Video re photographs non-disclosure

[sami]

Hello sami thank you for your reply and your explanation that Real Justice was not referring to me as DIRT but another poster on the forum not a nice thing to say whoever the post was aimed at.  I have noticed that the post has now been modified.  Sami whilst I believe you cos I know what a nice guy you are and we get on so well but other posters on the forum may not so in fairness to Real Justice maybe you should get him to message NGB who this post was aimed at then NGB will confirm on the forum it was not me he was calling dirt.  Matter will be then closed and I will offer my sincere apologies to RJ on the open forum How do you feel about that my friend x

susan your lovely person and polite to all forum members,rj made that comment as a bit of a joke to someone who had been very rude to him you know yourself the name calling that goes on here,i can assure you it was not aimed at you, i can message him but not sure if he will do as you asked plus hes already removed it,jackie is just shit stirring dont fall for it.xx

[guest7363]

Thanks Jane, I do try 🙈

I think Bamber was in and out of love with Julie, the times he was in love with her she probably painted pictures in her mind of their future together, she probably loved to hear his stories of what he was going to give her and their future together,  this then became her window of opportunity, so long as she could distance herself from the eventuality, in her mind it made it easier for her.

I think with the silencer evidence transpiring and the finding of blood inside the silencer, the investigation would have taken a different route, even if Julie hadn’t come forward she would have been taken in for further questioning and with the best will in the world I don’t think she would have stood the pressure.
NGB, I’ve had a look at coercive control I’m quite convinced that Julie’s legal team could have claimed something from the long list of examples of This behaviour? 

One being, forcing you to take part in criminal activity. RE the caravan park robbery

[Jane]

That’s exactly why I expose people like you.

Ngb has your support for falsely accusing me of something I never did and would never do. I don’t know if his post was a wind up about respecting you but you are without a doubt with your post littered with explanation marks and your constant bullying of Lookout and your constant bullying by your gang.  It’s not normal behaviour.
When you supported Jeremy you never did a thing to move the case forward but you are a good addition to the guilty side because you continually get shown up by people that outwit you


I suggest when you're in a hole you stop digging. You're making yourself look more stupid than is necessary.

You carry on supporting people who falsely accuse people of things they haven’t done. Nothing changes

[susan]

Hi Sami

think Justice will message NGB he holds him in very high esteem and he will be understanding of referring to a poster as Dirt he should really have reported the post if it was very rude.  Thank you sami for your kindness you are a very kind lovely person and we have always got on so well xx

[Kaldin]

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.

Leaving the murders aside, in what way was Jeremy a "rogue type"? He didn't make her sell cannabis, and he didn't know about the cheque book fraud.

[Steve_uk]

Leaving the murders aside, in what way was Jeremy a "rogue type"? He didn't make her sell cannabis, and he didn't know about the cheque book fraud.

He nicked two Cartier watches from a New Zealand jewellers in 1982.

[Jan]

He nicked two Cartier watches from a New Zealand jewellers in 1982.

Was that his omission or what Bret said? He was not charged was he?

[Steve_uk]

Was that his omission or what Bret said? He was not charged was he?

He wasn't charged, no.

[Caroline]

Was that his omission or what Bret said? He was not charged was he?

He wouldn't be charged here - he nicked them in NZ.

[lookout]

How did he get through customs ?

[Jane]

How did he get through customs ?

Perfectly simple. He wore one and concealed the other.

[Jan]

He wouldn't be charged here - he nicked them in NZ.

Was he charged in New Zealand then ?

[sami]

Was he charged in New Zealand then ?

i think steve has answered that earlier ,when you asked him a few posts ago

[lookout]

Perfectly simple. He wore one and concealed the other.

They would have pinged going through the sensor.

[Jan]

i think steve has answered that earlier ,when you asked him a few posts ago

 I know 🙂

Just stating the obvious .