A New Approach

[Kaldin]

No she wouldn't IF that's what happened, however, Julie didn't mix with the relatives and they hardly going to tell Jeremy's girlfriend that they suspected him! She knew he was involved, because he told her.

Well yes - allegedly. Like maggie, I could have understood Julie's actions a lot more if she claimed that he hadn't told her, and that she gradually realised that he was involved. However, that's not what she said, so therefore, I don't understand her actions.

[Kaldin]

There was a valuble pidgeon clock, valuable china and silver at WHF.

The outside doors were locked every night.

There was a downstairs window which latched shut when exiting.

There was a kitchen fight during the massacre.

Neville received seven shots.

The twins were shot in their sleep.

Sheila had a bible by her chest.

There was going to be a phone call from WHF to Bamber's cottage from MM.

There was a phone at WHF which had a last number redial record.

Bamber had started conversations at supper about fostering.

Sheila was shot last.

June was shot in her bed.

Everyone was asleep. Except Neville.

Sheila was shot under the chin.

                                           -------------------

Why would she have heard of these things. I thought she just spent all her time at Bamber's jolly ups.

Why wouldn't she know about valuable stuff at the farm? She knew about a phone call to Jeremy's house because Jeremy could have told her that his father rang. A month after the murders I'm sure she would know a lot of that stuff - Jeremy could have told her, or the relatives could have told her. Colin could also have told her about the twins being shot in bed. She also saw the bodies, remember. Don't forget that she was relaying all this to the police a month after the murders - she didn't tell them the day of the murders. If she had done, of course she wouldn't have known a lot of that stuff.

[Adam]

Why wouldn't she know about valuable stuff at the farm? She knew about a phone call to Jeremy's house because Jeremy told her that her father rang. A month after the murders I'm sure she would know a lot of that stuff - Jeremy could have told her, or the relatives could have told her. Colin could also have told her about the twins being shot in bed. She also saw the bodies, remember. Don't forget that she was relaying all this to the police a month after the murders - she didn't tell them the day of the murders. If she had done, of course she wouldn't have known a lot of that stuff.

On the fence ? It seems you fire fighting a forest fire.

I'm sorry but Julie knowing all this from people other than Bamber is not credible.

Who else would tell her these things. She was outside of Essex with Bamber all of the time ?

Well you've been quoting Julie's WS. Now you're complaining it was written a month later. As it happens, her WS was completed very quickly after her police approach.

[Kaldin]

On the fence ? It seems you fire fighting a forest fire.

I'm sorry but Julie knowing all this from people other than Bamber is not credible.

Who else would tell her these things. She was outside of Essex with Bamber all of the time ?

Well you've been quoting Julie's WS. Now you're complaining it was written a month later. As it happens, her WS was completed very quickly after her police approach.

The stuff she told the police about what Jeremy allegedly said on 7th August was not relayed to the police until a month later. In that month, she could easily have found out loads of stuff about the murder scene. Jeremy would have been told about it for a start. Colin would know as well. The Bible was mentioned quite early on I think.

[Stephanie]

On the fence ? It seems you fire fighting a forest fire.

I'm sorry but Julie knowing all this from people other than Bamber is not credible.

Who else would tell her these things. She was outside of Essex with Bamber all of the time ?

Well you've been quoting Julie's WS. Now you're complaining it was written a month later. As it happens, her WS was completed very quickly after her police approach.

Couldn't agree with you more Adam!

But you are wasting your time attempting to debate with Kaldin; who keeps attempting to change the goals posts and veers from the factual evidence of JM's statements.

[Kaldin]

Couldn't agree with you more Adam!

But you are wasting your time attempting to debate with Kaldin; who keeps attempting to change the goals posts and veers from the factual evidence of JM's statements.

No I'm not - I'm simply on the fence. I'm sure it's probably been discussed during my six-year absence, but I don't mind having a look at what Julie could have found out during that month before she went to the police.

