outlandish Theory's

[Jane]

Those hiring lawyers,do you ask to see credentials ? Why not ?
 Because I will from now on if ever I needed one because of my personal mistrust of them.

I use a firm which has been used by my family for generations. The one time I didn't -on the recommendation of an estate agent- I very nearly came unstuck and could have lost money AND the house I was buying. Thankfully the "tried and trusted" were able to come to the rescue.

[lookout]

I use a firm which has been used by my family for generations. The one time I didn't -on the recommendation of an estate agent- I very nearly came unstuck and could have lost money AND the house I was buying. Thankfully the "tried and trusted" were able to come to the rescue.

My family had used the same firm for years too,but when the owner died,the company merged and it wasn't the same as the usual home visits ended. How sad it was to lose the most trusting men who had OUR interests at heart to revert to the jumped-up whiz-kids who now have THEIR interests at heart.
Our old bank manager was also of the same era and once he was gone,the banks were turned on their heads. Unless anyone has lived through that era,they don't know what I'm on about.

[guest7363]

Makes you wonder why Bamber has got through so many Lawyers? Either they seen through him, or was a fake or he got rid of them because they couldn't do anymore for him? But out of all his lawyers this man takes the biscuit,   Giovanni Di Stefano (born 1 July 1955) is an Italian businessman and convicted fraudster based in the United Kingdom. He has been involved in legal cases for high-profile notorious defendants worldwide; he has no legal qualifications and is not registered to work as an advocate in the UK or Italy.[1] He has been referred to as "The Devil's Advocate" for his advocacy on behalf of such claimed clients as Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Miloševi?.[2][3] He was also a business associate of the Serbian paramilitary leader and indicted war criminal Arkan.[3][4]

He has been convicted four times in Ireland and the United Kingdom of fraud and related criminal offences, serving a total of eight and a half years for convictions between 1975 and the late 1980s. He was described by a judge as "one of life's great swindlers".[5] His most recent conviction, in March 2013, saw him being sentenced to 14 years' imprisonment after being found guilty or pleading guilty to 27 charges including deception, fraud and money laundering between 2001 and 2011 related to "tricking people into thinking he was a bona fide legal professional".[5][6].   This is the guy that arranged the lie detector test for Bamber.

[lookout]

Yes,there are a lot of " lifes swindlers " doing time. Doctors,lawyers,suspended sentences for professors, etc etc. Our home-grown swindlers.!
I wonder how many foreign doctors/nursing staff have got their certificates for practicing medicine in OUR hospitals ?

[lookout]

I can just imagine a " dumb " Jeremy carting a box of bullets upstairs after he'd scooped up what he'd wanted from the kitchen phone table,leaving an untidy mess of them.

Because Jeremy would have loaded the maximum quite easily,the spring action ? of re-loading a full quota of bullets would have been difficult for Sheila so two or three at a time seemed to have been the answer hence the " spares " in the bedroom.( Maybe that's how her nail came off initially ?)

Were any loose bullets found in his pocket btw ?     

Can anyone throw a light on whether rifles or indeed any gun has got a spring-loaded mechanism when bullets are loaded ?  Or some sort of breaking strain ?

[mike tesko]

Steve, psycho/sociopaths are devoid of a certain self regulation that you and I know as a conscience. They have no qualms about lying so their bodies don't register the physiological changes we experience when we act deviously or untruthfully.

(1) - http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-bamber-lie-test-proves-468144


JEREMY Bamber passed a lie detector test yesterday - backing his 22 year fight to prove he did not murder five members of his family.

And the expert who conducted it said: "I am absolutely convinced he is innocent."

Terry Mullins added: "He did not show any sign of a reaction, not a flicker which would have shown up guilt."

Now Bamber's lawyers will send the results to the Home Secretary and ask for a third appeal.

Bamber was "overwhelmed" when told the results in a phone call to Full Sutton jail in York, where he is serving life. He told the Mirror: "I didn't do it. I couldn't have done. I wouldn't have done it."

He has always denied killing his adoptive parents Neville and June Bamber, his sister Sheila Caffell - nicknamed Bambi -and her six-year-old twins Nicholas and Daniel in Tolleshunt D'Arcy, Essex, in 1985.

He stood to inherit almost £500,000 from his parents. But he claims Sheila, who had a history of mental illness, killed them before turning the rifle on herself.

Police thought so too - until they found a silencer in a cupboard with her blood on and decided she could not have used it in the murders, shot herself and then put it back in the cupboard.

Bamber, 45, who has been asking for the test since 1991, was finally given permission by the Home Office. It is believed to be the first time it has been allowed behind bars.

He was wired up to a £10,000 polygraph machine, said to be the most sophisticated available with 95 to 98 per cent accuracy. It measures reactions that can indicate guilt, including heartbeat, blood pressure, sweat and even electromagnetic impulses.

