Author Topic: What makes Bamber innocent?  (Read 351476 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1035 on: May 19, 2016, 10:53:PM »
There's a Hell of a lot that JB didn't say in court------------because he was taken by surprise over the whole fiasco of being accused. How was he supposed to remember what he didn't do,or knew nothing about anything ? I suggest that those who put him away were much the same as those here------without empathy,void of humanity and as thick as two short planks.
now dont go reporting to modarater when people insult you calling people thick as 2 planks is ok with you is it than you and jackie go crying to the modarater  when it gets dished out to you

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1036 on: May 19, 2016, 10:58:PM »
I've NEVER reported anyone yet,so shut it.What's more I don't gang up either,it's always one to one with me. I don't have to rely on " back-up " !! I refer to you because you're nothing but a troublemaker SHERLOCK !

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1037 on: May 19, 2016, 11:05:PM »
I've NEVER reported anyone yet,so shut it.What's more I don't gang up either,it's always one to one with me. I don't have to rely on " back-up " !! I refer to you because you're nothing but a troublemaker SHERLOCK !
thats your opinion others on here iam sure would disagree with you.iam not sherlock use my correct name or i will call you some thing befitting you

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1038 on: May 20, 2016, 12:18:AM »

Mike, the sequence of their names is of no relevance. Call them policemen A, B, and C or 1, 2, and 3. It amounts to the same thing. Of course you believe the unidentified person, you insist is Ralph Nevill, was "in possession of a firearm" It equipped him better for shooting the family which is your other claim. I wonder when it was that Jeremy changed his mind from blaming it on Sheila to blaming it on the police to blaming it on the unidentified person ect................to NOW, once again blaming Sheila.

Well, one things for sure, at the time news was broken to Jeremy at the scene that everyone was dead inside the farmhouse, that Jeremy believed in his own mind that cops had killed at least one member of his family, possibly even as many as two or three of the adult victims in a shoot out when cops entered the farmhouse. Then when cops proceeded with the 'four murders and a suicide' approach, that he eventually altered his view to accept it as cops were portraying it - that his sister had shot and killed the other four, then taken her own life. This belief continued right the way up to, and beyond the trial date, until 1989 when I first came into contact with him at HMP Full Sutton. At that time, he believed whole heartedly that his sister had killed herself. By the beginning of 1990, I had gleaned sufficient information from him about his case, what he had been prosecuted for, and the available evidence relied upon to convict him of the murders, to enable me to be satisfied that his sister had 'not' killed herself. Jeremy continued to promote his belief that Sheila had shot herself, but she couldn't have. He was wrong about that, but it wasn't part of my remit to destroy what he believed to be true. By the time of my release from custody on the 26th July, 1990, I had already convinced myself that the silencer, paint, and blood evidence was nothing but a red herring that was introduced to help secure the convictions for these murders. All my research into issues involving the silencer, paint and blood since that time, have strengthened my resolve that it was 'dodgy evidence'. Since, 1990, I have had many opportunities to interrogate Jeremy about his sisters death, and in due course I have leaked suggestions to him, about how his sister met her death upstairs in the so called Main bedroom. This was my way of trying to draw information from him which as a serving prisoner I had not been able to successfully find answers to questions at the fore surounding his sisters death, and her ability or otherwise to be able to have overpowered and slain the other four victims. Now, I was an outsider, on the other side of the fence, with more resources available to me. I initially toyed with the suggestion that Anthony Pargeter might have been responsible. I arrived at this juncture because of the sudden disappearance of his Bruno bolt action rifle from the farmhouse, overnight based on what Jeremy told cops about all the guns that cops would find once they got into the farmhouse and carried out a search. Jeremy had been adamant that 'Anthony's Bruno rifle' was present at the farmhouse at the time of the shootings, but cops didn't find it, and neither did the relatives...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1039 on: May 20, 2016, 12:34:AM »
There's a Hell of a lot that JB didn't say in court------------because he was taken by surprise over the whole fiasco of being accused. How was he supposed to remember what he didn't do,or knew nothing about anything ? I suggest that those who put him away were much the same as those here------without empathy,void of humanity and as thick as two short planks.

