Who Asked For The Carpets (etc.) To Be Burned?

[guest154]

Lookout's theory is wrapped around a rubrics cube that's had all the stickers removed and put back in the wrong place! 

I'm starting to wonder if she is serious. 

[Alias]

I'm starting to wonder if she is serious. 

Having fun?

[Alias]

No but he ordered the carpets and bedding to be burned and the house cleaned. It wasn't EP - it was Jeremy.

In the real world, he couldn´t have done that, and he did not

[Alias]

You are making it up as you go along, Caroline!

[Jane]

In the real world, he couldn´t have done that, and he did not

As the "real world" means different things to different people, it maybe just as well we have statements to rely on. Perhaps you can find one which corroborates your belief.

[Jane]

Which tells me that Neville had left everything to Jeremy to relay his message to the police. Nothing sinister there except that if only Jeremy had remembered to think about his own part in all this.

Lookout, there are certain facts which are undeniable. One of them being however much you believe in your naive and lazy boy's innocence, his behaviour, after Nevill's alleged call, given it's OBVIOUS urgency and despite you saying he didn't spell that out in words of one syllable, was wholly and totally inappropriate.

 As you're now claiming that he was relying on Jeremy to call them, I feel as if I maybe sensing a bit of a wobble in your, once, firmly held belief in Nevill's alleged call to the police. This being so, he won't have failed, in his alleged call to him, to convey to Jeremy, the urgency of the situation, making what Jeremy chose to do next even more inappropriate.

It occurs to me, that unless piggy wigs develop wings and something new and outstanding to prove his innocence is discovered, all you're going to be left with is an intuitive belief in his innocence. I think it would help enormously if you were to write everything down in a factual way -including how you believe Sheila accomplished the massacre- and bring all the pieces together. I won't pretend it isn't going to be risky because if you do it honestly, you may just discover that Sheila couldn't have done it. However, if you want to PROVE that Jeremy is innocent rather than just repeating it as a mantra, it could be a risk worth taking.

[lookout]

Lookout, there are certain facts which are undeniable. One of them being however much you believe in your naive and lazy boy's innocence, his behaviour, after Nevill's alleged call, given it's OBVIOUS urgency and despite you saying he didn't spell that out in words of one syllable, was wholly and totally inappropriate.

 As you're now claiming that he was relying on Jeremy to call them, I feel as if I maybe sensing a bit of a wobble in your, once, firmly held belief in Nevill's alleged call to the police. This being so, he won't have failed, in his alleged call to him, to convey to Jeremy, the urgency of the situation, making what Jeremy chose to do next even more inappropriate.

It occurs to me, that unless piggy wigs develop wings and something new and outstanding to prove his innocence is discovered, all you're going to be left with is an intuitive belief in his innocence. I think it would help enormously if you were to write everything down in a factual way -including how you believe Sheila accomplished the massacre- and bring all the pieces together. I won't pretend it isn't going to be risky because if you do it honestly, you may just discover that Sheila couldn't have done it. However, if you want to PROVE that Jeremy is innocent rather than just repeating it as a mantra, it could be a risk worth taking.

I can't PROVE that Jeremy is innocent  ( except that I believe and have faith in him ) the same as you can't PROVE that he's guilty,unless you count that old chestnut of " behaviour " as being part of his guilt.
Jeremy himself was not believed for telling the truth ( his word against a mob who wanted to see him jailed for reasons of their own ) was that reason enough to send him to a " death sentence ?"

I explained years ago how I'd imagined that Sheila had committed the murders and I'm not going to fall for it again,being torn to shreds,so what's the point ? Besides,I know when someone is lying-------and Jeremy ISN'T ,it's the rest of you who are with your outlandish theories. The Brothers Grimm would have been jealous !!

[Jane]

I can't PROVE that Jeremy is innocent  ( except that I believe and have faith in him ) the same as you can't PROVE that he's guilty,unless you count that old chestnut of " behaviour " as being part of his guilt.
Jeremy himself was not believed for telling the truth ( his word against a mob who wanted to see him jailed for reasons of their own ) was that reason enough to send him to a " death sentence ?"

