Author Topic: What makes Bamber innocent?  (Read 351320 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

John

  • Guest
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #510 on: May 07, 2016, 05:38:PM »
No, he didn't that was 'dodgy Stan' Jones trying to truck J into saying something that couldn't be true. But dodgy 'Stan' did not know that J had attempted to call Witham  police station that morning but got no response, and how he had then called Julie, and afterwards how he called Chelmsford police station and spoken to PC West. Whatever J said was true, because despite what 'Stan' was trying to do, J had called cops, before, and after, he called Julie Mugford at 3.30am...

Well actually you're wrong because Jerry phoned Julie just after 3am.   ;)

Took him just over twenty minutes to phone police at Chelmsford... he was in such a hurry wasn't he?  :)
« Last Edit: May 07, 2016, 05:40:PM by John »

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #511 on: May 07, 2016, 05:40:PM »
Lookout after 30 years you must join David, Trudie and Mike and step up to the plate.

David has sent his forensic evidence breakthrough to Jeremy, and Mike has posted Youtube videos on how the police framed Jeremy. Trudie is sending weekly vlogs.

Jeremy wanted this forum taken down. Posting on it does not benefit him.





Shut up you ! I'm in no mood for idiots.

John

  • Guest
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #512 on: May 07, 2016, 05:45:PM »
Stop talking nonsense, J had no input in the fact that cops found two bodies in the kitchen upon entry. J had no input whatsoever in the fact that cops reported the presence of a female body in the kitchen, after they themselves had already reported the presence of dads body in the kitchen also? You are nuts to even be suggesting that J had control of cops inside the farmhouse, outside the farmhouse, and anywhere else. Cops do not get controlled by criminals, least of all someone of J's character, and intelligence back in August 1985...

Facts dear boy...FACTS!!   It was Jeremy who first informed police at Chelmsford HQ of a possible domestic shooting.  It was Jeremy who briefed the police on his sister and of all the guns available to her.  It was Jeremy who informed police that Sheila had mental health issues. It was Jeremy who told police Sheila was quite capable of firing a rifle.

Notice the coincidences?
« Last Edit: May 07, 2016, 05:46:PM by John »

John

  • Guest
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #513 on: May 07, 2016, 05:48:PM »
Dad did call police, its recorded in the phone message log timed, 3.26am, a log which cops and prosecution failed to disclose to the defence, the court, and the jury, because its contents contradicted their argument that if Sheila had gone crazy, that dad would have called cops, not Jeremy...

Bollocks, that's all in your imagination, Nevill never telephoned anyone.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2016, 05:49:PM by John »

John

  • Guest
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #514 on: May 07, 2016, 05:50:PM »
That's very well-written Caroline. I am no expert on firearms but wouldn't it be incredibly difficult for someone to shoot Sheila by accident, especially as that particular gun was stiff, as corroborated in the courtroom at trial.

Of course it would, Mike Tesko dwells in la la land if he thinks anyone would believe that nonsense for a minute.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44293
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #515 on: May 07, 2016, 05:54:PM »
Well actually you're wrong because Jerry phoned Julie just after 3am.   ;)

Took him just over twenty minutes to phone police at Chelmsford... he was in such a hurry wasn't he?  :)

Mike has Jeremy spoken to you about his 3am phone call to Julie ? He just said 'no comment' to the police.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #516 on: May 07, 2016, 05:55:PM »
Ah, just as I thought, you can't think of anything off the top of your head for why both of them should want to conceal the fact that dad 'had' called cops. But there is nothing wrong with not knowing the answer. In fact you yourself have just become a victim of the tactic used by the Prosecutor to question them during their testimony. You see, all cops and civilian employees who work for the cops all know that when you are in the witness box, only answer questions that are asked of you. Answer as often as possible with a yes, or a no, reply. Never volunteer any information that you have not been asked about...

That's what happened during the trial, they were never asked if dad had made a call to cops, so in keeping with their training they did not volunteer that information. Furthermore, defence counsel couldn't question PC West or Malcolm Bonnet about dads call because the prosecution had not disclosed the contents of both logs to them. The gist of what appears to have taken place is that the contents from the 3.36am phone log record, were being spoken about in terms of the call itself having occurred at 3.26am, instead...

What reason would West have for not telling Jeremy that his father had already called?
Few people have the imagination for reality

John

  • Guest
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #517 on: May 07, 2016, 05:57:PM »
How did the anshuzt rifle get onto Sheila's body from its original position at the bedroom window from 7.15am, onward, that's the question which cops need to be answering, no matter how stiff or easy it was to activate the trigger. Also bear in mind, that Sheila's death downstairs in the kitchen was being referred to as a suicide, by 7.45am, and then much later (after 8.10am) when her body ends up dead upstairs in the bedroom, her death is described as a suicide again once the investigation gets underway? How can Sheila have committed suicide twice, once downstairs in the kitchen, and a second time upstairs in the bedroom? This brings me on to how the home secretary at the time, hit the tabloid headlines with ' How did he fool you'? Thing is, he didn't try to fool anybody. How can J have 'fooled cops' into reporting his sisters death downstairs in the kitchen as a suicide by 7.45am, and then later the investigation into her death upstairs be pursued as another suicide? Which part don't you understand?

