Author Topic: A New Approach  (Read 56028 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #30 on: July 30, 2017, 05:21:PM »
I will try and watch that as I am not really familiar with the case .


Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #31 on: July 30, 2017, 05:31:PM »
A New Approach

There has been a number of documentaries and books made about the Whitehouse Farm Murders but I believe the standard of true crime documentaries has risen immensely and TVs companies are now commissioning true crime series as well as one offs.
I believe everyone on this forum would agree it is impossible to portray what happened at WHF, the aftermath, the trial and the conviction in one hour. I know that Mark Williams Thomas believes Jeremy Bamber is innocent but he had an impossible task to squeeze everything he wanted to highlight about the case in the 60 minutes (less ad breaks). He was also desperate to interview Julie Mugford and was quite happy to fly to Canada to do this.
 Because this case is still discussed in the media and documentary makers are still interested in working with Jeremy there needs to be much detailed information available on a programme to gain more public interest

I believe a documentary should start with the conviction and work backwards starting with why the jury found Jeremy guilty

Part one and two

(1) The silencer, who found it, forensics etc

(2) Julie Mugford How she apparently             
      knew Jeremy was planning to
      murder his family, how she apparently
      knew from Jeremy the night before
      the murders his plans and she knew
      Jeremy was responsible straight after
      the murders Jeremy was responsible
      for the murders. How Julie volunteered
      to identify the bodies of victims
      murdered (including 2 small children)
      when she knew her boyfriend was
      responsible. How Julie stood shoulder
      to shoulder with Colin Caffell (the
      father of the two young children
      murdered) at the funerals at the same
      time comforting Jeremy Bamber.
      How Julie Mugford carried on sleeping
      and partying with Jeremy for weeks
      after the murders and funerals.
      Julie showed how dishonest she was
      carrying out a number of cheque
      frauds in London and being involved
      in a robbery at the Bamber caravan
      park
      With any documentary it will be
      important to show Julie did not speak
      to the police to tell them she knew
      Jeremy was responsible until Jeremy
      finished their relationship
      Probably one of the most important
      factors that should be included is the
      deal Julie Mugford did with the News
      Of the world to get a £25,000 if
      Jeremy was convicted. Julie Mugford
      has never been convicted of any of her   
      crimes
      With regard to the above most of this
      has never been included in a
      documentary before because of the
      time factor and I am sure if the six part
      documentary is commissioned the
      general public will start to look at
      the case differently
      Could Julie Mugford be trusted? she
      was a prolific liar and she made a lot of
      money from the NOTW on Jeremy's
      conviction and acted without a doubt
      as a women scorned

       If this documentary is made
       accurately it might even push Julie
       into saying what really happened in
       all those police interviews and why
       would she offer to identify 3 adults
       and 2 children when she knew they
       had been murdered by her
       boyfriend

After details of the silencer and more information is broadcast about Julie Mugford then the severity of Sheila's illness needs dealing with and then the relatives and the money trail and the the altered statements and withheld evidence
That's a start, that should wet the appetite of the viewing audience
 

 
     

Basically you want someone to make a documentary based completely on your one sided biased opinion which makes sure Julie Mugford is made out the be the evil one? Good luck with that!  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #32 on: July 30, 2017, 05:39:PM »
Or this , which I had not read before

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #33 on: July 30, 2017, 05:39:PM »
Basically you want someone to make a documentary based completely on your one sided biased opinion which makes sure Julie Mugford is made out the be the evil one? Good luck with that!  ;D ;D ;D ;D

I have helped make it happen before and I am confident it will happen again but a series so the cold hard facts of Julie Mugfords part in this case are available to the general public here and abroad

People should be able to make their own mind about Julie Mugford and whether she was a credible witness, then we can move on to the silencer evidence
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

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #34 on: July 30, 2017, 05:44:PM »
I have helped make it happen before and I am confident it will happen again but a series so the cold hard facts of Julie Mugfords part in this case are available to the general public here and abroad

People should be able to make their own mind about Julie Mugford and whether she was a credible witness, then we can move on to the silencer evidence

it won't happen - it's too biased.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Samson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 184
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #35 on: July 30, 2017, 05:45:PM »
I will try and watch that as I am not really familiar with the case .
It is podcasts, no pictures.
His approach is anti science, he is obsessed with arguments from incredulity. Yet it tops Itunes in NZ and Australia.
Ridiculous and very sad.
He is wrong at every turn. But hey, listen with an open mind if you have time and report back. There is the Bamber/Bain thread running right here.

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #36 on: July 30, 2017, 05:51:PM »
it won't happen - it's too biased.



Who's saying that, you?
When have you had any influence in this case. You wouldn't know where to start
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

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #37 on: July 30, 2017, 05:55:PM »
Either Julie was lying about Jeremy being responsible for the murders or she was a first class actress standing next to Colin Caffell

Holding on and comforting the person who murdered Colin's children
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

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #38 on: July 30, 2017, 06:29:PM »


Who's saying that, you?
When have you had any influence in this case. You wouldn't know where to start

Prove me wrong then! You say you've done it before? Really? What documentary were you responsible for?
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #39 on: July 30, 2017, 06:31:PM »
Either Julie was lying about Jeremy being responsible for the murders or she was a first class actress standing next to Colin Caffell

Holding on and comforting the person who murdered Colin's children

Maybe she was just in denial - eh?
Few people have the imagination for reality

Online Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21095
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #40 on: July 30, 2017, 06:38:PM »
Try the "Black Hands" approach, a truly disgraceful compendium of lies about the Bain case.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/mediawatch/audio/201852320/murder-mysteries-on-demand-are-in-demand

Let me make it quite clear, Robin Bain did this crime almost exactly as Sheila Caffel did hers, unplanned after being stressed to the max by family members earlier. Van Beynen in episode 10 does a better xxxx xxxxxx of xxxxxxxxx than Adam here.
Yes and Robin's bobble cap stayed on his head throughout the rampage..

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #41 on: July 30, 2017, 07:24:PM »
Prove me wrong then! You say you've done it before? Really? What documentary were you responsible for?

I will prove you wrong
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

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #42 on: July 30, 2017, 07:27:PM »
Maybe she was just in denial - eh?

Or maybe Jeremy was not responsible
She hadn't been dumped at that point
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

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #43 on: July 30, 2017, 07:32:PM »
Well as an excuse everyone says she was just a young easily influenced frightened girl . Well perhaps it was actually the police who finally influenced , frightened her , into doing what she "believed " to be the right thing .

Because otherwise I don't understand why in 2002 she said she sincerely believed he was guilty.

Surely if all she said was true , she knows he is .

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #44 on: July 30, 2017, 07:32:PM »
I will prove you wrong

Yeah, you only answered half of that (won't be holding my breath!), which other documentary have you been involved with or are you talking about that home made effort which you posted here a few months back?  ::)
Few people have the imagination for reality