80 point timeline (attributed to JBCampaign)

[Stephanie]

You'd just like that,wouldn't you ?

Anyone could do it Lookout. I could do it if I wanted. I just think someone like Mike deserves to wrap things up, after all the time and energy he's put in over the years. It could also help him come to terms with the betrayal.

[mike tesko]

The timings I rely upon are accurate and fit in with all the now known facts - I don't rely on any timings given by Julie or Jeremy. I rely on the sequence with which these calls happened, it's called reconstructing the events from the known facts. The police message log contents were not communication errors, they were an  accurate account of real time events. Jeremy had no input into the way any of these messages were being relayed. If he had known these facts his defence at his trial would have been run differently, and the outcome would have been in his favour!!!

[Stephanie]

The timings I rely upon are accurate and fit in with all the now known facts - I don't rely on any timings given by Julie or Jeremy. I rely on the sequence with which these calls happened, it's called reconstructing the events from the known facts. The police message log contents were not communication errors, they were an  accurate account of real time events. Jeremy had no input into the way any of these messages were being relayed. If he had known these facts his defence at his trial would have been run differently, and the outcome would have been in his favour!!!

So then you are relying on the timings given by the police? The same police you say stitched Bamber up?

Come on Mike! Stop doing this. You are better than people like Jeremy Bamber!

Jeremy had access to the police logs prior to his trial. Why are you making excuses?

It was Jeremy who let Jeremy down. No one else.

[Stephanie]

The timings I rely upon are accurate and fit in with all the now known facts - I don't rely on any timings given by Julie or Jeremy. I rely on the sequence with which these calls happened, it's called reconstructing the events from the known facts. The police message log contents were not communication errors, they were an  accurate account of real time events. Jeremy had no input into the way any of these messages were being relayed. If he had known these facts his defence at his trial would have been run differently, and the outcome would have been in his favour!!!

The outcome wasn't in his favour because it was showed he had lied Mike!

[Stephanie]

There are numerous timelines of events Mike.

Jeremy's

Julie's

The police

The CT

Yours

& others.

It was Jeremy Bamber who was accused of the murders. Therefore it is his timeline that is in question.

[Caroline]

There are numerous timelines of events Mike.

Jeremy's

Julie's

The police

The CT

Yours

& others.

It was Jeremy Bamber who was accused of the murders. Therefore it is his timeline that is in question.

His first statement is important and those times crucial. The time of the first phone call was given as 'about' 03:10 - not about 03:00 or 03:15. He argued against calling the police at 03:36 initially, until he had the idea of Nevill calling the police, not he's arguing FOR 03:36. The CT seem intent on arguing that Nevill called the police and that there was evidence of Sheila being alive while police were outside. If this formed part of submissions, it would be kicked out - again.

[Stephanie]

His first statement is important and those times crucial. The time of the first phone call was given as 'about' 03:10 - not about 03:00 or 03:15. He argued against calling the police at 03:36 initially, until he had the idea of Nevill calling the police, not he's arguing FOR 03:36. The CT seem intent on arguing that Nevill called the police and that there was evidence of Sheila being alive while police were outside. If this formed part of submissions, it would be kicked out - again.

Totally Caroline.

Jeremy relies on the ideas of others in order to keep his campaign alive.

Here he is thanking those people for all their ideas.

"I also want to thank the people who have come forward as part of our appeal for new information —no matter how small and insignificant you think your knowledge is it all helps build a picture and often evidence from two different people will fit together perfectly like missing pieces of the jigsaw puzzle—so don’t hesitate to get in touch if you have information. http://jeremybamber.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/new-case-material-obtained.html

Those of us who know the case inside out know that there is no one out there who will have firsthand knowledge of what happened that night. So why is he thanking people are requesting others come forward?

It's simple. He wants peoples ideas in order to continue the farce that he started. Just as SH did with people like Stephanie Bon, the Innocent Project, Rough Justice etc etc.

People like Bamber exploit others. This is all they know. Is isn't about the truth; it's about keeping the lie going for as long as possible.

[Stephanie]

His first statement is important and those times crucial. The time of the first phone call was given as 'about' 03:10 - not about 03:00 or 03:15. He argued against calling the police at 03:36 initially, until he had the idea of Nevill calling the police, not he's arguing FOR 03:36. The CT seem intent on arguing that Nevill called the police and that there was evidence of Sheila being alive while police were outside. If this formed part of submissions, it would be kicked out - again.

And again the Courts, the CCRC and all those people who have worked on this case in the past will see it for what it is.

However much they attempt to push it, bottom line is they will get no where.

[Caroline]

And again the Courts, the CCRC and all those people who have worked on this case in the past will see it for what it is.