Just for you I will explain it in simple language.

1. Jeremy shoots Sheila second time and lays rifle along her body to make it look like a suicide.  First mistake because rifle would never have ended up in that position anyway.

2. Police arrive on scene, find Sheila with rifle lying on her.  Standard procedure, police lift rifle, make safe and put it adjacent to window. Photographed there.

3. After doctor inspects body police put rifle back on body where found.  Photos taken.

4. Police assume four murders and a suicide.

End of story...no mystery...no conspiracy!
« Last Edit: May 07, 2016, 05:59:PM by John »

John

  • Guest
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #518 on: May 07, 2016, 06:05:PM »





 But it WASN'T Jeremy ! He wasn't the psychotic one in the family ! Nor the narcissistic psychopath,nor the one who'd claimed to be a part of the " Devil's child/ren ". Nor the one who was found committing a "deadly sin " in the fields of WHF. Nor the one who was jealous of anyone talking to his father,or Neville's attention being drawn to someone other than himself which was a three-way thing discounting Jeremy.

No, he was simply the one who planned to drug his family before burning them and the house down.   Remember the robbery and arson at Osea a few weeks earlier, was that the starter ahead of the main course?

What a nice boy!
« Last Edit: May 07, 2016, 06:07:PM by John »

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #519 on: May 07, 2016, 06:05:PM »
 It's customary to answer " no comment " no matter who it is who's been arrested !! In case their words get twisted by the police---------as what happened in JB's case when he first rattled off the truth without a solicitor present. That's why a solicitor SHOULD be present,to speak for the accused.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21081
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #520 on: May 07, 2016, 06:08:PM »
It's customary to answer " no comment " no matter who it is who's been arrested !! In case their words get twisted by the police---------as what happened in JB's case when he first rattled off the truth without a solicitor present. That's why a solicitor SHOULD be present,to speak for the accused.
He did handle himself well under interrogation; nobody is denying that. But he'd had eight long years at Gresham's of imposing authority figures scrutinizing him to prepare him for the ordeal.

John

  • Guest
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #521 on: May 07, 2016, 06:09:PM »
https://youtu.be/mmCART1vcCo

Lookout you must come up with something substantive on Jeremy's innocence.

Mike came up with his Youtube video last year about EP framing Jeremy, which he said he has received conmunication about.  And he also said he has passed his picture of Sheila on the bed, to his legal advisors,  around 18 months ago.

David has received a reply from Jeremy on his 'forensic evidence breakthough'.

Trudie is posting weekly vlogs.

Jeremy needs you to step up. Just posting on here does nothing.

Mike Tesko's claimed photo of Sheila on the bed with one bullet hole in her neck is lie, pure and simple!

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #522 on: May 07, 2016, 06:13:PM »
It's customary to answer " no comment " no matter who it is who's been arrested !! In case their words get twisted by the police---------as what happened in JB's case when he first rattled off the truth without a solicitor present. That's why a solicitor SHOULD be present,to speak for the accused.

Customary? I don't think so Lookout. He first 'rattled' off his story on the morning of the murders. Are you suggesting he should have asked for a solicitor to be present when he spoke to police? If so, he might as well have put the handcuffs on himself!!
Few people have the imagination for reality

John

  • Guest
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #523 on: May 07, 2016, 06:14:PM »
The transcripts of BOTH phone-calls are entirely different---------meaning that there were TWO separate phone-calls made that night/early morning. Both given as Mr Bamber ! Anyone with half a brain can see what's happened.It depends whether you want to or not.

Only one call received by police despite the myths.  Jeremy didn't know that the time of his call from the farm to his own house wouldn't be recorded by BT.  He had to leave the handset off to make it appear that Nevill made the call and was interrupted and also to ensure that the phone rang long enough so that he could nip home and answer it.  Since the phone was then disabled Jerry had to wait for a while before phoning Julie.  Not a very imaginative plan.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2016, 06:21:PM by John »

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #524 on: May 07, 2016, 06:15:PM »
No, he was simply the one who planned to drug his family before burning them and the house down.   Remember the robbery and arson at Osea a few weeks earlier, was that the starter ahead of the main course?

What a nice boy!





One robbery doesn't constitute a mass murder carried out by the same man. Arson now too ??
If JB hadn't robbed the office ( then admitted it was him ) what pedigree would he have had leading up to the murders ?