During the 100 minute test Mr Mullins, one of only seven polygraph experts in the UK, asked three key questions: DID you shoot your family on August 7, 1985? DID you shoot five members of your family with an Anshutz rifle? WERE you in the house when they were shot with an Anshutz rifle? Bamber gave a categoric "No" to each one.

Mr Mullins said: "You only have to fail one question and you fail the whole test. But he passed every time.

"We are testing the nervous system, the fight or flight mechanism, and you cannot hide those reactions. But there was no suggestion he was lying in any answers."

He added: "I am absolutely clear that he did not do this. I am convinced he is innocent from his readings on these tests."

Bamber's lawyer Giovanni di Stefano, who has campaigned vigorously for him, said last night: "I believe there is sufficient evidence to prove his innocence.

"Although lie detector tests are not admissible in the UK justice system, I believe that such a sophisticated piece of equipment does have real value in determining guilt or innocence."

Bamber's appeals in 1987 and 2002 failed. Three weeks ago the Criminal Cases Review Commission refused to refer the case back to the Appeal Court.

But Mr di Stefano said: "I will be demanding immediate action. The Home Secretary should release Mr Bamber on licence until a retrial.

"He has spent 22 years behind bars for heinous crimes which he didn't commit."

[email protected]

[mike tesko]

It seems they may only be used on sex offenders, and as a possible move towards their parole.

(1) - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-449643/Mass-killer-Bamber-passes-lie-detector.html

Mass killer Bamber 'passes lie detector'

Last updated at 11:10 20 April 2007

Mass killer Jeremy Bamber's legal team claims he has 'conclusively' passed a lie detector test and proved his innocence. A lawyer for the 45-year-old, who was jailed for life for the murder of five members of his family, said he completed the test at Full Sutton prison, near York, yesterday. Giovanni di Stefano said the convicted murderer was asked a series of questions, including whether he carried out the killings.
Mr di Stefano said the results confirmed that Bamber was 'telling the truth' and he is now calling for him to be released. He said: "He has passed conclusively the lie detector test. I will now be asking the Secretary of State to refer the case to the Parole Board with a view to them releasing him." He added he would also make a further application to the Criminal Cases Review Commission for an appeal. He lost appeals in 1987 and 2002 following his conviction in 1986.

Bamber has always denied shooting dead his adoptive parents Neville and June, sister Sheila Caffell and her twin six-year-old sons Nicholas and Daniel at the family's home, in Tolleshunt D'Arcy, Essex, in 1985. A Prison Service spokeswoman would not comment on the lie detector claims. On his website, Bamber announced: "Jeremy passed a polygraph test in prison today."

On this site Bamber listed 12 questions he had been asked during the lie detector test. He said they were:

1. Did you shoot your family on 7 August 1985? -No.

2. Did you shoot five members of your family with a Anschutz rifle? - No.

3. Were you present inside the house when they were shot with a Anschutz rifle - No.

4. Did you shoot your father Neville? - No.

5. Did you shoot your mother June? - No.

6. Did you shoot your sister Sheila Caffell? - No.

7. Did you shoot your twin nephews Daniel and Nicholas? - No.

8. Did you hide a rifle silencer in a cupboard after shooting your family? - No.

9. Did you climb out of a window of your parent's (sic) home after shooting them? - No.

10. Did you shoot your family in your father's home? - No.

11. Did Pc Berry radio in a report of seeing someone in an upstairs window around 4am on the morning of the shooting? - Yes.
12. Did you pay a professional hitman to shoot your family? - No.

The test was carried out by Terry Mullins, one of Britains leading lie detector experts.

Testing takes about two hours and during that time the subject's physiological conditions are monitored such as breathing, blood pressure and pulse rate.

[guest7363]

(1) - http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-bamber-lie-test-proves-468144


JEREMY Bamber passed a lie detector test yesterday - backing his 22 year fight to prove he did not murder five members of his family.

And the expert who conducted it said: "I am absolutely convinced he is innocent."

Terry Mullins added: "He did not show any sign of a reaction, not a flicker which would have shown up guilt."

Now Bamber's lawyers will send the results to the Home Secretary and ask for a third appeal.

Bamber was "overwhelmed" when told the results in a phone call to Full Sutton jail in York, where he is serving life. He told the Mirror: "I didn't do it. I couldn't have done. I wouldn't have done it."

He has always denied killing his adoptive parents Neville and June Bamber, his sister Sheila Caffell - nicknamed Bambi -and her six-year-old twins Nicholas and Daniel in Tolleshunt D'Arcy, Essex, in 1985.

He stood to inherit almost £500,000 from his parents. But he claims Sheila, who had a history of mental illness, killed them before turning the rifle on herself.

Police thought so too - until they found a silencer in a cupboard with her blood on and decided she could not have used it in the murders, shot herself and then put it back in the cupboard.

Bamber, 45, who has been asking for the test since 1991, was finally given permission by the Home Office. It is believed to be the first time it has been allowed behind bars.

He was wired up to a £10,000 polygraph machine, said to be the most sophisticated available with 95 to 98 per cent accuracy. It measures reactions that can indicate guilt, including heartbeat, blood pressure, sweat and even electromagnetic impulses.

