Latest Vlog _ Jeremy's Polygraph Test_2

[Stephanie]

Okay, that's what I thought you meant. Phew. 

I'd agree that there is potential for that being the case.

Admittedly I could have explained it better than I did. 

[Neil]

Jeremy's only hope for parole could very well be if he confesses at some point and admits his part in the killings.

Confession or not, once found guilty, he was never, ever going to get parole. 

[guest2181]

Yes I do disagree with the rationale of what you are saying. Just because a review team reject something that does not mean that what was presented to them was false. The prison board is not an unimpeachable authority on what is correct and not correct.

However I am not in favour of how the Campaign Team operates so I agree with you to some extent

You've answered a different question to the one I asked, but fair enough.

The review team have used psychological reports to justify JB's status as a Category A prisoner.

A category A prisoner is defined as:
Prisoners whose escape would be highly dangerous to the public, the police or the security of the state, no matter how unlikely that escape might be.

_______________________________

Therefore, the claims from the campaign team regarding JB's psychological reports, are clearly incompatible with the judgement that cites the reports as indicating that his escape would be highly dangerous to the public, the police or the security of the state.

[David1819]

You've answered a different question to the one I asked, but fair enough.

The review team have used psychological reports to justify JB's status as a Category A prisoner.

A category A prisoner is defined as:
Prisoners whose escape would be highly dangerous to the public, the police or the security of the state, no matter how unlikely that escape might be.

_______________________________

Therefore, the claims from the campaign team regarding JB's psychological reports, are clearly incompatible with the judgement that cites the reports as indicating that his escape would be highly dangerous to the public, the police or the security of the state.

Yes they are incompatible but the campaign team don't have to accept the courts opinions and rulings neither do I or you for that matter.

Anyway it would be interesting if we could get the 2008 judgement I cant find it anywhere 
Bailii does not have it either I looked    any ideas?

[Caroline]

Yes they are incompatible but the campaign team don't have to accept the courts opinions and rulings neither do I or you for that matter.

Anyway it would be interesting if we could get the 2008 judgement I cant find it anywhere 
Bailii does not have it either I looked    any ideas?

And we don't have to accept the findings of Mullins or Egan and personally, I don't. Also, the OS is misleading on the 27 assessments.

[David1819]

And we don't have to accept the findings of Mullins or Egan and personally, I don't. Also, the OS is misleading on the 27 assessments.

Its a free country, we can believe the world is flat if we like 

[Caroline]

Its a free country, we can believe the world is flat if we like 

You mean it's not?  Next you'll be saying there's no Santa Claus!   

[guest2181]

Yes they are incompatible.

Yeah, we know. 

[Jane]

Yes, so clearly the claims that there are all these tests showing JB to be psychologically 'normal', are completely bogus.

And clearly there are things known about him that only those who need to know are aware of.

[David1819]

Yeah, we know. 

What was the reason he was downgraded to category B for a while then back to A again? I don't really get why the A,B,C categories apply to the likes of Jeremy because Life without Parole is like a category in itself (too dangerous to ever be realeased)

[Jane]

Trudi is not looking at the whole picture.

I'm unsure if it's due to her lack of knowledge regarding all that has gone on since Bambers conviction in the 80's or whether she is confused herself?

She certainly doesn't strike me as someone with a solid and thorough understanding of the case and what has gone on from then to now.

Steph, I suspect that some of us, who previously thought he was innocent, didn't either. Speaking for myself, it was probably a case of not wanting to look at the bigger picture out of fear of what I might see there  -I guess you'll know how "uncomfortable" it feels to have one's whole belief system turned on it's head. Surprisingly, when I did look, it was a relief.

[Jane]

What was the reason he was downgraded to category B for a while then back to A again? I don't really get why the A,B,C categories apply to the likes of Jeremy because Life without Parole is like a category in itself (too dangerous to ever be realeased)

I guess like all institutions, "I's" have to be dotted and "T's" crossed. Everybody/thing must be labelled which I suppose can be taken to mean that all of those considered to be too dangerous to release are automatically Cat A.

[guest2181]

What was the reason he was downgraded to category B for a while then back to A again? I don't really get why the A,B,C categories apply to the likes of Jeremy because Life without Parole is like a category in itself (too dangerous to ever be realeased)

It is claimed that he was downgraded to Cat B for a mere 3 months between June and September 1991.

I don't know why, or if it is even true. I understood that he was moved prisons rather than actually downgraded, but the information available is somewhat vague.

I rather suspect that, like everything else, the reality will be rather different to what is being claimed by the campaign team.

Three months in 30 years doesn't sound like something to use to argue that he has a reduced level of dangerousness.

[Jane]

It is claimed that he was downgraded to Cat B for a mere 3 months between June and September 1991.

I don't know why, or if it is even true. I understood that he was moved prisons rather than actually downgraded, but the information available is somewhat vague.

I rather suspect that, like everything else, the reality will be rather different to what is being claimed by the campaign team.

Three months in 30 years doesn't sound like something to use to argue that he has a reduced level of dangerousness.

It's an irony, that having spent 30 years claiming innocence and trying to get out, as a guilty convict who has failed to admit his guilt, he's considered to dangerous to ever release. 'Course, when you think about it, he's actually only done 6 years per life he took.

[guest2181]

It is claimed that he was downgraded to Cat B for a mere 3 months between June and September 1991.

I don't know why, or if it is even true. I understood that he was moved prisons rather than actually downgraded, but the information available is somewhat vague.

I rather suspect that, like everything else, the reality will be rather different to what is being claimed by the campaign team.

Three months in 30 years doesn't sound like something to use to argue that he has a reduced level of dangerousness.

To put this in perspective, three months equates to 0.8% of the 366 months that he has been in prison.