Author Topic: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?  (Read 246164 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33773
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #150 on: November 04, 2015, 07:34:PM »
I'm not saying it was the case in this instance but often sisters or brothers of an unwell sibling prefer to call them 'lazy' 'pretending' 'attention seeking' etc. rather than admit they are really ill.  :-\  They simply don't want to accept the truth so it's easier to pretend it isn't happening.


OR he didn't know her well enough/had never spent enough time with her/didn't care. Not wanting to accept truth implies fear arising from caring, perhaps.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21095
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #151 on: November 04, 2015, 07:43:PM »
Everything seemed to be done clandestinely and in an underhand way,from keeping Sheila's illness quiet and no doubt Jeremy's schooldays where it's unlikely he told his parents about the abuse he suffered,the bank books and contents of the safe and June's heartfelt letter to be read after her death..

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #152 on: November 04, 2015, 07:47:PM »
Everything seemed to be done clandestinely and in an underhand way,from keeping Sheila's illness quiet and no doubt Jeremy's schooldays where it's unlikely he told his parents about the abuse he suffered,the bank books and contents of the safe and June's heartfelt letter to be read after her death..
There are families like that, I have experienced one, very different from my own family where we were all encouraged to have our own opinions and to voice them and we did!!. ;D ;D  If you always have to 'tow the line' and 'play' the family game without veering from the 'party line' I would guess you can end up very confused and bottled up. :-\
« Last Edit: November 04, 2015, 07:50:PM by maggie »

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21095
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #153 on: November 04, 2015, 08:00:PM »
There are families like that, I have experienced one, very different from my own family where we were all encouraged to have our own opinions and to voice them and we did!!. ;D ;D  If you always have to 'tow the line' and 'play' the family game without veering from the 'party line' I would guess you can end up very confused and bottled up. :-\
Is this one explanation for his refusal to open up now..

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #154 on: November 04, 2015, 08:12:PM »
Is this one explanation for his refusal to open up now..
Possibly if that is what he's doing but I'm not sure.  I do believe if JB killed the family he must be a narcissistic psychopath who enjoys the notoriety and what he may see as super star status. :-\  No decent human being could contemplate such a horrendous act. imo
« Last Edit: November 04, 2015, 08:14:PM by maggie »

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33773
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #155 on: November 04, 2015, 08:15:PM »
Possibly if that is what he's doing but I'm not sure.  I do believe if JB killed the family he must be a narcissistic psychopath who enjoys the notoriety and what he may see as super star status. :-\


A side to his personality which could have developed because he MAY have experienced Sheila as getting all the attention.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21095
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #156 on: November 04, 2015, 08:24:PM »
I wonder how the "horrible things" Jeremy alleged to Julie manifested themselves? The only thing he has ever mentioned is her pulling his legs to get him out of bed early on Christmas morning.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #157 on: November 04, 2015, 08:30:PM »
I wonder how the "horrible things" Jeremy alleged to Julie manifested themselves? The only thing he has ever mentioned is her pulling his legs to get him out of bed early on Christmas morning.
Don't know Steve but then I don't know if I believe Julie that much even if JB is guilty, I think she was looking after number one when she went to the police rather than thinking of the people who lost their lives.

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #158 on: November 04, 2015, 09:32:PM »
Don't know Steve but then I don't know if I believe Julie that much even if JB is guilty, I think she was looking after number one when she went to the police rather than thinking of the people who lost their lives.

What did she say that you don't believe?  The only lies she would have a reason to tell would be if she
had conspired with him to commit the murders or conspired to help obstruct justice and in such case the lies would be to conceal her guilt.  So the lies would be failing to tell her full role.  It would mean Jeremy told her even more and she agreed to assist him.  While that would be damning to herself it could be even more damning to Jeremy than what she said. 

