Sandra Leans book "No Smoke" should be re-vised or withdrawn

[nugnug]

you perfectly aware of it and choose to lie about as jackie can confirm.

[Stephanie]

you perfectly aware of it and choose to lie about as jackie can confirm.

Simon Hall and those people he told about the Zenith burglary were the ones who chose to lie about this omission, not me.

[nugnug]

sorry but theres proof to the contrary.

[Stephanie]

sorry but theres proof to the contrary.

nugnug
Joined: 15 Feb 2010
Posts: 1341
PostPosted: Fri Aug 09, 2013 10:59 pm    Post subject:   Reply with quote
im still in denial about this case i cant believe it. 

nugnug
Joined: 15 Feb 2010
Posts: 1341
PostPosted: Sat Aug 10, 2013 11:45 am    Post subject:   Reply with quote
i wonder was his mental health was assessed before he made a formall confession in the case of someone who hadent been convicted it would of been but with a convicted man it might not of been

Karen
Joined: 21 Apr 2010
Posts: 1211
PostPosted: Sat Aug 10, 2013 11:20 am    Post subject:   Reply with quote
I believe Simon had been in an open prison for some time Mo jo

You are correct nugnug he did seem to be having some sort of breakdown which appeared to get worse over this past year

As for his confession, I too am very shocked as are Simon's friends and family.

I would like to see this confession for myself. It will probably end up in the newspapers ..MODERATED OUT.

Karen
Joined: 21 Apr 2010
Posts: 1211

PostPosted: Sat Aug 10, 2013 12:12 pm    Post subject:   Reply with quote
I don't know the answer to that question nugnug. As you will be aware, Simon was totally alienated from his family and friends ...MODERATED OUT ....

MODERATED OUT

I also know that the police took a statement from Simon also. Simon Hall gave a statement to the police in relation to alleged historical childhood abuse, nothing to do with his confession. Why would the police do this when they already believed he was guilty anyway? http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6640.msg313343.html#msg313343
http://shirleymckie.myfastforum.org/ftopic1528-0-asc-0.php

[Stephanie]

sorry but theres proof to the contrary.

What there is proof of is that you have attacked, harassed and stalked me via the internet for years now.

[nugnug]

I'm afraid there is Jackie has already suplyed it.

[sandra L]

At 7.46 this morning, I posted

I'm not inclined to take Stephanie's word at face value because, amongst other things, as she openly admits, she took a post from my facebook wall, altered it, then posted it elsewhere to make it look as if I was guilty of wrongdoing when she knew perfectly well I was not.

 Stephanie responded at 9.54am

You are projecting Sandra

But wait! At 2.20am, Stephanie posted a long post, which she has now posted several times, which included the following excerpt from me

I wrote a long email on October 4th, explaining the circumstances. Part of that email, however, referred to a post Stephanie had put on the Wrongly Accused forum meantime, in her belief that I was ignoring her.  (Note this is only a 48 hour period.) I wrote, “I'm also interested in why you chose to use my facebook post (adapted) to post on wrongly accused. Following from Shirley's post as it does, it makes it look like one of the "un-named" individuals is me. I have never attacked you, criticised you or made any other negative comment about you anywhere - I may simply be reading too much into it, but that is certainly how it came across.”

Stephanie responded:“....yes, I did use your post on facebook on the wrongly accused, and when I did I knew you would be more annoyed over that than you are about what I am going through at the moment. And I have a couple of friends that will verify that. “

I was extremely concerned at this, as it appeared that Stephanie was happy to have me painted in a dishonest light, simply because I had not responded immediately to her emails

.

So, there you have it folks. The poster on here happily accusing all and sundry of dishonesty not only admits to dishonestly painting others as dishonest, but, when called out on it, attempts to use further dishonesty (you're projecting) to make it seem like her target is the one being dishonest.

Not particularly intelligent, utterly transparent, and, if I were so inclined, I'd even say, a little sad.

My advice, which will, of course, go completely unheeded, would be, Put the shovel down.

