If Jeremy was released

[David1819]

Another poster mentioned you beforehand. My post doesn't just mention you.

I said I believe you believe think Bamber is guilty. There has been just too much incriminating evidence posted on here resulting in 5 other long term supporters changing stance. All of which you have read as you spend all day on here.

But as you said 'hell would freeze over' before you change you're 'gut feeling' from 31 years ago & withdraw support.

Your exaggerating again Adam. Only two long term supporters have changed stance.

Caroline - Jeremy failing to adequately answer a question about a wallet that took place 30 years ago is by default "evasive". Therefore he did indeed murder his family. Right after killing everyone, Jeremy went to the upstairs office, took all the money out of Nevill's wallet. He then stood there at 2.30 am counting the money then put it back in Nevill's wallet and put Nevill's wallet along with the money exactly where it was found. Why he would count the money and not take it is rather odd. Maybe after he finished counting the cash he realised his scuba suit had no pockets?

JaneJ - Compromise is an inherent part of a loving relationship. For Caroline's sake Jane J had to change stance and decide Julie's court outfit was not so bad after all.

[Adam]

Susan and Grahame changed stance. Although Grahame resurfaced to the forum claiming the police framed Bamber. Alias changed stance to undecided saying she believed Bamber would let Sheila live rather than shoot her twice.

Jane J supporting Bamber  because she didn't like Julie's court outfit is no worse than some of the other reasons.  Changing stance directly after Caroline is no confirmation she was following Caroline, as Jane J has always refused to discuss her stance change reason.

[Caroline]

Your exaggerating again Adam. Only two long term supporters have changed stance.

Caroline - Jeremy failing to adequately answer a question about a wallet that took place 30 years ago is by default "evasive". Therefore he did indeed murder his family. Right after killing everyone, Jeremy went to the upstairs office, took all the money out of Nevill's wallet. He then stood there at 2.30 am counting the money then put it back in Nevill's wallet and put Nevill's wallet along with the money exactly where it was found. Why he would count the money and not take it is rather odd. Maybe after he finished counting the cash he realised his scuba suit had no pockets?

JaneJ - Compromise is an inherent part of a loving relationship. For Caroline's sake Jane J had to change stance and decide Julie's court outfit was not so bad after all.

Didn't say any of that xxxxxxxx.

[David1819]

Didn't say any of that xxxxxxxx.

Then what are you saying?

Because if the sum of money in the wallet links Jeremy to the crime as you suggest. What other way could he have possibly counted the money that night? And what reason is there for him not taking the money after he counted it?

You see, the conjecture that arises from walletgate is absurd.

[Adam]

I bet Caroline sometimes wishes she had done what Jane J did. Annonce a stance change and not give a reason.

[Scales]

Looking ahead to the future if Jeremy ever gets released how would he cope with the world. So much has changed since 1985. Mobile phones, internet, volumes of traffic, housing estates, terrorism and lots lots more. Not knowing him personally how do you all think he would manage in 2017? How much compensation would he receive? Who would have to pay that? Would he be entitled  to anything at WHF? All hypothetical of course but what do you think he be like?

The Thought of release will probable frighten him now.

Is he on this forum?

[susan]

I bet Caroline sometimes wishes she had done what Jane J did. Annonce a stance change and not give a reason.

Adam why do you think that I am under the impression that Caroline changed her stance for more reasons than the wallet issue she saw the truth behind all the myths and stories told on here after the intensive research she did and made her own mind up on innocent or guilty,

[susan]

The Thought of release will probable frighten him now.

Is he on this forum?

Jeremy is not allowed internet access so no he is not on the forum but I suspect members of his CT are

[susan]

Then what are you saying?

Because if the sum of money in the wallet links Jeremy to the crime as you suggest. What other way could he have possibly counted the money that night? And what reason is there for him not taking the money after he counted it?

You see, the conjecture that arises from walletgate is absurd.

David I think what caused Caroline to become suspicious of Jeremy was how evasive he was when she asked him about the wallet not the money or how he knew what was in the way he ignored the question etc.,

[Caroline]

Then what are you saying?

Because if the sum of money in the wallet links Jeremy to the crime as you suggest. What other way could he have possibly counted the money that night? And what reason is there for him not taking the money after he counted it?

You see, the conjecture that arises from walletgate is absurd.

Caroline - Jeremy failing to adequately answer a question about a wallet that took place 30 years ago is by default "evasive". Therefore he did indeed murder his family. No, didn't say he murdered his family because he knew how much was in the wallet! I SAID his AVOIDING the question caused me to be suspicious because he wasn't evasive - he AVOIDED the question and still is; providing TWO reasons why he didn't answer - one contradicting the other. This is ONE of the reasons that formed doubts about him in my mind. ONE of the reasons - got it?

Right after killing everyone, Jeremy went to the upstairs office, took all the money out of Nevill's wallet. He then stood there at 2.30 am counting the money then put it back in Nevill's wallet and put Nevill's wallet along with the money exactly where it was found. Why he would count the money and not take it is rather odd. How the bloody hell would I know? But he didn't need to take it then, an empty wallet might seem suspicious - he could easily take it later, it wasn't going anywhere - or so he thought!

Maybe after he finished counting the cash he realised his scuba suit had no pockets? I have never said I believe in the we suit as well you know but don't let he facts get in the way of your goading. You don't usually let a little thing such as a FACT get in the way.

JaneJ - Compromise is an inherent part of a loving relationship. For Caroline's sake Jane J had to change stance and decide Julie's court outfit was not so bad after all. Your obsession with both of us is really quite creepy and certainly unhealthy. I used to rate you quite highly as a poster until you developed into a was of the most obsessed supporters that I have seen. Seriously, if I were you, I'd be embarrassed!

[David1819]

Caroline - Jeremy failing to adequately answer a question about a wallet that took place 30 years ago is by default "evasive". Therefore he did indeed murder his family. No, didn't say he murdered his family because he knew how much was in the wallet! I SAID his AVOIDING the question caused me to be suspicious because he wasn't evasive - he AVOIDED the question and still is; providing TWO reasons why he didn't answer - one contradicting the other. This is ONE of the reasons that formed doubts about him in my mind. ONE of the reasons - got it?

Right after killing everyone, Jeremy went to the upstairs office, took all the money out of Nevill's wallet. He then stood there at 2.30 am counting the money then put it back in Nevill's wallet and put Nevill's wallet along with the money exactly where it was found. Why he would count the money and not take it is rather odd. How the bloody hell would I know? But he didn't need to take it then, an empty wallet might seem suspicious - he could easily take it later, it wasn't going anywhere - or so he thought!

Maybe after he finished counting the cash he realised his scuba suit had no pockets? I have never said I believe in the we suit as well you know but don't let he facts get in the way of your goading. You don't usually let a little thing such as a FACT get in the way.

Then he didn't answer because he had no answer to question. If he never counted the money and put the wallet away he would have nothing to be evasive about. Thus no answer is in itself the answer to your question.

[Caroline]

Then he didn't answer because he had no answer to question. If he never counted the money and put the wallet away he would have nothing to be evasive about. Thus no answer is in itself the answer to your question.

Enough David - I'm not in the habit of making excuses if you wish to do that, that's your concern. I won't be replying to any more of this!