Taken by surprise? He had MONTHS to prepare and the reason why he SHOULD have remembered is that the memories were attached to an incident with was life changing. There is a hell of a lot that Jeremy didn't say - the TRUTH for starters!!
Few people have the imagination for reality

John

  • Guest
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1040 on: May 20, 2016, 12:50:AM »
Well, one things for sure, at the time news was broken to Jeremy at the scene that everyone was dead inside the farmhouse, that Jeremy believed in his own mind that cops had killed at least one member of his family, possibly even as many as two or three of the adult victims in a shoot out when cops entered the farmhouse. Then when cops proceeded with the 'four murders and a suicide' approach, that he eventually altered his view to accept it as cops were portraying it - that his sister had shot and killed the other four, then taken her own life. This belief continued right the way up to, and beyond the trial date, until 1989 when I first came into contact with him at HMP Full Sutton. At that time, he believed whole heartedly that his sister had killed herself. By the beginning of 1990, I had gleaned sufficient information from him about his case, what he had been prosecuted for, and the available evidence relied upon to convict him of the murders, to enable me to be satisfied that his sister had 'not' killed herself. Jeremy continued to promote his belief that Sheila had shot herself, but she couldn't have. He was wrong about that, but it wasn't part of my remit to destroy what he believed to be true. By the time of my release from custody on the 26th July, 1990, I had already convinced myself that the silencer, paint, and blood evidence was nothing but a red herring that was introduced to help secure the convictions for these murders. All my research into issues involving the silencer, paint and blood since that time, have strengthened my resolve that it was 'dodgy evidence'. Since, 1990, I have had many opportunities to interrogate Jeremy about his sisters death, and in due course I have leaked suggestions to him, about how his sister met her death upstairs in the so called Main bedroom. This was my way of trying to draw information from him which as a serving prisoner I had not been able to successfully find answers to questions at the fore surounding his sisters death, and her ability or otherwise to be able to have overpowered and slain the other four victims. Now, I was an outsider, on the other side of the fence, with more resources available to me. I initially toyed with the suggestion that Anthony Pargeter might have been responsible. I arrived at this juncture because of the sudden disappearance of his Bruno bolt action rifle from the farmhouse, overnight based on what Jeremy told cops about all the guns that cops would find once they got into the farmhouse and carried out a search. Jeremy had been adamant that 'Anthony's Bruno rifle' was present at the farmhouse at the time of the shootings, but cops didn't find it, and neither did the relatives...

That fairy tale is well and truly blown apart by the fake telephone call in which Jeremy claims that his father said that Sheila had the gun or words to that effect.  You and he best stop trying to make up new stories because you get caught out in the finer details every time.

ps  found that Sheila on the bed photo yet?
« Last Edit: May 20, 2016, 12:51:AM by John »

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1041 on: May 20, 2016, 06:18:AM »
There's a Hell of a lot that JB didn't say in court------------because he was taken by surprise over the whole fiasco of being accused. How was he supposed to remember what he didn't do,or knew nothing about anything ? I suggest that those who put him away were much the same as those here------without empathy,void of humanity and as thick as two short planks.


That's a little rich, coming from someone who lacks the humility to admit when they're wrong. Classic case of projection going on here, methinks.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1042 on: May 20, 2016, 06:33:AM »
Well, one things for sure, at the time news was broken to Jeremy at the scene that everyone was dead inside the farmhouse, that Jeremy believed in his own mind that cops had killed at least one member of his family, possibly even as many as two or three of the adult victims in a shoot out when cops entered the farmhouse. Then when cops proceeded with the 'four murders and a suicide' approach, that he eventually altered his view to accept it as cops were portraying it - that his sister had shot and killed the other four, then taken her own life. This belief continued right the way up to, and beyond the trial date, until 1989 when I first came into contact with him at HMP Full Sutton. At that time, he believed whole heartedly that his sister had killed herself. By the beginning of 1990, I had gleaned sufficient information from him about his case, what he had been prosecuted for, and the available evidence relied upon to convict him of the murders, to enable me to be satisfied that his sister had 'not' killed herself. Jeremy continued to promote his belief that Sheila had shot herself, but she couldn't have. He was wrong about that, but it wasn't part of my remit to destroy what he believed to be true. By the time of my release from custody on the 26th July, 1990, I had already convinced myself that the silencer, paint, and blood evidence was nothing but a red herring that was introduced to help secure the convictions for these murders. All my research into issues involving the silencer, paint and blood since that time, have strengthened my resolve that it was 'dodgy evidence'. Since, 1990, I have had many opportunities to interrogate Jeremy about his sisters death, and in due course I have leaked suggestions to him, about how his sister met her death upstairs in the so called Main bedroom. This was my way of trying to draw information from him which as a serving prisoner I had not been able to successfully find answers to questions at the fore surounding his sisters death, and her ability or otherwise to be able to have overpowered and slain the other four victims. Now, I was an outsider, on the other side of the fence, with more resources available to me. I initially toyed with the suggestion that Anthony Pargeter might have been responsible. I arrived at this juncture because of the sudden disappearance of his Bruno bolt action rifle from the farmhouse, overnight based on what Jeremy told cops about all the guns that cops would find once they got into the farmhouse and carried out a search. Jeremy had been adamant that 'Anthony's Bruno rifle' was present at the farmhouse at the time of the shootings, but cops didn't find it, and neither did the relatives...


