Who sowed the seeds

[lookout]

Innocents on the forum are as rare as hens teeth so it's only natural that I welcome them.You're also in your element that you've got the easiest option,though any fool would be with the man charged and imprisoned.Who wouldn't be  ?

[Jane]

Innocents on the forum are as rare as hens teeth so it's only natural that I welcome them.You're also in your element that you've got the easiest option,though any fool would be with the man charged and imprisoned.Who wouldn't be  ?

I can understand that you like to feel supported. I see no reason for you to call us fools. It maybe that when it comes to being reasonable, some of those in the guilty camp have the edge.

[lookout]

I can understand that you like to feel supported. I see no reason for you to call us fools. It maybe that when it comes to being reasonable, some of those in the guilty camp have the edge.

Of course you've got the edge as well as the advantage.He's already in prison, the work has been done for you,so why the need to go further ? I wouldn't have thought that the guilters would have been left with so much to say,with not even " an unfair trial " amongst you,except to snipe at those of us whose views differ. 

[Jane]

Of course you've got the edge as well as the advantage.He's already in prison, the work has been done for you,so why the need to go further ? I wouldn't have thought that the guilters would have been left with so much to say,with not even " an unfair trial " amongst you,except to snipe at those of us whose views differ.

I don't think it's ever just a case of someone being guilty so we put them in prison. It's very doubtful that "being guilty" simply happened. It's the reasons/explanations for why someone is guilty which interest me. It would be an over simplification to use greed as THE motive. I'm interested in what may have caused the greed.

[lookout]

I don't think it's ever just a case of someone being guilty so we put them in prison. It's very doubtful that "being guilty" simply happened. It's the reasons/explanations for why someone is guilty which interest me. It would be an over simplification to use greed as THE motive. I'm interested in what may have caused the greed.

Greed represents them all I'd have said,even rumbling on years after the tragedy when AP took those who were responsible,to court, in order to retrieve what was his.

[Jane]

Greed represents them all I'd have said,even rumbling on years after the tragedy when AP took those who were responsible,to court, in order to retrieve what was his.

And what would you have done if you believed a member of your family had done you out of something you believed to be rightfully yours, Lookout.

[lookout]

And what would you have done if you believed a member of your family had done you out of something you believed to be rightfully yours, Lookout.

I wouldn't have waited years that's for sure. Plus I'd have questioned as to why it hadn't been pointed out to me after or during probate when matters were sorted.

[Jane]

Innocents on the forum are as rare as hens teeth so it's only natural that I welcome them.You're also in your element that you've got the easiest option,though any fool would be with the man charged and imprisoned.Who wouldn't be  ?

Just a thought,Lookout, but those who DO support you -and there are many- in the innocent camp, from WAY back, are vociferous enough to drown out ANY number of us in the guilty camp. It's not OUR fault is it, that it seems none of them agree with each other -or you?

[Jane]

I wouldn't have waited years that's for sure. Plus I'd have questioned as to why it hadn't been pointed out to me after or during probate when matters were sorted.

But, nevertheless, forget the timing, like AP, you'd have done something...........YOUR way. HE did it HIS way.

[lookout]

But, nevertheless, forget the timing, like AP, you'd have done something...........YOUR way. HE did it HIS way.

He wouldn't have waited if he'd been told straightaway. Probably a court case wouldn't have ensued if they'd been up-front with what they owed him.This was his own flesh and blood trying to fleece him !!
A sure sign of greed wanting everything for themselves-------even that which wasn't even theirs.

[Jane]

He wouldn't have waited if he'd been told straightaway. Probably a court case wouldn't have ensued if they'd been up-front with what they owed him.This was his own flesh and blood trying to fleece him !!
A sure sign of greed wanting everything for themselves-------even that which wasn't even theirs.

I'm not going to allow you to steer this off course, Lookout. This was about what you perceived as other's greed and it turns out, that under similar circumstances, you'd probably have take the same course of action, albeit at a different stage of the game. It matters little what processes you'd have employed to get to the ultimate goal, OR who you think rightfully owned what.

[Stephanie]

A sure sign of greed wanting everything for themselves-------even that which wasn't even theirs.

You keep using the word greed, yet appear to have missed the fact Jeremy stated to police the reason he robbed the family caravan park was GREED.

