New Technology

[lookout]

But you'll undoubtedly be jumping for joy  IF Jeremy's conviction was overturned and the circumstantial evidence -which will quite suddenly become acceptable- convicted Sheila.

" Jumping for joy "? I'm not neurotic either and just take things in my stride.

[Jane]

" Jumping for joy "? I'm not neurotic either and just take things in my stride.

Which side stepped what I said. If Jeremy's conviction -based on circumstantial evidence which you claim to abhor because it isn't forensic- was overturned and Sheila was then convicted on circumstantial evidence, I doubt you'd be shouting as loudly on her behalf.

[Caroline]

But I've NEVER seen or been convinced about this forensic evidence against Jeremy,so I can only gather that you're just playing for time when you state that there is----------hoping that the question will go away.

Because you don't understand the difference between forensic and circumstantial - you proved that this morning when I asked you what forensic evidence shows Sheila was guilty and you answered with a list of circumstantial reasons.

[lookout]

Because you don't understand the difference between forensic and circumstantial - you proved that this morning when I asked you what forensic evidence shows Sheila was guilty and you answered with a list of circumstantial reasons.

I gave you forensic--------the Bible the blue socks too,which nobody bothered to investigate. I DO know the difference between forensic and circumstantial !!
 Stop exaggerating with your " list of circumstantial reasons ".Where ?

[guest154]

I gave you forensic--------the Bible the blue socks too,which nobody bothered to investigate. I DO know the difference between forensic and circumstantial !!
 Stop exaggerating with your " list of circumstantial reasons ".Where ?

If they weren't investiagated, that means we don't know who's blood was on them. If we do not know who's blood is on those items then how can you say they are pieces of forensic evidence to prove Sheila's guilt.

Not taking a leap of faith and filling in the blanks with your own thoughts again are you?

[lookout]

If they weren't investiagated, that means we don't know who's blood was on them. If we do not know who's blood is on those items then how can you say they are pieces of forensic evidence to prove Sheila's guilt.

Not taking a leap of faith and filling in the blanks with your own thoughts again are you?

Well it couldn't have been Jeremy's blood or we'd have known about it !!

[Jane]

Well it couldn't have been Jeremy's blood or we'd have known about it !!

If they weren't investigated it hardly matters WHOSE blood it was, however, not for the life of me can I think why there'd be any cause to think it was Jeremy's.

[lookout]

If they weren't investigated it hardly matters WHOSE blood it was, however, not for the life of me can I think why there'd be any cause to think it was Jeremy's.

It mattered a lot who the blood belonged to and as for me mentioning Jeremy,on most threads he's had the blame for everything else.

[Jane]

It mattered a lot who the blood belonged to and as for me mentioning Jeremy,on most threads he's had the blame for everything else.

But if it wasn't investigated, it was NOBODIES blood!!!! I really don't believe the case would unravel because of blood on a sock. Your view of Jeremy is somewhat emotional. It isn't unlikely that he'll be blamed on most threads which mention him. he was, after all, convicted of the crime, and most here believe the conviction to be sound.

[lookout]

But if it wasn't investigated, it was NOBODIES blood!!!! I really don't believe the case would unravel because of blood on a sock. Your view of Jeremy is somewhat emotional. It isn't unlikely that he'll be blamed on most threads which mention him. he was, after all, convicted of the crime, and most here believe the conviction to be sound.

All I can say is that you're in for a rude awakening.

[Caroline]

All I can say is that you're in for a rude awakening.

Rubbish! 

[lookout]

Rubbish! 

Ohhhh,you can say what you like. The difference is,I can say things with confidence,can you ?

[Jane]

Ohhhh,you can say what you like. The difference is,I can say things with confidence,can you ?

You can say it with confidence but confidence doesn't go hand in hand with being right. I was once confidently assert that the earth was flat. Thank God some had the humility and sense to change their minds.

[Caroline]

Ohhhh,you can say what you like. The difference is,I can say things with confidence,can you ?

You can say and pretend what you like. I am 100% confident that Jeremy Bamber will never get out because he murdered 5 members of his family out of complete and utter greed!

[lookout]

You can say it with confidence but confidence doesn't go hand in hand with being right. I was once confidently assert that the earth was flat. Thank God some had the humility and sense to change their minds.

 The very mention of earth being a planet tells us that it isn't flat ? Something we all know from childhood ? That's an easy one.