Trudie Benjamin - Top 5 reasons why Bamber is innocent.

[Caroline]

Why don't you start up a collection backing EP ?

I don't think EP need a collection.

What do you imagine they will be selling in the Bamber shop? I reckon they will certainly stock some 'mugs' - Sorry, I couldn't resist.

[guest154]

Why don't you start up a collection backing EP ?

EP don't need it. They've proven their case. It's not up for Jeremy and his bunch to prove theirs, they may be able to fool some people - but not many!

I don't think EP need a collection.

What do you imagine they will be selling in the Bamber shop? I reckon they will certainly stock some 'mugs' - Sorry, I couldn't resist.

T-shirts with a photo of Bamber on. The photo will be from '85 not from today.

[Stephanie]

 On the contrary,it's a very accurate description when it's considered that an injustice has been done. It's mainly those who agree with every aspect of the law that consider it to be inaccurate.

I don't believe "with every expect of law" it's down to interpretation. I know how evidence can and is presented in a court of law in relation to a murder trial, for example. I know the evidence can and is manipulated and I know mistakes are made by experts, for example. I've seen boxes and boxes of case papers gathered as part of a murder investigation and more boxes with the prosecution and defences case set out. I'm not green.

I don't believe Jeremy Bamber has suffered an injustice. I've always believed he was guilty. Since I've unravelled the truth regarding the SH case, I feel confident the similarities between the two cases only lead to one conclusion. Jeremy Bamber is guilty and using his 'charms' to exploit and manipulate people.

[Stephanie]

I can't imagine ANY of them going against what the law considers when going into business.
I can guarantee there won't be any jiggery-pokery where finances are concerned and EVERY penny will be accounted for. Trudi's husband has had 16 years experience of directorship so he's not likely to renege in any way.

It's just sour grapes,Hartley because they happen to be on the right track of making people sit up and take notice.

I don't believe Hartley is suggesting 'jiggery-pokery where finances are concerned' is what the JB Campaign Ltd company will be doing?

But they could well indeed pay themselves a fee of some description and cover their travelling costs (petrol, food) to Essex from donations, for example.

Who pays for the videos to be produced for example? Or are they funding this out of their own pockets? Maybe the person who produces the videos does it for free or indeed they (company) edit them and produce them for free?

If they visit Jeremy in prison they could of course also claim their costs back via the donations/Ltd company.

[lookout]

I don't believe "with every expect of law" it's down to interpretation. I know how evidence can and is presented in a court of law in relation to a murder trial, for example. I know the evidence can and is manipulated and I know mistakes are made by experts, for example. I've seen boxes and boxes of case papers gathered as part of a murder investigation and more boxes with the prosecution and defences case set out. I'm not green.

I don't believe Jeremy Bamber has suffered an injustice. I've always believed he was guilty. Since I've unravelled the truth regarding the SH case, I feel confident the similarities between the two cases only lead to one conclusion. Jeremy Bamber is guilty and using his 'charms' to exploit and manipulate people.

JB is by no means stupid and would have certainly realised long before now that a " confession " would possibly have seen him a free man,or else a reduction in category to give him more freedom within a more open prison. It's because there's no confession coming forthwith beyond 30 years of incarceration that everyone involved becomes bloody-minded in their thoughts of him being a " dangerous psychopath "(,covering the knowledge that some might think he's innocent), to justify their reason for keeping him in jail. NOBODY likes to admit that they're wrong,but there comes a time that the longer this goes on,and the more JB keeps pleading innocence,that something has to give,somewhere.
As Poppy said,say it was a member of your family,would you took what the police said as gospel ?

No two cases are the same when they're years apart especially when you try to match the cases up,they're by no means copycat ones which is why so many are falling through the net and ending up as MOJ's.

[maggie]

I don't believe Hartley is suggesting 'jiggery-pokery where finances are concerned' is what the JB Campaign Ltd company will be doing?

But they could well indeed pay themselves a fee of some description and cover their travelling costs (petrol, food) to Essex from donations, for example.

Who pays for the videos to be produced for example? Or are they funding this out of their own pockets? Maybe the person who produces the videos does it for free or indeed they (company) edit them and produce them for free?

If they visit Jeremy in prison they could of course also claim their costs back via the donations/Ltd company.

I don't see it matters how they run their business as long as it's legal and within the law, which I'm sure it is. 
It doesn't make JB any more or less guilty. 
Think this thread has gone way off topic.

[guest2181]

I don't believe Hartley is suggesting 'jiggery-pokery where finances are concerned' is what the JB Campaign Ltd company will be doing?

But they could well indeed pay themselves a fee of some description and cover their travelling costs (petrol, food) to Essex from donations, for example.

Who pays for the videos to be produced for example? Or are they funding this out of their own pockets? Maybe the person who produces the videos does it for free or indeed they (company) edit them and produce them for free?

If they visit Jeremy in prison they could of course also claim their costs back via the donations/Ltd company.

Correct.

To go further, the system that they appear to have set up is open to abuse and is not controlled or audited, in a way a charity would be for example.

[lookout]

I think there are much bigger fish to fry,Hartley. Amazon ? Google et al ?

Whatever " abuse " you're thinking about,it's small potatoes and not worth mentioning. Those involved will have covered every angle.

