A New Approach

[Jane]

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 .

C'mon Jan. Such is the hatred you and others bear this woman, it really wouldn't matter HOW she put it coz there's no way on God's earth that you're prepared to believe her.

[Jan]

C'mon Jan. Such is the hatred you and others bear this woman, it really wouldn't matter HOW she put it coz there's no way on God's earth that you're prepared to believe her.

No I don't belive verbatim what she said , but I am saying I am not sure of why she did it .

There could be several reasons or even a combination of reasons .

Why would I hate her ?

I am not personally connected to the case or her or Jeremy ?

[Jane]

No I don't belive verbatim what she said , but I am saying I am not sure of why she did it .

There could be several reasons or even a combination of reasons .

Why would I hate her ?

I am not personally connected to the case or her or Jeremy ?

Jan, if you have no emotional involvement with what you seem to think are the lies she told to help convict Jeremy, why are you SO certain that she'd have done A instead of B, or that she definitely wouldn't have done something else. You weren't in her shoes. You have no idea what it might have felt like to be her in that situation. You have no idea what sort of mental hold they may have had on each other. You have no idea of how she feared being implicated. The woman she is now would probably never find herself in such a situation. The girl was naive and wanting the carrot which had been dangled. Like you, I don't believe she told the entire truth but I think that would have been more about keeping her own involvement out of it rather that dropping Jeremy further in it. In this, if she only told police what he had told her, she can't be accused of lying. The lies would have been his.

[susan]

No I don't belive verbatim what she said , but I am saying I am not sure of why she did it .

There could be several reasons or even a combination of reasons .

Why would I hate her ?

I am not personally connected to the case or her or Jeremy ?

Jan you have never come over as hating Julie or indeed anyone else either I don't hate her I think she behaved in such a manner she put Julie first at the expense of a man going to prison for a crime he did not commit I have often wondered if she thought he would walk free it is my understanding his Defence team thought that. Hate is a very strong word a word I don't like at all.

[Samson]

Jan, if you have no emotional involvement with what you seem to think are the lies she told to help convict Jeremy, why are you SO certain that she'd have done A instead of B, or that she definitely wouldn't have done something else. You weren't in her shoes. You have no idea what it might have felt like to be her in that situation. You have no idea what sort of mental hold they may have had on each other. You have no idea of how she feared being implicated. The woman she is now would probably never find herself in such a situation. The girl was naive and wanting the carrot which had been dangled. Like you, I don't believe she told the entire truth but I think that would have been more about keeping her own involvement out of it rather that dropping Jeremy further in it. In this, if she only told police what he had told her, she can't be accused of lying. The lies would have been his.

As I understand it her trepidation was such that a conviction interview with News Of The World was handled with perfect aplomb, and she purchased an apartment with the loot. I would have purchased the apartment, clever investment, clever young woman.  Go forth Julie and work with children. After all you are something of an expert in managing difficult situations with composure and class.`

[maggie]

Jan you have never come over as hating Julie or indeed anyone else either I don't hate her I think she behaved in such a manner she put Julie first at the expense of a man going to prison for a crime he did not commit I have often wondered if she thought he would walk free it is my understanding his Defence team thought that. Hate is a very strong word a word I don't like at all.

I would imagine that she believed if he was innocent he would have walked free and therefore has no reason all these years on to doubt his guilt. 

[JackieD]

As I understand it her trepidation was such that a conviction interview with News Of The World was handled with perfect aplomb, and she purchased an apartment with the loot. I would have purchased the apartment, clever investment, clever young woman.  Go forth Julie and work with children. After all you are something of an expert in managing difficult situations with composure and class.`

Thank you Samson perfectly putting

[Jan]

Personal attacks again
At no time has Jan said she hated Muggy

 I have tried to excuse her behaviour if anything. Except the interview in the news of the world .

I may be a prude but I can not think of anything more inappropriate after such a tragic case . Whoever was responsible.

But I don't hate her or anyone else connected with the case.

[Adam]

Disadvantages of Julie trying to frame an innocent Bamber

She didn't know what evidence existed.

There would be no evidence against Bamber. He was innocent. 

There would be evidence showing Sheila was guilty. As she was.

She would be charged by the police. When caught lying. 

Having a criminal record may effect her teaching career. 

To make Bamber look bad, she had to implicate herself in the caravan break in. Effecting her teaching career ? 

