The missing boxes poll:

[Adam]

If they did offer her a deal, I don't think it's unusual. The thing is, Julie didn't come forward until after Liz Rimmington informed the police that she might have information relating to the murders. So, she clearly told both Liz Rimmington and Susan Battersby that Jeremy was guilty before any deal could have been offered by EP. I think EP had to play down her chequered past to make her a more credible witness and she was a key witness. It would be wrong if they made her lie but she had already told her story to two people (at least) before ever going to the police and neither Susan Battersby or Liz Rimmington have cause to lie. If you get what I mean?

She told five people. Thread already created.

Julie was in the room when Liz Rimmington phoned Stan Jones.

Yes Liz Rimmington and SB have no reason to lie about what Julie said. And Julie had no reason to lie to them.

[Caroline]

She told five people. Thread already created.

Julie was in the room when Liz Rimmington phoned Stan Jones.

Yes Liz Rimmington and SB have no reason to lie about what Julie said. And Julie had no reason to lie to them.

I know

[lookout]

Being prompted ?

[lookout]

Which would all depend on how far in advance JM knew that it would be " worth her while ".

[Caroline]

Which would all depend on how far in advance JM knew that it would be " worth her while ".

She didn't know 'it would be worth her while' when she told SB or LR. It was only 'worth her while' after the trial and she sold the story.

[Jan]

If they did offer her a deal, I don't think it's unusual. The thing is, Julie didn't come forward until after Liz Rimmington informed the police that she might have information relating to the murders. So, she clearly told both Liz Rimmington and Susan Battersby that Jeremy was guilty before any deal could have been offered by EP. I think EP had to play down her chequered past to make her a more credible witness and she was a key witness. It would be wrong if they made her lie but she had already told her story to two people (at least) before ever going to the police and neither Susan Battersby or Liz Rimmington have cause to lie. If you get what I mean?

Yes I understand that - so lets hope that she was  telling the truth and not just an attention seeker that went too far .

[lookout]

I think the fact that JM was supposed to have been " telling the truth " is now wearing a bit thin.

[Caroline]

Yes I understand that - so lets hope that she was  telling the truth and not just an attention seeker that went too far .

I think she was telling the truth as far as Jeremy's involvement in the murders was concerned.

[Adam]

Yes I understand that - so lets hope that she was  telling the truth and not just an attention seeker that went too far .

An attention seeker that went too far ?

Strange way to get attention.

[Jan]

An attention seeker that went too far ?

Strange way to get attention.

Not if she was feeling let down by him it works both ways - she was obviously capable of telling lies ( she had done it before ) and perhaps she wanted attention from her friends so she played the victim.And made up her story to blacken his name ,  not ever thinking they would go to the police - after all she didn't did she?

Inn a way I am defending her really because I just can not get my head round if she is telling the WHOLE truth why she did not do something sooner.

[Jan]

Adam do you believe her story about trying to smother Jeremy?

[Caroline]

Adam do you believe her story about trying to smother Jeremy?

I don't think she meant 'smother' as in any REAL attempt to suffocate.

[Jan]

There was something I read where one of the officers said they were suspicious about Julie earlier on ( in other words they thought she might be involved ) and I do still wonder if they in a roundabout way did  to try through her to try and get some information and she started questioning Jeremy.

But of course I don't know for sure - but I still feel her testimony does not add up and I think she could be a drama queen . I have very niggling doubts about her evidence.

[Caroline]

There was something I read where one of the officers said they were suspicious about Julie earlier on ( in other words they thought she might be involved ) and I do still wonder if they in a roundabout way did  to try through her to try and get some information and she started questioning Jeremy.

But of course I don't know for sure - but I still feel her testimony does not add up and I think she could be a drama queen . I have very niggling doubts about her evidence.

If someone did something similar to you (reported you to the police for something you hadn't done and you got convicted), how would you feel about them?

[Jan]

If someone did something similar to you (reported you to the police for something you hadn't done and you got convicted), how would you feel about them?

Do you mean that you don't understand his letters to her? And you think he should be slagging her off?