Who's engaged with who during the 32 year Industrial frame.

[Adam]

The police

Would have had to engage with every individual or organisation. To varying degrees.

A 24/7 framing department may have been created after Peter Simpson replaced Taff Jones. A mountain of false evidence has been created & the DPP approved their submission which had quickly been created. 

Roch says Ainsley was brought in to dispose of evidence.


The qualified experts

The police would have told them what evidence they wanted them to forge.

There may have been lobbyists within the industrial frame department.  To suss out which qualified experts were willing to commit forgery & perjury in court. As a lot of qualified experts were required.


The blood testers

The police simply put Sheila's blood on the silencer & gave it to Huntingdon.

The testers submitted the results & testified. These were correct results from the fabricated evidence the police gave them.

Unlikely they knew about the fabrication prior to receiving the silencer. Would have been asked to committ forgery & perjury if the results given to the police were not suffient.


The relatives

Would need to engage with the police & agree to give false WS's & commit perjury.   Saying they found the silencer with paint & Sheila's blood on.

They engaged with Julie & Bamber in formal & informal ways. May have tipped Julie off that Bamber was being framed.


Julie Mugford

Had to engage with the police to give a false WS & commit perjury.

Also engaged with Mary Mugford. Either asking her to give a false WS & committ perjury, or accepting MM's offer to do this.   

Spent a long time exclusivly with Bamber & engaged with the relatives.


Mary Mugford

Engaged with her daughter & the police.

Agreed to give a false WS & commit perjury. Either offerring or being asked to by Julie or the police.

Also met Bamber pre & post massacre.


James Richards

Would only need to engage with the police. Who asked him to create a false WS & commit perjury.


DPP

The police handed them the evidence. This was substantial due to the forgery & false WS's. The DPP instantly approved the submission.

It is unclear whether the DPP knew that the evidence was false.


The trial prosecution team

It is unclear whether the police told them of the industrial frame.


Bamber's trial legal team

They were not involved in the frame. However it has been suggested they were not good enough, although highly paid.

They did not suggest an industrial frame at trial.


The judge

Presided over all the prosecution witnesses who committed perjury.

No suggestion he was part of the frame although Bamber's first appeal was based on the judges summing up.


The CCRC

Submitted Bamber's case to the COA in 2002. Were criticised for doing so.

May have then closed ranks after 2002 after engaging with the police. Resulting in a 2012 rejection.


COA

A 522 point document outlines the reasons for 2002 dismissal.

The police may have asked the COA to dismiss the 2002 application after the CCRC had put it through. 


The police Complaints Authority

This is the police investigating the police. So the police closed ranks. They would have to engage with several other people & bodies to be able to give reasons for rejecting Bamber's application.

[Jane]

The police

Would have had to engage with every individual or organisation. To varying degrees.

A 24/7 framing department may have been created after Peter Simpson replaced Taff Jones. A mountain of false evidence has been created & the DPP approved their submission which had quickly been created. 

Roch says Ainsley was brought in to dispose of evidence.


The Experts

The police would have told them what evidence they wanted them to forge.

There may have been lobbyists within the industrial frame department.  To suss out which experts were willing to commit forgery & perjury in court. A lot of experts were required.


The blood testers

The police simply put Sheila's blood on the silencer & gave it to Huntingdon.

The testers submitted the results & testified. These were correct results from the fabricated evidence the police gave them.

Unlikely they knew about the fabrication prior to receiving the silencer. Would have been asked to committ forgery & perjury if the results given to the police were not suffient.


The relatives

Would need to engage with the police & agree to give false WS's & commit perjury.   Saying they found the silencer with paint & Sheila's blood on.

They engaged with Julie & Bamber in formal & informal ways. May have tipped Julie off that Bamber was being framed.


Julie Mugford

Had to engage with the police to give a false WS & commit perjury.

Also engaged with Mary Mugford. Either asking her to give a false WS & committ perjury, or accepting MM's offer of help.   

Spent a long time exclusivly with Bamber & engaged with the relatives.


Mary Mugford

Engaged with her daughter & the police.

Agreed to give a false WS & commit perjury. Either offerring or being asked to by Julie or the police.

Also met Bamber pre & post massacre.


James Richards

Would only need to engage with the police. Who asked him to create a false WS & commit perjury.


DPP

The police handed them the evidence. This was substantial due to the forgery & false WS's. The DPP instantly approved the submission.

It is unclear whether the DPP knew that the evidence was false.


Bamber's trial legal team

They were not involved in the frame. However it has been suggested they were not good enough, although highly paid.

They did not suggest an industrial frame at trial.


The judge

Presided over all the prosecution witnesses who committed perjury.

No suggestion he was part of the frame although Bamber's first appeal was based on the judges summing up.


The CCRC

Submitted Bamber's case to the COA in 2002. Were criticised for doing so.

May have then closed ranks after 2002 after engaging with the police. Resulting in a 2012 rejection.


COA

A 522 point document outlines the reasons for 2002 dismissal.

The police may have asked the COA to dismiss the 2002 application after the CCRC had put it through. 


