80 point timeline (attributed to JBCampaign)

[Stephanie]

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

No Roch, it's an excuse. It's BS. And it's the same BS guilty men use to buy them time. Jeremy would have been told about disclosure prior to his trial. I have a letter written by the police to SH and his parents about disclosure. I can't be bothered to fish it out but Jeremy had experience of the criminal justice system and would have known his rights. He showed he knew his rights during police interviews. Even though his performance about speaking to his solicitor in private was over-egged imo.

Should a convicted sex offender be given access to all photos used against him in a court of law? 

[Caroline]

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

Roch, two years ago Jeremy told me he had almost ALL of the PII documents and pictures but every week we hear more and more about none disclosure or thugs still hidden. I could say anything existed but that the police were hiding it, it doesn't mean it's true and you can't disclose what you don't have.

[JackiePreece]

Mike I'm unsure why you are digging your heals in? You know the timings you have posted above are wrong.

Plus as I've already stated; if Julie was lying, which you say she was, why are you relying on her timings and not Jeremy's?

You either believe her to be a liar or she was telling the truth. You can't pick and choose what evidence of hers you wish to use to support your argument.

Mike you have an opportunity to put this case to bed once and for all. What's stopping you?

Mike has never changed his stance and there is no new evidence available to give him a reason to change his stance

[JackiePreece]

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.

Do it then!! Your not doing anything else
Go to the press
If you are taken seriously you might make some money out of it

You won't though will you

[Stephanie]

You won't though will you

Maybe I will

[JackiePreece]

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.

Spot on post

[JackiePreece]

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.

But you haven't cleaned up have you even though you are on here 24/7

Where's a plausible explanation for special branch destroying evidence

Why would an intelligent girl like Julie Mugford not go to the police immediately after the murders

How extraordinary how Ewen smith get head hunted by the CCRC just as he was working on the JB case

Why did the CCRC decide to close down the application from JB just as Simon McKay a high profile solicitor had been instructed

Why have the defence never been allowed to see witness statements from when the case was a suicide and not a murder

What exactly have you closed down and exactly how many people on this forum believe you have closed anything down

[JackiePreece]

Maybe I will

Good
Brilliant news
Then you can post how successful you have been

[Stephanie]

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). Once you get past this bias Roch, you will be in a better position to see both side of the argument as opposed the one you favour due to your distrust with EP 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.

It's already been proven in a court of law and indeed on this forum that Jeremy Bamber is guilty.

There was no call from Nevill. The facts are then when you are ready to see them Roch.

Ainsley didn't have any crucial evidence destroyed. It was Bamber who had crucial evidence destroyed; including the poor little dog. He knew exactly what he was doing when he agreed to having the carpets incinerated and that of his family members. 

People like Jeremy Bamber are clogging up the criminal justice system and in so doing are allowing genuinely innocent men and women to suffer because of their greed, omnipotence and psychopathy.

The knock on effect of the criminal behaviours of men like Bamber is far reaching Roch.

[Stephanie]

Good
Brilliant news
Then you can post how successful you have been

Stop focusing on me and focus on the case. The reason you are no further forward and haven't yet figured out Bamber to be guilty is because you are too wrapped up in everyone else; like me for example. Put your personal differences to one side and look at what is staring you in the face.

[Stephanie]

Good
Brilliant news
Then you can post how successful you have been

Maybe it will be you who finally goes to the press with Bamber's guilt, when you realise you have been played?

[lookout]

There's nothing like giving yourself a pat on the back for " cleaning up " a case which involved five murders,Caroline. You must have been up all night,every night with your testing kit.

These are not " excuses " which others give,they are suggestions in opposition to your " excuses ".You seem to be of the opinion that only those who are guilters are allowed their views,while the supporters are just an inconvenience giving theirs.
A debate is never a one-sided thing so you should learn to accept that what we,as supporters say/post are just as valid as yours and that you can't have it all your own way.

I personally don't leap up and down with any " excitement ".How can you when there has been 5 murders ? I just imagine if it had been my own family.

EVERYTHING is based on " myths " until we get the TRUE recollection behind those hidden documents and files,etc. At least I know of one person who was involved in the harrowing case,do you ?

[Stephanie]

But you haven't cleaned up have you even though you are on here 24/7 If you believe this to be true then you too would be on here 24/7

Where's a plausible explanation for special branch destroying evidence  Are you referring to the cannabis plants?

Why would an intelligent girl like Julie Mugford not go to the police immediately after the murders Why are you defending a nonce?

How extraordinary how Ewen smith get head hunted by the CCRC just as he was working on the JB case Coinsidence

Why did the CCRC decide to close down the application from JB just as Simon McKay a high profile solicitor had been instructed Because they learned things about Bamber that they are not allowed to repeat

Why have the defence never been allowed to see witness statements from when the case was a suicide and not a murder Who says they haven't?

What exactly have you closed down and exactly how many people on this forum believe you have closed anything down I think Caroline closes lots down. She clearly has a good grasp of the case and has indeed done her homework

[Stephanie]

Mike has never changed his stance and there is no new evidence available to give him a reason to change his stance

Just because he has never changed his stance doesn't mean he won't ever change his stance. If he were to change stance I am in no doubt he will gainer a lot a support from a lot of people..

[David1819]

It's already been proven in a court of law and indeed on this forum that Jeremy Bamber is guilty.

Where?