For instance, suppose instead of just telling her that his plan included receiving a call that he told her he was going to lie and pretend he received a call from WHF and that in order to try to get police to believe he actually received such call he was going to call her and she tell police he called and told her he was upset after receiving such fictional call.   This is even more damning because it makes it even more clear that the call was fictional.  Her claim he told her his plan included receiving a call from WHF is still bad but not as direct about the purpose one has to think about it.

If this had been the case it means that when Julie told police about his telling her he received the call that she was helping him lie. She was part of a conspiracy to obstruct justice. If this were true she would have reason to leave out entirely that he had planned to say he received a call form WHF. he fact she mentioned it suggests she truly didn't appreciate he was telling her that he was going to make the call up.   
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #159 on: November 04, 2015, 09:37:PM »
Is this one explanation for his refusal to open up now..

No, I think he doesn't want to admit his guilt because he will no longer have the 'is he or isn't he' question and he will simply be classed by other inmates as a child killer and they are classed as the lowest of the low. I'm sure after all this time, they would also take pleasure in taunting him!
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21095
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #160 on: November 04, 2015, 09:39:PM »
What did she say that you don't believe?  The only lies she would have a reason to tell would be if she
had conspired with him to commit the murders or conspired to help obstruct justice and in such case the lies would be to conceal her guilt.  So the lies would be failing to tell her full role.  It would mean Jeremy told her even more and she agreed to assist him.  While that would be damning to herself it could be even more damning to Jeremy than what she said. 

For instance, suppose instead of just telling her that his plan included receiving a call that he told her he was going to lie and pretend he received a call from WHF and that in order to try to get police to believe he actually received such call he was going to call her and she tell police he called and told her he was upset after receiving such fictional call.   This is even more damning because it makes it even more clear that the call was fictional.  Her claim he told her his plan included receiving a call from WHF is still bad but not as direct about the purpose one has to think about it.

If this had been the case it means that when Julie told police about his telling her he received the call that she was helping him lie. She was part of a conspiracy to obstruct justice. If this were true she would have reason to leave out entirely that he had planned to say he received a call form WHF. he fact she mentioned it suggests she truly didn't appreciate he was telling her that he was going to make the call up.
But shouldn't Julie have realized at the call 1 stage(we'll call it the "tonight's the night..it's now or never" call)that Jeremy was serious about killing his family..

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #161 on: November 04, 2015, 09:43:PM »
If she'd have known Steve,she would. That's the question.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #162 on: November 04, 2015, 09:45:PM »
What did she say that you don't believe?  The only lies she would have a reason to tell would be if she
had conspired with him to commit the murders or conspired to help obstruct justice and in such case the lies would be to conceal her guilt.  So the lies would be failing to tell her full role.  It would mean Jeremy told her even more and she agreed to assist him.  While that would be damning to herself it could be even more damning to Jeremy than what she said. 

For instance, suppose instead of just telling her that his plan included receiving a call that he told her he was going to lie and pretend he received a call from WHF and that in order to try to get police to believe he actually received such call he was going to call her and she tell police he called and told her he was upset after receiving such fictional call.   This is even more damning because it makes it even more clear that the call was fictional.  Her claim he told her his plan included receiving a call from WHF is still bad but not as direct about the purpose one has to think about it.

If this had been the case it means that when Julie told police about his telling her he received the call that she was helping him lie. She was part of a conspiracy to obstruct justice. If this were true she would have reason to leave out entirely that he had planned to say he received a call form WHF. he fact she mentioned it suggests she truly didn't appreciate he was telling her that he was going to make the call up.
Sorry to disagree with you scip but I find much of her statement and behaviour questionable. This has nothing to do with whether I believe JB guilty or not.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2015, 09:48:PM by maggie »

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21095
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #163 on: November 04, 2015, 09:54:PM »
Sorry to disagree with you scip but I find much of her statement and behaviour questionable. This has nothing to do with whether I believe JB guilty or not.
But the statement has been gone over many times with a fine tooth comb by Kingsley Napley or whoever is representing him now pro bono..

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #164 on: November 04, 2015, 09:54:PM »
Jeremy's " jokes " and one-liners became serious threats during JM's questioning.