Her own 1984 crime may come to light. Effecting her teaching career ? 

There was no financial reward in approaching the police. 

It shows she was upset about splitting up with Bamber. 

She would be on her own. No other witnesses could support her claims. 

Bamber would have the last laugh. When Julie was exposed. 

She would have to follow through her approach. Right through to the ultimate (unlikely) conviction. Lying to the world. 

It would show she was vindictive. Once exposed. 

She may quickly wilt under pressure.  This is something she had never attempted before, and a massive long term lie. So why bother in the first place ? 

It would show she had no sympathy for a grieving man. Once exposed. 

It would show how upset she was that she was no longer with Bamber. Once exposed. 

It would show she was stupid. Once exposed. 

An approach may ultimately be time consuming. Depending on her success. Taking up months or years of her life. Effecting her second degree and teaching career. 

It would be her word against Bamber's. For the last month the police had treated it as murder/suicide, which was correct as she knew he was innocent. 

She will not know the details of the forensic evidence. It may show Sheila was the killer. Which would not be surprising as Bamber was innocent. 

It would be bringing other people into this, such the deceased grieving relatives and her own friends and relatives. 

She may feel bad after her initial approach. But is coming clean now an option ? 

She had already given a WS and gone around with Bamber for one month. The police will know she had approached them after she split with Bamber. 

She was attempting to reverse a decision announced in the media, which the police were in public sticking to - murder/suicide. One month after the massacre. 

Her approach may only last a few minutes. Experienced police officers may dismiss it, after all Bamber was innocent. Bamber may not even find out about Julie's attempt for revenge. 

If an unsuccessful police approach  became news in the media, she would forever be looked upon as a heartless and lying woman. Friends and relatives may desert her.

[JackieD]

Jan, if you have no emotional involvement with what you seem to think are the lies she told to help convict Jeremy, why are you SO certain that she'd have done A instead of B, or that she definitely wouldn't have done something else. You weren't in her shoes. You have no idea what it might have felt like to be her in that situation. You have no idea what sort of mental hold they may have had on each other. You have no idea of how she feared being implicated. The woman she is now would probably never find herself in such a situation. The girl was naive and wanting the carrot which had been dangled. Like you, I don't believe she told the entire truth but I think that would have been more about keeping her own involvement out of it rather that dropping Jeremy further in it. In this, if she only told police what he had told her, she can't be accused of lying. The lies would have been his.

Young naive women do not walk down oxford street carrying out multiple cheque frauds
She wasn't starving she didn't have a baby
She was greedy for money

The last discription you would use for Mugford is naive

She was jealous and vengeful and started a chain of events that proved how dangerous she was

[Jan]

ADam I don't understand any of your post it does not really make sense .What are you trying to say ?

In fewer words.

[Adam]

Young naive women do not walk down oxford street carrying out multiple cheque frauds
She wasn't starving she didn't have a baby
She was greedy for money

The last discription you would use for Mugford is naive

She was jealous and vengeful and started a chain of events that proved how dangerous she was

Multiple. Thought it was once with Susan Battersby.

[Adam]

ADam I don't understand any of your post it does not really make sense .What are you trying to say ?

In fewer words.

There are at least 26 huge disadvantages of a woman trying to frame an innocent man. A month after the massacre.

If she was actually devastated about apparently being jilted. Bit strange she started betraying Bamber while still with him.

[susan]

I have tried to excuse her behaviour if anything. Except the interview in the news of the world .

I may be a prude but I can not think of anything more inappropriate after such a tragic case . Whoever was responsible.

But I don't hate her or anyone else connected with the case.

Jan I agree with you her pay out resulted indirectly from the deaths of 5 innocent people two of them wee boys how could she be flashing her thighs and grinning all over her face like she did in such a sad situation she came over as a very shallow uncaring young lady,

[Jane]

As I understand it her trepidation was such that a conviction interview with News Of The World was handled with perfect aplomb, and she purchased an apartment with the loot. I would have purchased the apartment, clever investment, clever young woman.  Go forth Julie and work with children. After all you are something of an expert in managing difficult situations with composure and class.`

I don't know when I've ever said her behaviour was exemplary. I just SO love it when people, probably old enough now, to be her parents, bluster about what they, all paragons of virtue, naturally, would have done had they been her. As far as your own bluster is concerned, you've effectively managed to shut down the JB section of IA, PLEASE, don't do the same here.