Author Topic: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?  (Read 50218 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48661
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #450 on: October 29, 2015, 09:49:AM »
Petey,instead of surreptitiously including me in your post,why not post openly and honestly about your grievances of myself to find out if I might be answerable to your accusations.

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #451 on: October 29, 2015, 10:14:AM »
So--------it's because of the reason that I'm here that petey won't post ?

I would ask any poster to go back to petey's first posts aimed at me,then decide for yourselves whose posts were scathing----------------a nice welcome for me on to the forum over 3 years ago I must say !!

I suppose now I'm to blame for everyone else who has left the forum.!

Hello Lookout
Have not read petey's posts have not got time just now but one thing I can say with hand on heart nobody has ever left this forum because of you as you are loved by mostX

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #452 on: October 29, 2015, 10:27:AM »
So--------it's because of the reason that I'm here that petey won't post ?

I would ask any poster to go back to petey's first posts aimed at me,then decide for yourselves whose posts were scathing----------------a nice welcome for me on to the forum over 3 years ago I must say !!

I suppose now I'm to blame for everyone else who has left the forum.!
I don't know but I don't think that is what petey was saying, Lookout
You have had your disagreements but I think you are both good people with strong opinions however it's not my place to speak for either of you so shall  :-X. :)
« Last Edit: October 29, 2015, 10:28:AM by maggie »

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #453 on: October 29, 2015, 12:50:PM »
So--------it's because of the reason that I'm here that petey won't post ?

I would ask any poster to go back to petey's first posts aimed at me,then decide for yourselves whose posts were scathing----------------a nice welcome for me on to the forum over 3 years ago I must say !!

I suppose now I'm to blame for everyone else who has left the forum.!

I don't think it was you who Petey was alluding to Lookout - think about it.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48661
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #454 on: October 29, 2015, 01:09:PM »
I don't think it was you who Petey was alluding to Lookout - think about it.






That's debateable Caroline.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #455 on: October 29, 2015, 01:36:PM »





That's debateable Caroline.

No, he did everything but write the persons name and it wasn't you!  :D :D
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48661
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #456 on: October 29, 2015, 01:44:PM »
No, he did everything but write the persons name and it wasn't you!  :D :D






Caroline my name was there with Jackie's,Steph's and Mike's.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48661
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #457 on: October 29, 2015, 01:48:PM »
See post 429,4th paragraph. There's your proof.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #458 on: October 29, 2015, 03:04:PM »
See post 429,4th paragraph. There's your proof.

Oh!  :-[ - well, at least you have company? (Trying to make it sound better)
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7614
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #459 on: October 29, 2015, 03:36:PM »
Ignore Peteys post Lookout. I've never debated on the Hillsborough case for starters so I don't know why he has chosen to include me in his rant and allude to what he has? Guess he thinks it makes for better reading?
This is why in the past I questioned whether or not he was legally qualified. He cannot provide evidence for all of his assertions so am unsure why he posted our names like he has?
« Last Edit: October 29, 2015, 03:50:PM by stephanie »
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48661
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #460 on: October 29, 2015, 04:08:PM »
Ignore Peteys post Lookout. I've never debated on the Hillsborough case for starters so I don't know why he has chosen to include me in his rant and allude to what he has? Guess he thinks it makes for better reading?
This is why in the past I questioned whether or not he was legally qualified. He cannot provide evidence for all of his assertions so am unsure why he posted our names like he has?






I shall ignore him in future Steph then he can't say anything.

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7614
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #461 on: October 29, 2015, 06:08:PM »
I shall ignore him in future Steph then he can't say anything.

No disrespect to people who do spend every day on here, but I simply don't have the time or the inclination at present. If the case ever progresses or I have something more productive to add, maybe this will change.

Well according to his post yesterday "I simply don't have the time or inclination at present" - he's referring to spending time on the forum and/or posting.

And as you can see he states "if the case ever progresses or I have something more productive to add" he appears to be suggesting he won't post.

