tonights the night.

[susan]

1984 minor cheque book fraud. The police found out about it after she had completed her WS. Nothing to do with the massacre - Dismissed.

Burglary - She told the police about Bamber robbing his family. Bamber told her to be a look out. - Dismissed.

Selling cannabis at college - As Bamber did. Source please. However nothing to do with the massacre - Dismissed.

Drug abuse - Just like Bamber again then. Again source please. Nothing to do with the massacre - Dismissed.

Perverting the course of justice - She approached the police after 1 month after telling 5 people while still with Bamber. After Bamber had finally stopped whisking her around England & Amsterdam - Dismissed.

Being an accomplice - She was in London when Bamber massacred everyone - Dismissed.

Making a verbal NOTW deal - As Bamber had also done. Prior to his sick efforts to sell pictures of Sheila to the Sun - Dismissed.

Adam how arrogant you are to make out you know more about the law than NGB who is a fully qualified experienced Barrister.

[Adam]

It is strange that with over 200 pieces of forensic & circumstantial evidence against the only alive individual who could have committed the massacre,  supporters so passionately support Bamber. A man virtually every supporter has never met.

The police were corrupt, Julie is literally hated by supporters,  the relatives framed another greiving relation, the experts lied, the judge was biased, the defence were not good enough, Mary Mugford supported her pyschotic daughter, James Richards was wrong, the COA are outdated, the CCRC were wrong, the police complaints commission biased.

I know it's a high profile case & Bamber has always said he's innocent. But surely a convicted man saying he's innocent shouldn't negate over 200 pieces of evidence & several court decisions.  Otherwise no one would ever be convicted.

[susan]

1984 minor cheque book fraud. The police found out about it after she had completed her WS. Nothing to do with the massacre - Dismissed.

Burglary - She told the police about Bamber robbing his family. Bamber told her to be a look out. - Dismissed.

Selling cannabis at college - As Bamber did. Source please. However nothing to do with the massacre - Dismissed.

Drug abuse - Just like Bamber again then. Again source please. Nothing to do with the massacre - Dismissed.

Perverting the course of justice - She approached the police after 1 month after telling 5 people while still with Bamber. After Bamber had finally stopped whisking her around England & Amsterdam - Dismissed.

Being an accomplice - She was in London when Bamber massacred everyone - Dismissed.

Making a verbal NOTW deal - As Bamber had also done. Prior to his sick efforts to sell pictures of Sheila to the Sun - Dismissed.

Adam I read all your posts and sometimes you come over as quite desperate as if you have doubts about your own posts an example of this is the fact that you have to refer Julie's fraud as "minor" also you try to take posts away from your main points by bringing up the nude pictures etc you don't come over as a confident poster at all.  Now don't say the same applies to me I admit I am not confident in my posting I have to read old posts to refresh my mind and get some details.

[Steve_uk]

You are correct nugnug.  Adam is simply wrong.  I have posted about this at length in the past.  JM potentially faced very serious charges.  If her account is correct she could have been charged as an accomplice to murder (based upon support both before and after the events), or with assisting an offender, or with perverting the course of justice, leaving aside the unrelated deception, burglary and drugs offences.

The point was she turned Queen's evidence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turn_state%27s_evidence

It may be that she potentially faced serious charges, which is what Jeremy Bamber was counting on and explains her reticence for the month in question.

Adam is not wrong: it is you who have either been misinformed or are desperate to deceive.

[Adam]

The point was she turned Queen's evidence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turn_state%27s_evidence

It may be that she potentially faced serious charges, which is what Jeremy Bamber was counting on and explains her reticence for the month in question.

Adam is not wrong: it is you who have either been misinformed or are desperate to deceive.

I suppose the police could have prosecuted Julie for apparently dealing in low grade drugs at college. Or for being a look out to Bamber as he robbed his family. Or for waiting a month before approaching the police.

This would mean Julie wouldn't be an important witness in a 5x murder charge.

I know what I would prefer the police to do when women & children had been shot while they slept.

[Steve_uk]

I suppose the police could have prosecuted Julie for apparently dealing in low grade drugs at college. Or for being a look out to Bamber as he robbed his family. Or for waiting a month before approaching the police.

This would mean Julie wouldn't be an important witness in a 5x murder charge.

I know what I would prefer the police to do when women & children had been shot while they slept.

He's wrong about noble cause corruption as well. We're not dealing with the odd murder here but cases where potentially thousands of lives can be saved.

[Jane]

He's wrong about noble cause corruption as well. We're not dealing with the odd murder here but cases where potentially thousands of lives can be saved.

As with the incarceration of "The Three Musketeers".

[Steve_uk]

As with the incarceration of "The Three Musketeers".

And who wouldn't have stopped the transatlantic bomb plot by any means available? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/6153243/Airline-terror-trial-The-bomb-plot-to-kill-10000-people.html

[Jan]

The point was she turned Queen's evidence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turn_state%27s_evidence

It may be that she potentially faced serious charges, which is what Jeremy Bamber was counting on and explains her reticence for the month in question.

Adam is not wrong: it is you who have either been misinformed or are desperate to deceive.

Not wrong about what ?

[Steve_uk]

Not wrong about what ?

We've been through this before several years ago. The trouble is ngb1066 doesn't debate but presents a fait accompli, which members are supposed to accept due to his elevated status. In fact when I come to think of it it reminds me of another forum I used to frequent but I digress. He's far too much of a gentleman, above the fray or out of touch to argue the toss, whichever way you care to look at it.

[Jan]

He's wrong about noble cause corruption as well. We're not dealing with the odd murder here but cases where potentially thousands of lives can be saved.

Can someone be wrong or right about noble cause corruption? Sure that is a matter of opinion ?

[Steve_uk]

Can someone be wrong or right about noble cause corruption? Sure that is a matter of opinion ?

Well the principle of not getting your hands dirty is a noble one. The problem is there are people in our society not playing by our rules. I always thought I was the one living in the past.

[Jane]

Can someone be wrong or right about noble cause corruption? Sure that is a matter of opinion ?

NO. Strictly on a point of law, NCC is wrong. End of. No argument. However, The Law doesn't allow for sentiment or emotion -it would NEVER do for me to be a lawyer!!!- but it does affect, sentimentally and emotionally, most of those it touches.

[Steve_uk]

Adam how arrogant you are to make out you know more about the law than NGB who is a fully qualified experienced Barrister.

This is an open forum Susan and if you want it otherwise then go ahead and cleanse it of the troublemakers, though the precedent might come back and bite you.

[Adam]

This is an open forum Susan and if you want it otherwise then go ahead and cleanse it of the troublemakers, though the precedent might come back and bite you.

Whatever deal the police made with Julie, it was legal. As 32 years later it hasn't been breached.

The only thing relevant is the caravan break in & Julie not approaching the police for a month. The caravan break in relating more to Bamber.

It is a pity NGB couldn't give the forum more information. He just left it to Jan to bring up unrelated apparent drug dealing.