Author Topic: A New Approach  (Read 56029 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44321
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #180 on: August 02, 2017, 04:36:PM »
Obviously Bamber getting Julie involved in his caravan break in & drug smuggling from Amsterdam shows he believed she was suffiently under his spell.

This explains Bamber's 10pm, 3am & 5.30am phone calls to Julie either side of the massacre. Once again he needed her by his side until things blew over.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2017, 04:37:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline buddy

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1296
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #181 on: August 02, 2017, 04:39:PM »
Hello buddy, bet there aren't many Headteachers who have a past quite like hers.  ::)
No Maggie that is why she left these shores. British would not have been very forgiving.

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #182 on: August 02, 2017, 04:40:PM »
Hello buddy, bet there aren't many Headteachers who have a past quite like hers.  ::)

Maggie she would not have got where she is today with a criminal record.  I have wondered if she has fleeting thoughts about the Court proceedings and the love of her life still in prison makes me shudder.

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #183 on: August 02, 2017, 04:42:PM »
Obviously Bamber getting Julie involved in his caravan break in & drug smuggling from Amsterdam shows he believed she was suffiently under his spell.

This explains Bamber's 10pm, 3am & 5.30am phone calls to Julie either side of the massacre. Once again he needed her by his side until things blew over.

Adam do you think Jeremy and Julie planned the murders together and she was not able to be by his side because she would have no alibi.

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #184 on: August 02, 2017, 04:44:PM »
Surely you look in a mirror? ;)

Another vile comment from the most twisted person on the forum

How dare you compare me with one of the most wicked  women that got her kicks from visiting forums
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 susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #185 on: August 02, 2017, 04:46:PM »
You are always asking people for sources, but never provide any yourself. Which is creepy.

The source is Bamber's court testimony.

Adam you know I don't do sources or links you are the man for that and when you provide them I read them I will pop along and read Jeremy's Court testimony I learn so much from you :)

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44321
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #186 on: August 02, 2017, 04:47:PM »
Adam do you think Jeremy and Julie planned the murders together and she was not able to be by his side because she would have no alibi.

No. Bamber told Julie of his plans. She did not believe he would do anything. Don't blame her, 5X massacres are non existent.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #187 on: August 02, 2017, 04:47:PM »
No Maggie that is why she left these shores. British would not have been very forgiving.

I would love to see her NOTW article on the front of every newspaper in Canada then she wouldn't have that smug look on her face anymore

Karma
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 Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33773
Re: Re: A New Approach
« Reply #188 on: August 02, 2017, 04:48:PM »
Another vile comment from the most twisted person on the forum

How dare you compare me with one of the most wicked  women that got her kicks from visiting forums

The only reason you've STOPPED visiting the other forum is because you were chucked off. Now we're stuck with your fantasies.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33773
Re: Re: A New Approach
« Reply #189 on: August 02, 2017, 04:50:PM »
I would love to see her NOTW article on the front of every newspaper in Canada then she wouldn't have that smug look on her face anymore

Karma

I'm surprised you haven't already supplied it..............or perhaps you have and they declined your offer?

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #190 on: August 02, 2017, 04:52:PM »
I don't know what Julie committing minor cheque book fraud with Susan Battersby as a 19 year old in 1984 , has got to do with Bamber massacring his family. Apart from it would deter Julie from approaching the police after the massacre, as Bamber knew about the cheque book fraud.

Ditto the caravan break in which Bamber got Julie to be a look out. Julie told the police about the caravan break in. The judge also said that the caravan break in showed Bamber trusted Julie enough to involve him in his crimes.

Involve him in his crimes? That's interesting.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #191 on: August 02, 2017, 04:54:PM »
It was Bamber's choice to rob his family & stage the scene.

He said he would be the number one suspect but no one will be able to prove it. He also said he did it to highlight poor security. However then contradicted himself by saying he shouldn't have spent all the money.

Julie was just dragged along in the middle of the night to act as look out.

She did not know the word no then?

Offline buddy

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1296
Re: Re: A New Approach
« Reply #192 on: August 02, 2017, 05:04:PM »
The only reason you've STOPPED visiting the other forum is because you were chucked off. Now we're stuck with your fantasies.
I find it quite pathetic to keep attacking Jackie for her views. She was chucked off for her views did not follow that forums stance. It is not a fantisy but her take on things which she is entitled to.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13779
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #193 on: August 02, 2017, 05:19:PM »
Adam you know I don't do sources or links you are the man for that and when you provide them I read them I will pop along and read Jeremy's Court testimony I learn so much from you :)

He doesn't have nor has he read Jeremy's court testimony.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33773
Re: A New Approach
« Reply #194 on: August 02, 2017, 05:23:PM »
I find it quite pathetic to keep attacking Jackie for her views. She was chucked off for her views did not follow that forums stance. It is not a fantisy but her take on things which she is entitled to.

I think you have it the wrong way round, buddy. It's Jackie who comes at me, all guns blazing. I have NEVER fired the first bullet. I've told her publicly, if she leaves me alone, I'll be delighted to ignore her, but it seems she gets some sort of perverted pleasure in continuing to have digs at me. It concerns me not a JOT. For every dig she takes at me, I'll return it. Believe me, she's no innocent. This is a woman who has caused more mischief than most of us have had hot dinners, nevertheless, as you say, she's entitled to her take on things, but for those who want the truth, fantasies create a barrier.