Author Topic: Jeremy speaks to The Guardian about the referral of his case by the CCRC  (Read 8057 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Jackiepreece

  • Guest
So Bob woof woof we spend hours on this forum hoping for startling amazing new revelations could you produce this evidence we are all desperate for anything new on here or did you just read it in a book

Offline part due

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 38
I read about that in a book.The journalist says he met up with Jeremy and Brett Collins in a pub (forget which one) in Tolleshunt Darcy/Goldhanger.He said that they were giggling like two schoolboys and making sexual inuendos toward each other to,pretending they were gay.I suppose we cant always believe what we read? Does anyone know if Jeremy and Brett are still in touch? Does he ever visit him in prison? Because they were very close friends for a long while.
Strange how all these close friends don't support him anymore isn't it, why is that??
If it was a close friend of mine i would still be there for them whatever, that's if i thought he was innocent of course. Anyone know if any of his original friends are still around or are his supporters just ones who have claimed their lives to his cause?? :D

Jackiepreece

  • Guest
So Bob if you were really trying to discredit Jeremy and keep him locked up for life why didnt you post the nude picture facts at the same time as the other article that was probably sold for the price of one morgage payment

Mike your mate had these so called facts for years when you supported JB

Why do I keep getting asked about this public support I thought public support is a good thing dont you Bob

John

  • Guest
Jeremy says that his life on the farm was idyllic yet we know that he hated it and couldn't wait to get away from the routine boring tasks.  He also speaks of his love for his parents yet his father was going through hell with him and even contemplated disowning him.

No mention of his thieving from the caravan park though, the arson attacks etc...

Finally he speaks of his beautiful sister whom he loved to visit in London. I wonder what Sheila would have thought of him trying to flog semi-nude pictures of her to the daily rag.

All this talk about holding info back from the CCRC, who does he think he is kidding exactly?



Jeremy Bamber: 'I will feel hope again' - audio
So all these accusations you have concrete proof of have you? Or is it all hearsay that has gone through the human mind mixing machine and has come out as something completely different from the original story? eg: Do you think that the photograph story hasn't been twisted somewhat from what really happened. All you have to do is post some concrete proof of this story alone.

Well yes actually, countless witnesses have testified to this and much more.  I am yet to hear of anyone speak on his behalf that actually knew him.  Mike Tesko didn't even know him then so his views have been cultivated over many subsequent years.

Another question we have now is why he acted like an idiot when interviewed by the police.  What did he hope to achieve by such behaviour, was this his way of coping with the truth or should that be lies?

The semi-nude photographs story hasn't been twisted at all since The Times itself reported their refusal to entertain such sordid behaviour.  maybe you should read the edition for yourself, I have already posted the details.

They didn't need to shoot the officer. The silencer left the same imprint on the officers neck as was found on Sheila's. It therefore is quite clear that someone forced her to comply with the rifle pressed firmly against her neck before shooting her twice.  The police demonstrated that she could not have shot herself with a sound moderator attached and I am quite sure she didn't go to the bother of putting it away in a downstairs cupboard just for the hell of it.

It is interesting that nobody can explain the total and I mean total lack of gun oil or any propellant residue on either Sheila or her clothing and that includes all her other clothing.  It is also quite impossible for her to have loaded the rifle without incurring chips to her manicured nails.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2011, 01:34:PM by John »

Tyler

  • Guest
Tell me John.Did you get bored with being Part Due? Why do you hide behind so many different user names?Is it to make it look like many others share your unfounded beliefs?

John

  • Guest
Tell me John.Did you get bored with being Part Due? Why do you hide behind so many different user names?Is it to make it look like many others share your unfounded beliefs?

Sorry matey, if the cap fits and all that.  I only have my own account on this forum as Mike can confirm.

Tyler

  • Guest
Tell me John.Did you get bored with being Part Due? Why do you hide behind so many different user names?Is it to make it look like many others share your unfounded beliefs?

Sorry matey, if the cap fits and all that.  I only have my own account on this forum as Mike can confirm.

I know that you have your own account on this forum.How could I not?Or anyone else for that matter? But I know you also have others (sandy etc). And please dont refer to me as matey.It is not polite.

John

  • Guest
Tell me John.Did you get bored with being Part Due? Why do you hide behind so many different user names?Is it to make it look like many others share your unfounded beliefs?

