The 3am telephone call. What was said ?

[Reader]

Jeremy lied in his statements and he wanted to see what lies he put in his statements so he would not contradict them.  Police would not show him so he said he stood by whatever he put in his statements.

To show he lied, you have to prove he intended to deceive and you haven't done that. Instead, you're claiming you know his thoughts. Additionally, you have overlooked the fact that the police did show him the part of his first statement that was relevant to what they were asking him about at the time.

[Caroline]

Those who commit suicide rarely tell anyone either.

I don't think that's true at all.

[Caroline]

To show he lied, you have to prove he intended to deceive and you haven't done that. Instead, you're claiming you know his thoughts. Additionally, you have overlooked the fact that the police did show him the part of his first statement that was relevant to what they were asking him about at the time.

No one needs to do it for him, he's proved time and time again that he intended to deceive - because he errrr 'lied' 

[Reader]

You ask how we know his motive was to make reasonable sound what he said!

I don't recognize that as something I asked. It's not even in correct English.

I can't seriously believe you ask that question!

Maybe you misunderstood what I was asking. Your remark "Surely the first requisite of a liar is to make statements which are plausible and believable." seems to be in agreement with my post.

[Reader]

I don't think that's true at all.

How many of those who have committed suicide have then told you (or anyone else) about it?

[Reader]

No one needs to do it for him, he's proved time and time again that he intended to deceive - because he 'lied'

You conveniently don't consider mistakes and assumptions that seemed reasonable at the time, but weren't correct. Instead of explaining your conclusions, you are just mocking those who disagree with them.

[Jane]

I don't recognize that as something I asked. It's not even in correct English.
Maybe you misunderstood what I was asking. Your remark "Surely the first requisite of a liar is to make statements which are plausible and believable." seems to be in agreement with my post.

I'll agree with whatever you say when I consider it to be worth agreeing with. What I've experienced, for the most part, is pedantry.

[Reader]

Jeremy's wit stat says he received the call from his father at ABOUT 03.10 am.
He phoned JM at ABOUT 03.25 am.
Then phoned JM again at ABOUT 05.45 am.

So he called Julie before the police

So you're agreeing with me now? You're also agreeing with what Jeremy said initially in his interviews. When interviewed, Jeremy was asked "how long were you on the phone to her?" and replied "A minute two minutes not very long as I had to ring the police." Thus it came out quite naturally and at an early stage of his interview that he called Julie before calling the police. This wasn't explicitly contradicted by the times mentioned above.

[Reader]

I'll agree with whatever you say when I consider it to be worth agreeing with.

How can I tell whether or not you're agreeing, especially when you apparently accidentally misquote me?

[Jane]

If it's a myth..., but you haven't established that Jeremy made it up. If he made it up, why didn't he ensure he gave a plausible account that he could stick to?
Neither I nor you can remember those things, as we weren't there. On the other hand, in his interview transcripts, he initially stated that he called Julie before he called the police.
What are you referring to and how can you possibly know that his motive was to appear reasonable?
There is no proof of that. It (11 minutes) isn't consistent with the police evidence.
How do you know? Did he have only one telephone? Jeremy has consistently maintained that Nevill rang him and that this call woke him up.
You haven't quoted such argument. What proof do you have that anyone was specifically asked in court whether Jeremy's call was nearer to 3am than to 3:30am? It was Julie who had given the time of about 3:30, whereas Jeremy had given "about 3:25am" in his statement.
Where can I see proof of this, including Jeremy's exact words?
You are trying to combine the time recorded by Pc West with an unverified assertion of a duration of 11 minutes that is inconsistent with Pc West's evidence in court. You seem to be attacking the prosecution evidence rather than Jeremy's account.

I wasn't attempting to quote you.

You asked "How can you possibly know that his motive was to appear reasonable"? which I may well have misinterpreted because for one so quick to criticize my grammar, you don't make it clear whether the motive was to appear as reasonable at a future date or time OR that it was his motive to appear reasonable. I took it to be the latter so I thought your question somewhat ridiculous because who, in their right mind -given the circumstances- would cook up anything which would sound UNreasonable?

[Caroline]

How many of those who have committed suicide have then told you (or anyone else) about it?

OMG! What a stupid thing to say. Think everyone here knows my brother killed himself - he mentioned it a few times and one day he went through with it.

[Caroline]

You conveniently don't consider mistakes and assumptions that seemed reasonable at the time, but weren't correct. Instead of explaining your conclusions, you are just mocking those who disagree with them.

I'm not mocking anyone but your suggestion that we need to prove Jeremy lied is silly - the court did that hence why he's been banged up for 30 years. YOU need to prove he didn't!

[lookout]

There goes the word " mocking " again.

[scipio_usmc]

To show he lied, you have to prove he intended to deceive and you haven't done that. Instead, you're claiming you know his thoughts. Additionally, you have overlooked the fact that the police did show him the part of his first statement that was relevant to what they were asking him about at the time.

It is not plausible that he forgot that he phoned Julie before police and honestly made an error thinking he called her after calling the police.  He knew it would look bad to tell the truth so that was why he lied and said he called police before Julie. Saying that you refuse to believe he lied about it is meaningless and doesn't render it not proven.

He blatantly lied about calling police before Julie, messed up admitting he called Julie first then reverted to his prior claims saying he stood by whatever he put in his statements. He then lied at trial testifying he remembered calling police first.

[Caroline]

There goes the word " mocking " again.

And here it goes again - MOCKING!