The Glasgow Herald newspaper cuttings.

[Adam]

Because she doesn't?.... move on with your life! I agreed with every one of your reasons...but telling people they're wrong isn't the way to convince people...

Thank you. Yes I did believe they were 12 good reasons. Rather than 'tosh'.

[notsure]

Hi caroline. In answer to your question there isnt one single piece of so called evidence that points towards his innocence.

I want hard evidence. I want to see the original investigation documents and the complete trial documents .

as it stands the evidence i have is that which is on this site and media etc. I have the guilters giving thier views on how they see things and for me it isnt enough.. i do respect those viewpoints but i dont have enough evidence in my opinion to make an informed deciscion.

guilters try and get us to see that he did it based on what we know, surely we cannot make a deciscion based on part of the evidence. We need it all.

i worry about the family, they had far too much influence with the police. Jms evidence from what ive read didnt really come into the jury making thier deciscion.  The family got all the money and didnt consider any other option at all. It wasnt shiela it was jeremy.

i hear sighs, i know you guilters can argue away everything ive said but i want the whole story not just part of it.

i do find it interesting reading the debates a d the banter and the odd argument though.

[Adam]

Hi caroline. In answer to your question there isnt one single piece of so called evidence that points towards his innocence.

I want hard evidence. I want to see the original investigation documents and the complete trial documents .

as it stands the evidence i have is that which is on this site and media etc. I have the guilters giving thier views on how they see things and for me it isnt enough.. i do respect those viewpoints but i dont have enough evidence in my opinion to make an informed deciscion.

guilters try and get us to see that he did it based on what we know, surely we cannot make a deciscion based on part of the evidence. We need it all.

i worry about the family, they had far too much influence with the police. Jms evidence from what ive read didnt really come into the jury making thier deciscion.  The family got all the money and didnt consider any other option at all. It wasnt shiela it was jeremy.

i hear sighs, i know you guilters can argue away everything ive said but i want the whole story not just part of it.

i do find it interesting reading the debates a d the banter and the odd argument though.

Well you ain't going to see original documents. Or the original trial documents.

There is a mountain of incriminating forensic and circumstantial evidence. A lot more than most other cases.

There is just one alive suspect, who had lots of motives, an opportunity and no alibi.

I know that people want to belong to a purpose. Bamber being up against the establishment is a popular choice. He might even send people nice letters. But every ounce of common sense points to guilty.

[Caroline]

Hi caroline. In answer to your question there isnt one single piece of so called evidence that points towards his innocence.

I want hard evidence. I want to see the original investigation documents and the complete trial documents .

as it stands the evidence i have is that which is on this site and media etc. I have the guilters giving thier views on how they see things and for me it isnt enough.. i do respect those viewpoints but i dont have enough evidence in my opinion to make an informed deciscion.

guilters try and get us to see that he did it based on what we know, surely we cannot make a deciscion based on part of the evidence. We need it all.

i worry about the family, they had far too much influence with the police. Jms evidence from what ive read didnt really come into the jury making thier deciscion.  The family got all the money and didnt consider any other option at all. It wasnt shiela it was jeremy.

i hear sighs, i know you guilters can argue away everything ive said but i want the whole story not just part of it.

i do find it interesting reading the debates a d the banter and the odd argument though.

OK Notsure, which other case has made the entire trial documents available to anyone who asks?

[lookout]

It was DCI " Taff " Jones,the first officer at the scene,who,to quote a poster,stated that " he knew exactly what had happened at the farmhouse,but to declare how,he'd have had to reveal the precise details of the appalling incompetence of several police units that day,particularly the armed officers who had finally forced their way in---which we're expected to believe,was four or more hours after the cops had first arrived at a completely silent house which contained only corpses ( I mean,come on---can anyone believe this ?)",unquote.

This loyal soul," Taff " Jones,rather than dob anyone in,threw his hand in and walked away from the case. 

[scipio_usmc]

It was DCI " Taff " Jones,the first officer at the scene,who,to quote a poster,stated that " he knew exactly what had happened at the farmhouse,but to declare how,he'd have had to reveal the precise details of the appalling incompetence of several police units that day,particularly the armed officers who had finally forced their way in---which we're expected to believe,was four or more hours after the cops had first arrived at a completely silent house which contained only corpses ( I mean,come on---can anyone believe this ?)",unquote.

This loyal soul," Taff " Jones,rather than dob anyone in,threw his hand in and walked away from the case.

Jones theory was a joke he misread the scene badly:

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6752.msg309590.html#msg309590