Entrapment strategy of coercive control employed by Bamber over Julie Mugford

[Stephanie]

Do you also accept We all know Julie is a competent liar

What I accept is Julie has been subjected to decades of abuse because of her involvement with Jeremy Bamber, as indeed have others, and this abuse has been rationalised by many in order to support there agendas. There has been much suggestion of her complicity into the murders which leaves me questioning why these suggestions are made in the first place.

Many people are unaware of the consequences of abusive partners in romantic relationships nor of the strategies employed by these abusers. Julie Mugford's witness statements clearly also demonstrates Bamber's strategies of entrapment and control and thankfully the police recognised this when she finally came forward. They are to be congratulated for this aspect of their investigations, not condemned imo.

She was not a scorned women as some have suggested she was a victim of psychological torture. There is a vast difference between the two.

And because of what she had been subjected to by Bamber it is understandable why she made the odd one or two mistakes whilst giving live evidence.

[Stephanie]

Let's see if this thread in particular appeals to those forum members who appear to lack the insight in relation to some of the posts they make regarding my experiences.

[Stephanie]

"What researchers, practitioners, and policymakers in much of the world now appreciate is that the significance of physical and sexual violence in male partner abuse derives from their role as part of an ongoing and multi-faceted strategy to subordinate women. This strategy is designed to deprive women of their autonomy, dignity, and their basic rights and resources; extends over time and through social space via various forms of surveillance, harassment, and stalking; and encompasses a range of tactics that hurt women, make them afraid, isolate them, and subject them to what the Council of Europe has called “arbitrary violations of liberty.”

See more at: http://blog.oup.com/2016/04/from-domestic-violence-to-coercive-control/#sthash.U7YhpMb4.dpuf

Though this excerpt doesn't make it clear, these strategies can also apply to women who have been psychological abused. 

[Stephanie]

"Men use a range of techniques to achieve coercive control. One of the most valuable
and commonly used techniques is the disguise. This means that men will behave and
present one way when abusing the woman in private (a terroriser), and very differently
when in public, at work or socialising (a charmer). This ability to put on a disguise not
only prevents people detecting his abuse but also acts to confuse and isolate the woman
further. She thinks, ‘maybe there’s something wrong with me because he’s acting so
nice with them.’ In fact in social situations he is cleverly able to act both as a respectable
member of society while sending secret intimidating signals to the woman that only
she will understand.
https://www.whiteribbon.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/From_violence_to_coercive_control_Fisher_2011.pdf

This is exactly how I perceive Jeremy Bamber.

Statistics suggests an abuser is 60-80% more likely to use coercive control over a partner as opposed to physical assault which is 20 - 40% more likely

So whilst it has been suggested Jeremy Bamber hasn't presented with examples of physical violence, which I disagree with, he has displayed high levels of coercive control.

Many people have questioned why Julie Mugford stayed with Jeremy Bamber for as long as she did and why she didn't go to the police sooner. The answers to these questions are complex but again can be explained in terms of the coercive control she had been subjected to by Bamber, much of which would have been invisible to outsiders looking in.

The following book is a worthwhile read imo:

https://books.google.co.uk/booksid=8h0TDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA4&lpg=PA4&dq=entrapment+strategies+and+coercive+control&source=bl&ots=waeK7jzB-O&sig=VyCL7uQrexUOqZhHk4eCqqSqTn0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj1kN62rq3RAhUDIcAKHYyNA50Q6AEIQzAF#v=onepage&q=entrapment%20strategies%20and%20coercive%20control&f=false

[lookout]

 " Decades of abuse ?" Where ? How,when he's been locked-up ? It's JB who's being abuse by being locked-up for years----------for NOTHING.

[Stephanie]

" Decades of abuse ?" Where ? How,when he's been locked-up ? It's JB who's being abuse by being locked-up for years----------for NOTHING.

Julie Mugford murdered no one yet people are still abusing her 30 years on for having giving evidence against Jeremy Bamber. Therefore indirectly she is still being abused by Bamber.

Jeremy Bamber was found guilty of mass murder in a court of law, therefore in your opinion he is allegedly innocent. He isn't allegedly guilty.

He is allegedly being abused for nothing in your eyes.

Did you know Lookout that coercive control is the most widespread and devastating strategy men use to dominate women in personal life?

