what do jeremys demands for further tests on the silencer prove.

[Caroline]

Not in this case they don't. Take your blinkers off providing they're not welded.

I have looked at this from both sides Lookout so your comment is rather silly given that you haven't and believed he was innocent from the start, won't even consider an opposing view and prefer to argue your point based on intuition! If you EVER take off your blinkers, remove the rose coloured glasses with Jeremy's reflection imprinted on them too!

[lookout]

Manic ??

[Caroline]

I jolly well hope so Jackie. There must be enough in the kitty to at least fund that alone. It's Jeremy who's pushed for this. Would it not be a strange thing to do if you were guilty ? You'd be hoping and praying that nothing would be found. In actual fact,you wouldn't go to the trouble of mentioning it let alone pleading for scientists to go through forensic evidence.

You would if you knew you didn't use the silencer! I think Jackie is talking about Holly's theory, not anything organised by the CT - Jackie isn't party to any of that. You're setting yourself up for another disappointment Lookout.

[Caroline]

Manic ??

Totally! Can't believe anyone would fall for that rubbish! 

[lookout]

I have looked at this from both sides Lookout so your comment is rather silly given that you haven't and believed he was innocent from the start, won't even consider an opposing view and prefer to argue your point based on intuition! If you EVER take off your blinkers, remove the rose coloured glasses with Jeremy's reflection imprinted on them too!

And how would you know whether I had my " moments " or not ? You're too busy looking for loopholes to allow yourself the time to think anything but objectively.

[Caroline]

And how would you know whether I had my " moments " or not ? You're too busy looking for loopholes to allow yourself the time to think anything but objectively.

because you have SAID you have NEVER wavered! Your comment applies to you Lookout - you're anything BUT objective!

[Jane]

And how would you know whether I had my " moments " or not ? You're too busy looking for loopholes to allow yourself the time to think anything but objectively.

I'd suggest, Lookout, that it's you who are looking for the loopholes in the hope of finding one big enough for him to crawl out through.

[Steve_uk]

You would if you knew you didn't use the silencer! I think Jackie is talking about Holly's theory, not anything organised by the CT - Jackie isn't party to any of that. You're setting yourself up for another disappointment Lookout.

But doesn't this if true just open a whole new can of worms..

[lebaleb]

So someone deluded enough to mistake a a silencer for a feminine hygiene product would have the wherewithal to load a gun she has never seen/used before and orchestrate the murders of 4 people? By the way, I do know something about psychotic episodes and you are right, they are in the brain but side effects from drugs DO have a physical and disabling effect.

Yes they would.
The meds are a balancing act that can easily fail. I've seen it happen.

[Jane]

Yes they would.
The meds are a balancing act that can easily fail. I've seen it happen.

And just how many of those whose meds have been unbalanced have been women with access to guns?

[lookout]

You'll be hearing it a bit more soon because I'm kept up to speed too. 

[Caroline]

You'll be hearing it a bit more soon because I'm kept up to speed too. 

Of course you are 

[JackiePreece]

You would if you knew you didn't use the silencer! I think Jackie is talking about Holly's theory, not anything organised by the CT - Jackie isn't party to any of that. You're setting yourself up for another disappointment Lookout.

I suggest you hop over to red and discuss your theories directly with Holly
In your own time Caroline

[Caroline]

I suggest you hop over to red and discuss your theories directly with Holly
In your own time Caroline

Errrr, are you blind? 

[mike tesko]

The fact of the matter is this:-

There existed three sound moderators, silencers, or suppressors, or whatever god dam name anybody wants to give to 'em. The prosecution, the police, the relatives, and all their supporters, are happy for the matter to remain a 'one silencer, etc', case, but the truth is / was that the following ones ended up in police possession at one stage or another -

(1) - Ralph Bambers' Parker Hale silencer
(2) - Anthony Pargeters' Parker Hale Silencer
(3) - The Boutflour owned parker Hale Silencer

Three identical looking Parker Hale silencers ended up being present at Jeremys' trial, all of which had been given to Essex police by the relatives at one stage or another. The jury were not made aware that there existed these three identical looking Parker Hale Silencers at court. One thing which springs to mind, is how easy it would have been for the parker hale silencer taken from the scene, to become mixed up, with an identical parker hale silencer belonging to Anthony Pargeter, or the identical parker hale silencer belonging to the Boutflour family. How would it have been possible for the jury, or anybody for that matter, to be able to differentiate one parker hale silencer, from  another identical parker hale silencer, belonging to the same group?

No steps or measures were taken, to keep all these different identical looking parker hale silencers a part...

Think about it, think about the process involved in removing the so called Ralph Bamber owned Parker Hale Silencer from the farmhouse, and taking it into their fold where the other identical looking parker hale silencers existed...