The police Complaints Authority

This is the police investigating the police. So the police closed ranks. They would have to engage with several other people & bodies to be able to give reasons for rejecting Bamber's application.....................

..................namely, Bill Brewer, Jan Strewer, Peter Gurney, Perter Davey, Dan'l Whidden, Harry Hawk,and Uncle Tom Cobley ET AL.........................

[Roch]

..................namely, Bill Brewer, Jan Strewer, Peter Gurney, Perter Davey, Dan'l Whidden, Harry Hawk,and Uncle Tom Cobley ET AL.........................

How many people were involved in covering up Hillsborough and/or other notable MOJ's?  It happens. Get over it.

[Jane]

How many people were involved in covering up Hillsborough and/or other notable MOJ's?  It happens. Get over it.

I bet that's what THEY drummed into you to catch you. I FULLY aware that bad 'stuff' happens, but I simply don't believe it happens all the time. Jeremy Bamber is a convenient band wagon. I'd suggest it's you who need to "get over it".

[Roch]

I bet that's what THEY drummed into you to catch you. I FULLY aware that bad 'stuff' happens, but I simply don't believe it happens all the time. Jeremy Bamber is a convenient band wagon. I'd suggest it's you who need to "get over it".

Well you're coming out with all this Tom Cobbley rubbish. It's already been explained - it doesn't work like that. Can you not acknowledge the explanation and move on? And anyway, surely in any wrongful conviction or misdirected verdict, it takes all sorts to play their part knowingly or otherwise.

[Jane]

Well you're coming out with all this Tom Cobbley rubbish. It's already been explained - it doesn't work like that. Can you not acknowledge the explanation and move on? And anyway, surely in any wrongful conviction or misdirected verdict, it takes all sorts to play their part knowingly or otherwise.

THIS -the above- from the chief proponent if the conspiracy theory who doesn't believe it's incumbent on him to give any reasons other than "it doesn't work like that". I'm certain life would be easier if I were to "acknowledge the explanation and move on" but telling me only "it doesn't work like that" ISN'T an explanation, let alone a satisfactory one. I've arrived at UTC, only because you've lead me there by confirming to me "it takes all sorts...................", something part of a conspiracy of which I was fully aware.

[David1819]

The police

Would have had to engage with every individual or organisation. To varying degrees.

A 24/7 framing department may have been created after Peter Simpson replaced Taff Jones. A mountain of false evidence has been created & the DPP approved their submission which had quickly been created. 

Roch says Ainsley was brought in to dispose of evidence.


The qualified experts

The police would have told them what evidence they wanted them to forge.

There may have been lobbyists within the industrial frame department.  To suss out which qualified experts were willing to commit forgery & perjury in court. As a lot of qualified experts were required.


The blood testers

The police simply put Sheila's blood on the silencer & gave it to Huntingdon.

The testers submitted the results & testified. These were correct results from the fabricated evidence the police gave them.

Unlikely they knew about the fabrication prior to receiving the silencer. Would have been asked to committ forgery & perjury if the results given to the police were not suffient.


The relatives

Would need to engage with the police & agree to give false WS's & commit perjury.   Saying they found the silencer with paint & Sheila's blood on.

They engaged with Julie & Bamber in formal & informal ways. May have tipped Julie off that Bamber was being framed.


Julie Mugford

Had to engage with the police to give a false WS & commit perjury.

Also engaged with Mary Mugford. Either asking her to give a false WS & committ perjury, or accepting MM's offer to do this.   

Spent a long time exclusivly with Bamber & engaged with the relatives.


Mary Mugford

Engaged with her daughter & the police.

Agreed to give a false WS & commit perjury. Either offerring or being asked to by Julie or the police.

Also met Bamber pre & post massacre.


James Richards

Would only need to engage with the police. Who asked him to create a false WS & commit perjury.


DPP

The police handed them the evidence. This was substantial due to the forgery & false WS's. The DPP instantly approved the submission.

It is unclear whether the DPP knew that the evidence was false.


The trial prosecution team

It is unclear whether the police told them of the industrial frame.


Bamber's trial legal team

They were not involved in the frame. However it has been suggested they were not good enough, although highly paid.

They did not suggest an industrial frame at trial.


The judge

Presided over all the prosecution witnesses who committed perjury.

No suggestion he was part of the frame although Bamber's first appeal was based on the judges summing up.


The CCRC

Submitted Bamber's case to the COA in 2002. Were criticised for doing so.

May have then closed ranks after 2002 after engaging with the police. Resulting in a 2012 rejection.


COA

A 522 point document outlines the reasons for 2002 dismissal.

The police may have asked the COA to dismiss the 2002 application after the CCRC had put it through. 


The police Complaints Authority

This is the police investigating the police. So the police closed ranks. They would have to engage with several other people & bodies to be able to give reasons for rejecting Bamber's application.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions

[JackieD]

I bet that's what THEY drummed into you to catch you. I FULLY aware that bad 'stuff' happens, but I simply don't believe it happens all the time. Jeremy Bamber is a convenient band wagon. I'd suggest it's you who need to "get over it".

