Audio

[Alias]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWFCvXNAlPA

Why do you think Jeremy says THE gun around 00:37. That has always puzzled me.

[Paul]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWFCvXNAlPA

Why do you think Jeremy says THE gun around 00:37. That has always puzzled me.

I wonder if he is emphasising the word himself or saying that Ralph said it that way?

[John]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWFCvXNAlPA

Why do you think Jeremy says THE gun around 00:37. That has always puzzled me.

Good point, it also contains superfluous info which is consistent with a cover-up.
Dad said, "Please come over".   Totally unbelievable, was this a party Nevill was planning on or what?

Nobody and I mean nobody rings their son in the middle of the night when their daughter has gone crazy/berserk with a gun and asks "please".

It just isn't credible.

[Alias]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWFCvXNAlPA

Why do you think Jeremy says THE gun around 00:37. That has always puzzled me.

Good point, it also contains superfluous info which is consistent with a cover-up.
Dad said, "Please come over".   Totally unbelievable, was this a party Nevill was planning on or what?

Nobody and I mean nobody rings their son in the middle of the night when their daughter has gone crazy/berserk with a gun and asks "please".

It just isn't credible.

I have to be honest. I have a problem with a lot of what Jeremy says in his telephone (?) interview. Isn´t there just one? But longer than this part here - I have heard more anyway. And do have some issues with the sound of it.
Maybe I will go through it one day and talk about what my thoughts are. I know I won´t be popular for it, but I have to be honest to myself. I want the truth.

[John]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWFCvXNAlPA

Why do you think Jeremy says THE gun around 00:37. That has always puzzled me.

Good point, it also contains superfluous info which is consistent with a cover-up.
Dad said, "Please come over".   Totally unbelievable, was this a party Nevill was planning on or what?

Nobody and I mean nobody rings their son in the middle of the night when their daughter has gone crazy/berserk with a gun and asks "please".

It just isn't credible.

I have to be honest. I have a problem with a lot of what Jeremy says in his telephone (?) interview. Isn´t there just one? But longer than this part here - I have heard more anyway. And do have some issues with the sound of it.
Maybe I will go through it one day and talk about what my thoughts are. I know I won´t be popular for it, but I have to be honest to myself. I want the truth.

I think the more he says now the bigger a foot he puts in it.

[Paul]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWFCvXNAlPA

Why do you think Jeremy says THE gun around 00:37. That has always puzzled me.

Good point, it also contains superfluous info which is consistent with a cover-up.
Dad said, "Please come over".   Totally unbelievable, was this a party Nevill was planning on or what?

Nobody and I mean nobody rings their son in the middle of the night when their daughter has gone crazy/berserk with a gun and asks "please".

It just isn't credible.

I have to be honest. I have a problem with a lot of what Jeremy says in his telephone (?) interview. Isn´t there just one? But longer than this part here - I have heard more anyway. And do have some issues with the sound of it.
Maybe I will go through it one day and talk about what my thoughts are. I know I won´t be popular for it, but I have to be honest to myself. I want the truth.

I'd be interested in hearing your views abs

[Alias]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWFCvXNAlPA

Why do you think Jeremy says THE gun around 00:37. That has always puzzled me.

Good point, it also contains superfluous info which is consistent with a cover-up.
Dad said, "Please come over".   Totally unbelievable, was this a party Nevill was planning on or what?

Nobody and I mean nobody rings their son in the middle of the night when their daughter has gone crazy/berserk with a gun and asks "please".

It just isn't credible.

I have to be honest. I have a problem with a lot of what Jeremy says in his telephone (?) interview. Isn´t there just one? But longer than this part here - I have heard more anyway. And do have some issues with the sound of it.
Maybe I will go through it one day and talk about what my thoughts are. I know I won´t be popular for it, but I have to be honest to myself. I want the truth.

I'd be interested in hearing your views abs

Thank you Paulluap. It has bothered me for a while, I am just a little bit of a chicken, so I´ve 
Guess I opened up a little bit with the THE, couldn´t keep it inside any longer. 

[Paul]

Perhaps if you can find another link or two to any audio I can have a listen too. Happy to receive a PM too.

6 minutes here http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/audio/2011/jan/30/jeremy-bamber-murder-appeal-audio

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/01/31/the-jeremy-bamber-files-exclusive-audio-extracts-of-the-convicted-killer-discussing-his-case-115875-22887323/

[joolz1975]

Why chicken?? Your opionion is as validcas anyones in here and you have a right to think what you want !

Me i think hes guilty as charged ( the more i read the more im sure) i used to be 50/50 but that changed quite quickly after joining this forum! Nobody has posted anything thats made me think hes innocent (quite the opposite in fact) maybe im wring but who cares cos in the scheme of things my opinion doesnt matter anyway!

