Author Topic: Mugfords statements.  (Read 7722 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #75 on: May 13, 2017, 01:44:PM »
I was trying to think of that phrase the other day-----Gish Gallop,yes,blinding one with science,etc.
It's what happened at the trial.

Offline buddy

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1296
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #76 on: May 13, 2017, 03:51:PM »
"I had a good friendly relationship with the whole family". This was after June had called her a Harlot, and offered to buy her a flat. "I was very hurt by June's remarks".
" Prior to Christmas 1984 I met Colin, said to Jeremy that he would be hurt at the death of his children, Jeremy said he would be doing Colin a favour, as they would be a millstone round his neck".
So as early as before Christmas 1984 2 years before the murders she was aware of the plan to commit mass murder. Go to the police NO. No one can convince me that this is truthful, if it is then she was an accomplice.

guest2181

  • Guest
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #77 on: May 13, 2017, 04:03:PM »
"I had a good friendly relationship with the whole family". This was after June had called her a Harlot, and offered to buy her a flat. "I was very hurt by June's remarks".
" Prior to Christmas 1984 I met Colin, said to Jeremy that he would be hurt at the death of his children, Jeremy said he would be doing Colin a favour, as they would be a millstone round his neck".
So as early as before Christmas 1984 2 years before the murders she was aware of the plan to commit mass murder. Go to the police NO. No one can convince me that this is truthful, if it is then she was an accomplice.

8 months not 2 years.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #78 on: May 13, 2017, 04:06:PM »
I can certainly agree there,to which, IF JB had said those things then she has to be the most hardened of criminals herself and without doubt an accessory.

I note that the fact JM allegedly knew that the tragedy was going to happen,that this didn't also make headline news like that of others who'd also known of their partner's intentions. Why was she any different ?

Offline buddy

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1296
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #79 on: May 13, 2017, 04:10:PM »
8 months not 2 years.
OK Hartley, but still enough time.

Offline JackiePreece

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4743
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #80 on: May 13, 2017, 04:19:PM »
On tape & in WS's she's said why she didn't believe Bamber would do anything. And why she didn't do anything for a month.

You're last post backs this up. As there are no other examples of boyfriends carrying out boasts to girlfriends to kill their family. So why should Julie believe Bamber would be different ?

The evidence of Bamber keeping a tight reign on Julie & whisking her around England & Amsterdam for a month, meant she didn't get the chance to engage with the police.

Hilarious
Mugford had no opportunity to engage with the police?????
"No hour of life is wasted that is spent in the saddle" Winston Churchill

Offline buddy

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1296
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #81 on: May 13, 2017, 05:11:PM »
Hilarious
Mugford had no opportunity to engage with the police?????
He was keeping such a tight rein on Julie that he dumped her. and still it took a month for her to come forward!. Oh was it because she was only 20. I am sure that there have been girls younger than that who would have said something. Stop keep harping about her age. I saw terrible things before I was 20.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33775
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #82 on: May 13, 2017, 05:14:PM »
He was keeping such a tight rein on Julie that he dumped her. and still it took a month for her to come forward!. Oh was it because she was only 20. I am sure that there have been girls younger than that who would have said something. Stop keep harping about her age. I saw terrible things before I was 20.

I'm truly sorry that you had that experience, Buddy but everything depends on one's past experienced on no all will had had yours. They will, however, have had their own.

Offline buddy

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1296
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #83 on: May 13, 2017, 05:20:PM »
I'm truly sorry that you had that experience, Buddy but everything depends on one's past experienced on no all will had had yours. They will, however, have had their own.
Jane I had no passed experience of gathering body parts.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44381
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #84 on: May 13, 2017, 11:45:PM »
He was keeping such a tight rein on Julie that he dumped her. and still it took a month for her to come forward!. Oh was it because she was only 20. I am sure that there have been girls younger than that who would have said something. Stop keep harping about her age. I saw terrible things before I was 20.

That is wrong. She went to the police straight after they split.

Of course he kept a tight reign on her. Whisking her over to WHF at 6am on the massacre morning. Then taking her to Eastbourne, Pevensey, Amsterdam, London & the funeral.

A month after the massacre, Bamber was not aware of the silencer & felt he was safe. Julie wanted out anyway as she knew what Bamber had done.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline JackiePreece

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4743
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #85 on: May 14, 2017, 09:17:AM »
That is wrong. She went to the police straight after they split.

Of course he kept a tight reign on her. Whisking her over to WHF at 6am on the massacre morning. Then taking her to Eastbourne, Pevensey, Amsterdam, London & the funeral.

A month after the massacre, Bamber was not aware of the silencer & felt he was safe. Julie wanted out anyway as she knew what Bamber had done.

Mind reading must be your speciality
"No hour of life is wasted that is spent in the saddle" Winston Churchill

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33775
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #86 on: May 14, 2017, 09:38:AM »
Jane I had no passed experience of gathering body parts.

My respect to you, Buddy.

Offline buddy

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1296
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #87 on: May 23, 2017, 04:08:PM »
In her statement JM said she knew from day one that Jeremy was responsible. Not a hitman but Jeremy.
For years I thought that AE had convinced JM to identify the twins but no she didn't. JM asked permission to identify the twins, but wait a minute the poor traumatised JM asked for a second viewing why?
Did she want to gloat over her boyfriends handywork? No she knew that Jeremy wasn't responsible or she would have shopped him in on day one if she knew.
It is beyond belief that she taught children after the tragedy. JM is a liar IMO.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33775
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #88 on: May 23, 2017, 04:18:PM »
In her statement JM said she knew from day one that Jeremy was responsible. Not a hitman but Jeremy.
For years I thought that AE had convinced JM to identify the twins but no she didn't. JM asked permission to identify the twins, but wait a minute the poor traumatised JM asked for a second viewing why?
Did she want to gloat over her boyfriends handywork? No she knew that Jeremy wasn't responsible or she would have shopped him in on day one if she knew.
It is beyond belief that she taught children after the tragedy. JM is a liar IMO.

There's "knowing" and hoping like hell one's mistaken and then there's KNOWING and there's no doubt. I guess IF it was actually permission she sought, it was probably about her suitability, as a non family member -none of whom DID offer and none of whom could tell the twins apart- to do what should have been the family's job. I don't recall that she made an official request for a second viewing.

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
Re: Mugfords statements.
« Reply #89 on: May 23, 2017, 04:25:PM »
There's "knowing" and hoping like hell one's mistaken and then there's KNOWING and there's no doubt. I guess IF it was actually permission she sought, it was probably about her suitability, as a non family member -none of whom DID offer and none of whom could tell the twins apart- to do what should have been the family's job. I don't recall that she made an official request for a second viewing.

You keep defending her if you think her actions are acceptable. I think it would be very hard to find a women so nasty and one day she will get the fame she craved in the News of the World article for all the wrong reasons and will end up paying a very high price for her lies
Julie Mugford the main prosecution witness was guilty of numerous crimes, 13 separate cheque frauds, robbery, and drug dealing and also making a deal with a national newspaper before trial that if she could convince a jury her ex boyfriend was guilty of five murders she would receive £25,000