What makes Bamber innocent?

[lookout]

If there'd been the technology in 1985 as there is now,there wouldn't have been a trial. Though even now,they still manage to get things wrong.

[mike tesko]

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? 

No, he didn't...

That was suggested by dodgy 'Stan' Jones, pressurising Julie Mugford and her drug lodgers, to make J appear to be a liar, but it wasn't J lying, it was Mugford and the druggie witnesses of imaginary truth who lied...

[mike tesko]

Facts dear boy...FACTS!!   It was Jeremy who first informed police at Chelmsford HQ of a possible domestic shooting. Again, no it wasn't, since dad alerted cops as per his 3.26am phone log, and as everyone is aware J's call to Chelmsford was not until 3.36am. You can pretend all you like that J was the killer, but he wasn't. How could he have killed his sister upstairs in the bedroom, when cops reported her death as a suicide downstairs in the kitchen by 7.45am. Not only that but how did J manage to use the rifle at the bedroom window upstairs from 7.15am onward, and place it onto Sheila's body upstairs, when from 3.52am, J was in the company of cops? It was Jeremy who briefed the police on his sister and of all the guns available to her. No, dad told cops, that 'my daughter has got one of my guns', in his 3.26am phone call, long before J arrived at the scene at 3.52am...  It was Jeremy who informed police that Sheila had mental health issues. Sheila's psychiatrist knew all the facts relating to Sheila's mental illness years before J mentioned anything to cops at the scene... It was Jeremy who told police Sheila was quite capable of firing a rifle. it was June Bamber who told her sister, Pamela, that J had been showing Sheila how to load the rifle with bullets, long before the shootings occurred, as recounted by Robert Boutflour, so your point now is?

Notice the coincidences?
I agree..

[Caroline]

I read books,don't you ? Oh,you don't have Lomax's do you ?

Yes, I do have Lomax but I guess he got that from Jeremy and Jeremy could have told him anything.

[Caroline]

Because the idiot was getting confused with there being two Mr Bambers so it was easier to just mention one. Perhaps you haven't realised that JB wasn't the only one with no gumption.

Was he? I don't think so Lookout but I do know that Jeremy has LOTS of gumption. West would know the difference between the two callers and would have told Jeremy that he had just spoken to his father.

[John]

Was he? I don't think so Lookout but I do know that Jeremy has LOTS of gumption. West would know the difference between the two callers and would have told Jeremy that he had just spoken to his father.

Another excellent point, the devil is in the detail.

[John]

No, he didn't...

That was suggested by dodgy 'Stan' Jones, pressurising Julie Mugford and her drug lodgers, to make J appear to be a liar, but it wasn't J lying, it was Mugford and the druggie witnesses of imaginary truth who lied...

The independent witnesses testified to the time so wrong again.

[John]

Facts dear boy...FACTS!!   It was Jeremy who first informed police at Chelmsford HQ of a possible domestic shooting.

Again, no it wasn't, since dad alerted cops as per his 3.26am phone log, and as everyone is aware J's call to Chelmsford was not until 3.36am. You can pretend all you like that J was the killer, but he wasn't. How could he have killed his sister upstairs in the bedroom, when cops reported her death as a suicide downstairs in the kitchen by 7.45am. Not only that but how did J manage to use the rifle at the bedroom window upstairs from 7.15am onward, and place it onto Sheila's body upstairs, when from 3.52am, J was in the company of cops

You are totally wrong about the 3.36 note passed by West to Bonnett.  There was no telephone call by Nevill Bamber to anyone and what's more you can't prove there was!

[John]

It was Jeremy who briefed the police on his sister and of all the guns available to her.

No, dad told cops, that 'my daughter has got one of my guns', in his 3.26am phone call, long before J arrived at the scene at 3.52am.

Dad told cops nothing, your imaginary telephone call again. 

[John]

It was Jeremy who informed police that Sheila had mental health issues.

Sheila's psychiatrist knew all the facts relating to Sheila's mental illness years before J mentioned anything to cops at the scene...

Not at all, Jeremy went to great pains to inform the first police responders as to Sheila's supposed problemns.

[John]

It was Jeremy who told police Sheila was quite capable of firing a rifle.

It was June Bamber who told her sister, Pamela, that J had been showing Sheila how to load the rifle with bullets, long before the shootings occurred, as recounted by Robert Boutflour, so your point now is?

Wrong again! 

[mike tesko]

Was he? I don't think so Lookout but I do know that Jeremy has LOTS of gumption. West would know the difference between the two callers and would have told Jeremy that he had just spoken to his father.

That's incorrect, it's not police policy to tell informants anything about what another informant has told them....

[lookout]

So what,if JB had shown Sheila how to load a gun/rifle ? For all any of us know Sheila might have asked JB to show her how it was done. JB would have obliged but wouldn't have had a clue that his sister was using her know-how for future reference.

It's not a case whether anything is the truth or not,it's whatever is perceived according to what YOU,YOURSELVES believe.
None of us were at WHF when certain things were discussed so what makes any of us think that what we say are facts ?
All this discussion is about now is US and THEM without any thought given that there were three other adults involved besides Jeremy. ALL with an axe to grind in one way or another and ALL at the end of their tethers,so why single out one individual just because he happens to be alive ?

[mike tesko]

Another excellent point, the devil is in the detail.

Yes, the devil is in the detail, cops don't tell one informant (J) what another informant (dad) had told them, especially since J was speaking over the phone, and not face to face with PC West. Not only that but cops hadn't investigated what dad had told them (3.26am) by that stage (3.36am, or until after the arrival of the occupants CA07 arriving at the general scene at around 3.48am. With this in mind, and the fact that J had finished his 3.36am call to PC West by the time the occupants of CA07 arrived in Pages lane, you tell me what cops knew regarding the fact that anyone had fired a shot, or been wounded by the time J called West at 3.36am, because J certainly didn't tell PC West that at 3.36am, and dad didn't tell cops that anyone had been shot by reference to ' dads' 3.26am phone log. The facts are 'that two phone logs' existed, one timed at 3.26am, and the other timed 3.36am. It was 'never part of the prosecutions case', either during the October, 1986 trial, or the failed 2002 apoeal, that the 'contents of both these logs', related to the same call. If you have got that idea inside your head, then I for one do not know where you have got idea from. In the first call (3.26am) the informant is clearly identified as being 'dad' from the farmhouse, because he blurts out, 'my daughter has got one of my guns, and is going crazy', as opposed to the informant in the 'other' phone log timed at 3.36am, which identifies the caller as 'J', because the contents clearly state, ' your sister has got the gun and is going berserk'. Nothing could be any clearer...

[Caroline]

That's incorrect, it's not police policy to tell informants anything about what another informant has told them....

Oh come on Mike!