[Adam]

The stuff she told the police about what Jeremy allegedly said on 7th August was not relayed to the police until a month later. In that month, she could easily have found out loads of stuff about the murder scene. Jeremy would have been told about it for a start. Colin would know as well. The Bible was mentioned quite early on I think.

Ok you believe Julie got all this information from other people. Although have been complaining she stayed with Bamber after the massacre.

Again, if Julie was somehow a person everyone was slipping information to for some reason, it makes no difference to Bamber's guilt.

Julie also said Bamber planned to cycle to WHF. Which was easy to do. Do you think it was a coincidence Bamber brought Junes bike to the cottage just before the massacre ?

[Kaldin]

No idea why you keep using that idiom as you clearly do not understand its meaning!

As already pointed out by others your quite apparent bias and vitriol towards Julie Mugford is written in black and white by your very own hand.

I have no idea why you keep bothering me if you don't like my posts. Of course I'm on the fence. I've been discussing Julie Mugford's behaviour from the viewpoint that Jeremy was guilty and she knew he was guilty. Now I wouldn't mind discussing it from the viewpoint that he's not guilty and her story was not true.

[Kaldin]

Ok you believe Julie got all this information from other people. Although have been complaining she stayed with Bamber after the massacre.

Again, if Julie was somehow a person everyone was slipping information to for some reason, it makes no difference to Bamber's guilt.

Julie also said Bamber planned to cycle to WHF. Which was easy to do. Do you think it was a coincidence Bamber brought Junes bike to the cottage just before the massacre ?

She probably got most of it from Jeremy. The police would have told him a lot of it, and he would have told Julie. She would also get info from the press and other people.

It didn't need to be a coincidence that the bike was at Jeremy's house. That could be where she got the idea from.

[Adam]

She probably got most of it from Jeremy. The police would have told him a lot of it, and he would have told Julie. She would also get info from the press and other people.

It didn't need to be a coincidence that the bike was at Jeremy's house. That could be where she got the idea from.

You've now said it. Suggesting Julie lied.

Bamber was 'unlucky' that he brought the bike over just before the massacre. It gave Julie an open goal.

[Kaldin]

You've now said it. Suggesting Julie lied.

Bamber was 'unlucky' that he brought the bike over just before the massacre. It gave Julie an open goal.

I'm merely saying it's a possibility. After all, that's what the defence claimed isn't it?

[David1819]

Couldn't agree with you more Adam!

But you are wasting your time attempting to debate with Kaldin; who keeps attempting to change the goals posts and veers from the factual evidence of JM's statements.

factual evidence from JM statements? There are none.

[David1819]

Well yes - allegedly. Like maggie, I could have understood Julie's actions a lot more if she claimed that he hadn't told her, and that she gradually realised that he was involved. However, that's not what she said, so therefore, I don't understand her actions.

She was fooled into believing Jeremy killed the family. Then told she would go down with him if she did not testify against him. Not difficult to work out.

[gringo]

Well yes - allegedly. Like maggie, I could have understood Julie's actions a lot more if she claimed that he hadn't told her, and that she gradually realised that he was involved. However, that's not what she said, so therefore, I don't understand her actions.

   As you have reasonably pointed out , Kaldin, this is not even a debate about JB's guilt or innocence. If JB is guilty then JM's actions in the lead up to, during and in the aftermath of the killings defy explanation, other than that she was a willing accessory.
     Quite why this view is attacked by so many guilters is inexplicable. It makes no difference to JB's guilt or innocence but it should be apparent to all that if JB is guilty then it is self evident that Mugford was a willing accomplice.
     
   

[Caroline]

Well yes - allegedly. Like maggie, I could have understood Julie's actions a lot more if she claimed that he hadn't told her, and that she gradually realised that he was involved. However, that's not what she said, so therefore, I don't understand her actions.

If you don't, you don't. I guess that's said about a lot of people - perhaps even yourself.