How Many People Knew The Twins

[Roch]

Why not?

She would have to be as absolutely cold as ice to do that and then just carry on as normal until her and Jeremy split. 

I think it's far more likely that her story was simply cobbled together, as a result of external pressures, a build up of mumerings and the realisation that Jeremy was going to take a fall.

[lookout]

They did, they used Eley only.

The images provided by David are not connected to this case, they show packaging of Eley bullets sold in the US distributed by Remington.
Such packaging is not available in the UK as they are distributed by Eley themselves.

I see.

[Jane]

She would have to be as absolutely cold as ice to do that and then just carry on as normal until her and Jeremy split. 

I think it's far more likely that her story was simply cobbled together, as a result of external pressures, a build up of mumerings and the realisation that Jeremy was going to take a fall.

Suppressed feelings wouldn't have been inappropriate under the circumstances.

[Roch]

It doesn't but if people are trying to demonise her by saying she was sick to ID the twins when she knew Jeremy had just murdered them, they have to acknowledge his guilt.

Hi Caroline - this is something that guilters do all the time on here and it needs addressing.  Forgive me for butting in - but Jackie is speaking hypothetically.

It means she would be sick, if she identified twins while knowing Jeremy was guilty.  It gets interpreted as innocent posters expressing that Jeremy must be guilty.  That's not what innocent posters are expressing.  They are tryng to express the level of unbelievableness in the prosection case.

[Adam]

I've amended my list on why Julie identified the bodies. After reading AE's WS. As Hartley said yesterday 'it doesn't really matter' that Julie identified the bodies. Which I've ways agreed with . 

Supporters always try to make a big thing of it. Jackie claiming  'Julie wouldn't have identified the bodies if Bamber was guilty'. I'm not sure how Jackie knows what Julie would do.

                                            -----------------------

AE asked her to.

The police asked her to.

Robert Howie volunteered but the police rejected his offer.

Saying 'no' would have been rude and unhelpful.

No one else volunteered.

Julie could identify the bodies apart.

She wanted to be helpful.

She was not as upset as everyone else. As was not related to any of the deceased.

She still didn't believe or was not sure Bamber was guilty.

She was not doing anything useful or constructive,  as had been whisked over by Bamber. So offered, or was asked.

Bamber seemed to be coping well, and could cope for a short period while Julie went to identify the bodies.

She went with another relative to give moral support.

If she didn't go with another relative, then she would have originally assumed she would be accompanied.

She believed Bamber could be guilty, identifying the twins is no worse than being by his side as he acted.

Bamber didn't offer to do this. 

Her WS was true and she felt she could communicate with them.

She offered in error. But couldn't withdraw once the offer had been made.

She wanted a break from the crime scene and police. Which was a situation she had not asked to be a part of.

She believed seeing the twins would help her come to terms with what had happened.

She was in the room when discussions about who would do this started. So not surprising she ended up doing this.

If not in the room, Bamber or someone else recommended to the police Julie could do this.

She had little attachment to the twins. They were her boyfriends sisters, sons.

Bamber had brought her over in a police car. She assumed this was so she could be helpful. Identifying the bodies is being helpful.

No one tried to stop her identifying the twins.

A combination of all or several of the above 24 reasons.

I wish supporters would address my 25 reasons why Julie identified the twins. It's been posted on this thread & a separate thread previously created in 2016.

Supporters just saying Bamber is innocent because Julie identified the twins, is not good enough.

[Adam]

Must admit if I had been woken then whisked over to a murder scene by Bamber, & the police asked me to do something, I'll do it.

[lookout]

How do you expect anyone to truthfully know why JM went to the mortuary ? Except that JM had volunteered to go " to save Jeremy "------CAL's words,and to also" convince herself that it had really happened". Closure in other words.
I do know,that according to AE JM had not cried or shown any distress whatsoever.

[maggie]

Must admit if I had been woken then whisked over to a murder scene by Bamber, & the police asked me to do something, I'll do it.

She wasn't whisked anywhere Adam, she made a choice to go or are you saying that Julie was just a girl therefore she didn't have a mind of her own? 

[Caroline]

She would have to be as absolutely cold as ice to do that and then just carry on as normal until her and Jeremy split. 

I think it's far more likely that her story was simply cobbled together, as a result of external pressures, a build up of mumerings and the realisation that Jeremy was going to take a fall.

Not really, think about it - someone you really care about is full of banter about what life would be life if only he/she could land their inheritance. You never really take them seriously when they talk about their family being gone. Then one day ........ There must have been a lot of confusion; "did he or didn't he?" Maybe she had to see for herself BUT the reason Julie ended up doing the formal ID was because she could tell the twins apart, not because she got some sick pleasure out of it and as Jane keeps saying 'there was no one else' other than Heather and Jones wanted her to stay with Colin.

