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

[David1819]

For reasons only known to you, you appear to be ignoring the following;

"Psychopaths generate as many pretend sob stories as needed in order to draw others into their hidden games, again and again and again. The ability they have to lie pathologically, easily, and confidently makes it possible for them to convince others that such an implausible number of tragedies is plausible, which unfortunately opens the door to a variety of manipulation and exploitation opportunities.

There is no documentary proof that Jeremy has been diagnosed with any mental illness and there is evidence to the contrary. A diagnoses of psychopathy alone or any mental illness for that matter does not establish ones guilt.

As usual your argument is poor. You are clasping at straws and seem intent on dismissing JM's evidence; therefore your confirmation bias is blinding you to the factual evidence in this case.

I put forward the argument here complete with all the evidence needed.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7554.0.html

[Stephanie]

There is no documentary proof that Jeremy has been diagnosed with any mental illness and there is evidence to the contrary. A diagnoses of psychopathy alone or any mental illness for that matter does not establish ones guilt.

I put forward the argument here complete with all the evidence needed.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7554.0.html

That may be the case David but there was no documentary proof that SH had been diagnosed with a mental health condition or a PD. Therefore again this argument is moot.

What evidence is there to the contrary I've seen none. Please explain..

The arguments I've seen you put forward are weak and you do not back up your arguments with evidence. What you do however attempt to do, is undermine peoples reasoning with comments of a personal nature or play on the vulnerabilities of others in the hope they will support you.

[Stephanie]

There is no documentary proof that Jeremy has been diagnosed with any mental illness and there is evidence to the contrary. A diagnoses of psychopathy alone or any mental illness for that matter does not establish ones guilt.

I put forward the argument here complete with all the evidence needed.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7554.0.html

You only need watch the vlog about Terry Mullins and read the thread on this forum to see there is evidence to show Terry Mullins contradicts himself.. http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7494.0.html

Where is your argument and where is your evidence?

[Stephanie]

Steph/Steve. I think by 2001, she may have been wondering -like many of us who have cause to look back at certain aspects of our pasts, wishing we hadn't been there- HOW she'd had any part of it. WHY she had/hadn't done certain things. All of course, with the luxury of hindsight and maturity.

In 1985, whilst it was established that "she'd been very much in love with him and had hoped to marry him" it MAY also have been that she felt that if they HAD married, she'd have been saved from all that subsequently happened. Maybe, as a 21 year old, she fantasized that marriage would somehow "unhappen" what had occurred. It can't have been a time of unalloyed joy for her, but I don't believe she would have experienced what relief it would be to have it over UNTIL she'd experienced it.

And/or the fact Bamber continues to publicly maintain his innocence and has the support of the people he has, could make it difficult for her...?

[Stephanie]

I put forward the argument here complete with all the evidence needed.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7554.0.html

This isn't an argument David - this is your bias! If that is all the evidence you think is needed to support your claim them you've got a lot more to learn about this case!

The hit man story doesn't prove Julie was lying at all - one of them was but it could just as easily have been Jeremy. Why? Because it is so different from what actually happened that you might assume she would be discredited by telling it. No? Well, you're using it for that very reason now!

AE was told by a police officer about how June and Sheila were found, she no doubt told RWB. They both mention that the bible was on Sheila's chest which as we know, it wasn't when she was discovered. However, perhaps it was when Jeremy left her and it slid off.

Not sure what point you're trying to make by 'the method of travel' as was pointed out to you on the red forum, he had to get there somehow and the bicycle was found in his garden - this supports what Julie said rather than contradicts. The family also saw the bike! He also had to get in the house and the windows are the obvious choice.

The wetsuit was no doubt mentioned to Julie when questioned by Jones  "Did Jeremy ever mention anything about a wetsuit" so, Julie notes it down.

The £2000.00 ic clearly a coincidence given that Jeremy went to New Zealand years before the murders.

Lets see;

He had to get there and his mothers bike was in his garden.

He had to get in, doors were locked and bolted from the inside - had to be a window.

