Author Topic: The window catch issue  (Read 42264 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21084
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #360 on: November 05, 2016, 08:47:PM »
I do agree, it is odd how he just melted away and was never spoken of again??
I don't see it the way you do really. Police wanted to talk to the organ grinder, not the monkey.

guest7363

  • Guest
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #361 on: November 05, 2016, 08:50:PM »
I do agree, it is odd how he just melted away and was never spoken of again??
Yes he was the man of the hour when living it up and things looked rosy, but nowhere in his hour of need?

Online lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #362 on: November 05, 2016, 08:55:PM »
I feel certain that they all recall the brouhaha which followed the case, but for those coming up for retirement now, it was probably their first major case and they'd have had no yardstick by which to judge it. I don't believe it's they who would complain about how the investigation was carried out as they'd have lacked the experience. I have the feeling that conversations about the case MAY be reserved for private gatherings like the funeral my friend recently attended. You must remember Lookout that those as incensed about what you believe to be his wrongful conviction are in the minority. I believe the majority of police, past and present, simply followed orders and probably believe they did their duty.





Following orders isn't always the right thing to do. In careers such as the Police,NHS, Lawyers,etc and the Forces,lots of people have come unstuck through following orders to which they've been " programmed/brainwashed " to do because they've felt it their duty. This doesn't allow any leeway to think differently and it's dangerous.

How do you know that supporters are in the minority ?

Online lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #363 on: November 05, 2016, 09:04:PM »
As far as JB " keeping quiet " about JM,if he was to forever mention that she hadn't been squeaky-clean herself,etc etc,he'd have been slated for blaming her for this that and the other so he can't win in that respect can he ?
Why should he mention her anyway ?
Why should he mention Brett Collins ?
There's no need to is there ? What would be the point ?
Only those who are looking to blame someone do that !!

Online lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #364 on: November 05, 2016, 09:10:PM »
Jeremy is NOT looking to blame anyone !! He hasn't even blamed his sister because of her illness.

His only interest for the past 30 years has been trying to prove that it wasn't himself.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #365 on: November 05, 2016, 09:18:PM »




Following orders isn't always the right thing to do. In careers such as the Police,NHS, Lawyers,etc and the Forces,lots of people have come unstuck through following orders to which they've been " programmed/brainwashed " to do because they've felt it their duty. This doesn't allow any leeway to think differently and it's dangerous.

How do you know that supporters are in the minority ?

They've also been known to "come unstuck" for having shown initiative instead of obeying orders. There are still those jobs where people are neither required nor paid to think and as such they have to be protected from taking the fallout if things go wrong when they're doing no more than what's in their job description.

I can take a calculated guess from the lack of supportive 'traffic' on forums like this.

Online lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #366 on: November 05, 2016, 09:23:PM »
They've also been known to "come unstuck" for having shown initiative instead of obeying orders. There are still those jobs where people are neither required nor paid to think and as such they have to be protected from taking the fallout if things go wrong when they're doing no more than what's in their job description.

I can take a calculated guess from the lack of supportive 'traffic' on forums like this.




The red forum isn't exactly overflowing is it and that's for the against crowd.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #367 on: November 05, 2016, 09:28:PM »



The red forum isn't exactly overflowing is it and that's for the against crowd.

That's my point, Lookout. Interest, one way or the other, is diminishing.

Online lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #368 on: November 05, 2016, 09:28:PM »
How many hundred guilters are listed on Twitter or Change.org ?

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #369 on: November 05, 2016, 09:35:PM »
How many hundred guilters are listed on Twitter or Change.org ?

I'm sure you could find out if you're interested.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21084
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #370 on: November 05, 2016, 09:46:PM »
As far as JB " keeping quiet " about JM,if he was to forever mention that she hadn't been squeaky-clean herself,etc etc,he'd have been slated for blaming her for this that and the other so he can't win in that respect can he ?
Why should he mention her anyway ?
Why should he mention Brett Collins ?
There's no need to is there ? What would be the point ?
Only those who are looking to blame someone do that !!
One might have thought that he would have been angry or bitter that the word of an untruthful young woman had been taken against his, from his point of view. Why is he not more bitter for thirty-one years' wrongful incarceration, unless he knows his whole tale was a pack of lies?

Online lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #371 on: November 05, 2016, 09:56:PM »
One might have thought that he would have been angry or bitter that the word of an untruthful young woman had been taken against his, from his point of view. Why is he not more bitter for thirty-one years' wrongful incarceration, unless he knows his whole tale was a pack of lies?



Personally I'd have been hopping mad and would have remained that way,sick sister or not. Maybe religion bounced off his mother and taught him to be calm and forgiving,I don't know,but I certainly couldn't be------it's not in my nature.
I bet his B/P is normal too.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #372 on: November 05, 2016, 10:06:PM »
One might have thought that he would have been angry or bitter that the word of an untruthful young woman had been taken against his, from his point of view. Why is he not more bitter for thirty-one years' wrongful incarceration, unless he knows his whole tale was a pack of lies?

I totally agree, Steve. Anger and bitterness would both be appropriate. What would be quite INappropriate is the absence of these emotions. We don't choose what we feel. We can't turn feelings on and off like light switches. 

Online lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #373 on: November 05, 2016, 10:16:PM »
The trouble here is that where emotions are concerned,whatever it is that you express could be taken either way.
Prisoners who are vocal are usually ignored because I imagine that a lot of them shout " I didn't do it " or words to that effect and nobody believes them anyway. Then you get the quiet ones who are also blamed for being quiet or seemingly void of emotion.

Eddie Gilfoyle was quiet and being in prison ate away at him,so there's no judging what emotion a person is going through,nor can anyone judge how a person feels.

Offline Roch

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17579
Re: The window catch issue
« Reply #374 on: November 05, 2016, 10:22:PM »
Hi Roch, in one statement he does underplay any tension that evening, but if you check his next statement for some unknown reason he builds on Sheila being vacant?  What amazes me is he cannot remember what he spoke to Sheila about in the rape field?
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5816.0;attach=37837

Hi Justice,  I'm not sure about the rape field - I agree it is interesting that he is not able to provide details of the conversation.  He does go on to express that there were no 'cross words' between them.  The twins were present - but we cannot know whether the conversation was merely innocuous chatter or something more serious.

Do you not agree that if he knows of a way or method to open catches from the outside, which in theory should be the hardest to do, he could also have a method or means of closing the catch or handle?  It was stated by I think Taff who didn't arrive till after 9.15 that the ground floor windows were secure and on their latches, I don't think they were properly checked it would have been a more quick visual check I would have thought and would have expected because of the murder suicide theory, many times I have locked schools up and from the inside the window looks shut only to find on my outside perimeter check it's not fully closed.

You can only use your experience I suppose - and I see where you're coming from.  We have though, a situation where not just one lead detective on the investigation - but two- both claim that the farmhouse was fully secured.  That is DCI Thomas Jones and his pro-relatives replacement - DCS Ainsley.   Incidentally, wasn't 'Mick' Ainsley drafted in to a security role at the caravan site some time later?  Presumably Robert Boutflour trusted him. 
 
In addition, it is now claimed that PI MIller had also disregarded relatives' theories about entering / leaving via windows: he expressed that "police sophisticated equipment had not detected such tampering".

How does Jeremy Bamber evade all trace of tampering? 

Perhaps this influenced the conclusions reached by DI Kenneally.



« Last Edit: November 05, 2016, 10:37:PM by Roch »