So it's unlikely you'll need to ignore him as it doesn't appear he'll be posting anything "unproductive"

Time will tell I guess.....
« Last Edit: October 29, 2015, 06:13:PM by stephanie »
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline petey

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #462 on: October 29, 2015, 10:46:PM »
Ignore Peteys post Lookout. I've never debated on the Hillsborough case for starters so I don't know why he has chosen to include me in his rant and allude to what he has? Guess he thinks it makes for better reading?
This is why in the past I questioned whether or not he was legally qualified. He cannot provide evidence for all of his assertions so am unsure why he posted our names like he has?

I don't particularly wish to get involved in a tit for tat argument with u.  I'm sure u are well aware that in my opinion we crossed words when u told me in no uncertain terms how u were looking forward to my apology when Simon Hall walked free an innocent man. This was sometime ago and don't think I've interacted with u much since. I can't begin to understand what you went through and I would imagine continue to go through.

Clearly I have not linked ur posts or lookouts to Hillsborough, although to be quite honest I think that is fairly obvious from my post. I did pick up lookout when in my opinion she showed disrespect to the victims, but that was some time ago.

Offline petey

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #463 on: October 29, 2015, 10:58:PM »
Petey,instead of surreptitiously including me in your post,why not post openly and honestly about your grievances of myself to find out if I might be answerable to your accusations.

Without going into detail and dragging up posts you have made over the years I think ur posting in relation to June Bamber and the relatives has been absolutely reprehensible. On top of that, intentionally or not u were very disrespectful to the victims of Hillsborough in one of your posts which I picked u up on, in my opinion.

I have no qualms with u choosing to support jb, although I think one basis of ur argument that u ' had a gut feeling from day 1' is deeply flawed.

Regardless of whether you think jb is innocent or guilty, surely u view the relatives and June Bamber the victims of an appalling tragedy?

In that regard I would never dream of making some of the posts u have aimed at the relatives or June Bamber, without definitive proof.

This is not an attempt to be condescending, but my conscience would not allow me to make posts attacking the relatives, June Bamber, Julie Mugford et al without tangible evidence of their wrong doing. Without such they are victims of a terrible tragedy. Unless u think that none of the relatives grieved when several members of their family died and they didn't care that they died, or the relatives were in some way behind their deaths, then I see no reason why u cannot view them as victims.

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7614
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: Neville's call to Jeremy. A 1% likelihood ?
« Reply #464 on: October 30, 2015, 12:21:AM »
I don't particularly wish to get involved in a tit for tat argument with u.  I'm sure u are well aware that in my opinion we crossed words when u told me in no uncertain terms how u were looking forward to my apology when Simon Hall walked free an innocent man. This was sometime ago and don't think I've interacted with u much since. I can't begin to understand what you went through and I would imagine continue to go through.

Clearly I have not linked ur posts or lookouts to Hillsborough, although to be quite honest I think that is fairly obvious from my post. I did pick up lookout when in my opinion she showed disrespect to the victims, but that was some time ago.

You do indeed want to get involved in a 'tit for tat' argument with me; if you didn't you wouldn't have written the above....

You posted :

"Although I'm not going to rise to various attacks on me and sickening posts aimed at me over the years in particular by the likes of Mike, Jackie P, Steph, Lookout they do make me slightly more reluctant to log on for some idle chit chat on here when nothing fundamental is happening in the case"
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7052.msg334408.html#msg334408

Now you are talking about when I have allegedly said how I was looking forward to an apology from you when Simon Hall walked free an innocent man. I say allegedly because I can't be bothered to search for the evidence. Having said that, I believed him to be 100% innocent and nothing I read in the case files suggested otherwise and I believe I would have said that.

Anyway I am digressing - how the hell can you go from accusing me of attacking you and making sickening posts aimed at you, as you allude, to you now bringing up "how I said I would be awaiting for an apology from you when Simon Hall cleared his name?"

You are one sick twisted bloke/brute imo!

And you clearly have double standards.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2015, 01:10:AM by stephanie »
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"