just your made up claims that you refuse to believe she would wear shoes like that and uninformed decision they look too big for her.  Your uninformed opinions on the size in relation to her feet - which can't be gleemed from such photo and uninformed opinions about what she would wear means less than nothing.

[Jane]

The presumption is they are Sheila's because were in Sheila's room in a location where she would have taken them off while undressing.  She put her items on the bed while standing int he very area where the shoes were supporting that is where she kicked them off. Ann Eaton confirmed they were hers.  That's sufficient.

What evidence do you have to counter this?  None just your made up claims that you refuse to believe she would wear shoes like that and uninformed decision they look too big for her.  Your uninformed opinions on the size in relation to her feet - which can't be gleemed from such photo and uninformed opinions about what she would wear means less than nothing.

She wouldn't have kicked off slippers she hadn't bought with her/didn't own. AE DIDN'T confirm that the men's slippers were Sheila's. For the SECOND TIME, Ann hadn't seen Sheila. Didn't even know she was staying. What Ann said was "She had bloody great feet" which could have referred to the black canvas espadrilles the police removed.

[scipio_usmc]

She wouldn't have kicked off slippers she hadn't bought with her/didn't own. AE DIDN'T confirm that the men's slippers were Sheila's. For the SECOND TIME, Ann hadn't seen Sheila. Didn't even know she was staying. What Ann said was "She had bloody great feet" which could have referred to the black canvas espadrilles the police removed.

She has seen Sheila in the past.  She would have a basis to know what shoes Sheila wore while you have no basis.

The shoes were clearly kicked off where Sheila undressed and was standing while playing with the items on the bed.  There is nothing to suggest they were not hers.  That you decided they are male slippers is not evidence of anything except what your opinion is.  That the same people are suggesting Nevill kicked off his shoes there so he could go sleep in the other bed is pathetic but even worse is suggesting Sheila wanted to sleep with her mother.  I haven't slept in my parents bed since I was 2.  Nothing suggests that Sheila would be different.

We just have fools making wild leaps that cause them humiliation when rational objective people read their babble.

[Caroline]

She has seen Sheila in the past.  She would have a basis to know what shoes Sheila wore while you have no basis.

The shoes were clearly kicked off where Sheila undressed and was standing while playing with the items on the bed.  There is nothing to suggest they were not hers.  That you decided they are male slippers is not evidence of anything except what your opinion is.  That the same people are suggesting Nevill kicked off his shoes there so he could go sleep in the other bed is pathetic but even worse is suggesting Sheila wanted to sleep with her mother.  I haven't slept in my parents bed since I was 2.  Nothing suggests that Sheila would be different.

We just have fools making wild leaps that cause them humiliation when rational objective people read their babble.

Yes, there is because they are MEN'S and AE wouldn't have a clue what Sheila wore - it just suits you to keep saying it because you have nothing else - Jeremy confirmed they ARE his fathers slippers and as far as I can see, he would gain nothing from lying. He was in a far better position to know that AE - or YOU!

[Steve_uk]

She has seen Sheila in the past.  She would have a basis to know what shoes Sheila wore while you have no basis.

The shoes were clearly kicked off where Sheila undressed and was standing while playing with the items on the bed.  There is nothing to suggest they were not hers.  That you decided they are male slippers is not evidence of anything except what your opinion is.  That the same people are suggesting Nevill kicked off his shoes there so he could go sleep in the other bed is pathetic but even worse is suggesting Sheila wanted to sleep with her mother.  I haven't slept in my parents bed since I was 2.  Nothing suggests that Sheila would be different.

We just have fools making wild leaps that cause them humiliation when rational objective people read their babble.

Scipio I do think the Defence have a gripe when black canvas shoes are removed from a crime scene and a Police Officer tells Ann Eaton "you haven't seen those". Along with Doctor Hugh Cameron Ferguson's evidence which Carol Ann Lee now tells us the Doctor says Sheila was capable of murdering her children they are relevant issues for anyone seeking a retrial.

[Jane]

YOOOO HOOOO SCIIIIPPPPIIIIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. WE'RE ALL WAITING FOR YOUR APOLOGY

[scipio_usmc]

Yes, there is because they are MEN'S and AE wouldn't have a clue what Sheila wore - it just suits you to keep saying it because you have nothing else - Jeremy confirmed they ARE his fathers slippers and as far as I can see, he would gain nothing from lying. He was in a far better position to know that AE - or YOU!

Jeremy had repeatedly lied, nothing he says is trustworthy.

Your claim they are men's is totally unsupported by any evidence it is simply unsupported opinion based upon looking at an unclear photo that doesn't even show the whole shoe.  You don't even know it is a slipper.  You don't know what the bottom is like or outside material.  You can't establish it is not a canvas shoe Ann Eaton referred to.   You simply made up it has to be men's has to be too big for Sheila and has to be Nevill's.

[Caroline]

Jeremy had repeatedly lied, nothing he says is trustworthy.

Your claim they are men's is totally unsupported by any evidence it is simply unsupported opinion based upon looking at an unclear photo that doesn't even show the whole shoe.  You don't even know it is a slipper.  You don't know what the bottom is like or outside material.  You can't establish it is not a canvas shoe Ann Eaton referred to.   You simply made up it has to be men's has to be too big for Sheila and has to be Nevill's.

We can SEE what it see and it's an old man's slipper - Jeremy has no reason to lie. You do though because you can't stand being wrong! You would think you would be used to it by now!!