Never mind the penny will drop one day with you regardless of the people you are surrounded by

It is well known police corruption and cover ups go on and if you don't believe that you are living in cloud cuckoo land
Why don't you get in touch with the people still alive who were jailed for the Guildford Bombings and tell them it's a shame bad stuff happened

Bad stuff by the police kills people and ruins life and you bragging about what people you 'know' means your posts will biased and weak

Wake up and smell the coffee with the Bamber case and stop defending Mugford she was and is a prolific liar and evil wicked women either way if Jeremy is innocent or guilty

[Adam]

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions

Thank you for you're contribution David.

You have previously said the conviction was due to 'forgery & perjury'. Do you believe there was more or less forgery & perjury than my thread post says ?

[Jane]

Never mind the penny will drop one day with you regardless of the people you are surrounded by

It is well known police corruption and cover ups go on and if you don't believe that you are living in cloud cuckoo land
Why don't you get in touch with the people still alive who were jailed for the Guildford Bombings and tell them it's a shame bad stuff happened

Bad stuff by the police kills people and ruins life and you bragging about what people you 'know' means your posts will biased and weak



Wake up and smell the coffee with the Bamber case and stop defending Mugford she was and is a prolific liar and evil wicked women either way if Jeremy is innocent or guilty

I joined the Jeremy Bamber Forum. As far as I'm concerned it has nothing to do Guilford.............other than his grandmother owning  property there, I believe.

You accuse me of bragging yet, from residence in your own cloud cuckoo land, you name drop continually. I guess that makes your posts even more "weak" than you accuse mine of being.

It seems to have escaped you that if Julie is guilty, so is Jeremy.

[JackieD]

I joined the Jeremy Bamber Forum. As far as I'm concerned it has nothing to do Guilford.............other than his grandmother owning  property there, I believe.

You accuse me of bragging yet, from residence in your own cloud cuckoo land, you name drop continually. I guess that makes your posts even more "weak" than you accuse mine of being.

It seems to have escaped you that if Julie is guilty, so is Jeremy.

Exactly who do I brag about?

I have been lucky enough to meet a number of legal experts and a criminologist and documentary maker that have discussed the case with me a number of times and I will continue to mention these impartial people

On the other hand you continually mention you know the relatives who tried to mislead the jury during the trial of Jeremy Bamber
This behaviour was to help convict Jeremy and get their hands on the Bamber fortunes

It's not something I would be bragging about

[lookout]

One thing which did strike me at that time in the 1980's was that the interest rate was about 11/12% and for those in business it was like a win on the lotto as they reaped benefits of this rate by accumulating a tidy bank account on their profits.
Not so for those who were paying mortgages and if business wasn't so good,as it threw lots of people in the red. For those people,times were tough and a great worry too,but not for the Bamber's as a shrewd Neville must have smiled on his way to the bank.   Neville's remark about RWB not being a " good businessman " must have hit home as he,RWB, was feeling the pinch having to go to granny,cap in hand.Then Neville buying land so that the Eaton's could  use it to advantage----------Neville's way of helping out while things were obviously tough.

Who wouldn't have wanted a ( free ) profitable business at that time ??  Mortgage free !!

[Steve_uk]

One thing which did strike me at that time in the 1980's was that the interest rate was about 11/12% and for those in business it was like a win on the lotto as they reaped benefits of this rate by accumulating a tidy bank account on their profits.
Not so for those who were paying mortgages and if business wasn't so good,as it threw lots of people in the red. For those people,times were tough and a great worry too,but not for the Bamber's as a shrewd Neville must have smiled on his way to the bank.   Neville's remark about RWB not being a " good businessman " must have hit home as he,RWB, was feeling the pinch having to go to granny,cap in hand.Then Neville buying land so that the Eaton's could  use it to advantage----------Neville's way of helping out while things were obviously tough.

Who wouldn't have wanted a ( free ) profitable business at that time ??  Mortgage free !!

I thought all farmers were doing well under the Common Agricultural Policy? Plus the Speakman line had the caravan park to fall back on. Didn't Nevill do his best to help out the Eatons anyway by buying the land over cost price?

[Jane]

Exactly who do I brag about?

I have been lucky enough to meet a number of legal experts and a criminologist and documentary maker that have discussed the case with me a number of times and I will continue to mention these impartial people

On the other hand you continually mention you know the relatives who tried to mislead the jury during the trial of Jeremy Bamber
This behaviour was to help convict Jeremy and get their hands on the Bamber fortunes

It's not something I would be bragging about

And you've named each and every one AD NAUSEUM! Whether or not they're impartial is irrelevant.

OK. YOU'VE made the declaration/accusation. NOW you're going to have tell the forum which relatives I've claimed to know, irrelevant of what they've allegedly said to whom OR allegedly done.

It's time you learned that you can't go on making accusations with nothing to back them up.

[Steve_uk]

And you've named each and every one AD NAUSEUM! Whether or not they're impartial is irrelevant.

OK. YOU'VE made the declaration/accusation. NOW you're going to have tell the forum which relatives I've claimed to know, irrelevant of what they've allegedly said to whom OR allegedly done.

It's time you learned that you can't go on making accusations with nothing to back them up.

That will be the day.