Will there ever be another CCRC hearing ?

[Adam]

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.standard.co.uk/panewsfeeds/bamber-murder-appeal-bid-rejected-7681464.html&ved=0ahUKEwjZjqnf_bPKAhXhvHIKHUPPAGI4KBAWCDkwCQ&usg=AFQjCNEtB20eYSRPE_PtxSJyzQnIFmgvIA&sig2=KlnH97xfRYHpUKwxECopzw


It looks like 'no'. As the  CCRC were quite dismissive of the 2012 application.

[Adam]

''The Criminal Cases Review Commission said that despite a lengthy and complex investigation, it "has not identified any evidence or legal argument that it considers capable of raising a real possibility that the Court of Appeal would quash the convictions".

[guest154]

I do not think so.

[Adam]

''The Commission said this was its final decision in its longest-running case''.

[Adam]

Giving its reasons in a 109-page statement, it said: "Matters of pure speculation or unsubstantiated allegation constitute neither new evidence nor new argument capable of giving rise to a real possibility that the Court of Appeal will quash a conviction. Neither can such a real possibility arise from the accumulation of multiple unsubstantiated allegations''

[David1819]

Jeremy has confirmed he will be submitting another application to the CCRC. I can imagine he will keep doing this for as long as he is in prison. In 25 years time we could be discussing his 15th CCRC submission 

I have also heard that there is currently a legal dispute between Jeremy and the CCRC arguing that they acted unlawfully in their in their 2012 decision. How this works I don't know 

[lookout]

The CCRC didn't even give JB a chance in 2012. They were a disgrace and not fit for purpose.

[Adam]

''The Commission is satisfied that nothing in the submissions made by and on behalf of Mr Bamber or any issues raised in the recent documentary can, either individually or cumulatively, give rise to a real possibility that the Court of Appeal would find any of Mr Bamber's convictions to be unsafe."

[guest154]

Jeremy has confirmed he will be submitting another application to the CCRC. I can imagine he will keep doing this for as long as he is in prison. In 25 years time we could be discussing his 15th CCRC submission 

I have also heard that there is currently a legal dispute between Jeremy and the CCRC arguing that they acted unlawfully in their in their 2012 decision. How this works I don't know 

Are you talking about the judicial review of the CCRC's decision? That has already been decided that the CCRC acted lawfully in their decision.

[lookout]

How did they know if they hadn't even looked ? There WAS new information that Simon McKay had submitted,so why didn't they take the trouble to read it all ?

[Jane]

I do not think so.

Maybe the one of the reasons that Jeremy carries on with his quest is because he's always referenced, in their reports, as MR Bamber.

[Jan]

We will have to wait and see. Simple answer and I don't see it warrants yet another thread.

[guest154]

How did they know if they hadn't even looked ? There WAS new information that Simon McKay had submitted,so why didn't they take the trouble to read it all ?

Of course they read it, it is their job to read and consider whatever is submitted. How would you know they hadn't read it? They will have given Jeremy's legal team a full report in response to the submissions.  "Didn't take the troublt to read it all." Your posts really are terrible, what a poor argument.

Maybe the one of the reasons that Jeremy carries on with his quest is because he's always referenced, in their reports, as MR Bamber.

Always nice to be called Mr. 

[Jan]

Of course they read it, it is their job to read and consider whatever is submitted. How would you know they hadn't read it? They will have given Jeremy's legal team a full report in response to the submissions.  "Didn't take the troublt to read it all." Your posts really are terrible, what a poor argument.

Always nice to be called Mr. 

Mr Mat   personal post - two wrongs don't make a right you know.

[guest154]

Mr Mat   personal post - two wrongs don't make a right you know.

Personal post about a post. Not about a poster. The post is terrible, the argument is terrible, weak and unsubstantiated.