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

[buddy]

They would have carried on, as they had the Speakman money to fall back on. Yes it's an emotional case, and you're right we should all stand back a little from time to time.

Yes Steve they did have the Speakman  money, they also talked Granny Speakman out of leaving anything to JB. They were also stunned when they found out that Neville had bought land from under there feet and given it to JB. I respect your stance, but still think the family were in fear of what JB was going to do. I fall short of the family framing JB, but "found evidence" for the police, and Jones was happy to oblige. The fact they made him head of security stinks IMO.

[Steve_uk]

Alan Dovey story CAN be proved, it's in his WS. You guilters have no more than fabricated evidence.
The trouble is Steve is you have become so entrenched now that you can't see the wood for the trees.
How would the family had survived had JB been cleared?

This is the visit to the bank by Julie and Susan on Friday 4th October 1985. I think this can be explained by the Police Officer not escorting them to the bank but being in Dovey's office when the girls arrived. It was 17 years after the event and memories can fade, though I do accept that it could be interpreted as misleading.

[Steve_uk]

Yes Steve they did have the Speakman  money, they also talked Granny Speakman out of leaving anything to JB. They were also stunned when they found out that Neville had bought land from under there feet and given it to JB. I respect your stance, but still think the family were in fear of what JB was going to do. I fall short of the family framing JB, but "found evidence" for the police, and Jones was happy to oblige. The fact they made him head of security stinks IMO.

Jeremy was not going to inherit directly from his grandmother, whose estate was divided between her two blood daughters. Jeremy wasn't even going to inherit Nevill's money directly, which was willed to June: only the Farm, on condition that he was still farming satisfactorily on the day of his father's demise.

I think Jeremy took all this as a game, cocking a snook at the will. He was devoid of any emotion and saw it as a financial transaction no less. When one compares this with the Julie Mugford and Alan Dovey incident the latter really does pale into insignificance.

[buddy]

Jeremy was not going to inherit directly from his grandmother, whose estate was divided between her two blood daughters. Jeremy wasn't even going to inherit Nevill's money directly, which was willed to June: only the Farm, on condition that he was still farming satisfactorily on the day of his father's demise.

I think Jeremy took all this as a game, cocking a snook at the will. He was devoid of any emotion and saw it as a financial transaction no less. When one compares this with the Julie Mugford and Alan Dovey incident the latter really does pale into insignificance.

JB was going to inherit money from his grandmother. I agree that he would not get the farm, but he was
not interested in it anyway. He would have taken the money and run,but the family would have been up the creek, that is why they took over the farm IMO.
I agree Steve that on its own the JM, AD, incident is of no consequence, but it is only one of a number of things that trouble me.

[Steve_uk]

JB was going to inherit money from his grandmother. I agree that he would not get the farm, but he was
not interested in it anyway. He would have taken the money and run,but the family would have been up the creek, that is why they took over the farm IMO.
I agree Steve that on its own the JM, AD, incident is of no consequence, but it is only one of a number of things that trouble me.

Well I've told you who the beneficiaries of Mabel Speakman were going to be. The problem Jeremy had was that he wanted money immediately. Barbara Wilson said there was always an ulterior motive in everything he did; that's how his mind worked.

[buddy]

With respect Steve we will have to agree to disagree.

[Steve_uk]

With respect Steve we will have to agree to disagree.

Even Scott Lomax doesn't argue that Mabel Speakman left a will in favour of her grandson, thus disinheriting her own blood daughters.  https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=H8U7AwAAQBAJ&pg=PT44&lpg=PT44&dq=jeremy+bamber+mabel+speakman+will&source=bl&ots=E_UFNN48fW&sig=YDP49vnlV06tREEZ8y1S3PoTY6s&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjDs7KKwpXUAhVYFMAKHf2BC4wQ6AEIQjAD#v=onepage&q=jeremy%20bamber%20mabel%20speakman%20will&f=false

[guest7363]

In your opinion ' taken away by one mans greed'

In my opinion a young man has been locked up for over 30 years because of xxxx xxxxxx greed
I believe her and her father were the ringleaders in this miscarriage of justice

Hi Caroline it was this post I took offence to.

[notsure]

Hi Caroline it was this post I took offence to.

I'm not really sure why you would be offended by this post justice.anyone looking at the evidence could come to the conclusion that they instigated the demise of jb and then went on to do everything they could to ensure he was found guilty.

It's not a personal insult it's an observation after reading the material available and an opinion that's all.

Don't take things to heart , imagine how jb feels if he is truly innocent and he has been accused of the worst crime anyone can commit .