During the 100 minute test Mr Mullins, one of only seven polygraph experts in the UK, asked three key questions: DID you shoot your family on August 7, 1985? DID you shoot five members of your family with an Anshutz rifle? WERE you in the house when they were shot with an Anshutz rifle? Bamber gave a categoric "No" to each one.

Mr Mullins said: "You only have to fail one question and you fail the whole test. But he passed every time.

"We are testing the nervous system, the fight or flight mechanism, and you cannot hide those reactions. But there was no suggestion he was lying in any answers."

He added: "I am absolutely clear that he did not do this. I am convinced he is innocent from his readings on these tests."

Bamber's lawyer Giovanni di Stefano, who has campaigned vigorously for him, said last night: "I believe there is sufficient evidence to prove his innocence.

"Although lie detector tests are not admissible in the UK justice system, I believe that such a sophisticated piece of equipment does have real value in determining guilt or innocence."

Bamber's appeals in 1987 and 2002 failed. Three weeks ago the Criminal Cases Review Commission refused to refer the case back to the Appeal Court.

But Mr di Stefano said: "I will be demanding immediate action. The Home Secretary should release Mr Bamber on licence until a retrial.

"He has spent 22 years behind bars for heinous crimes which he didn't commit."

[email protected]

how to pass a lie detector test, get a fake lawyer and Say only what you need to. “Yes” or “No” answers should be all you need for most of the test.  Easy peasy, have a look what Bamber had to answer.

[mike tesko]

how to pass a lie detector test, get a fake lawyer and Say only what you need to. “Yes” or “No” answers should be all you need for most of the test.  Easy peasy, have a look what Bamber had to answer.

If you had to take a lie detector test, on the basis that what your saying is true, you would certainly fail to pass the test. The Polygraph tester is an EXPERT in his own right. Something your not qualified to give an opinion on, other than to either agree, or disagree, with his findings. More to the point, no other EXPERT WITNESS in this field of expertise, has claimed his findings are not accurate based upon the questions asked, and the answers given, and the recordings retained from the devices. All these are available for any other qualified expert to examine and challenge if Mr Mullins findings are not accurate...


Step forward - 'No - one'...

[Jane]

how to pass a lie detector test, get a fake lawyer and Say only what you need to. “Yes” or “No” answers should be all you need for most of the test.  Easy peasy, have a look what Bamber had to answer.

As you say, Justice. Easy peasy. I'd fail even though telling the absolute truth. My heart rate and bp would soar from just being put in that situation.

[lookout]

Did JB have a " fake lawyer " present during the test ?

[Jane]

If you had to take a lie detector test, on the basis that what your saying is true, you would certainly fail to pass the test. The Polygraph tester is an EXPERT in his own right. Something your not qualified to give an opinion on, other than to either agree, or disagree, with his findings. More to the point, no other EXPERT WITNESS in this field of expertise, has claimed his findings are not accurate based upon the questions asked, and the answers given, and the recordings retained from the devices. All these are available for any other qualified expert to examine and challenge if Mr Mullins findings are not accurate...


Step forward - 'No - one'...

The efficacy of the SO CALLED lie detector test has been done to death.  There is NOTHING more any EXPERT WITNESS can say than a subject satisfactorily answered certain questions. This isn't a science with 100% reliability.

[mike tesko]

As you say, Justice. Easy peasy. I'd fail even though telling the absolute truth. My heart rate and bp would soar from just being put in that situation.

Yes, but Jeremy Bamber passed his test, he did not fail it. Like everything else in Bambers favour to help establish his innocence, the guilters will accept nothing. It beggars belief that we have had two SOCO's testifying and lying during the trial about the order key crime scene photographs were taken proving police put the rifle from the bedroom window onto Sheila's body, and then took photographs showing the rifle on her body, claiming the photographs depict how Bamber had left the scene unmoved, untouched...

[Jane]

Yes, but Jeremy Bamber passed his test, he did not fail it. Like everything else in Bambers favour to help establish his innocence, the guilters will accept nothing. It beggars belief that we have had two SOCO's testifying and lying during the trial about the order key crime scene photographs were taken proving police put the rifle from the bedroom window onto Sheila's body, and then took photographs showing the rifle on her body, claiming the photographs depict how Bamber had left the scene unmoved, untouched...

It doesn't mean he was telling the truth, though. All it means is that he satisfactorily answered the questions he was asked. He had no reason to be concerned about the questions. Psychopaths lack conscience so he'd have had no qualms about lying because his body wouldn't react to it.

[lookout]

It doesn't mean he was telling the truth, though. All it means is that he satisfactorily answered the questions he was asked. He had no reason to be concerned about the questions. Psychopaths lack conscience so he'd have had no qualms about lying because his body wouldn't react to it.

Some psychopaths DO react to lie detectors. They're so set and keen to give the right answers that stress./anxiety and sweat show themselves. This is a FACT.