I agree, but why would she have told the police that Jeremy had told her he was responsible on 7th August?
Julie Mugford stated -
8th August
"Killing his family again. He not mentioned this for about 2 months. He said that his original plan was not fool proof because of the drugs and he didn’t know how to administer it. He said he thought about getting cyanide but wherever he got it would be recorded. He then said that as they lived on a farm it might be acceptable but then he dismissed that idea. I remember that I made a joke about the house saying that he couldn’t burn it down because it was so beautiful. He said he had changed his mind about burning it down because it might have been seen too quickly and the evidence would not have been destroyed.
He also dismissed the fire because there were valuables in the house which would be lost. He told me the house insurance was low. He mentioned about a pigeon clock and china and silver which he thought were valuable. He said that the only other way that he could do it was to shoot them. He told me that he was always thinking about it on his tractor.
He said he had to plan it so it was fool proof. He was trying to find a way of getting in and out of the house without trace as the outside doors were always locked. This was all he said at that stage and he would have to think more about it
Why should I accept "evidence" from books just because others do? I'm my own person. Did Julie say that or not? If she did, can you point to a statement where she said it?
.
About June 1985 whilst I was out in the car with Jeremy he told me that he was being pressurised by his parents and he hoped that Sheila was coming to stay. He said that he would use a cycle to do it and would do a trial run to see how long it would take. He thought it would take………..?? (The rest of this page is missing, it looks like she could be saying 15 minutes to me)."
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1647You are clearly cherry picking parts of the evidence to suit your agenda