[JackieD]

Even Scott Lomax doesn't argue that Mabel Speakman left a will in favour of her grandson, thus disinheriting her own blood daughters.  https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=H8U7AwAAQBAJ&pg=PT44&lpg=PT44&dq=jeremy+bamber+mabel+speakman+will&source=bl&ots=E_UFNN48fW&sig=YDP49vnlV06tREEZ8y1S3PoTY6s&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjDs7KKwpXUAhVYFMAKHf2BC4wQ6AEIQjAD#v=onepage&q=jeremy%20bamber%20mabel%20speakman%20will&f=false

Why do you keep quoting books, they are not an accurate source

[lookout]

Jeremy has been too busy trying to prove his innocence,with no time to grieve over the period of time that it takes,but once this is over,it'll all hit him hard when he realises that he won't see his family ever again.
His loss will be severely felt by him along with the betrayal of many that mentally he'll be ill-prepared for the outside world without the help, support and intervention of a professional group.It won't be easy for him and I don't envy how institutionalised he'll feel and experience. What a culture shock he'll receive.

[guest7363]

I'm not really sure why you would be offended by this post justice.anyone looking at the evidence could come to the conclusion that they instigated the demise of jb and then went on to do everything they could to ensure he was found guilty.

It's not a personal insult it's an observation after reading the material available and an opinion that's all.

Don't take things to heart , imagine how jb feels if he is truly innocent and he has been accused of the worst crime anyone can commit .

Hiw would you like your name branded about all the time on a forum saying you were responsible for something without proof, what about her children and grandchildren, just because Jackie says so without providing any evidence. If Anne came on here and called Jackie out she would get banned, it's a joke. I hope soon these people who make lives hard for others on Facebook, twitter, forums are brought to justice themselves.  I asked Bill for proof and called him untruthful with Roch and all hell let's loose, at least they have a chance to prove me wrong.  The forum is run now to promote untruths and you either swallow it or piss off, I don't want any further part in it, I'm really insensed by it notsure, I asked Jackie to be careful how she worded it and tried to help, i have given up, I hate liars and con merchants and I tried to protect posters from one, but it seems it's ok on here.

There are people commuting suicide through this sort of activity on internet, all I ask was being a bit more considerate, if you think it's ok then go ahead.

[guest7363]

I'm not really sure why you would be offended by this post justice.anyone looking at the evidence could come to the conclusion that they instigated the demise of jb and then went on to do everything they could to ensure he was found guilty.

It's not a personal insult it's an observation after reading the material available and an opinion that's all.

Don't take things to heart , imagine how jb feels if he is truly innocent and he has been accused of the worst crime anyone can commit .

Their names wasn't blanked out, they have been now by someone.

[Caroline]

Hiw would you like your name branded about all the time on a forum saying you were responsible for something without proof, what about her children and grandchildren, just because Jackie says so without providing any evidence. If Anne came on here and called Jackie out she would get banned, it's a joke. I hope soon these people who make lives hard for others on Facebook, twitter, forums are brought to justice themselves.  I asked Bill for proof and called him untruthful with Roch and all hell let's loose, at least they have a chance to prove me wrong.  The forum is run now to promote untruths and you either swallow it or piss off, I don't want any further part in it, I'm really insensed by it notsure, I asked Jackie to be careful how she worded it and tried to help, i have given up, I hate liars and con merchants and I tried to protect posters from one, but it seems it's ok on here.

There are people commuting suicide through this sort of activity on internet, all I ask was being a bit more considerate, if you think it's ok then go ahead.

I agree that if people make unsubstantiated claims, they should expect to be called on it and if they don't like that, they really shouldn't make the claims in the first place. Expecting people to have blind faith in someone they don't know is a bit silly. Personally, I think at the heart of it, this is ALL CT propaganda.

[maggie]

Hiw would you like your name branded about all the time on a forum saying you were responsible for something without proof, what about her children and grandchildren, just because Jackie says so without providing any evidence. If Anne came on here and called Jackie out she would get banned, it's a joke. I hope soon these people who make lives hard for others on Facebook, twitter, forums are brought to justice themselves.  I asked Bill for proof and called him untruthful with Roch and all hell let's loose, at least they have a chance to prove me wrong.  The forum is run now to promote untruths and you either swallow it or piss off, I don't want any further part in it, I'm really insensed by it notsure, I asked Jackie to be careful how she worded it and tried to help, i have given up, I hate liars and con merchants and I tried to protect posters from one, but it seems it's ok on here.

There are people commuting suicide through this sort of activity on internet, all I ask was being a bit more considerate, if you think it's ok then go ahead.

No one is supporting anyone for telling untruths justice.  You suggested BR was another poster using a different persona, maybe you were wrong about that?

I don't recall hell breaking loose I recall I may have commented that your accusations weren't acceptable, we can't have any poster accusing others of lying without proof therefore removing the post seemed the best option. 

It is fair enough that you are protective towards people you know and believe are being bad mouthed on the forum but that has always been the way it is on here.  I have removed the words from the post which made you so angry, I had missed this but if you had pmd me about it I would have edited the post.

I don't believe it's fair to expect me, one moderator on this forum to see everything on here.  I am always willing do my best to help and support posters.