[Stephanie]

JB is by no means stupid and would have certainly realised long before now that a " confession " would possibly have seen him a free man,or else a reduction in category to give him more freedom within a more open prison. It's because there's no confession coming forthwith beyond 30 years of incarceration that everyone involved becomes bloody-minded in their thoughts of him being a " dangerous psychopath "(,covering the knowledge that some might think he's innocent), to justify their reason for keeping him in jail. NOBODY likes to admit that they're wrong,but there comes a time that the longer this goes on,and the more JB keeps pleading innocence,that something has to give,somewhere.
As Poppy said,say it was a member of your family,would you took what the police said as gospel ?

No two cases are the same when they're years apart especially when you try to match the cases up,they're by no means copycat ones which is why so many are falling through the net and ending up as MOJ's.

I believe Jeremy has missed his opportunity to come clean about his crimes. I further believe he wouldn't confess due to the danger he would then be in from other inmates. Remember some of the men in prison with him will never be released either - so they would feel they would have nothing to lose by attacking him, for example. And then there are some men who wouldn't care if time was added to their tarif. They would see attacking Jeremy as a way to move up the hierarchy.

I have admitted publicly I was wrong about the SH case. Does that not count? And SH was my husband who I believed was innocent so your interpretation of Poppy's statement does not apply to me.

You appear to be missing my points regarding the two case? I'm unsure why you are choosing to do this?

I'm 'not bloody minded' either - nor do I believe all those claiming innocence are guilty. I'm in no doubt some convictions are not only unsafe but that the convicted is indeed innocent in every sense of the word but NOT Jeremy Bamber!

Because I believe Jeremy Bamber to be guilty and has maintained innocence this long, I not only believe he is a psychopath I also believe him to be to be a coward.

[Stephanie]

Correct.

To go further, the system that they appear to have set up is open to abuse and is not controlled or audited, in a way a charity would be for example.

I agree with you. I am not however suggesting they are crooks.

[Caroline]

JB is by no means stupid and would have certainly realised long before now that a " confession " would possibly have seen him a free man,or else a reduction in category to give him more freedom within a more open prison. It's because there's no confession coming forthwith beyond 30 years of incarceration that everyone involved becomes bloody-minded in their thoughts of him being a " dangerous psychopath "(,covering the knowledge that some might think he's innocent), to justify their reason for keeping him in jail. NOBODY likes to admit that they're wrong,but there comes a time that the longer this goes on,and the more JB keeps pleading innocence,that something has to give,somewhere.
As Poppy said,say it was a member of your family,would you took what the police said as gospel ?

No two cases are the same when they're years apart especially when you try to match the cases up,they're by no means copycat ones which is why so many are falling through the net and ending up as MOJ's.

Poppy's comment is a little ill advised, given what happened to Jeremy's family.

[Stephanie]

Poppy's comment is a little ill advised, given what happened to Jeremy's family.

Agreed!

[Stephanie]

I don't see it matters how they run their business as long as it's legal and within the law, which I'm sure it is. 
It doesn't make JB any more or less guilty. 
Think this thread has gone way off topic.

If you look at the OS Maggie it is misleading -

It states on the home page -

"The 10k Challenge

Jeremy urgently requires donations for forensic works. Donate today!"

Underneath there is a donate button which took me to paypal

http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk

[guest2181]

Correct.

To go further, the system that they appear to have set up is open to abuse and is not controlled or audited, in a way a charity would be for example.

It also sticks out that they have gone to considerable effort to position themselves as 'THE' official campaign team, attacking anyone who may potentially tread on their toes.
They refer to this very forum and list it as being unsupported, although I'm guessing that 'despised' would be a more accurate description.

There is also a strange notice which indicates that they have all the legal representation that the will ever need and warn people off from contacting them or JB with a view to assist with his legal representation. This is no doubt a nod toward Jackie Preece who assisted in bringing Simon Mckay on board which in turn reduced the campaign teams influence/closeness for a period of time. NGB's involvement with the legal side of things, even if it was only minor/unofficial was probably not welcomed by the campaign team either, especially with his involvement in this forum.

The whole jealousy thing is very strange.

[Stephanie]

It also sticks out that they have gone to considerable effort to position themselves as 'THE' official campaign team, attacking anyone who may potentially tread on their toes.
They refer to this very forum and list it as being unsupported, although I'm guessing that 'despised' would be a more accurate description.

There is also a strange notice which indicates that they have all the legal representation that the will ever need and warn people off from contacting them or JB with a view to assist with his legal representation. This is no doubt a nod toward Jackie Preece who assisted in bringing Simon Mckay on board which in turn reduced the campaign teams influence/closeness for a period of time. NGB's involvement with the legal side of things, even if it was only minor/unofficial was probably not welcomed by the campaign team either, especially with his involvement in this forum.

The whole jealousy thing is very strange.

I think I've touched on this before?

I don't think it's about jealousy per se - for me it's clear Jeremy Bamber is orchestrating the entire thing. I'm in no doubt discussions have been made between the CT but IMHO the responsibility lies squarely at the feet of Bamber. It is he who knows the ins and outs of what has gone on before.

http://www.sott.net/article/298624-The-way-of-the-psychopath

For me, the behaviours you have described Hartley are as a result of Jeremy Bambers input and show how his CT have been and are still being controlled. I'm not knocking them for this btw.

They appear to be moving forward with the campaign in the belief they have learned from previous mistakes and it is why they have made these statements. Imo.