I explained years ago how I'd imagined that Sheila had committed the murders and I'm not going to fall for it again,being torn to shreds,so what's the point ? Besides,I know when someone is lying-------and Jeremy ISN'T ,it's the rest of you who are with your outlandish theories. The Brothers Grimm would have been jealous !!

 So you keep insisting, however, your ability to tell lies from truth becomes doubtful in the extreme when you choose to believe an ex an very unlamented member of this forum, a PROVEN liar, over one of the most honest people on this board who has frequently put herself out to give you assistance. Jeremy would seem more practised a telling lies than are you at detecting them.

I can go with "a mob" -although that's not how I see them- wishing to see Jeremy convicted. Does not everyone wish to see the guilty behind bars? What I CAN'T go with is that all and sundry knowingly conspired to get an innocent man convicted.

[lookout]

So you keep insisting, however, your ability to tell lies from truth becomes doubtful in the extreme when you choose to believe an ex an very unlamented member of this forum, a PROVEN liar, over one of the most honest people on this board who has frequently put herself out to give you assistance. Jeremy would seem more practised a telling lies than are you at detecting them.

I can go with "a mob" -although that's not how I see them- wishing to see Jeremy convicted. Does not everyone wish to see the guilty behind bars? What I CAN'T go with is that all and sundry knowingly conspired to get an innocent man convicted.

I'm sure you'll be proved wrong in due course. However,if/when it comes to that I won't be jumping through hoops or screeching in an hysterical manner,but instead I'll be giving myself a quiet pat on the back at having the ability to tell truth from lies which this case in mainly based on.

[Steve_uk]

I'm sure you'll be proved wrong in due course. However,if/when it comes to that I won't be jumping through hoops or screeching in an hysterical manner,but instead I'll be giving myself a quiet pat on the back at having the ability to tell truth from lies which this case in mainly based on.

Lookout at least you and Mike have put your theories forward,unlike Trudi who hasn't yet ventured into specifics.

[lookout]

Lookout at least you and Mike have put your theories forward,unlike Trudi who hasn't yet ventured into specifics.

Steve,I've been thinking about something else concerning the bodies of the deceased. How was it that an officer had said " a further 3 bodies " without first checking ? Someone must have counted only 3 ?
What made the officer so sure that there " were a further 3 bodies ?" What makes matters worse is that an officer/s actually radioed to base saying that there were a further 3 bodies,which meant that TWO were found on entry !!

I much prefer to put my own slant on things rather than following what others say,or indeed what the court conclusion came to.

[guest154]

I'm sure you'll be proved wrong in due course. However,if/when it comes to that I won't be jumping through hoops or screeching in an hysterical manner,but instead I'll be giving myself a quiet pat on the back at having the ability to tell truth from lies which this case in mainly based on.

 

[lookout]

Yes,ludicrous isn't it ? Senior officers with " dyslexia ". Tut tut.

[guest154]

Steve,I've been thinking about something else concerning the bodies of the deceased. How was it that an officer had said " a further 3 bodies " without first checking ? Someone must have counted only 3 ?
What made the officer so sure that there " were a further 3 bodies ?" What makes matters worse is that an officer/s actually radioed to base saying that there were a further 3 bodies,which meant that TWO were found on entry !!

I much prefer to put my own slant on things rather than following what others say,or indeed what the court conclusion came to.

Yeah, we know.  Two COLP reports, one hidden, mysterious claims on autopsy reports only you can see. Tapes of Nevilles call being destroyed, that only you know about. A "source" telling you erroneous information about a crime scene photo of Neville.

Your "slant" appears alot.

[Steve_uk]

Unfortunately the Dixon of Dock Green era of policing is gone forever. I really can't explain this except it was early in the morning and maybe the people involved were half asleep. It wouldn't be the first time people were in positions of authority who couldn't do their job, or people at the top promoted beyond their station.