[Jane]

Hi Caroline - this is something that guilters do all the time on here and it needs addressing.  Forgive me for butting in - but Jackie is speaking hypothetically.

It means she would be sick, if she identified twins while knowing Jeremy was guilty.  It gets interpreted as innocent posters expressing that Jeremy must be guilty.  That's not what innocent posters are expressing.  They are tryng to express the level of unbelievableness in the prosection case.

Then if I may, Roch, I'd like to pick up on something that those of the innocent persuasion are inclined to say without thinking it through. At the time Julie identified the twins, I don't believe she categorically KNEW that Jeremy was responsible. I think, though, because of the conversations they'd had, she was afraid and suspicious that he MIGHT be. Not for one moment do I think she wanted to believe her suspicions were correct. It may well have been, that having seen the appalling damage done to the boys, she convinced herself that the man she loved wasn't capable of such. I suspect doubts remained and I think she probably spent the following month in a mind set of veering between his guilt and his innocence. I think, over the next month, it may have been the behaviours she saw demonstrated, the words she heard said, coupled with his cavalier treatment of her, which finally convinced her of his guilt.  Julie never said Jeremy was guilty. How could she 'KNOW'? She wasn't there. She only KNEW what he'd told her. All she'd have had when she identified the twins was a horrible and nagging suspicion.

[Adam]

She wasn't whisked anywhere Adam, she made a choice to go or are you saying that Julie was just a girl therefore she didn't have a mind of her own?

Bamber got a police car to pick her up.

What was she going to do, refuse to go ?

[Caroline]

Hi Caroline - this is something that guilters do all the time on here and it needs addressing.  Forgive me for butting in - but Jackie is speaking hypothetically.

It means she would be sick, if she identified twins while knowing Jeremy was guilty.  It gets interpreted as innocent posters expressing that Jeremy must be guilty.  That's not what innocent posters are expressing.  They are tryng to express the level of unbelievableness in the prosection case.

I know exactly what she means - however, if Jeremy is guilty, Julie making a formal ID pales into insignificance. This is something the innocent side do all of the time; making the claim that Julie is 'sick' has the element of Jeremy being guilty BUT they push that aside and pull Julie into the spotlight with the claim of 'what about her'. There is nothing worse than killing 5 members of your family for money - there just isn't.

[Jane]

How do you expect anyone to truthfully know why JM went to the mortuary ? Except that JM had volunteered to go " to save Jeremy "------CAL's words,and to also" convince herself that it had really happened". Closure in other words.
I do know,that according to AE JM had not cried or shown any distress whatsoever.

Hmm. This is the trouble with absolutes. I think what is more true, AE hadn't actually SEEN Julie cry or show distress. Hardly surprising if she had suspicions about Jeremy's involvement.

[lookout]

Hmm. This is the trouble with absolutes. I think what is more true, AE hadn't actually SEEN Julie cry or show distress. Hardly surprising if she had suspicions about Jeremy's involvement.

" Absolutes ?"----again ? What's that about ?

I bet AE didn't shed many tears either.Too busy ranting,tearing paper and making notes as well as hinting at getting black flowers for Sheila. What a lovely woman ! Not.

[maggie]

She would have to be as absolutely cold as ice to do that and then just carry on as normal until her and Jeremy split. 

I think it's far more likely that her story was simply cobbled together, as a result of external pressures, a build up of mumerings and the realisation that Jeremy was going to take a fall.

I tend to agree with you Roch, if we take the view that Julie didn't in any way suspect that JB was involved at the time of her identifying the boys, staying at Colin's, accompanying him to the funeral and various getaways we could believe that by the time she went to the police she may have been troubled by insinuation and murmerings as you suggest.  Adding to this her memories of comments and threats by Jeremy about his family over the time she had known him may have caused some kind of realisation to take root in her mind until it became too strong and she couldn't ignore it any more therefore she shared it with friends and rightly they persuaded her to go and speak to the police.

She would have been a gift to the police who could easily have worked on her convincing her and reinforcing her fears that he had done it, and explaining that they needed her to be a witness for them to ensure he was locked up for good. Her past criminal behaviour gave them an added lever to 'persuade' her of his guilt and her need to point the finger at him.

If JM knew JB was responsible from the start as is the official claim she would have to have been a young woman without any moral compass at all or as you say 'as cold as ice' to behave the way she did and although her behaviour before the crime was very questionable since the trial she does seem to have grown up, had a good career and lead a decent life without any sign of criminality etc.

It's good to look at things from different angles sometimes as there are many possibilities and as far as we know any one of them or none of them may be the truth.