Author Topic: Video re photographs non-disclosure  (Read 94525 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #660 on: January 01, 2020, 04:18:PM »
Not sure that every murderer reacts in the same way tbh. That’s a bit of a generalisation.

Apparently jeremy was in shock and vomiting as confirmed by the police and other observers.

He walked into the middle of the poppy field, a couple of fingers down the throat would induce that.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #661 on: January 01, 2020, 04:18:PM »
Not sure that every murderer reacts in the same way tbh. That’s a bit of a generalisation.

Apparently jeremy was in shock and vomiting as confirmed by the police and other observers.


Did anyone actually see evidence of what he vomited?

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #662 on: January 01, 2020, 04:23:PM »
Colin hadn't put much trust in the relatives after he'd received a phone-call from DB meant for AP about the " blockbusting " headlines showing JB as the killer.

Stan Jone's hadn't proved himself to be too friendly towards Colin either when he told Colin he'd have to go and identify the bodies of his sons. Colin clearly told him " he couldn't ", but insisted as he was the only one who could tell them apart. Colin had still refused and said he couldn't believe the man because he was so pressing.
When Heather had offered, Jones ignored her.

When did heather offer
Julie Mugford the main prosecution witness was guilty of numerous crimes, 13 separate cheque frauds, robbery, and drug dealing and also making a deal with a national newspaper before trial that if she could convince a jury her ex boyfriend was guilty of five murders she would receive £25,000

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #663 on: January 01, 2020, 04:30:PM »

The problem here is empathy, or more correctly, LACK of it. You, and others, are SO certain how you'd have felt and sure of what you'd have done. The truth is, you only THINK you know. Unless you -or I- were any of those who played a part in this tragedy, and had their history, we haven't a clue.

Jane you are an absolute joke and I can hardly bare to read your ridiculous posts

You promote Mugford at every opportunity as a poor girl yet when Colin has been through the most horrendous trial whoever was responsible where was the empathy from the disgusting Mugford for Colin she was straight in the newspaper grinning from ear to ear with her £25,000 in her underwear
She should have handed that money straight over to Colin if she was telling the truth
Julie Mugford the main prosecution witness was guilty of numerous crimes, 13 separate cheque frauds, robbery, and drug dealing and also making a deal with a national newspaper before trial that if she could convince a jury her ex boyfriend was guilty of five murders she would receive £25,000

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #664 on: January 01, 2020, 04:34:PM »
He walked into the middle of the poppy field, a couple of fingers down the throat would induce that.


Have you replied to Gringo yet?
Julie Mugford the main prosecution witness was guilty of numerous crimes, 13 separate cheque frauds, robbery, and drug dealing and also making a deal with a national newspaper before trial that if she could convince a jury her ex boyfriend was guilty of five murders she would receive £25,000

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #665 on: January 01, 2020, 04:36:PM »

Did anyone actually see evidence of what he vomited?


Excuse me ? You are now going to make an assumption that the vomiting was fake and induced ? Feel free because that’s something that I am sure can not be proved either way .
 

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #666 on: January 01, 2020, 04:38:PM »
He walked into the middle of the poppy field, a couple of fingers down the throat would induce that.

Are you positive you have the timing of the vomiting and the “walk “ in the right order , because I was just reading that officer’s statement . What a coincidence .

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #667 on: January 01, 2020, 04:43:PM »
Jane you are an absolute joke and I can hardly bare to read your ridiculous posts

You promote Mugford at every opportunity as a poor girl yet when Colin has been through the most horrendous trial whoever was responsible where was the empathy from the disgusting Mugford for Colin she was straight in the newspaper grinning from ear to ear with her £25,000 in her underwear
She should have handed that money straight over to Colin if she was telling the truth


I'm not responsible for others' empathy or lack of it, anymore, thankfully, than I am for vitriol and jealousy you exhibit towards Julie.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #668 on: January 01, 2020, 04:45:PM »
We were all doing so well .

And it’s a bit early to be on the vino .

Perhaps in the spirit of 2020 try to keep off the personal posts .


Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #669 on: January 01, 2020, 04:46:PM »

Excuse me ? You are now going to make an assumption that the vomiting was fake and induced ? Feel free because that’s something that I am sure can not be proved either way .


It could easily have been either. He could have made retching noises and produced nothing, OR stuck his fingers down his throat to induce it.

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #670 on: January 01, 2020, 04:48:PM »

I'm not responsible for others' empathy or lack of it, anymore, thankfully, than I am for vitriol and jealousy you exhibit towards Julie.

You seem to think your experienced to declare who has empathy or not
You haven’t got a clue
What Julie did to Colin when she signed that contract was despicable

She will go down in history for what she did
They should make a six part drama just about her
Julie Mugford the main prosecution witness was guilty of numerous crimes, 13 separate cheque frauds, robbery, and drug dealing and also making a deal with a national newspaper before trial that if she could convince a jury her ex boyfriend was guilty of five murders she would receive £25,000

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #671 on: January 01, 2020, 04:48:PM »

It could easily have been either. He could have made retching noises and produced nothing, OR stuck his fingers down his throat to induce it.

Could of. No evidence that he did . And the police seemed to think he was genuinely in shock and sobbing to see his father .

So yet again if he is guilty their years of experience in judging people deserted them .

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #672 on: January 01, 2020, 04:50:PM »

Did anyone actually see evidence of what he vomited?
i thank stan jones said it looked like he was (trying) to be sick

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #673 on: January 01, 2020, 04:54:PM »
The famous

‘I think’
Julie Mugford the main prosecution witness was guilty of numerous crimes, 13 separate cheque frauds, robbery, and drug dealing and also making a deal with a national newspaper before trial that if she could convince a jury her ex boyfriend was guilty of five murders she would receive £25,000

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Re: Video re photographs non-disclosure
« Reply #674 on: January 01, 2020, 04:56:PM »
Could of. No evidence that he did . And the police seemed to think he was genuinely in shock and sobbing to see his father .

So yet again if he is guilty their years of experience in judging people deserted them .



The police, as a unit, seemed genuinely to believe Sheila was guilty so it's hardly surprising if they genuinely believed the only remaining family member was genuinely vomiting.