Video re photographs non-disclosure

[Jan]

Thanks Sami, it’s the new me, cool calm and Collective The three C’s

As long as it’s not CBS


Calm before storm.

[guest7363]

I agree with you that whatever your view on the case JM comes across as dreadful.  I do not hold back in my total condemnation of her.  This is my continuing battle with some members here, particularly Steve_UK, but also to an extent Jane and even Caroline, whom I respect a lot even though I disagree with her on some aspects of the case (but agree more than you might realise on others).  However RJ has been fairly balanced in relation to JM.  He is certainly not a supporter of her.  He has a view on JB based upon people he knows and although I do not share his view I recognise that it is sincerely held and fairly argued.  I think sensible debate is the answer here, particularly if we hope to persuade people of our view.

Thanks NGB, I had to think what and how to  put it so not to offend, Ive no time for Julie in how she behaved, I think to a certain degree she was part of it, along with A N Other.  I do think with the advances in DNA and police techniques she wouldn’t be needed if the crime was committed recently and she would have been charged more than likely, but back then,  with the case finally balanced she became a necessity to tip the scales.

[guest7363]

As long as it’s not CBS


Calm before storm.

🙈🙈🙈. I’m going off air till the bloody series has finished 😂😂😂

[sami]

we must remember she did not plan or commit the actual murders,and its common for criminals to turn queens evidence,against their friends,its happened to steel n whomes,range rover murders.as she said she didnt think anyone would believe her

[JackieD]

I agree with you that whatever your view on the case JM comes across as dreadful.  I do not hold back in my total condemnation of her.  This is my continuing battle with some members here, particularly Steve_UK, but also to an extent Jane and even Caroline, whom I respect a lot even though I disagree with her on some aspects of the case (but agree more than you might realise on others).  However RJ has been fairly balanced in relation to JM.  He is certainly not a supporter of her.  He has a view on JB based upon people he knows and although I do not share his view I recognise that it is sincerely held and fairly argued.  I think sensible debate is the answer here, particularly if we hope to persuade people of our view.

I suppose if you believe this is a miscarriage of justice case then what she has done is unthinkable but I still find it impossible to believe anyone takes her word for any of it, yet people on here believe her for no reason at at.  My sticking point has always been as know is the visit to the mortuary. I will never accept the reason as identifying the twins. If you are training to be a teacher the vision of two children with holes in their heads would never leave you.
To see your boyfriends handiwork would not be possible

[guest7363]

iam sure we have all been in love its a wonderful thing ,it can make one do all sorts of things others might mind gross

Spot on Sami, you have a great way with describing, it’s totally true, it’s an unsettling idea for lots of people, love makes you do loads of stupid things, I once bought a bunch of flowers, “can you believe it” 😂😂😂

[sami]

I suppose if you believe this is a miscarriage of justice case then what she has done is unthinkable but I still find it impossible to believe anyone takes her word for any of it, yet people on here believe her for no reason at at.  My sticking point has always been as know is the visit to the mortuary. I will never accept the reason as identifying the twins. If you are training to be a teacher the vision of two children with holes in their heads would never leave you.
To see your boyfriends handiwork would not be possible

the wounds were to the head not the face ,would the mortuary attendant not cover up the wounds to the  head with bandages but leave the faces visible.i think he might

[JackieD]

Spot on Sami, you have a great way with describing, it’s totally true, it’s an unsettling idea for lots of people, love makes you do loads of stupid things, I once bought a bunch of flowers, “can you believe it” 😂😂😂

See you have just made light of her involvement again. RJ you have no idea in statements or in interviews if she is lying or telling the truth do you.

[guest7363]

I suppose if you believe this is a miscarriage of justice case then what she has done is unthinkable but I still find it impossible to believe anyone takes her word for any of it, yet people on here believe her for no reason at at.  My sticking point has always been as know is the visit to the mortuary. I will never accept the reason as identifying the twins. If you are training to be a teacher the vision of two children with holes in their heads would never leave you.
To see your boyfriends handiwork would not be possible

To be honest Jackie, I think you could become a better poster if you lost some of your hatred, it’s not all about JM that Bamber got convicted, I think the net was closing in and she became part of it, she took the flack and spotlight away from the shoddy police work, she was the catch up for the lost ground and got protected in return.