Which is a curious and overly swift change of mind set given how he'd reported that his father had allegedly called him -sounding panicked- to report that his sister had gone mad and had got hold of a gun that according to Jeremy, she was more than competent to use because she knew how to fire every weapon in the house. Still, I suppose it didn't hurt to blame someone else. I all helped to deflect any blame which may have come his way. Still, at least you now seem to have accepted that Sheila didn't shoot herself. Now it just needs a quantum leap for you to realize it was Jeremy all along. One thing you've never explained is WHY, when the police must have at least been knowledgeable about gun suicides, did they place the gun across Sheila in such a posed way without considering the variables of length of gun and angle of shots in conjunction with the placement position.

Offline JackiePreece

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4743
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1043 on: May 20, 2016, 07:36:AM »
That's what I said, they are talking about MOVEMENT and NOT a figure. Since then it's become a figure which has now grown legs and even has a name.

No I don't believe in the silencer and I do think he would still have been convicted without it - no I don't believe in noble cause corruption or in guilty people being allowed to get off scot free on a technicality.

Do I think faking the silencer was fair - no
Do I think Jeremy is guilty - yes
Do I think he should gain his freedom if the silencer is ever proven to have been faked - no
Do I think it would be fair for him to have a retrial - yes.

That wasn't what you said at all.  You said the following

"Only Jeremy has said it was a figure, it was described at the time as movement."

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7638.msg360534.html#msg360534

Bewes is on record by way of this audio recording saying Myalls said he saw "someone".

For those interested skip approx first 3 minutes

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/video/2011/jan/30/jeremy-bamber-new-evidence-video

Why wasn't this brought up at trial?  Is it in Bews and Myalls statements?  I will have a look later today or tomorrow.  Off to give my two horses their breakfast now and then on to the office for a days work   ::)
"No hour of life is wasted that is spent in the saddle" Winston Churchill

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1044 on: May 20, 2016, 10:18:AM »
Taken by surprise? He had MONTHS to prepare and the reason why he SHOULD have remembered is that the memories were attached to an incident with was life changing. There is a hell of a lot that Jeremy didn't say - the TRUTH for starters!!





" Months " to prepare for what ? Something he knew nothing about ? It's pretty difficult if not nigh on impossible to defend yourself, against what ? One voice amid the world and its wife.
Jeremy told the TRUTH what more could he do under the circumstances ? The reason he " didn't say a lot " was because he WASN'T involved and knew NOTHING of what went on that night.
It was others who'd seemed to have had a lot to say,without the proof to back it up too. This trial was well biased in no uncertain terms.
Even to it having been held on " home ground "---Essex,which I've always thought as weird. Nearer for all the curtain-twitchers to add to the fray.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2016, 10:27:AM by lookout »

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1045 on: May 20, 2016, 10:19:AM »
That fairy tale is well and truly blown apart by the fake telephone call in which Jeremy claims that his father said that Sheila had the gun or words to that effect.  You and he best stop trying to make up new stories because you get caught out in the finer details every time.

ps  found that Sheila on the bed photo yet?
very good point john by saying his father had said it was sheila he sealed his fate because once you look at the evidence it clearly shows it wasnt sheila than that only leaves jb.a case of trying to be too clever

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1046 on: May 20, 2016, 11:36:AM »
That's right,go for the easiest option.

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1047 on: May 20, 2016, 11:44:AM »
That's right,go for the easiest option.
its not the easiest but common sense how do you account for the lack of forensics on sc

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1048 on: May 20, 2016, 11:47:AM »
thats your opinion others on here iam sure would disagree with you.iam not sherlock use my correct name or i will call you some thing befitting you






Okay rotti.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: What makes Bamber innocent?
« Reply #1049 on: May 20, 2016, 11:51:AM »
its not the easiest but common sense how do you account for the lack of forensics on sc





Because the forensic examinations in general were crap. If forensic material hadn't been destroyed,Jeremy wouldn't be where he is.