[Jane]

Jeremy had repeatedly lied, nothing he says is trustworthy.

Your claim they are men's is totally unsupported by any evidence it is simply unsupported opinion based upon looking at an unclear photo that doesn't even show the whole shoe.  You don't even know it is a slipper.  You don't know what the bottom is like or outside material.  You can't establish it is not a canvas shoe Ann Eaton referred to.   You simply made up it has to be men's has to be too big for Sheila and has to be Nevill's.

DUMBO, if it looks like a man's slipper and we say it's a man's slipper and Jeremy corroborates it as BEING a man's slipper, I imagine there's every chance that it IS a man's slipper and you're a bad loser.

[scipio_usmc]

Scipio I do think the Defence have a gripe when black canvas shoes are removed from a crime scene and a Police Officer tells Ann Eaton "you haven't seen those".

First of all she screwed it up.  They told her she didn't see them take the paint samples.  They didn't care about the shoes they spoke to her about clothes and shoes to try to support their lie they were there for the inquest because they didn't want anyone to know they actually went there to take the paint samples.  She watched them take the samples and didn't want it to get back to Jeremy so told her she didn't see it which means keep quiet. 

Second, They didn't want Jeremy to find out they didn't trust him because then he would stop cooperating. Cooperation not only meant enabling them to search the premises without needing a warrant, it means he would talk to them and potentially while talking they could get something useful out of him.  If he knew they were suspicious then he would be even more apt to lie about seemingly mundane things.  They would see mundane if he wasn't suspicious but he might see their reason for asking if he knew they were suspicious.

There is nothing improper about wanting to conceal the investigation from him. 

Along with Doctor Hugh Cameron Ferguson's evidence which Carol Ann Lee now tells us the Doctor says Sheila was capable of murdering her children they are relevant issues for anyone seeking a retrial.

Ferguson's changed opinions many years after the trial are wholly meaningless. They were based upon things that never happened. Even if he simply changed his mind because he simply viewed the same set of facts differently it makes no difference it is not new evidence.  His opinion is meaningless anyway because the evidence that convicted Jeremy was evidence that Sheila could not have killed herself and evidence that Jeremy told Julie he planned to kill them and admitted he was responsible.  To refute guilt the prosecution has to undermine one of these two premises.  Ferguson's opinions don't relate to either.

[Caroline]

First of all she screwed it up.  They told her she didn't see them take the paint samples. They didn't care about the shoes they spoke to her about clothes and shoes to try to support their lie they were there for the inquest because they didn't want anyone to know they actually went there to take the paint samples.  She watched them take the samples and didn't want it to get back to Jeremy so told her she didn't see it which means keep quiet. 

Second, They didn't want Jeremy to find out they didn't trust him because then he would stop cooperating. Cooperation not only meant enabling them to search the premises without needing a warrant, it means he would talk to them and potentially while talking they could get something useful out of him.  If he knew they were suspicious then he would be even more apt to lie about seemingly mundane things.  They would see mundane if he wasn't suspicious but he might see their reason for asking if he knew they were suspicious.

There is nothing improper about wanting to conceal the investigation from him. 

Ferguson's changed opinions many years after the trial are wholly meaningless. They were based upon things that never happened. Even if he simply changed his mind because he simply viewed the same set of facts differently it makes no difference it is not new evidence.  His opinion is meaningless anyway because the evidence that convicted Jeremy was evidence that Sheila could not have killed herself and evidence that Jeremy told Julie he planned to kill them and admitted he was responsible.  To refute guilt the prosecution has to undermine one of these two premises.  Ferguson's opinions don't relate to either.

No, you got that WRONG, they said that about the shoes!!!!

[Jane]

First of all she screwed it up.  They told her she didn't see them take the paint samples.  They didn't care about the shoes they spoke to her about clothes and shoes to try to support their lie they were there for the inquest because they didn't want anyone to know they actually went there to take the paint samples.  She watched them take the samples and didn't want it to get back to Jeremy so told her she didn't see it which means keep quiet. 

Second, They didn't want Jeremy to find out they didn't trust him because then he would stop cooperating. Cooperation not only meant enabling them to search the premises without needing a warrant, it means he would talk to them and potentially while talking they could get something useful out of him.  If he knew they were suspicious then he would be even more apt to lie about seemingly mundane things.  They would see mundane if he wasn't suspicious but he might see their reason for asking if he knew they were suspicious.

There is nothing improper about wanting to conceal the investigation from him. 

Ferguson's changed opinions many years after the trial are wholly meaningless. They were based upon things that never happened. Even if he simply changed his mind because he simply viewed the same set of facts differently it makes no difference it is not new evidence.  His opinion is meaningless anyway because the evidence that convicted Jeremy was evidence that Sheila could not have killed herself and evidence that Jeremy told Julie he planned to kill them and admitted he was responsible.  To refute guilt the prosecution has to undermine one of these two premises.  Ferguson's opinions don't relate to either.

NO, it wasn't about paint samples that they said "You haven't seen this" it was about a pair of black canvas espadrilles when they and Ann were in Sheila's bedroom.

[scipio_usmc]

NO, it wasn't about paint samples that they said "You haven't seen this" it was about a pair of black canvas espadrilles when they and Ann were in Sheila's bedroom.

[Jane]

How very strange. It now appears there may have been several things they told her she knew nothing about.