[guest7363]

Julie Mugford murdered no one yet people are still abusing her 30 years on for having giving evidence against Jeremy Bamber. Therefore indirectly she is still being abused by Bamber.

Jeremy Bamber was found guilty of mass murder in a court of law, therefore in your opinion he is allegedly innocent. He isn't allegedly guilty.

He is allegedly being abused for nothing in your eyes.

Did you know Lookout that coercive control is the most widespread and devastating strategy men use to dominate women in personal life?

I wonder Steph, when Bamber got Julie to assist with the Robbery it was part of his strategy to control Julie?  This could be why he confessed to Julie about the murders, he thought that he had a hold over her regarding this and the cheque book fraud?

[lookout]

Julie Mugford murdered no one yet people are still abusing her 30 years on for having giving evidence against Jeremy Bamber. Therefore indirectly she is still being abused by Bamber.

Jeremy Bamber was found guilty of mass murder in a court of law, therefore in your opinion he is allegedly innocent. He isn't allegedly guilty.

He is allegedly being abused for nothing in your eyes.

Did you know Lookout that coercive control is the most widespread and devastating strategy men use to dominate women in personal life?

I wouldn't know about coercive control in men,personally,but I do know that a woman HAS to be the instigator of a man having coercive control. Behind every man,there is a " she who must be obeyed ",or else. Takes two to tango and all that.

BTW,I'm no feminist either and will ALWAYS look at both sides when it comes to tale-telling.

[Stephanie]

I wouldn't know about coercive control in men,personally,but I do know that a woman HAS to be the instigator of a man having coercive control. Behind every man,there is a " she who must be obeyed ",or else. Takes two to tango and all that.

BTW,I'm no feminist either and will ALWAYS look at both sides when it comes to tale-telling.

You clearly know nothing and are showing ignorance.

Just not both sides when it comes to Jeremy Bamber because you made your mind up 30 odd years ago that he was innocent and no one is going to change your mind. Even the man himself if he confessed. Yes we know Lookout. 

[lookout]

You clearly know nothing and are showing ignorance.

Just not both sides when it comes to Jeremy Bamber because you made your mind up 30 odd years ago that he was innocent and no one is going to change your mind. Even the man himself if he confessed. Yes we know Lookout. 

How do you know that I " know nothing ?" Stop being so bloody rude.

[lebaleb]

What I accept is Julie has been subjected to decades of abuse because of her involvement with Jeremy Bamber, as indeed have others, and this abuse has been rationalised by many in order to support there agendas. There has been much suggestion of her complicity into the murders which leaves me questioning why these suggestions are made in the first place.

Many people are unaware of the consequences of abusive partners in romantic relationships nor of the strategies employed by these abusers. Julie Mugford's witness statements clearly also demonstrates Bamber's strategies of entrapment and control and thankfully the police recognised this when she finally came forward. They are to be congratulated for this aspect of their investigations, not condemned imo.

She was not a scorned women as some have suggested she was a victim of psychological torture. There is a vast difference between the two.

And because of what she had been subjected to by Bamber it is understandable why she made the odd one or two mistakes whilst giving live evidence.

[/b]

She also lied in her statements to the police which is a crime.

[Stephanie]

[/b]

She also lied in her statements to the police which is a crime.

What did she lie about. List what you think it is she lied about.

[lookout]

" Odd one or two mistakes ?" There was a barrage of them.Pity she " blubbered " all through her questioning by the defense or you'd have heard a few more. Those crocodile tears were well-timed !!

[Stephanie]

" Odd one or two mistakes ?" There was a barrage of them.Pity she " blubbered " all through her questioning by the defense or you'd have heard a few more. Those crocodile tears were well-timed !!

If they had been crocodile tears the jury would have noticed. The reason she cried was because it was clearly a traumatising experience for her.

The barrage of mistakes you refer were made by Jeremy and that is why he is where he is now. The reason he remains after so long is because all arguments put forward have been weak, and get weaker still with the passage of time.

[lookout]

If they had been crocodile tears the jury would have noticed. The reason she cried was because it was clearly a traumatising experience for her.

The barrage of mistakes you refer were made by Jeremy and that is why he is where he is now. The reason he remains after so long is because all arguments put forward have been weak, and get weaker still with the passage of time.

Nearly as traumatising as receiving a cheque for £25,000 ?