Author Topic: Julie Mugford  (Read 3585 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #15 on: August 03, 2018, 11:00:PM »
   This doesn't explain how Julie's story contains many details, which as David has shown, came not from Jeremy but AE  and RWB.

Hitman!
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 20872
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #16 on: August 03, 2018, 11:31:PM »
Jeremy is obviously not going to furnish every detail to the girl he is about to dump. He fed her the bare bones to keep her onside and thought he could buy her off with the managership of a wine bar in a fashionable area of London. He had very little experience of women and certainly none as academic as Julie. You're also forgetting that detail about the glove coming off in the fight with Nevill and the conversation with Charles Marsden at Christmas 1984 where he speculates about the Farm burning down.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13705
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #17 on: August 04, 2018, 12:14:AM »
Hitman!


Exactly! Where indeed - the rumour that Matthew McDonald was a 'mercenary' made him the perfect target for gossip mongers and I believe this is where JM got her hitman story from! I have to wonder also if the seed was planted by the family and it was embroidered into the elaborate tapestry of hearsay and conjecture we have today!

Well done Caroline!

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #18 on: August 04, 2018, 02:42:AM »

Well done Caroline!

So you got your theories from me. That's no surprise, you don't have an original thought in your head. By the way how's the big breakthrough coming along? You know, the one about the palm print?

I was once as taken in by Bamber as you are - then woke up!
« Last Edit: August 04, 2018, 02:43:AM by Caroline »
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44120
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #19 on: August 04, 2018, 07:20:AM »
Bamber's one reason for Julie creating a 35 page WS & testifying against him, is according to him, 'he jilted her'.

Appreciate supporters will come up with lots of alternative crazy theories.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2018, 07:25:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44120
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #20 on: August 04, 2018, 07:21:AM »
Disadvantages in Julie trying to frame an innocent man. A month after the massacre -

There was no evidence against Bamber. He was innocent. 

She had waited a month.

She would be charged by the police. When caught lying. 

Having a criminal record will effect her teaching career. 

To make Bamber look bad, she had to implicate herself in the caravan break in. Effecting her teaching career ? 

Her own 1984 minor crime may come to light. Effecting her teaching career ? 

At the time there was no financial reward in approaching the police. 

It shows she was upset about splitting up with Bamber. 

She would be on her own. No other witnesses could support her claims. 

Bamber would have the last laugh. When Julie was exposed. 

She would have to follow through her approach. Right through to the ultimate (unlikely) conviction. Lying to the world. 

It would show she was vindictive. Once exposed. 

She may quickly wilt under pressure.  This is something she had never attempted before, and a massive long term lie. So why bother in the first place ? 

It would show she had no sympathy for a grieving man. Once exposed. 

It would show how upset she was that she was no longer with Bamber. Once exposed. 

It would show she was stupid. Once exposed. 

An approach may ultimately be time consuming. Depending on her success. Taking up months or years of her life. Effecting her second degree and teaching career. 

It would be her word against Bamber's. For the last month the police had treated it as murder/suicide, which was correct as she knew he was innocent. 

She will not know the details of the forensic evidence. It may show Sheila was the killer. Which would not be surprising as Bamber was innocent. 

It would be bringing other people into this, such the deceased grieving relatives and her own friends and relatives. 

She may feel bad after her initial approach. But is coming clean now an option ? 

She had already given a short WS on the massacre day and gone around with Bamber for one month. The police will know she had approached them after she split with Bamber. 

She was attempting to reverse a decision announced in the media, which the police were in public sticking to - murder/suicide. One month after the massacre. 

Her approach may only last a few minutes. Experienced police officers may dismiss it, after all Bamber was innocent. Bamber may not even find out about Julie's sick attempt for revenge. 

If an unsuccessful police approach  became news in the media, she would forever be looked upon as a heartless and lying woman. Friends and relatives may desert her.

Perjury can result in prison. 

Julie would be condidered sick & unhinged when exposed. 
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #21 on: August 04, 2018, 12:51:PM »
So you got your theories from me. That's no surprise, you don't have an original thought in your head. By the way how's the big breakthrough coming along? You know, the one about the palm print?

I was once as taken in by Bamber as you are - then woke up!

Actually, the above isn't quite true, I was NEVER the caliber of supporter as the likes of you and gringo.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48661
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #22 on: August 04, 2018, 01:00:PM »
Well I haven't got to the stage of talking to myself yet. :)) :)) :)) :)) :)) :))

guest154

  • Guest
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #23 on: August 04, 2018, 02:05:PM »
Actually, the above isn't quite true, I was NEVER the caliber of supporter as the likes of you and gringo.

Still you should be tarred and feathered though.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48661
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #24 on: August 04, 2018, 02:11:PM »
Oh joy-------it's the reinforcement.  :)) :)) :)) :)) :)) :))

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #25 on: August 04, 2018, 02:50:PM »
Well I haven't got to the stage of talking to myself yet. :)) :)) :)) :)) :)) :))

Neither have I - not sure what you're on about?
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48661
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #26 on: August 04, 2018, 03:03:PM »
Neither have I - not sure what you're on about?






You answered your own post.

Offline gringo

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3390
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #27 on: August 04, 2018, 03:10:PM »
Actually, the above isn't quite true, I was NEVER the caliber of supporter as the likes of you and gringo.
   How do you measure a supporter's caliber?

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #28 on: August 04, 2018, 03:12:PM »
   How do you measure a supporter's caliber?

By how far they will go to make back white - it's clear how far you will go!
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline gringo

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3390
Re: Julie Mugford
« Reply #29 on: August 04, 2018, 03:15:PM »
By how far they will go to make back white - it's clear how far you will go!
   Self awareness not your strong point?