Boutflour came up with the notion of the wetsuit, Julie was interviewed at length and Jones may have asked her about it - she noted it down.

Fingerprints on the bullets, finger prints on the rifle - two DIFFERENT things.

£2000.00 years apart? Hardly relevant.

[lookout]

He's no more a psychopath than anyone here.

[Jane]

And/or the fact Bamber continues to publicly maintain his innocence and has the support of the people he has, could make it difficult for her...?

ALL of that and probably more, Steph. I'm fully aware that there are some here who can only recognize things in terms of "black or white". I don't experience life as being that way. Most -ALL- of what we do is about a host of different reasons but we probably give the one we feel to be most appropriate by way of explanation.

[Jane]

He's no more a psychopath than anyone here.

I don't know what makes you confident that there isn't a psychopath here.

[lookout]

I don't know what makes you confident that there isn't a psychopath here.

You seem quite confident that there is ?

[Jane]

You seem quite confident that there is ?

No. I just don't see any reason why there shouldn't be. There's nothing to say "Psychopaths not allowed".

[Steve_uk]

You seem quite confident that there is ?

I don't know whether it's a red herring or not lookout. It doesn't seem to tally with the young Jeremy who craved hugs and affection. There's a quote from Dr. Robert Hare here:

Three decades of these studies, by Hare and others, has confirmed that psychopaths' brains work differently from ours, especially when processing emotion and language. Hare once illustrated this for Nicole Kidman, who had invited him to Hollywood to help her prepare for a role as a psychopath in Malice. How, she wondered, could she show the audience there was something fundamentally wrong with her character?

"I said, 'Here's a scene that you can use,' " Hare says. " 'You're walking down a street and there's an accident. A car has hit a child in the crosswalk. A crowd of people gather round. You walk up, the child's lying on the ground and there's blood running all over the place. You get a little blood on your shoes and you look down and say, "Oh shit." You look over at the child, kind of interested, but you're not repelled or horrified. You're just interested. Then you look at the mother, and you're really fascinated by the mother, who's emoting, crying out, doing all these different things. After a few minutes you turn away and go back to your house. You go into the bathroom and practice mimicking the facial expressions of the mother.' " He then pauses and says, "That's the psychopath: somebody who doesn't understand what's going on emotionally, but understands that something important has happened."

[lookout]

No. I just don't see any reason why there shouldn't be. There's nothing to say "Psychopaths not allowed".

Speak for yourself.

[Stephanie]

I don't know whether it's a red herring or not lookout. It doesn't seem to tally with the young Jeremy who craved hugs and affection. There's a quote from Dr. Robert Hare here:

Three decades of these studies, by Hare and others, has confirmed that psychopaths' brains work differently from ours, especially when processing emotion and language. Hare once illustrated this for Nicole Kidman, who had invited him to Hollywood to help her prepare for a role as a psychopath in Malice. How, she wondered, could she show the audience there was something fundamentally wrong with her character?

"I said, 'Here's a scene that you can use,' " Hare says. " 'You're walking down a street and there's an accident. A car has hit a child in the crosswalk. A crowd of people gather round. You walk up, the child's lying on the ground and there's blood running all over the place. You get a little blood on your shoes and you look down and say, "Oh shit." You look over at the child, kind of interested, but you're not repelled or horrified. You're just interested. Then you look at the mother, and you're really fascinated by the mother, who's emoting, crying out, doing all these different things. After a few minutes you turn away and go back to your house. You go into the bathroom and practice mimicking the facial expressions of the mother.' " He then pauses and says, "That's the psychopath: somebody who doesn't understand what's going on emotionally, but understands that something important has happened."

Bit like Bambers acting attempts at the funeral..

[Jane]

Speak for yourself.

If you're trying to say that you see no reason for a psychopath to be a member of this forum, perhaps you could explain why.

[Steve_uk]

Bit like Bambers acting attempts at the funeral..

..and his reactions outside the farmhouse, knowing all were dead within.