outlandish Theory's

[Caroline]

OK, Good. In the past I have benefited from the this approach, but been disadvantaged on other occasions. My overall interpretation of this process, is that the truth is not always achieved, obtained, or established...

Although sometimes it is or mostly is.

[notsure]

I feel as if I'm banging my head against a brick wall here. Had counsel wanted the answer to the question "Will your family benefit from Jeremy being convicted", THAT would have been the question they asked. It was with good reason that they didn't ask that question, instead asking if HE would benefit from Jeremy's conviction.

Blimey jane dont bang your head against a brick wall on my account. If you dont want to reply to my post then dont.

you know as well as i do it was a sly  thing to do, had everyone known about the eatons boutflours/ land deals money trail etc it could have been a completely different syory.

like you say it was with good reason the right questions werent asked.

[Caroline]

Blimey jane dont bang your head against a brick wall on my account. If you dont want to reply to my post then dont.

you know as well as i do it was a sly  thing to do, had everyone known about the eatons boutflours/ land deals money trail etc it could have been a completely different syory.

like you say it was with good reason the right questions werent asked.

Why would it be a different story? There is no implication that the relatives had anything to do with the murders. The phone call makes it either Jeremy or Sheila, Sheila couldn't have done it so that leaves Jeremy. They wouldn't be the first relatives to inherit by default.

[mike tesko]

Although sometimes it is or mostly is.

Yes, but in this instance, the facts are undeniably proven - Crime Scene Photograph No. 23, was taken before Crime Scene  Photographs, No.'s 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32, were taken.  So, do you not agree that photo''s 25, 26, 27, 228, 29, 30,, 31 and 32, were taken after photograph 23 was taken?

If you deny this as being factual, please give your reasons, or your evidence for believing an alternative?

[Caroline]

Yes, but in this instance, the facts are undeniably proven - Crime Scene Photograph No. 23, was taken before Crime Scene  Photographs, No.'s 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32, were taken.  So, do you not agree that photo''s 25, 26, 27, 228, 29, 30,, 31 and 32, were taken after photograph 23 was taken?

If you deny this as being factual, please give your reasons, or your evidence for believing an alternative?

Yes, I do agree that photo''s 25, 26, 27, 228, 29, 30,, 31 and 32, were taken after photograph 23 was taken?

[Jane]

Blimey jane dont bang your head against a brick wall on my account. If you dont want to reply to my post then dont.

you know as well as i do it was a sly  thing to do, had everyone known about the eatons boutflours/ land deals money trail etc it could have been a completely different syory.

like you say it was with good reason the right questions werent asked.

You may not have called it "sly" if you'd felt a great wrong had been done you and this person was trying to put it right.

[notsure]

No i may not have done jane, but that person who may have been trying to put things right might have been wrong.

look jane im not saying he isnt guilty im just trying to work out what is real proof and what isnt.

[mike tesko]

Yes, I do agree that photo''s 25, 26, 27, 228, 29, 30,, 31 and 32, were taken after photograph 23 was taken?

Ok, Love (figure of speech, regionally), so, we have agreement that police ''did' set the death scene of Jeremy Bambers sister...

This is a beginning...

It's acceptance has serious implications, since a reliance upon the images contained in these crime scene photographs, establishes, that Jeremy Bamber, could not, did not put 'that' rifle, upon his sisters body,  to fool the police into accepting that his sister had killed herself. Do you agree, with this scenario?

[mike tesko]

So, as the facts seem to suggest, the anshuzt rifle was at the bedroom window, before it was photographed on Sheila's body?

[mike tesko]

OK, if rifle was photographed resting against bedroom window, before it was photographed on Sheila's body, what does this, inform the impartials?

[mike tesko]

OK, if rifle was photographed resting against bedroom window, before it was photographed on Sheila's body, what does this, inform the impartials?

Surely, this establishes beyond reasonable doubt, that police, not anybody else, placed the rifle upon the body?

[mike tesko]

Am I making up this, scenario?

[Jane]

Am I making up this, scenario?

As you're the one telling this particular story, you're only one who knows the answer to that.... so are you?

[mike tesko]

As you're the one telling this particular story, you're only one who knows the answer to that.... so are you?

 no love, I am not lying...

[mike tesko]

no love, I am not lying...

Whether or not, it is a story, or the truth, what does, the fact that the rifle resting against the bedroom window, before it was photographed on Sheila's body, really mean>?