My biggest worry is that a guilty man will get freed on a technicality just because he has a fanclub!

[Alias]

Why chicken?? Your opionion is as validcas anyones in here and you have a right to think what you want !

Me i think hes guilty as charged ( the more i read the more im sure) i used to be 50/50 but that changed quite quickly after joining this forum! Nobody has posted anything thats made me think hes innocent (quite the opposite in fact) maybe im wring but who cares cos in the scheme of things my opinion doesnt matter anyway!

My biggest worry is that a guilty man will get freed on a technicality just because he has a fanclub!

Why chicken? It is just a gut feeling. Then again maybe not all of it. I am still trying to sort it out in my mind.
PaulluaP, here is more audio, it is from 12:00.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EDp_tqUysI

In it, Jeremy could be contradicting himself about what they saw in that window - or more precisely, who saw it. In his blog, he is very specific about a fully lit room, a grown person walking from right to left that HE HIMSELF saw.
In this audio he says. "I know that I was outside with the police when they saw someone moving around in the house."
THEY saw? Shouldn't that have been WE saw?
Little things like that...

[Paul]

Yes, you're right there. A very clear emphasis on THEY saw.  Interesting stuff!

[Alias]

Perhaps if you can find another link or two to any audio I can have a listen too. Happy to receive a PM too.

6 minutes here http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/audio/2011/jan/30/jeremy-bamber-murder-appeal-audio

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/01/31/the-jeremy-bamber-files-exclusive-audio-extracts-of-the-convicted-killer-discussing-his-case-115875-22887323/

Had not heard that before. Thanks.
He should shut up. He gives himself away all the time. Just my opinion.

[Alias]

A lie is a lie. If you were innocent, there would not be a lie. Jeremy is lying. And probably guilty of this horrible crime.
I wish his own parents would have kept him and loved him + the grandparents that forced his parents to give him up! Fuck them all!

[CHRIS T]

Why chicken?? Your opionion is as validcas anyones in here and you have a right to think what you want !

Me i think hes guilty as charged ( the more i read the more im sure) i used to be 50/50 but that changed quite quickly after joining this forum! Nobody has posted anything thats made me think hes innocent (quite the opposite in fact) maybe im wring but who cares cos in the scheme of things my opinion doesnt matter anyway!

My biggest worry is that a guilty man will get freed on a technicality just because he has a fanclub!

Why chicken? It is just a gut feeling. Then again maybe not all of it. I am still trying to sort it out in my mind.
PaulluaP, here is more audio, it is from 12:00.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EDp_tqUysI

In it, Jeremy could be contradicting himself about what they saw in that window - or more precisely, who saw it. In his blog, he is very specific about a fully lit room, a grown person walking from right to left that HE HIMSELF saw.
In this audio he says. "I know that I was outside with the police when they saw someone moving around in the house."
THEY saw? Shouldn't that have been WE saw?
Little things like that...

Hi Abs! I have heard these audiotapes before, but thought i would listen to them again in case i'd  missed something. Regarding the above: I simply took what Jeremy had said as him emphasising the words "they saw" (rather than "we saw") to get the significant point across that not only did he see someone in the window, but that the police did too!. If that makes any sense? I think too much is being read into those words, just my opinion.

I will say though, when Jeremy was asked by the interviewer what life was like on the farm, i think he used the wrong words there, when he said: "I am quite happy if i'm banged up!"

[Roch]

Why chicken?? Your opionion is as validcas anyones in here and you have a right to think what you want !

Me i think hes guilty as charged ( the more i read the more im sure) i used to be 50/50 but that changed quite quickly after joining this forum! Nobody has posted anything thats made me think hes innocent (quite the opposite in fact) maybe im wring but who cares cos in the scheme of things my opinion doesnt matter anyway!

My biggest worry is that a guilty man will get freed on a technicality just because he has a fanclub!

Joolz, it sounds a bit derogatory to label some people as being in a 'fan club'.  Maybe some people have examined the case in a similar manner to your own examination.... but have come to a different conclusion. 

Going off topic from the thread title...
I retain some doubt about Jeremy's alleged innocence due to damning circumstancial evidence.  I do retain some doubt as to the validity of this circumstancial evidence... but other than a document posted on here about composite statements,  I've yet to see solid proof from the defence, re statements actually being either 'sexed up' or eidited between arrest and trial with the aim of securing a conviction. 

On this issue alone, the defence is alleging that numerous pages of of statements are simply missing. 
It just goes round and round because I'm guessing the poster who adheres to the prosecution line would argue that the missing pages are probably irrelavent... and the poster who takes up the defence line would argue the exact opposite, suspecting the pages were ommitted precisely because they dont fit the prosecutions' case.