Murders at White House Farm by Carol Ann Lee.

[Caroline]

Sometimes this forum is its' own worst enemy.  It cannot afford to exist in a silo, separate from developments, when there are other people either willing to give insight and information or at least participate.  Well it can actually exist like that - but at what price?  Ever-decreasing relevance to the case?

But they aren't they just saying they have more insight and information.

[lookout]

Unfortunately Roch, because there's no information forthcoming as yet, the tendency is to go over old ground ( not a good idea for those of us/me, whose memory isn't as sharp as it was ) and sadly it just produces the same repetitive arguments as before. It's quite easy to lose interest this way.
 This is my view anyway.

[Roch]

But they aren't they just saying they have more insight and information.

Well if we use a recent example, I suppose that might depend on whether there is any images or information in the 36 page report that hasn't previously been noticed, examined or debated before.  I'm not sure.  But that's just one example - from one member.  Who knows what would happen and what might end up on here, if the place was more inclusive and less dismissive? 

[Caroline]

Well if we use a recent example, I suppose that might depend on whether there is any images or information in the 36 page report that hasn't previously been noticed, examined or debated before.  I'm not sure.  But that's just one example - from one member.  Who knows what would happen and what might end up on here, if the place was more inclusive and less dismissive?

Perhaps people wouldn't be so dismissive if they hadn't had the wool pulled so many times and people actually posted substance and not unsubstantiated claims.

[Roch]

Perhaps people wouldn't be so dismissive if they hadn't had the wool pulled so many times and people actually posted substance and not unsubstantiated claims.

I think once you catch sight of certain evidence - you will ask yourself (in at least some of these situations you may be referring to) - were the claims actually lacking in substance and did I really have the wool pulled over my eyes?

[Steve_uk]

I think once you catch sight of certain evidence - you will ask yourself (in at least some of these situations you may be referring to) - were the claims actually lacking in substance and did I really have the wool pulled over my eyes?

It would help if we could examine this evidence in open forum, instead of some clique deciding themselves what they will release into the public domain.

[susan]

It would help if we could examine this evidence in open forum, instead of some clique deciding themselves what they will release into the public domain.

Hi steve I get the impression that any new evidence would need to go to JB's legal team before it is put into the public domain I honestly don't think a clique exists on the forum with regard to this issue.

[Roch]

It would help if we could examine this evidence in open forum, instead of some clique deciding themselves what they will release into the public domain.

Steve I cant argue with that.  That's a fair point.  I'm afraid it's not in my remit to do that and hate to admit it - I'd be dubious about posting it up on here anyway.  I think it will come out in good time but I dont necessarily feel it will lead to the release of Jeremy - because I believe the case is so political - every possible dirty trick, dismissive attitude and due process red tape would be employed to ensure he stayed inside.

[Caroline]

I think once you catch sight of certain evidence - you will ask yourself (in at least some of these situations you may be referring to) - were the claims actually lacking in substance and did I really have the wool pulled over my eyes?

Maybe, maybe not - but that is the acid test and unless it is tested we'll never know.

[Steve_uk]

Hi steve I get the impression that any new evidence would need to go to JB's legal team before it is put into the public domain I honestly don't think a clique exists on the forum with regard to this issue.

Susan they are very slow. How long does it take for an expert to analyse Sheila's alleged suicide letter? That's just one example.

[Caroline]

Steve I cant argue with that.  That's a fair point.  I'm afraid it's not in my remit to do that and hate to admit it - I'd be dubious about posting it up on here anyway.  I think it will come out in good time but I dont necessarily feel it will lead to the release of Jeremy - because I believe the case is so political - every possible dirty trick, dismissive attitude and due process red tape would be employed to ensure he stayed inside.

But if this evidence is so compelling, they would have no choice.

[Roch]

But if this evidence is so compelling, they would have no choice.

Judging by the attitude of DCI Stuart Smith of the Serious Crime Directorate - I'm not so certain.  I felt his 'Dear Tatchell' letter was basically battening down the hatches and sticking up two fingers. 

[susan]

Steve I cant argue with that.  That's a fair point.  I'm afraid it's not in my remit to do that and hate to admit it - I'd be dubious about posting it up on here anyway.  I think it will come out in good time but I dont necessarily feel it will lead to the release of Jeremy - because I believe the case is so political - every possible dirty trick, dismissive attitude and due process red tape would be employed to ensure he stayed inside.

Hi Roch if the evidence is strong enough how can the case be dismissed.  I am not aware of any new evidence but I get the feeling more than your's has been discovered and if his supporters and legal team shout loud enough they will be heard.

[JackieD]

It would help if we could examine this evidence in open forum, instead of some clique deciding themselves what they will release into the public domain.

Don't we ridiculous. If Roch is not posting the information there will obviously be a reason
This is not a game, some information has to be confidential

[Caroline]

Don't we ridiculous. If Roch is not posting the information there will obviously be a reason
This is not a game, some information has to be confidential

Don't you read anything properly? Roch has said on MORE than one occasion that this info is already in the public domain!