However much they attempt to push it, bottom line is they will get no where.

Just lots of eye rolling and thoughts of 'not again'.

[Stephanie]

"The admin team have now obtained further case papers relating to my innocence and work sifting through the evidence will start on these in the coming weeks. It’s amazing how even after 28 years new information keeps emerging. http://jeremybamber.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/new-case-material-obtained.html

This is referred to as 'Dupers delight.'

[Roch]

His first statement is important and those times crucial. The time of the first phone call was given as 'about' 03:10 - not about 03:00 or 03:15. He argued against calling the police at 03:36 initially, until he had the idea of Nevill calling the police, not he's arguing FOR 03:36. The CT seem intent on arguing that Nevill called the police and that there was evidence of Sheila being alive while police were outside. If this formed part of submissions, it would be kicked out - again.

Caroline - from a guilty standpoint, why worry about it?  What you say regarding submissions is probably true. 

I think though that what people are genuinely trying to do is work out what really happened, from what information is already available.  This involves a certain amount of reading in between the lines to fill in the gaps in understanding (and this is obviously done from a standpoint of distrust towards EP about what really happened that morning).  Trying to fill in the gaps in understanding and trying to prove something are sometimes just not compatible.  Even if Nevill did phone Jeremy and police either once or twice, there is probably no way of absolutely proving that he did so.  Ainsley would have likely had all of the crucial evidence destroyed - OR - you are right, the innocent camp is wrong and there was never any crucial evidence around the calls to destroy in the first place.  JB isn't going anywhere is he? I think the authorities have made this clear.

[Roch]

"The admin team have now obtained further case papers relating to my innocence and work sifting through the evidence will start on these in the coming weeks. It’s amazing how even after 28 years new information keeps emerging. http://jeremybamber.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/new-case-material-obtained.html

This is referred to as 'Dupers delight.'

Is it not just an example of long-standing non-disclosure and eventual disclosure?

[Caroline]

Caroline - from a guilty standpoint, why worry about it?  What you say regarding submissions is probably true. 

I think though that what people are genuinely trying to do is work out what really happened, from what information is already available.  This involves a certain amount of reading in between the lines to fill in the gaps in understanding (and this is obviously done from a standpoint of distrust towards EP about what really happened that morning).  Trying to fill in the gaps in understanding and trying to prove something are sometimes just not compatible.  Even if Nevill did phone Jeremy and police either once or twice, there is probably no way of absolutely proving that he did so.  Ainsley would have likely had all of the crucial evidence destroyed - OR - you are right, the innocent camp is wrong and there was never any crucial evidence around the calls to destroy in the first place.  JB isn't going anywhere is he? I think the authorities have made this clear.

I don't worry about it Roch, I'm just interested in the MANY excuses that people make for Jeremy's behaviour and I also hate the myths that form from over excited members who put two and two together but can't add them up. Filling the gaps is one thing, but most use too much mortar and it ends up on the floor. Lets just say I like to 'clean up' a little.

[Adam]

Caroline - from a guilty standpoint, why worry about it?  What you say regarding submissions is probably true. 

I think though that what people are genuinely trying to do is work out what really happened, from what information is already available.  This involves a certain amount of reading in between the lines to fill in the gaps in understanding (and this is obviously done from a standpoint of distrust towards EP about what really happened that morning).  Trying to fill in the gaps in understanding and trying to prove something are sometimes just not compatible.  Even if Nevill did phone Jeremy and police either once or twice, there is probably no way of absolutely proving that he did so.  Ainsley would have likely had all of the crucial evidence destroyed - OR - you are right, the innocent camp is wrong and there was never any crucial evidence around the calls to destroy in the first place.  JB isn't going anywhere is he? I think the authorities have made this clear.

Everyone knows what happened - 

Bamber committee the massacre.

Rang Julie.

Rang the police.

Went to WHF.


Bamber has spent 7 years trying to manipulate a document digit being a 3 rather than a 2,  and claim Nevill also called the 5th furthest away police station.

He also says he phoned Julie after the police. But was very unsure of the sequence when interviewed by the police. Julies flatmates also refute Bamber's claim.

[Jane]

Jeremy told Mike many moons ago that he (Mike) was a clever bast*rd. Why doesn't Mike show Jeremy what a clever B he is and go to the press and present them with evidence of Bamber's guilt?

He could put this case to bed once and for all.

I asked the same -perfectly reasonable- question withing weeks of joining the forum. Mike insisted, back then, he had evidence which could free Jeremy and I wanted to know why he was telling a forum when he could have been presenting what he knew to Jeremy's legal team.