Sorry matey, if the cap fits and all that.  I only have my own account on this forum as Mike can confirm.

I know that you have your own account on this forum.How could I not?Or anyone else for that matter? But I know you also have others (sandy etc). And please dont refer to me as matey.It is not polite.

Who is Sandy?    Really, is this the best you can do?
« Last Edit: May 22, 2011, 01:43:PM by John »

Tyler

  • Guest
Tell me John.Did you get bored with being Part Due? Why do you hide behind so many different user names?Is it to make it look like many others share your unfounded beliefs?

Sorry matey, if the cap fits and all that.  I only have my own account on this forum as Mike can confirm.
What is the best that you can do John? Pass all your comments off as facts with no evidence to back any of it up?
I know that you have your own account on this forum.How could I not?Or anyone else for that matter? But I know you also have others (sandy etc). And please dont refer to me as matey.It is not polite.

Who is Sandy?    Really, is this the best you can do?

John

  • Guest
Jeremy says that his life on the farm was idyllic yet we know that he hated it and couldn't wait to get away from the routine boring tasks.  He also speaks of his love for his parents yet his father was going through hell with him and even contemplated disowning him.

No mention of his thieving from the caravan park though, the arson attacks etc...

Finally he speaks of his beautiful sister whom he loved to visit in London. I wonder what Sheila would have thought of him trying to flog semi-nude pictures of her to the daily rag.

All this talk about holding info back from the CCRC, who does he think he is kidding exactly?



Jeremy Bamber: 'I will feel hope again' - audio
So all these accusations you have concrete proof of have you? Or is it all hearsay that has gone through the human mind mixing machine and has come out as something completely different from the original story? eg: Do you think that the photograph story hasn't been twisted somewhat from what really happened. All you have to do is post some concrete proof of this story alone.
Why would you hold evidence back Grahame after being in jail for 26 years and desperate to get out if it would get you out of there.
Would you??

Classic Jeremy...playing games again...

chochokeira

  • Guest
Jeremy says that his life on the farm was idyllic yet we know that he hated it and couldn't wait to get away from the routine boring tasks.  He also speaks of his love for his parents yet his father was going through hell with him and even contemplated disowning him.

No mention of his thieving from the caravan park though, the arson attacks etc...

Finally he speaks of his beautiful sister whom he loved to visit in London. I wonder what Sheila would have thought of him trying to flog semi-nude pictures of her to the daily rag.

All this talk about holding info back from the CCRC, who does he think he is kidding exactly?



Jeremy Bamber: 'I will feel hope again' - audio
So all these accusations you have concrete proof of have you? Or is it all hearsay that has gone through the human mind mixing machine and has come out as something completely different from the original story? eg: Do you think that the photograph story hasn't been twisted somewhat from what really happened. All you have to do is post some concrete proof of this story alone.

Well yes actually, countless witnesses have testified to this and much more.  I am yet to hear of anyone speak on his behalf that actually knew him.  Mike Tesko didn't even know him then so his views have been cultivated over many subsequent years.

Another question we have now is why he acted like an idiot when interviewed by the police.  What did he hope to achieve by such behaviour, was this his way of coping with the truth or should that be lies?

The semi-nude photographs story hasn't been twisted at all since The Times itself reported their refusal to entertain such sordid behaviour.  maybe you should read the edition for yourself, I have already posted the details.

They didn't need to shoot the officer. The silencer left the same imprint on the officers neck as was found on Sheila's. It therefore is quite clear that someone forced her to comply with the rifle pressed firmly against her neck before shooting her twice.  The police demonstrated that she could not have shot herself with a sound moderator attached and I am quite sure she didn't go to the bother of putting it away in a downstairs cupboard just for the hell of it.

It is interesting that nobody can explain the total and I mean total lack of gun oil or any propellant residue on either Sheila or her clothing and that includes all her other clothing.  It is also quite impossible for her to have loaded the rifle without incurring chips to her manicured nails.


