'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.

[Adam]

You're changing the subject. What inaccuracies are you trying to wriggle out of this time?

I don't try to wriggle out of any inaccuracies. If I was I would do what you do, and hide by not creating threads for people to comment on.

Everything in my thread post was said in the documentary. Either by the narrator or several other people who were interviewed. So what's inaccurate ?

[Adam]

Obviously Bamber's supporters can either accept the points in the documentary. Or dispute every one of my 26 points. Which Jan attempted to do. But surely not all of the 26 points are wrong.

All the points seem correct or plausible to me, such as Bamber phoning Julie at 9.50pm and 3am. Or the caravan break in.  These happened.

[Adam]

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3729.0.html

Julie's WS states about MM putting the bible next to Sheila. Surely this information was not in the media. The police must have told her.

[Jane]

I don't try to wriggle out of any inaccuracies. If I was I would do what you do, and hide by not creating threads for people to comment on.

Everything in my thread post was said in the documentary. Either by the narrator or several other people who were interviewed. So what's inaccurate ?

SO!!!! Why would that make accurate some of what it said........................any more than claiming that because you create a thread, all you say in your posts is accurate? My perception of your treads is that you couldn't care less whether people respond or not. Your raison d'etre seems to be more about proclaiming your own beliefs as correct and awarding yourself kudos.

[Jane]

Obviously Bamber's supporters can either accept the points in the documentary. Or dispute every one of my 26 points. Which Jan attempted to do. But surely not all of the 26 points are wrong.

All the points seem correct or plausible to me, such as Bamber phoning Julie at 9.50pm and 3am. Or the caravan break in.  These happened.

And colouring his hair the day before the massacre, despite Julie saying otherwise?

[Jane]

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3729.0.html

Julie's WS states about MM putting the bible next to Sheila. Surely this information was not in the media. The police must have told her.

WHY?  Why should not Jeremy have told her A) that MM had done it or even B) that he'd done it?

[Adam]

SO!!!! Why would that make accurate some of what it said........................any more than claiming that because you create a thread, all you say in your posts is accurate? My perception of your treads is that you couldn't care less whether people respond or not. Your raison d'etre seems to be more about proclaiming your own beliefs as correct and awarding yourself kudos.

I just posted what was said,  for discussion.

People are perfectly entitled to say Miller was lying when he said 'Bamber controlled the scene'. Or Bews was lying when he said Bamber instantly 'moved things up a notch'. Or BW was lying when Neville told her he 'may get shot'.

Seems that everyone is lying.

Anyway, most the documentary is factual. Backed up by sources, some from Bamber himself.

[Adam]

WHY?  Why should not Jeremy have told her A) that MM had done it or even B) that he'd done it?

How could Bamber have told her ? He's innocent.

[Jane]

I just posted what was said,  for discussion.

People are perfectly entitled to say Miller was lying when he said 'Bamber controlled the scene'. Or Bews was lying when he said Bamber instantly 'moved things up a notch'. Or BW was lying when Neville told her he 'may get shot'.

Seems that everyone is lying.

Anyway, most the documentary is factual. Backed up by sources, some from Bamber himself.

Well it's a factual documentary with commentary from several people. Several of whom were related to the case or in contact with the family.

All of it seems correct and is backed up with other sources.

Seems you now changed your mind. That's fine by me. In fact, it's good. In your first post you insist that "it's a factual documentary......................all of it seems correct.................backed up by other sources" but later you tell us that only "most of the documentary is factual" which is what I told you in the first place.

[Jane]

How could Bamber have told her ? He's innocent.

That's a mind change TOO far, Adam.

[maggie]

Seems you now changed your mind. That's fine by me. In fact, it's good. In your first post you insist that "it's a factual documentary......................all of it seems correct.................backed up by other sources" but later you tell us that only "most of the documentary is factual" which is what I told you in the first place.

Sorry Adam, I just find these documentaries sensationalise and only include what suits their aim.  They leave out anything contradictory although those of use who have studied the case over time know very well it is contradictory on many levels and throws up a lot of questions.  From what I have heard and read about it, this documentary is no more convincing than something you would read in the Sun or the like. imo

[notsure]

Sorry Adam, I just find these documentaries sensationalise and only include what suits their aim.  They leave out anything contradictory although those of use who have studied the case over time know very well it is contradictory on many levels and throws up a lot of questions.  From what I have heard and read about it, this documentary is no more convincing than something you would read in the Sun or the like. imo

totally agree maggie.

[Jan]

A few questions for you Adam

Have you EVER doubted that Jeremy was guilty?

Why do you think it necessary to use falsehoods or assumptions to prove him guilty when he is in Jail serving a full life sentence?

Why do you seem  to alienate even people who have changed from innocent to guilty ? As if the fact they EVER had a doubt in their minds is somehow an insult in your mind?

How and why did you become interested in the case in the first place if it is so black and white?

[David1819]

I found this documentary rather boring TBH.

With the right director the WHF murders would make a great film

[Adam]

Sorry Adam, I just find these documentaries sensationalise and only include what suits their aim.  They leave out anything contradictory although those of use who have studied the case over time know very well it is contradictory on many levels and throws up a lot of questions.  From what I have heard and read about it, this documentary is no more convincing than something you would read in the Sun or the like. imo

Well it's the most recent documentary on the case. With lots of new information and several 'Primary' sources, which Jan demands. Although she is now saying the 'primary'sources all lied.

You haven't created any threads in the last two years. But if there are apparently lots of valid questions, feel free to ask them.