Most on here are guilters.

[buddy]

It seems that most on here are guilters, and post a lot on the red. Do you hope to get more ammo?
Why post here when you have a ready like minded audience?
If you are so sure, why are you here? Job done for you.
Why do so many guilters try to ram their theories down others throats if you are so sure?
So many long winded threads, why?
The guilters threads are no more valid than others on here. You may be right, but you may also be wrong.
Not all jury members were convinced of guilt, why?
The damning evidence was from a spurned woman, who stood to gain a lot of money, and get even.

[lookout]

That " spurned " woman had achieved both,buddy.

[David1819]

It seems that most on here are guilters, and post a lot on the red. Do you hope to get more ammo?
Why post here when you have a ready like minded audience?
If you are so sure, why are you here? Job done for you.
Why do so many guilters try to ram their theories down others throats if you are so sure?
So many long winded threads, why?
The guilters threads are no more valid than others on here. You may be right, but you may also be wrong.
Not all jury members were convinced of guilt, why?
The damning evidence was from a spurned woman, who stood to gain a lot of money, and get even.

I believe many guilters that post here are actually closet doubters. But don't like being doubtful so they come here to try and justify their positions to one another and to themselves.

If someone was 100% convinced of guilt they would not bother wasting their time on this forum. I am 100% sure that Scott Peterson is guilty that's why I don't bother debating with those that support him, to me it's done and dusted.

[lookout]

Still,it won't change my mind or my way of thinking regardless of the amount of guilters or what those on red have to say. I'm quite content at the thought that the man is wholly innocent.

[buddy]

Still,it won't change my mind or my way of thinking regardless of the amount of guilters or what those on red have to say. I'm quite content at the thought that the man is wholly innocent.

I wish I was as sure as you Lookout, but remain unconvinced of guilt.

[lookout]

I wish I was as sure as you Lookout, but remain unconvinced of guilt.

I've gone into it in great depth buddy,both from a psychological point of view and also from the point of view of each individuals persona as well as from a criminal view too.
It's probably best in your case to err on the side of caution, for the time being anyway. Nobody can tell you which way to push your thoughts so at least if you're cautious you will be so for all the right reasons-------------being non-committal is no bad thing.

[guest7363]

It seems that most on here are guilters, and post a lot on the red. Do you hope to get more ammo?
Why post here when you have a ready like minded audience?
If you are so sure, why are you here? Job done for you.
Why do so many guilters try to ram their theories down others throats if you are so sure?
So many long winded threads, why?
The guilters threads are no more valid than others on here. You may be right, but you may also be wrong.
Not all jury members were convinced of guilt, why?
The damning evidence was from a spurned woman, who stood to gain a lot of money, and get even.

I think you will find there are 5 on here who doubted Bambers Guilt at one time, but after being on the forum and having access to documents and doing own research, are now convinced of his guilt.  The rest it's a forum for debate

[Caroline]

I believe many guilters that post here are actually closet doubters. But don't like being doubtful so they come here to try and justify their positions to one another and to themselves.

If someone was 100% convinced of guilt they would not bother wasting their time on this forum. I am 100% sure that Scott Peterson is guilty that's why I don't bother debating with those that support him, to me it's done and dusted.

I have no doubt whatsoever that Jeremy is guilty - you shouldn't claim to know what so many other people would or wouldn't do.

[guest7363]

I believe many guilters that post here are actually closet doubters. But don't like being doubtful so they come here to try and justify their positions to one another and to themselves.

If someone was 100% convinced of guilt they would not bother wasting their time on this forum. I am 100% sure that Scott Peterson is guilty that's why I don't bother debating with those that support him, to me it's done and dusted.

Should we all leave then and leave you to it?  What would you spend your evenings doing, you don't seem to have any other interest. Mike set it up for debating innocence or guilt not just for innocence.  Like I said you don't like competition and it clearly shows.

[David1819]

Should we all leave then and leave you to it?  What would you spend your evenings doing, you don't seem to have any other interest. Mike set it up for debating innocence or guilt not just for innocence.  Like I said you don't like competition and it clearly shows.

If one is convinced of guilt and convinced Jeremy is where he should be, there is nothing to debate from that point of view.

If for example Jeremy was found not guilty back in 86. Then there would be a genuine motive for those convinced of guilt to debate, In the hope of trying to secure a second trail since double jeopardy laws no longer exists.

But If you are convinced with the status quo what objective do you have? 

[notsure]

I wish I was as sure as you Lookout, but remain unconvinced of guilt.

me too

[guest7363]

If one is convinced of guilt and convinced Jeremy is where he should be, there is nothing to debate from that point of view.

If for example Jeremy was found not guilty back in 86. Then there would be a genuine motive for those convinced of guilt to debate, In the hope of trying to secure a second trail since double jeopardy laws no longer exists.

But If you are convinced with the status quo what objective do you have? 

I think most of all,People have a lot of interesting perspectives and opinions, and it's enjoyable reading all of them.

[Adam]

I think most of all,People have a lot of interesting perspectives and opinions, and it's enjoyable reading all of them.

It's a famous case. And an interesting one.

So guilters, supporters and unsures will enjoy discussing it. Mike was pro active enough to create a forum.

[Steve_uk]

If one is convinced of guilt and convinced Jeremy is where he should be, there is nothing to debate from that point of view.

If for example Jeremy was found not guilty back in 86. Then there would be a genuine motive for those convinced of guilt to debate, In the hope of trying to secure a second trail since double jeopardy laws no longer exists.

But If you are convinced with the status quo what objective do you have? 

To show solidarity with Colin and respect his wishes to keep the man who murdered his sons where he is.

[David1819]

To show solidarity with Colin and respect his wishes to keep the man who murdered his sons where he is.

Even if the murderer was his ex wife?

You seem rather interested in Colin's position in this, do you actually know him?