Jeremy had form for greed.

The relatives didn't!

Jeremy had showed he was work shy, he wanted an easy life. Never mind what Julie or anyone else said; his history shows this. Even when he did work on the farm he was topping up his salary from the productions and supply of weed and from the bank of Mum & Dad.

[maggie]

Maggie will back me up on this Lookout - just so you know once and for all. When we ALL moderated, we talked extensively behind the scenes. For almost a year, I kept my feelings that Bamber might have been guilty from the rest of the board - truth is, we all had little niggles that we discussed between ourselves and for Jane and I, it became a niggle too many. However,  I came to a guilty conclusion on the open forum before Jane did.

You're the first to jump on someone's band wagon as long as they support an innocent stance - the above is just typical of you. 

I certainly do back up Caroline on this, I remember she was becoming more and more unsure about JB's innocence in her own mind.  I remember her pming me about it and it was quite a surprise to me at that time as it was for so many others later.  Then I became ill and I wasn't really on the forum for quite a long time.  It was during this time that Caroline and April both became convinced that he was guilty.  Over time without any persuasion or input from anyone else, I too started to believe in his guilt.

It was a slow process for me as well, I had believed he was innocent since back in 1985 and was shocked when he went to prison but my own life took over.    I found the forum in about 2012 and was a definite 'innocent' supporter for at least another 2 years. 

It was really hard for me to admit that he may be guilty because I had argued so hard and made so many friends on the forum who still believed in his innocence but eventually I had to let go and accept that Jeremy Bamber probably is guilty.

As a mod I have to read every post written on the forum, I have never read anything recently which can convince me again that he is innocent, some supporters write excellent posts but imo there's nothing new, some do make me question for a short while but I always revert to guilt.

I hope I'm not mistaken and Jeremy Bamber is innocent because for an innocent man to spend over 30 years in prison is horrendous and unforgivable but I can't believe in conspiracy theories which don't hold water.  I don't understand why the police would frame him in the first place, what reason could there be? 

I don't believe any poster changes sides from innocent to guilty without real thought, it was fun back in the day when we were all on the same side but you can't just pretend to make other posters happy.

[Jane]

I certainly do back up Caroline on this, I remember she was becoming more and more unsure about JB's innocence in her own mind.  I remember her pming me about it and it was quite a surprise to me at that time as it was for so many others later.  Then I became ill and I wasn't really on the forum for quite a long time.  It was during this time that Caroline and April both became convinced that he was guilty.  Over time without any persuasion or input from anyone else, I too started to believe in his guilt.

It was a slow process for me as well, I had believed he was innocent since back in 1985 and was shocked when he went to prison but my own life took over.    I found the forum in about 2012 and was a definite 'innocent' supporter for at least another 2 years. 

It was really hard for me to admit that he may be guilty because I had argued so hard and made so many friends on the forum who still believed in his innocence but eventually I had to let go and accept that Jeremy Bamber probably is guilty.

As a mod I have to read every post written on the forum, I have never read anything recently which can convince me again that he is innocent, some supporters write excellent posts but imo there's nothing new, some do make me question for a short while but I always revert to guilt.

I hope I'm not mistaken and Jeremy Bamber is innocent because for an innocent man to spend over 30 years in prison is horrendous and unforgivable but I can't believe in conspiracy theories which don't hold water.  I don't understand why the police would frame him in the first place, what reason could there be? 

I don't believe any poster changes sides from innocent to guilty without real thought, it was fun back in the day when we were all on the same side but you can't just pretend to make other posters happy.

CRACKING post, Maggie. Well done.

[Adam]

Lol. Caroline, Susan, Alias, Jane J and Grahane put up a feroucious long term fights against my guilty posts and threads. Which was good fun.

Caroline changing stance after Bamber didn't answer her question on the last harvest. Jane J changing stance a few hours later but has always refused to give a reason.

Susan said mine & Harters posts made her change her mind. 

Grahame said he 'has to give in to his betters'. Before returning to the forum 7 weeks later claiming the police framed Bamber.

Alias went from innocent and said she was now 'not sure'. Saying Bamber would not have shot Sheila twice.

David has changed from guilty to innocent after his 'forensic evidence breakthrough'.