Nonsense. Sheila's blood stained clothing that was found soaking in buckets in the scullery and which was taken home and washed by AE was never subjected to any tests for residues from the gun or bullets.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2011, 02:03:PM by chochokeira »

Tyler

  • Guest
That is true.If Sheila had been menstruating and needed to have her clothes soaked,I really cannot see how June would have left them in buckets in the kitchen.It is said that farmworkers often had breakfast in that kitchen,so men in and out often? I can imagine June being too prim and proper to just leave them soaking in buckets in the kitchen.Not to mention the unhygenic aspect of it too.And also,right near the aga.Wouldnt they have been in the way? I could accept it a little better if it wasnt for the fact that the farmhouse had around 3 kitchens?Why not put the buckets out of the way in the scullery? There was a shower room downstairs wasnt there? It is perfectly possible that if Sheila carried out the murders,that she could have put her clothes in soak and then took a shower.Many may think improbable,but certainly not impossible.I believe the defence had an expert that eplained riual cleansing/suicide at the trial?

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
That is true.If Sheila had been menstruating and needed to have her clothes soaked,I really cannot see how June would have left them in buckets in the kitchen.It is said that farmworkers often had breakfast in that kitchen,so men in and out often? I can imagine June being too prim and proper to just leave them soaking in buckets in the kitchen.Not to mention the unhygenic aspect of it too.And also,right near the aga.Wouldn't they have been in the way? I could accept it a little better if it wasnt for the fact that the farmhouse had around 3 kitchens?Why not put the buckets out of the way in the scullery? There was a shower room downstairs wasnt there? It is perfectly possible that if Sheila carried out the murders,that she could have put her clothes in soak and then took a shower.Many may think improbable,but certainly not impossible.I believe the defence had an expert that eplained riual cleansing/suicide at the trial?

The fight that took place happened in the kitchen right at the aga cooker. The bucket supposedly was there (if we assume Jeremy is the culprit), but it wasn't turned over? Something to think about right there.
And yes, it is a very, very odd place to put bloody underwear soaking! I can't imagine why anybody would do that!

Tyler

  • Guest
That is true.If Sheila had been menstruating and needed to have her clothes soaked,I really cannot see how June would have left them in buckets in the kitchen.It is said that farmworkers often had breakfast in that kitchen,so men in and out often? I can imagine June being too prim and proper to just leave them soaking in buckets in the kitchen.Not to mention the unhygenic aspect of it too.And also,right near the aga.Wouldn't they have been in the way? I could accept it a little better if it wasnt for the fact that the farmhouse had around 3 kitchens?Why not put the buckets out of the way in the scullery? There was a shower room downstairs wasnt there? It is perfectly possible that if Sheila carried out the murders,that she could have put her clothes in soak and then took a shower.Many may think improbable,but certainly not impossible.I believe the defence had an expert that eplained riual cleansing/suicide at the trial?

The fight that took place happened in the kitchen right at the aga cooker. The bucket supposedly was there (if we assume Jeremy is the culprit), but it wasn't turned over? Something to think about right there.
And yes, it is a very, very odd place to put bloody underwear soaking! I can't imagine why anybody would do that!

It wasnt just underwear.There was a pair of jogging bottoms aswell and possibly something else.

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
That is true.If Sheila had been menstruating and needed to have her clothes soaked,I really cannot see how June would have left them in buckets in the kitchen.It is said that farmworkers often had breakfast in that kitchen,so men in and out often? I can imagine June being too prim and proper to just leave them soaking in buckets in the kitchen.Not to mention the unhygenic aspect of it too.And also,right near the aga.Wouldn't they have been in the way? I could accept it a little better if it wasnt for the fact that the farmhouse had around 3 kitchens?Why not put the buckets out of the way in the scullery? There was a shower room downstairs wasnt there? It is perfectly possible that if Sheila carried out the murders,that she could have put her clothes in soak and then took a shower.Many may think improbable,but certainly not impossible.I believe the defence had an expert that eplained riual cleansing/suicide at the trial?

The fight that took place happened in the kitchen right at the aga cooker. The bucket supposedly was there (if we assume Jeremy is the culprit), but it wasn't turned over? Something to think about right there.
And yes, it is a very, very odd place to put bloody underwear soaking! I can't imagine why anybody would do that!

It wasnt just underwear.There was a pair of jogging bottoms aswell and possibly something else.

I wasn´t sure they were in the same bucket. Were they? Did Ann Eaton only take the bloodied knickers home with her to wash and then throw out (!!!), or did she take the jogging bottoms and a possible other item with her too?