Latest Vlog _ Jeremy's Polygraph Test_2

[David1819]

That you sense there may be something about your posts which may encourage others to "catch me out or something", rather suggests that there is something there to catch out? Of course, I could be wrong.

I'm simply misunderstood much of the time, Or I don't elaborate enough

[Jane]

I'm simply misunderstood much of the time, Or I don't elaborate enough

Aww. It's horrid to be misunderstood

[Stephanie]

Just an observation and no offence David, but I detect from how you use constant and systematic contradictions when you post it makes you feel superior to other posters or is it about control?

I am not contradicting myself, you take two sentences of mine from two different answers from two different conversations to try and catch me out or something?

I meant in general. In general you appear to me to use constant and systemic contradictions throughout all your posts. I wasn't referring to the 'two sentences' you refer to above, though you appeared to do it then also.
Why would you think I'm trying to catch you out? Catch you out how? I'm just stating my observations.

[Stephanie]

"Grooming is a insidious predatory tactic, utilized by abusers. Grooming is practiced by Narcissists, Antisocial predators, con-artists and sexual aggressors, who target and manipulate vulnerable people for exploitation.

Child grooming is the deliberate act of establishing an emotional bond with a child, to lower the child's resistance. Child grooming can result in the minor falling victim to physical, sexual and emotional abuse, or specifically, to manipulate children into participating in slave labor, prostitution, and/or the production of child pornography.

Adult grooming is correspondent to child grooming and applies to any situation where an adult is primed to allow him or herself to be exploited or abused. While it is a common assumption that grooming is only practiced on the very young, identical emotional and psychological processes are commonly used to abuse or exploit adults the elderly, and those with compromised mental facilities.

http://outofthefog.website/top-100-trait-blog/2015/11/4/grooming

[Stephanie]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do7E5ksS5jQ

Do you think Trudi is reading the forum? She answered my question re: psychopaths can pass a polygraph! Cheers Trudi

If Trudi has been warned by anyone to not read the forum (as I believe may be the case) and/or may not be familiar with it - I would suggest she ignores any advice she may have been given and would further suggest anyone who may be in contact with her highlights this forum to her.

She appears to be being brainwashed, as I once was. The Terry Mullins interview imo showed this.

[Jane]

If Trudi has been warned by anyone to not read the forum (as I believe may be the case) and/or may not be familiar with it - I would suggest she ignores any advice she may have been given and would further suggest anyone who may be in contact with her highlights this forum to her.

She appears to be being brainwashed, as I once was. The Terry Mullins interview imo showed this.

Steph, the first thing I'd do, if warned not to read or look at something, is want to know what I was missing. Presumably, she's no different. I wonder if she's brainwashed herself with, what she may see as being, her own "celebrity".

[Stephanie]

Steph, the first thing I'd do, if warned not to read or look at something, is want to know what I was missing. Presumably, she's no different. I wonder if she's brainwashed herself with, what she may see as being, her own "celebrity".

I obviously can't answer that question, only she knows why she's doing what she's doing and her motivations behind it.

She does appear confident in front of the camera. I was too overwhelmed and traumatised from having single handedly 'campaigned' and supported SH financially and emotionally on my own for all those years. I guess she's not emotionally invested in the same way I was.

I can't stand that word 'campaigner' I never saw myself as a 'campaigner.' I did what I did as I believed SH was innocent and that others were responsible. Of course with hindsight I realise now why I was left to 'campaign' single handedly. But that's a whole other story for another time...

I was treated like a pariah by some, and from my own experiences there's no 'celebrity factor' being linked to a convicted murderer maintaining innocence. I should add, I felt like this in the very beginning. There's nothing glamorous about visiting anyone in prison. It's a degrading experience and doesn't improve at any point, even in open prison conditions.

[Caroline]

If Trudi has been warned by anyone to not read the forum (as I believe may be the case) and/or may not be familiar with it - I would suggest she ignores any advice she may have been given and would further suggest anyone who may be in contact with her highlights this forum to her.

She appears to be being brainwashed, as I once was. The Terry Mullins interview imo showed this.

She must read the forum Steph because the points she addressed are ones frequently raised here.

[Stephanie]

She must read the forum Steph because the points she addressed are ones frequently raised here.

I've no idea? Someone could be relaying information to her I suppose?

This forum in particular helped me uncover the truth. There were numerous posts made by one or two members that didn't sit right with me and I needed to understand with SH why these comments would have been made...

I thought the Terry Mullins interview was weak and the information disclosed in that interview adds yet further weight to Bambers guilt and indications of psychopathy.

[David1819]

I meant in general. In general you appear to me to use constant and systemic contradictions throughout all your posts. I wasn't referring to the 'two sentences' you refer to above, though you appeared to do it then also.
Why would you think I'm trying to catch you out? Catch you out how? I'm just stating my observations.

well your entitled to your opinions

[David1819]

She must read the forum Steph because the points she addressed are ones frequently raised here.

Allot of people do. Ages ago I first pointed out that Jeremy could have entered the house and taken the phone off the hook in the kitchen and that will disable all the lines in the house preventing anyone else from making an outgoing call and that's all he needed to do.

That then became part of CALs version of events in her book when it was published some 6-7 month later. Holly over at red has noticed things like that also. could be coincidence tho

I have made a few other discoveries but I am reluctant to post it because I don't want some author or journalist to steal it 

[Jane]

Allot of people do. Ages ago I first pointed out that Jeremy could have entered the house and taken the phone off the hook in the kitchen and that will disable all the lines in the house preventing anyone else from making an outgoing call and that's all he needed to do.

That then became part of CALs version of events in her book when it was published some 6-7 month later. Holly over at red has noticed things like that also. could be coincidence tho

I have made a few other discoveries but I am reluctant to post it because I don't want some author or journalist to steal it 

Really, David. I'm very surprised  you'd say such a thing, because I could have sworn, from your posts, that you're convinced of Jeremy's innocence.

[Adam]

Allot of people do. Ages ago I first pointed out that Jeremy could have entered the house and taken the phone off the hook in the kitchen and that will disable all the lines in the house preventing anyone else from making an outgoing call and that's all he needed to do.

That then became part of CALs version of events in her book when it was published some 6-7 month later. Holly over at red has noticed things like that also. could be coincidence tho

I have made a few other discoveries but I am reluctant to post it because I don't want some author or journalist to steal it 

That is not a discovery. Bob Woffindon's guilty account of how Bamber did it, from years ago, mentioned this.

[David1819]

That is not a discovery. Bob Woffindon's guilty account of how Bamber did it, from years ago, mentioned this.

No Bob Woffindon claims Jeremy re-arraigned the phones so they could not call out. when my theory is much more simple - take phone off the hook in downstairs kitchen then no other phone can call out hence Jeremy did not need to take the upstairs phone downstairs ect ect. The upstairs phone was taken downstairs because June preffered it downstairs.

Simple

[Jane]

That is not a discovery. Bob Woffindon's guilty account of how Bamber did it, from years ago, mentioned this.

Sour grapes now, is it, Adam?