Viva Les Differences

[Adam]

Shutup yer moaning Adam. How old are you, 90 ?

My age is on my profile.

[nugnug]

Dog. Bone.

i asked a qustioon thats all.

[David1819]

erm becouse its ilgal.

client confidentailety.

They can use their discretion and speak to third parties if they feel its in their clients best interest.

You might then say Ed Lawson telling Paul Harrison in 2002 that "Bamber was a horrible man" and "In hindsight he was guilty" was not in Jeremys best interest. But this author has a habit of recalling interesting conversations with people who just so happen to be dead and therefore are unable to confirm or deny if they took place. 

Regardless. If we assume Ewen Smith did receive 11 diaries from 1969 to 1985 he still has five diaries unnaccounted for.

Depending on the situation in 1986 there would have to be a good reason why they were not used at trial in order to be an admissible gound of appeal.

[Jane]

i asked a qustioon thats all.

If only.

[Steve_uk]

They can use their discretion and speak to third parties if they feel its in their clients best interest.

You might then say Ed Lawson telling Paul Harrison in 2002 that "Bamber was a horrible man" and "In hindsight he was guilty" was not in Jeremys best interest. But this author has a habit of recalling interesting conversations with people who just so happen to be dead and therefore are unable to confirm or deny if they took place. 

Regardless. If we assume Ewen Smith did receive 11 diaries from 1969 to 1985 he still has five diaries unnaccounted for.

Depending on the situation in 1986 there would have to be a good reason why they were not used at trial in order to be an admissible gound of appeal.

Maybe because they were illegible, or could they possibly be forgeries?

[nugnug]

They can use their discretion and speak to third parties if they feel its in their clients best interest.

You might then say Ed Lawson telling Paul Harrison in 2002 that "Bamber was a horrible man" and "In hindsight he was guilty" was not in Jeremys best interest. But this author has a habit of recalling interesting conversations with people who just so happen to be dead and therefore are unable to confirm or deny if they took place. 

Regardless. If we assume Ewen Smith did receive 11 diaries from 1969 to 1985 he still has five diaries unnaccounted for.

Depending on the situation in 1986 there would have to be a good reason why they were not used at trial in order to be an admissible gound of appeal.

and why would they not hand over the other 5

[Caroline]

They can use their discretion and speak to third parties if they feel its in their clients best interest.

You might then say Ed Lawson telling Paul Harrison in 2002 that "Bamber was a horrible man" and "In hindsight he was guilty" was not in Jeremys best interest. But this author has a habit of recalling interesting conversations with people who just so happen to be dead and therefore are unable to confirm or deny if they took place. 

Regardless. If we assume Ewen Smith did receive 11 diaries from 1969 to 1985 he still has five diaries unnaccounted for.

Depending on the situation in 1986 there would have to be a good reason why they were not used at trial in order to be an admissible gound of appeal.

Some people will just hold on rather than admit it's a dead end! Who said the police or anyone else ever had the diaries were missing? Or perhaps Sheila even stopped writing for a while? Either way the dates were long enough before the murders as not to matter.

[Caroline]

and why would they not hand over the other 5

Who are they? Who said anyone had another 5?

[Adam]

Who are they? Who said anyone had another 5?

Nugs has had a vision.

[Caroline]

Nugs has had a vision.

I suggest he gets glasses then.

[David1819]

Maybe because they were illegible, or could they possibly be forgeries?

Forgeries? Well I guess you could claim Jeremy studied Sheila's handwriting and convincingly assembled a false sixteen years of Sheila's life into a whole saga of diary books as part of his plan. This hypothetical event is not constrained by laws of physics.

The fact you have suggested this only goes to show how futile the debate will get.

[nugnug]

Who are they? Who said anyone had another 5?

david did read the thread.

[Steve_uk]

Forgeries? Well I guess you could claim Jeremy studied Sheila's handwriting and convincingly assembled a false sixteen years of Sheila's life into a whole saga of diary books as part of his plan. This hypothetical event is not constrained by laws of physics.

The fact you have suggested this only goes to show how futile the debate will get.

I've lost track now of which diaries we're talking about.

[Caroline]

I've lost track now of which diaries we're talking about.

Well, there are the ones that exist and which the defence have seen (no implications that Sheila killed anyone) and there are the 'missing ones' that must say Sheila planned to killed the family. Of course they may simply never have been written in the first place but that doesn't implicate Sheila does it?

[nugnug]

Well, there are the ones that exist and which the defence have seen (no implications that Sheila killed anyone) and there are the 'missing ones' that must say Sheila planned to killed the family. Of course they may simply never have been written in the first place but that doesn't implicate Sheila does it?

well I suppose she could of stopped writing dairy's for a while and then started again

how come I never hear of these dairy's quoted.