Author Topic: Julie's WS the day after the massacre. Why wasn't Bamber accused ?  (Read 3535 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44411
She was Bamber's girlfriend.

The police were treating it as murder/suicide.

Bamber was 'terribly confident'.

She loved Bamber.

She was in shock.

She was 20 years old.

She was not asked by the police about the possibility it was Bamber. 

She (apparently) wanted to be the lady of the manor.

She refused to believe Bamber's claim about MM. As knew Bamber didn't have £2,000.

She felt if MM didn't do it, her accusation would collapse.

She would get into trouble if not believed. Perhaps charged which could effect her teaching career.

She had no friends or family to discuss the issue with and give her advice.

Bamber would leave her if she accused him.

She was grieving.

She wanted to let relatives grieve rather than make claims about a grieving Bamber.

She could approach the police at a more appropriate time.

If Bamber was guilty, the police would find out for themselves. She can engage if approached in the future.

Bamber was around and there was a lot of commotion.

Her WS was short. What's on it is true and not disputed.

She was worried about being implicated, knowing about Bamber's hatred and different plans. Again maybe effecting her teaching career.

Stan Jones said he should have pushed her more.

She wanted to assist in other ways. Identifying the bodies. Consoling the relatives.

She planned to speak to the police privately within a few days. This turned into a month as Bamber whisked her around England and Amsterdam.

There was no suggestion Bamber was the killer. The press were reporting it as murder/suicide.

Julie said on television that Bamber told her 'there was nothing she could have done to prevent it, and nothing she could do now'.

The police hardly spent any time with her. They had more important issues and people to speak to. 

If it was Bamber, then he must have covered his tracks. So why bother ?

She had not engaged with Bamber much since the massacre. Being taken to Catford police station, then only being around Bamber when lots of other people were around him. So not able to determine whether, as one poster said, Bamber mentioned MM as a joke.

The relatives were not accusing Bamber.

If Bamber told her about MM after her WS, all she could mention was Bamber's hatred and aborted plans. Which on it's own doesn't make him guilty.

« Last Edit: January 06, 2016, 11:56:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
"She planned to speak to the police privately within a few days. This turned into a month as Bamber whisked her around England and Amsterdam"

Really ? Is that what you believe ?

She went with the police to ID the bodies . Then would have been the time to go to the police. In her OWN statement she said on the night she knew he had done it.

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
"She planned to speak to the police privately within a few days. This turned into a month as Bamber whisked her around England and Amsterdam"

Really ? Is that what you believe ?

She went with the police to ID the bodies . Then would have been the time to go to the police. In her OWN statement she said on the night she knew he had done it.

Jan I have never been able to understand how Julie could bring herself to identify the two wee boys if she knew her current boyfriend was responsible for killing them one would have thought seeing the boys would have driven her straight to the police to tell them what she knew

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17252
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
what sort of person does that.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44411
Jan I have never been able to understand how Julie could bring herself to identify the two wee boys if she knew her current boyfriend was responsible for killing them one would have thought seeing the boys would have driven her straight to the police to tell them what she knew

Who else was available ?
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Who else was available ?





The relatives ?

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44411




The relatives ?

Why didn't they then ? Apart from the fact the were grieving.

I thought Julie went along with AE ?
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13787
Jan I have never been able to understand how Julie could bring herself to identify the two wee boys if she knew her current boyfriend was responsible for killing them one would have thought seeing the boys would have driven her straight to the police to tell them what she knew

JM didn't know anything at the time. Jeremy would not have been foolish enough to A. Tell her then B. Dump her after telling her.

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
JM didn't know anything at the time. Jeremy would not have been foolish enough to A. Tell her then B. Dump her after telling her.

David
I do agree with you or maybe Jan's theory is right she was in on it with him then grassed him up to save herself when she knew the police were suspicious of JB.

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Who else was available ?

Adam
cannot see how that answers my post at all. .

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44411
Re: Julie's WS the day after the massacre. Why wasn't Bamber accused ?
« Reply #10 on: January 06, 2016, 03:21:PM »
David
I do agree with you or maybe Jan's theory is right she was in on it with him then grassed him up to save herself when she knew the police were suspicious of JB.

Either way, it shows why her first WS supported Bamber and her second WS is true. She just missed out the bits where she encouraged Bamber. Although supplying him with sleeping pills is encouragement.

Personally my 30 reasons above highlight why she didn't rat on Bamber on day one. And my other thread shows why her WS submitted to court is the truth. I doubt she was expecting Bamber to do anything.


« Last Edit: January 06, 2016, 03:24:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: Julie's WS the day after the massacre. Why wasn't Bamber accused ?
« Reply #11 on: January 06, 2016, 03:21:PM »
David
I do agree with you or maybe Jan's theory is right she was in on it with him then grassed him up to save herself when she knew the police were suspicious of JB.
Hi Susan, I agree with you, jan and anyone else who thinks the same. I have thought for quite a while now that it was very possible that JM was in it which is why she knew all about it in the first place but when she saw everything slipping away from her and others usurping her and their relationship falling apart, she cut her losses and turned against him to save herself and before he took her down with him....... but I could be wrong  ;D
« Last Edit: January 06, 2016, 03:41:PM by maggie »

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: Julie's WS the day after the massacre. Why wasn't Bamber accused ?
« Reply #12 on: January 06, 2016, 03:26:PM »
Hi Susan, I agree with you, jan and anyone else who thinks the same  I have thought for quite a while now that it was very possible that JM was in it which is why she knew all about it in the first place but when she saw everything slipping away from her and others usurping her and their relationship falling apart, she cut her losses and turned against him to save herself and before he took her down with him....... but I could be wrong  ;D


Hahaha Maggie we could all be wrong but guess we will never know :))
« Last Edit: January 06, 2016, 03:42:PM by maggie »

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33782
Re: Julie's WS the day after the massacre. Why wasn't Bamber accused ?
« Reply #13 on: January 06, 2016, 03:44:PM »
Hi Susan, I agree with jan. I have thought for quite a while now that it was very possible that JM was in it which is why she knew all about it in the first place but when she saw everything slipping away from her and others usurping her and their relationship falling apart, she cut her losses and turned against him to save herself and before he took her down with him....... but I could be wrong  ;D


Maggie, as I posted on another thread, she may have thought a month was long enough -having taken her into his confidence, involving her in various illegal activities in which she'd given him her full support and loyalty- for him to have made them "official" with a suitably sized ring. When it didn't happen and she suffered the humiliation of hearing him arranging to meet another female, it may have dawned on her that her loyalty was misplaced.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: Julie's WS the day after the massacre. Why wasn't Bamber accused ?
« Reply #14 on: January 06, 2016, 03:50:PM »

Maggie, as I posted on another thread, she may have thought a month was long enough -having taken her into his confidence, involving her in various illegal activities in which she'd given him her full support and loyalty- for him to have made them "official" with a suitably sized ring. When it didn't happen and she suffered the humiliation of hearing him arranging to meet another female, it may have dawned on her that her loyalty was misplaced.
I remember ages ago when I was convinced JB was innocent, either Vic or Hartley posted up that 'they were a couple of toe rags' or something very like that.
The phrase stuck in my brain and developed over time. I think that is very possibly the truth, although I just MAY be wrong and am always open to new developments.