could jermy have walked to whf.

[maggie]

Bamber wouldn't be tired. The adreleline & thought of 435k would keep him going.

He did tell the police he was starving a few hours later. I'm not surprised.

Interestingly the police did not see any sign of particularly raised adrenaline but rather they reported he seemed mainly calm but emotional at times. 
As far as we know he had not eaten much the evening before. In his words he had fallen asleep and woken suddenly to the phone call from his father which must have raised his adrenaline to some extent.
It's hardly a 'clue' of his guilt that by the morning he was suffering from shock and low blood sugar, causing him to have distended pupils and to feel 'starving'. Anyone would.
To say he had been 'sick on whisky' is far fetched, he had a mouthful of whisky that made him wretch, again that's not surprising, particularly if his blood sugar was low.
JB may be an amazing actor who knew exactly how to behave in such circumstances or he behaved in a way not unexpected by anyone in such circumstances. 
At the time the police did not comment on any of his behaviour being unusual. It was only later after he became the suspect that some police, with hindsight claimed they had questioned some of his behaviour.  Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Sitting at a computer 30 odd years later picking out the points which backup your own arguments is a pretty wonderful thing as well.

[Steve_uk]

Interestingly the police did not see any sign of particularly raised adrenaline but rather they reported he seemed mainly calm but emotional at times. 
As far as we know he had not eaten much the evening before. In his words he had fallen asleep and woken suddenly to the phone call from his father which must have raised his adrenaline to some extent.
It's hardly a 'clue' of his guilt that by the morning he was suffering from shock and low blood sugar, causing him to have distended pupils and to feel 'starving'. Anyone would.
To say he had been 'sick on whisky' is far fetched, he had a mouthful of whisky that made him wretch, again that's not surprising, particularly if his blood sugar was low.
JB may be an amazing actor who knew exactly how to behave in such circumstances or he behaved in a way not unexpected by anyone in such circumstances. 
At the time the police did not comment on any of his behaviour being unusual. It was only later after he became the suspect that some police, with hindsight claimed they had questioned some of his behaviour.  Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Sitting at a computer 30 odd years later picking out the points which backup your own arguments is a pretty wonderful thing as well.

We don't even know whether he ingested whisky; Dr. Craig was observing Jeremy from afar in a poppy field. Jeremy was indeed acting, as he confirmed to Julie when he remarked: "I should have been an actor."

As far as sitting in front of a computer after 30 years, that's what we're all guilty of doing..

[maggie]

We don't even know whether he ingested whisky; Dr. Craig was observing Jeremy from afar in a rape field. Jeremy was indeed acting, as he confirmed to Julie when he remarked: "I should have been an actor."

As far as sitting in front of a computer after 30 years, that's what we're all guilty of doing..

I was quoting your comment that JB had been sick on whisky, Steve.

We don't know for certain that JB ever said 'I should have been an actor' that is hearsay oft quoted by those who want to prove their opinion is the right one.

I agree we all look at a computer, tablet or phone as members of this forum however we all need to be aware of Confirmation Bias.  We tend to be drawn to 'information' which backs up our theory and ignore anything which doesn't.  In fact everything should be taken on it's own merits, our own opinions without real evidence have no real relevance.

[Adam]

I was quoting your comment that JB had been sick on whisky, Steve.

We don't know for certain that JB ever said 'I should have been an actor' that is hearsay oft quoted by those who want to prove their opinion is the right one.

I agree we all look at a computer, tablet or phone as members of this forum however we all need to be aware of Confirmation Bias.  We tend to be drawn to 'information' which backs up our theory and ignore anything which doesn't.  In fact everything should be taken on it's own merits, our own opinions without real evidence have no real relevance.

It's in Julie's WS that he said he 'should have been an actor'.

[Adam]

There has been some strange suggestions on this thread -

Poachers would be out & see Bamber. Looking for owls I assume.

Cars may drive across pitch black fields. To avoid the 2am rush hour I assume.

People in houses hundreds of yards away may be awake & looking through windows in infra red binnoculars. Looking for alien landings ?

It would take Bamber 30 minutes longer to walk in the dark.

It would take Bamber a whopping 100 minutes to walk 3 miles.

Bamber would be tired on the way back.

[Steve_uk]

It's in Julie's WS that he said he 'should have been an actor'.

Yes, but the doubters treat all Julie's evidence as hearsay.

[susan]

I was quoting your comment that JB had been sick on whisky, Steve.

We don't know for certain that JB ever said 'I should have been an actor' that is hearsay oft quoted by those who want to prove their opinion is the right one.

I agree we all look at a computer, tablet or phone as members of this forum however we all need to be aware of Confirmation Bias.  We tend to be drawn to 'information' which backs up our theory and ignore anything which doesn't.  In fact everything should be taken on it's own merits, our own opinions without real evidence have no real relevance.

Maggie I agree but I think we all should look at the case with an open mind no point in posting silly sarcastic posts I suppose the only person gaining from them is the poster themselves it makes them feel good but makes them look immature and silly.

[maggie]

Yes, but the doubters treat all Julie's evidence as hearsay.

Not just Julie's evidence Sreve, I think you have to approach all statements with an open mind. 

[Jan]

There has been some strange suggestions on this thread -

Poachers would be out & see Bamber. Looking for owls I assume.

Cars may drive across pitch black fields. To avoid the 2am rush hour I assume.

People in houses hundreds of yards away may be awake & looking through windows in infra red binnoculars. Looking for alien landings ?

It would take Bamber 30 minutes longer to walk in the dark.

It would take Bamber a whopping 100 minutes to walk 3 miles.

Bamber would be tired on the way back.

You think these are strange? Yes your posts are because you are twisting what people say .

I think you have an ulterior motive because not even a townie could not understand the very basics of the countryside?

[Adam]

70~ minute walk by day 100~ minute walk by night.

[Adam]

how can there be no posbility theres people up and walking about at that time.

[Adam]

theres all sorts o people up about at that time o might poachers or a start threes people driving about people look out there windows about

how does he know one o his neighbours isn't going to look out the window.

[Adam]

but theres the walk back as well that would take a bit longer seeing as he wold be tired from the 3 miles he had already walked and the effort of comiting mas murder and you also have to take into account the time it woud take him to comit the murders.

[Adam]

There has been some strange suggestions on this thread -

Poachers would be out & see Bamber. Looking for owls I assume.

Cars may drive across pitch black fields. To avoid the 2am rush hour I assume.

People in houses hundreds of yards away may be awake & looking through windows in infra red binnoculars. Looking for alien landings ?

It would take Bamber 30 minutes longer to walk in the dark.

It would take Bamber a whopping 100 minutes to walk 3 miles.

Bamber would be tired on the way back.

I had to quote some posts. As Jan accused me of twisting what people say. Which is quite offensive.

[Jan]

I had to quote some posts. As Jan accused me of twisting what people say. Which is quite offensive.

I thinks it's offensive to say that poachers would be out looking for owls.

Insulting to country dwellers .