Why would Ann Eaton need the names of CCRC members who agreed to 2002 Appeal?

[Samson]

Is the suggestion that AE wanted to make a complaint about the CCRC referring the case to the COA ? As part of the complaint she asked EP for the names of  the people in the CCRC.  EP obliged.

Can't see any problem. It's no secret the relatives were disappointed with the 2002 CCRC decision. The COA agreed with the relatives saying they thought the jury were right.

If AE wants to include names in the complaint & EP are allowed to divulge this, there is no problem.

Bamber makes enough complaints himself & is always naming names.

I don't follow. Why were  the relatives were disappointed with the 2002 CCRC decision?

[Caroline]

I don't follow. Why were  the relatives were disappointed with the 2002 CCRC decision?

Because the CCRC's decision allowed an appeal and they didn't want him to have the appeal - clearly!

[gringo]

The only purpose served probably related to her own arrogance, vanity and self preservation.  Perhaps she intended to harangue them or send them 'inside info' to show them the error of their decision.   
     
Good question.  Has she got something on EP?
 

   That seems a reasonable conclusion to me, Roch.
     As to whether she has something on EP, do you think that perhaps they share the same sense of "self preservation?
     The silencer evidence, if fabricated as many believe, would implicate AE as well as EP officers. I can think of no good reason why EP would obtain this information and so far nor has anyone else.

[Reader]

They have published the names of the individuals themselves but are claiming it's confidential information

Public information:
The Criminal Cases Review Commission will be established on 1st January 1997. Its members will be:
Sir Frederick Crawford (Chairman)
Miss Fiona King
Mr. Laurence Elks
Mr. David Kyle
Mr. John Leckey
Miss Jill Gort
Mr. Baden Skitt
Mr. John Knox
Dr. James MacKeith
Mr. Karamjit Singh
Professor Leonard Leigh
Mr. Edward Weiss
Mr. Anthony Foster
Mr. Barry Capon

Why would AE want to know which of the above made the decision?

[Adam]

I don't follow. Why were  the relatives were disappointed with the 2002 CCRC decision?

They didn't beieve there was suffcient evidence for the CCRC to refer to the COA.

They were right, being a high profile case the CCRC may have felt pressurised. But the COA made the right decision and even made an indirect criticism of the CCRC's decision.

[Caroline]

Public information:
The Criminal Cases Review Commission will be established on 1st January 1997. Its members will be:
Sir Frederick Crawford (Chairman)
Miss Fiona King
Mr. Laurence Elks
Mr. David Kyle
Mr. John Leckey
Miss Jill Gort
Mr. Baden Skitt
Mr. John Knox
Dr. James MacKeith
Mr. Karamjit Singh
Professor Leonard Leigh
Mr. Edward Weiss
Mr. Anthony Foster
Mr. Barry Capon

Why would AE want to know which of the above made the decision?

You would have to ask her that. BUT the CT can' claim that giving the names out is confidential and then post the same list of names on Twitter. If it was confidential information for EP, the it SHOULD be confidential for the CT.

[Roch]

They didn't beieve there was suffcient evidence for the CCRC to refer to the COA.

They were right, being a high profile case the CCRC may have felt pressurised. But the COA made the right decision and even made an indirect criticism of the CCRC's decision.

There is one slight problem here.  He should never have actually been locked up in the first place. Since it was known that Sheila was the killer. This was explained to Ann. Yet Ann went on to actively share responsibility  for Jeremy's incarceration (it served her best interests).  I can see how it comes across as a bit 'rich' that she sought to harangue these officials.

[Caroline]

There is one slight problem here.  He should never have actually been locked up in the first place. Since it was known that Sheila was the killer. This was explained to Ann. Yet Ann went on to actively share responsibility  for Jeremy's incarceration (it served her best interests).  I can see how it comes across as a bit 'rich' that she sought to harangue these officials.

Well, that depends on whether you believe he killed five people or not.