[guest7363]

See you have just made light of her involvement again. RJ you have no idea in statements or in interviews if she is lying or telling the truth do you.

Lying for most in her first interview, possibly 80%  telling the truth in the second, playing down her involvement, I’m not a lawyer or a judge I’m a poster with an interest that’s all.  Julie is a twat Jackie does that make you feel better.

[Jan]

To be honest Jackie, I think you could become a better poster if you lost some of your hatred, it’s not all about JM that Bamber got convicted, I think the net was closing in and she became part of it, she took the flack and spotlight away from the shoddy police work, she was the catch up for the lost ground and got protected in return.

In those days the police did have licence to do whatever they could to get their man . It was a different era .

But it does not mean they are above the law now .

[Caroline]

I agree with you that whatever your view on the case JM comes across as dreadful.  I do not hold back in my total condemnation of her.  This is my continuing battle with some members here, particularly Steve_UK, but also to an extent Jane and even Caroline, whom I respect a lot even though I disagree with her on some aspects of the case (but agree more than you might realise on others).  However RJ has been fairly balanced in relation to JM.  He is certainly not a supporter of her.  He has a view on JB based upon people he knows and although I do not share his view I recognise that it is sincerely held and fairly argued.  I think sensible debate is the answer here, particularly if we hope to persuade people of our view.

Thanks NGB - likewise! 

[guest7363]

In those days the police did have licence to do whatever they could to get their man . It was a different era .

But it does not mean they are above the law now .

Never said it does Jan, I think now they do try (not everyone) to cross all the “Ts”:so to speak, they are under more scrutiny than before, it’s became harder for a DC to get a case accepted by the CPS, so yes times have changed along with advances in DNA, but everything is not always against the accused, the victim is sometimes hard done by, you talk of evidence being withheld from the defence I bet there is more withheld from the Jury that would support the victim.  I’m not talking about the Bamber case Jan, I’m talking cases overall.

[Jane]

Im not a Julie supporter Jan, she didn’t conduct herself the way I would expect my daughter to behave, Julie does lie yes, most women would like their men to be kind, empathic, understanding, and respectful. But and ( please don’t take offence anyone) some are attracted and defend the rogue type, till the shit hits the pan.

A very balanced and insightful post, RJ.

[Jane]

I agree with you that whatever your view on the case JM comes across as dreadful.  I do not hold back in my total condemnation of her.  This is my continuing battle with some members here, particularly Steve_UK, but also to an extent Jane and even Caroline, whom I respect a lot even though I disagree with her on some aspects of the case (but agree more than you might realise on others).  However RJ has been fairly balanced in relation to JM.  He is certainly not a supporter of her.  He has a view on JB based upon people he knows and although I do not share his view I recognise that it is sincerely held and fairly argued.  I think sensible debate is the answer here, particularly if we hope to persuade people of our view.

I'm not certain why you should feel the need to battle with me, NGB. I've never concealed my dislike of Julie going back to when I thought Jeremy was innocent. However, I'll admit my dislike of her then may, compared to now, have an uncomfortable resemblance to how Jeremy's 'would be' sees her now. Now, MY view of her is more balanced. I've learned something of her background from someone who knew her family. I've said, on countless occasions, that I find her behaviour appalling. I've said that I'd have been ashamed to have called her my daughter. I'm not certain what more I could say to get across that I don't support her. However, in a court of law -and despite some treating it that way, this forum isn't- everything which isn't white, is black. REAL life isn't like that. None of us are more than products of our upbringings and the standards we've witnessed and experienced -if we see our care-givers "getting away with it" it stands to reason we'll do the same- it's understandable when we're children. Children aren't responsible. It doesn't excuse those behaviours, as adults, we fail to take responsibility for but it helps to explain.

What she did was wrong, almost beyond belief, BUT -and in the legal world of black or white it really doesn't matter what was the driving force behind it- she came good and did the right thing. That the decision was taken not to prosecute her ISN'T her fault, but she may have paid for it since. I wonder, for how long she's expected to pay? How long is this sick vendetta against her going to last? It seems to me that if her "crimes" are measured as being on a par with Jeremy's, the "crimes" of those -some of whom appear to be coming from a position of jealousy- who actively seek to destroy her life and family, are every bit as bad as those they accuse her of.