[lookout]

At 7.46 this morning, I posted
 Stephanie responded at 9.54am
But wait! At 2.20am, Stephanie posted a long post, which she has now posted several times, which included the following excerpt from me.

So, there you have it folks. The poster on here happily accusing all and sundry of dishonesty not only admits to dishonestly painting others as dishonest, but, when called out on it, attempts to use further dishonesty (you're projecting) to make it seem like her target is the one being dishonest.

Not particularly intelligent, utterly transparent, and, if I were so inclined, I'd even say, a little sad.

My advice, which will, of course, go completely unheeded, would be, Put the shovel down.

Well said Sandra. I applaud you.

[lilly15]

I agree 

[marty]

Bingo

[Stephanie]

I wrote a long email on October 4th, explaining the circumstances. Part of that email, however, referred to a post Stephanie had put on the Wrongly Accused forum meantime, in her belief that I was ignoring her.  (Note this is only a 48 hour period.) I wrote, “I'm also interested in why you chose to use my facebook post (adapted) to post on wrongly accused. Following from Shirley's post as it does, it makes it look like one of the "un-named" individuals is me. I have never attacked you, criticised you or made any other negative comment about you anywhere - I may simply be reading too much into it, but that is certainly how it came across.”

Stephanie responded:“....yes, I did use your post on facebook on the wrongly accused, and when I did I knew you would be more annoyed over that than you are about what I am going through at the moment. And I have a couple of friends that will verify that. “

I was extremely concerned at this, as it appeared that Stephanie was happy to have me painted in a dishonest light, simply because I had not responded immediately to her emails. Other things going on behind the scenes had alerted me to the possibility that Stephanie was not being entirely straight with me.

There are 2 sides to every story Sandra and I have yet to tell mine regarding the time period to which you refer but for balance (and transparency), you stated in November 2010:

"My motivation has been called into question, my honesty and integrity trashed, all because I chose to devote seven years of my life trying to help people. Yes, I know you were at the centre of a hate campaign, but that wasn't my doing and I played no part in it whatsoever - nobody could ever have used a single word I had said about you, because there was nothing to use. http://forum.wronglyaccusedperson.org.uk/series-on-cases-from-sandra-leans-book-no-smoke/re-simon-hall-wrongly-convicted-of-murder/

" what hurts is that you could not step back, knowing me as I thought you did, and ask yourself, is there perhaps another explanation for this. Nope, instant public condemnation, in the belief that you were being attacked, when, in fact, I was trying to defend you.

That your words are being used to paint me as dishonest and unreliable, and that in turn is being used to undermine Luke's case, is probably one of the worst experiences in all of this. I thought you were my friend.

There was absolutely no intention to 'scapegoat' you for anything

My post was an attempt to take the wind out of his sails by saying, Yes, Stephanie did talk to John, but not in the sinister/negative way he is trying to portray it. What John has done is take an innocent mistake by Stephanie and turn it into a weapon for him to use against others
http://www.friedgreentomatoes.org/articles/emotional_manipulation.php

I'm not inclined to take Stephanie's word at face value because, amongst other things, as she openly admits, she took a post from my facebook wall, altered it, then posted it elsewhere to make it look as if I was guilty of wrongdoing when she knew perfectly well I was not.

The way you chose to word the above does indeed portray me in a sinister/negative way but that was your intent, though as I've stated, the other side to story has yet to be told.

However, it wasn't John who decided to take an innocent mistake made by me and choose to turn it into a weapon to use against others, it was you!

So, there you have it folks. The poster on here happily accusing all and sundry of dishonesty not only admits to dishonestly painting others as dishonest, but, when called out on it, attempts to use further dishonesty (you're projecting) to make it seem like her target is the one being dishonest.

Not particularly intelligent, utterly transparent, and, if I were so inclined, I'd even say, a little sad.

My advice, which will, of course, go completely unheeded, would be, Put the shovel down.

Maybe the intention of your above post was to knock the wind out of my sails but it merely solidifies to me what I learned about you long ago.

