Will there ever be another CCRC hearing ?

[notsure]

One VERY simple reason, Notsure. NONE of it was necessary. There was no need to frame anyone. They had a culprit. It was an open and shut case. It really didn't matter what the relatives said, they weren't there. All the police had to do was stick to their story. Why would it have been challenged any more, at this point, 30 years on, than the changed story is?

ok so does that mean it was necessary in other cases of mojs. Ive been reading about several lately. None of them were necessary .

i think it mattered very much what the relatives said, they were not going to let it drop and went higher up the police chain, the eatons and boutflours had a lot to lose. They became firm friends with police having them for dinner and drinks.

[notsure]

Listing MOJ's, or potential MOJ's which some of them are, doesn't create a thoughtful or convincing argument.

If I was to list GUILTY men and women in prison it wouldn't make Bamber guilty, or the argument of his guilt anymore firm.

WHAT you are joking arent you ! The judicial system needs looking at and  this case is littered with edited statements, family members intereferring with the case when they had no right to. Police making a complete hahh of it. Bloomin heck

[Jane]

ok so does that mean it was necessary in other cases of mojs. Ive been reading about several lately. None of them were necessary .

i think it mattered very much what the relatives said, they were not going to let it drop and went higher up the police chain, the eatons and boutflours had a lot to lose. They became firm friends with police having them for dinner and drinks.

I think you'll become even more Unsure if you try to take on board every MoJ.

I'm uncertain about the source of the rest of the information you give, but I'm fairly certain it isn't documented.

[lookout]

Perhaps if you nit-picked your way through the case instead of through peoples posts you might just be enlightened !!

[notsure]

No  I am not joking, we have different opinons on the case, that's all. You seem to have the view of a typical supporter which is anti police and anti relatives, it's not a new argument but it isn't one I agree with.

Listing MOJ's doesn't make Bamber any more innocent, his case stands on its own merits. I am sure if you were to look at other murders cases there would be discrepancies in logs and statements if you nit picked enough - it doesn't make Bamber special and it certainly doesn't make him  innocent.

ok so why oh why are we still debating this case 30 years later if its stands on its own merits.

[lookout]

 Ha,there's no answer to that one. Not from the guilters anyway.

[notsure]

No  I am not joking, we have different opinons on the case, that's all. You seem to have the view of a typical supporter which is anti police and anti relatives, it's not a new argument but it isn't one I agree with.

Listing MOJ's doesn't make Bamber any more innocent, his case stands on its own merits. I am sure if you were to look at other murders cases there would be discrepancies in logs and statements if you nit picked enough - it doesn't make Bamber special and it certainly doesn't make him  innocent.

why would i be anti police and relatives. I dont know any of them or the police involved. Ive made my opinion based on what is on this forum about this case. Its sort of opened up my interest in mojs, and to be honest i have found it all rather shocking thatit isnt as uncommmon as i thought.

[Caroline]

ok so why oh why are we still debating this case 30 years later if its stands on its own merits.

People still talk about Lord Lucan and it's pretty clear he killed the nanny! I guess we're still debating it because he's never had the guts to admit it. 

[maggie]

Have edited this thread, PLEASE refrain from abuse and personal arguments.

ALSO

PLEASE respect the relatives and friends who have suffered and continue to suffer so much due to the Hillsborough disaster and try not to use it for point scoring against others.  Thank you.   JFT96 YNWA

[Caroline]

WHAT you are joking arent you ! The judicial system needs looking at and  this case is littered with edited statements, family members intereferring with the case when they had no right to. Police making a complete hahh of it. Bloomin heck

Edited statements - which ones?? The family relayed their concerns, wouldn't you if you thought a killer of your family might go free? of course they had a right.

[guest154]

Have edited this thread, PLEASE refrain from abuse and personal arguments.

ALSO

PLEASE respect the relatives and friends who have suffered and continue to suffer so much due to the Hillsborough disaster and try not to use it for point scoring against others.  Thank you.   JF96 YNWA

Did you have to delete all the posts that were talking about the Bamber case? Couldn't just edit the ones that were talking about Hillsborough?

Edited statements - which ones?? The family relayed their concerns, wouldn't you if you thought a killer of your family might go free? of course they had a right.

Exactly what I said, but the whole post is gone.

[guest154]

ok so why oh why are we still debating this case 30 years later if its stands on its own merits.

Already answered this but it must have been accidentally deleted with the rest.


People debate this case because there is so much more into it than innocent/guilty. There are the recent appeals for people to paw through, some find that interesting.  Alot of the people that believe in Bambers guilt post here to correct the falsehoods some supporters and the OS post.

[maggie]

Did you have to delete all the posts that were talking about the Bamber case? Couldn't just edit the ones that were talking about Hillsborough?

Exactly what I said, but the whole post is gone.

The problem often is that they are all mixed up together and can't stand alone. 
I apologise to anyone who has had a decent post deleted, I do my best to save what I can but many of the posts were very personal and nothing to do with the thread title.

[Jane]

Edited statements - which ones?? The family relayed their concerns, wouldn't you if you thought a killer of your family might go free? of course they had a right.

Caroline, you make an EXCELLENT point. It's worthy of greater consideration. Notsure has complained about the relatives interfering but I feel very certain that if we suspected someone, in our own families, of committing a truly heinous crime and it looked as if they were going to get away with it Scot-free, we'd move heaven and earth, leave no stone unturned, and drag out everything we could about that person in order to make the police look in that person's direction.

[Adam]

Jan used to respond to my points in red. Which I didn't mind and admired her tenacity.

However she seems to have given up with this. To be honest it's not really possible to argue about the points in my recent threads. I mean the 24 disadvantages of Julie attempting to frame Bamber, are disadvantages. There are no two ways about it.