could rwb have been psycic.

[Caroline]

I'd say there were solicitor's aplenty in a large town like Colchester. It would have taken collusion -with RWB- on Mary Mugford's part to have set her daughter up with his solicitor.

Well, not necessarily, it could be a coincidence. His name may have been mentioned and approached because of his familiarity with events.

[Caroline]

With the greatest respect... this hardly makes JB innocent though does it?

Of course not because he isn't.

[Jane]

Well, not necessarily, it could be a coincidence. His name may have been mentioned and approached because of his familiarity with events.

Mmm. I can go with that.

[Jane]

With the greatest respect... this hardly makes JB innocent though does it?

Why would it?

[Roch]

Why would it?

I was being sarcastic.  As I am here:

So it's gone from not looking good and probable collusion, to mere coincidence, before you can say Bob's your uncle.  I can see now why no circumstance equates to JB being innocent.

[Jane]

I was being sarcastic.  As I am here:

So it's gone from not looking good and probable collusion, to mere coincidence, before you can say Bob's your uncle.  I can see now why no circumstance equates to JB being innocent.

Correct.

[Caroline]

I was being sarcastic.  As I am here:

So it's gone from not looking good and probable collusion, to mere coincidence, before you can say Bob's your uncle.  I can see now why no circumstance equates to JB being innocent.

I never thought it was collusion. It's a long way from not 'looking' good to collusion. Not sure why you injected sarcasm when none was required?

[Roch]

I never thought it was collusion. It's a long way from not 'looking' good to collusion. Not sure why you injected sarcasm when none was required?

If you read back, as soon as you posted that it didn't look good, Jane folllowed up that it could be collusion.  As soon as you suggested it may just be a benign coincidence, Jane followed suit in agreement. 

I couldn't help the initial sarcasm, I was trying to parody the usual dismissal we read on here 'doesn't mean JB is innocent' etc.

[Jane]

I was being sarcastic.  As I am here:

So it's gone from not looking good and probable collusion, to mere coincidence, before you can say Bob's your uncle.  I can see now why no circumstance equates to JB being innocent.

I wasn't actually putting forward collusion as a statement of fact.

[Roch]

I wasn't actually putting forward collusion as a statement of fact.

Perhaps not but you certainly weren't far off doing so...

I'd say there were solicitor's aplenty in a large town like Colchester. It would have taken collusion -with RWB- on Mary Mugford's part to have set her daughter up with his solicitor.

                               And shouldn't I at least get some credit for my 'Bob's your uncle' quip? 

                                       

[Jane]

Perhaps not but you certainly weren't far off doing so...

                               And shouldn't I at least get some credit for my 'Bob's your uncle' quip? 

                                       

No! Far from it, Had I said "It took collusion............." you'd have been correct. I used "Would have.................." because I didn't believe it was the case. Of course, HAD it been, "Bob" would most certainly have been my/your uncle

[Jane]

If you read back, as soon as you posted that it didn't look good, Jane folllowed up that it could be collusion.  As soon as you suggested it may just be a benign coincidence, Jane followed suit in agreement. 

I couldn't help the initial sarcasm, I was trying to parody the usual dismissal we read on here 'doesn't mean JB is innocent' etc.

My own post had been little more than sarcasm, which was why I agreed with Caroline. I DID not, DO not, NEVER have thought that Mary Mugford colluded with RWB. However, it WAS she who arranged a solicitor for Julie.

Something else with which I concur with Caroline. I seem to recall that she suggested that you take the forum a little too seriously. Perhaps you should refrain from telling people what they meant by the words they posted.

[Caroline]

If you read back, as soon as you posted that it didn't look good, Jane folllowed up that it could be collusion.  As soon as you suggested it may just be a benign coincidence, Jane followed suit in agreement. 

I couldn't help the initial sarcasm, I was trying to parody the usual dismissal we read on here 'doesn't mean JB is innocent' etc.

What's wrong with that? It could be either!

How may many times have you also seen that 'this' 'that' or 'the other' doesn't make him guilty?

[nugnug]

did rwb recound the solicter to them if so that proves there was contact between rwb and mugford.

[Caroline]

did rwb recound the solicter to them if so that proves there was contact between rwb and mugford.

That's the assumption being made - no evidence of it though.