Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?

[guest7363]

Aww Justice, that's beautiful. THANK-YOU But fluency and articulation alone are nothing without sincerity, and believe me, you have it in spades.

Thanks Jane " But" your going to see a new me, gone is the humour and sincerity I'm batting for both sides. Glad your back Jane I've missed you, have they done anything with them burnt huts yet? x

[guest7363]

Just a thought would anyone mind if I came as a different poster and viewed the case from both sides, I know this would be a first, I could keep my humour for Justice and then change sides again? Posters could have a dig at Justice and praise me as someone else?

[Adam]

Just a thought would anyone mind if I came as a different poster and viewed the case from both sides, I know this would be a first, I could keep my humour for Justice and then change sides again? Posters could have a dig at Justice and praise me as someone else?

What humour ?

[maggie]

Just a thought would anyone mind if I came as a different poster and viewed the case from both sides, I know this would be a first, I could keep my humour for Justice and then change sides again? Posters could have a dig at Justice and praise me as someone else?

Split Personality Justice???  Think that's one for ngb, unless it's a joke?
I have veered from innocent to 50/50 to probably guilty and now I believe that poor man is very possibly innocent.  So 90/10 

[guest7363]

What humour ?

Yes your right Adam, it's something other posters have a problem with and I'm glad you think like me.

[guest7363]

Split Personality Justice???  Think that's one for ngb, unless it's a joke?
I have veered from innocent to 50/50 to probably guilty and now I believe that poor man is very possibly innocent.  So 90/10 

Thanks Maggie for giving it some consideration, no it's not a joke, I realise you would have to authorise it because you would be able to check IP addresses and I want to be above board and we want to run the forum fair.  I don't joke

[maggie]

Must be horrible for him thinking,  if only.  I wonder if he blames himself at all

In his book he tells us how hard he worked to come to terms with their deaths. 

He probably suffered or at times still suffers from Post Traumatic Stress as well as appalling grief which encompasses many feelings.  He chose to use Alternative treatments as tools to cope and heal.  He wrote about some as them as if he wanted to knock the pain out of him

He may still need such treatments/coping mechanisms from time to time up to this day and no doubt his art gives him great solace.

I doubt Colin allows himself to think deeply about Jeremy but leaves that for others, he has had to learn to accept what happened, the only way for him to survive and find peace. 

Accept, that little word, is often the hardest thing of all.....

[Adam]

Split Personality Justice???  Think that's one for ngb, unless it's a joke?
I have veered from innocent to 50/50 to probably guilty and now I believe that poor man is very possibly innocent.  So 90/10 

You need to explain how Sheila committed the massacre.

I did ask you to do this when I joined the forum in 2013. You posted 'get lost Adam'.

Supporting Bamber because you don't know how he got Sheila a few feet into the main bedroom is not enough. I've given you enough options.

As with all other submitted scenarios, you don't need to take into account Sheila was highly sedated & unable to function from the the powerful effects of Haloperidol. Otherwise a scenario would have Sheila not waking up in the first place.

Other posters at the time also refused to submit a scenario but have since gone to 100% guilty .

You don't need to be 50/50 because you're a moderator. Mike is a moderator and is 100% pro Bamber.

[susan]

Just a thought would anyone mind if I came as a different poster and viewed the case from both sides, I know this would be a first, I could keep my humour for Justice and then change sides again? Posters could have a dig at Justice and praise me as someone else?

Justice that would not work as one poster would be biased about the other posters theories.  Just my take on it it is very difficult to debate this case.

[guest2181]

Justice that would not work as one poster would be biased about the other posters theories.  Just my take on it it is very difficult to debate this case.

Although it could help when the forum is quiet. GoodJustice and BadJustice could keep the discussion going amongst themselves. I think they would get on fairly well without too many fall outs. 

[maggie]

You need to explain how Sheila committed the massacre.

I did ask you to do this when I joined the forum in 2013. You posted 'get lost Adam'. Supporting Bamber because you don't know how he got Sheila a few feet into the main bedroom is not enough.

As with all other submitted scenarios, you don't need to take into account Sheila was highly sedated & unable to function from the the powerful effects of Haloperidol. Otherwise a scenario would have Sheila not waking up in the first place.

Other posters at the time also refused but have since gone to 100% guilty .

You don't need to be 50/50 because you're a moderator. Mike is a moderator and is 100% pro Bamber.

Oh there you are!!

I don't hAve to explain anything to you or anyone else thanks Adam.
I have never believed scenarios have any substance at all. How can I know what happened when?  Did Sheila stub her toe etc.

It is very helpful of you to tell me what I can or can't do as a moderator, now I will be equally helpful and as a moderator tell you the same.

Please stop pressurising people to give scenarios, some are happy to do so some prefer not to, it is their prerogative. 

I cannot find a clause anywhere in the forum rules which states every poster has to give a scenario because Adam says so.

I have always been neutral as a moderator and whatever my views are I will continue to be so. 

I have an open mind Adam, a condition incomprehensible to you I would guess. 

Maybe I was over enthusiastic 90/10....I'm leaning towards JB....... 50/50 is probably a good place to be.

[susan]

Although it could help when the forum is quiet. GoodJustice and BadJustice could keep the discussion going amongst themselves. I think they would get on fairly well without too many fall outs. 

Hello Hartley on reflection you could be right he could argue with himself so we would have no major fall outs maybe one of them could be banned but knowing Justice as I do that would not happen 

[maggie]

Hello Hartley on reflection you could be right he could argue with himself so we would have no major fall outs maybe one of them could be banned but knowing Justice as I do that would not happen 

A ban would kill two birds with one stone 

[guest7363]

Hello Hartley on reflection you could be right he could argue with himself so we would have no major fall outs maybe one of them could be banned but knowing Justice as I do that would not happen 

Ha Ha

[guest2181]

Hello Hartley on reflection you could be right he could argue with himself so we would have no major fall outs maybe one of them could be banned but knowing Justice as I do that would not happen 

I guess it depends, if BadJustice and GoodJustice got carried away and exchanged a joke, then all hell would probably break loose.