I recognise I cannot save all other victims from men like Simon Hall but I am appealing to your better nature to consider the impact your book could have on others. Whilst I fully understand you probably want to put it all behind you, there will be a point in the future imo where these matters will need addressing. Why wait when you can do something about it now?

[Stephanie]

Are people to sit back and do nothing when the authorities hide information, mislead the public about "facts," etc, or do we do what we can, with what we have, and leave it to people to make up their own minds what they think of the information presented?

Yet you sat back and did nothing when Simon Hall's guilt was being exposed back in early 2013? You sat back and did nothing when it became apparent Simon Hall had hidden information from the authorities (re the Zenith burglary) and indeed most of us and had misled the public about "facts," etc..

I don't understand your logic Sandra?

At that time, I asked you to help and come out and publicly support Simon's innocence but you refused and stated on the 3rd February 2013:

"I refer to your recent communications with me, your posts on the Bamber forum, and our previous exchanges.

While I appreciate that fighting a MOJ is an uphill struggle, and a steep learning curve, there are some "mistakes" which cannot be explained as ignorance, enthusiastic but misguided belief, or any of the other well trodden routes most people take on their journey towards justice.

I personally believe that your recent online behaviour, the way you handled Simon's confession to the other burglary, and the consequent attacks of Shaun and Stephanie Bon have all been detrimental to public support for Simon. The letter, supposedly from Simon, was a disgraceful slap in the face to many, many people who have tried to help Simon over the years.

I was a victim Sandra, a victim of a man who was both highly disturbed and indeed dangerous. I couldn't see the wood through the trees. My enthusiastic belief was indeed misguided and I was indeed ignorant to psychopathy and varying personality disorders.

[JackiePreece]

At 7.46 this morning, I posted
 Stephanie responded at 9.54am
But wait! At 2.20am, Stephanie posted a long post, which she has now posted several times, which included the following excerpt from me.

So, there you have it folks. The poster on here happily accusing all and sundry of dishonesty not only admits to dishonestly painting others as dishonest, but, when called out on it, attempts to use further dishonesty (you're projecting) to make it seem like her target is the one being dishonest.

Not particularly intelligent, utterly transparent, and, if I were so inclined, I'd even say, a little sad.

My advice, which will, of course, go completely unheeded, would be, Put the shovel down.

What a sad state of affairs Sandra considering you have only ever been kind to the person who is constantly attacking you
What dignified responses to these personal attacks

[nugnug]

Yet you sat back and did nothing when Simon Hall's guilt was being exposed back in early 2013? You sat back and did nothing when it became apparent Simon Hall had hidden information from the authorities (re the Zenith burglary) and indeed most of us and had misled the public about "facts," etc..

I don't understand your logic Sandra?

At that time, I asked you to help and come out and publicly support Simon's innocence but you refused and stated on the 3rd February 2013:

"I refer to your recent communications with me, your posts on the Bamber forum, and our previous exchanges.

While I appreciate that fighting a MOJ is an uphill struggle, and a steep learning curve, there are some "mistakes" which cannot be explained as ignorance, enthusiastic but misguided belief, or any of the other well trodden routes most people take on their journey towards justice.

I personally believe that your recent online behaviour, the way you handled Simon's confession to the other burglary, and the consequent attacks of Shaun and Stephanie Bon have all been detrimental to public support for Simon. The letter, supposedly from Simon, was a disgraceful slap in the face to many, many people who have tried to help Simon over the years.

I was a victim Sandra, a victim of a man who was both highly disturbed and indeed dangerous. I couldn't see the wood through the trees. My enthusiastic belief was indeed misguided and I was indeed ignorant to psychopathy and varying personality disorders.

you were fully aware of the zenth bugerly a long time before anyone else was as i am sure will confirm

jackie was the first to mention it not you.

[notsure]

What a sad state of affairs Sandra considering you have only ever been kind to the person who is constantly attacking you
What dignified responses to these personal attacks

well said jackie, I am not an expert on any of the cases Sandra has supported but can see she responds eloquently and sticks to the facts which I applaud her for.

anyone who fights so hard for someone else without any gain deserves a medal and all of those she has previously supported should be eternally grateful.