Books on the Case

[IndigoJ]

Hey all

Which books have you read on the case , and which would you recommend?

I first read Blood Relations Roger Wilkes some years ago ,

I then read Bamber S C Lomax a few years ago

and now I have just got out of the library The Murders at White House Farm - Carol Ann Lee

I do think the Wilkes book was very well written and the Lomax one not so much, will let you know my view on the Lee book when I've finished it

[lookout]

Until there's a book which publishes the truth of what happened that night I'm not particularly interested even though I have all of them I haven't read them fully.

The first book to be published after Jeremy's release will be the most interesting.

[Caroline]

Hey all

Which books have you read on the case , and which would you recommend?

I first read Blood Relations Roger Wilkes some years ago ,

I then read Bamber S C Lomax a few years ago

and now I have just got out of the library The Murders at White House Farm - Carol Ann Lee

I do think the Wilkes book was very well written and the Lomax one not so much, will let you know my view on the Lee book when I've finished it

CAL's book is excellent.

[Caroline]

Until there's a book which publishes the truth of what happened that night I'm not particularly interested even though I have all of them I haven't read them fully.

The first book to be published after Jeremy's release will be the most interesting.

You're sounding more and more like an advert.

[lookout]

You're sounding more and more like an advert.

Good.

[Steve_uk]

Hey all

Which books have you read on the case , and which would you recommend?

I first read Blood Relations Roger Wilkes some years ago ,

I then read Bamber S C Lomax a few years ago

and now I have just got out of the library The Murders at White House Farm - Carol Ann Lee

I do think the Wilkes book was very well written and the Lomax one not so much, will let you know my view on the Lee book when I've finished it

May I refer you to one of the best threads on this site: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2787.0.html

[JackieD]

Good.

 

[JackieD]

Good.

Great response to the abuser

[guest154]

Hey all

Which books have you read on the case , and which would you recommend?

I first read Blood Relations Roger Wilkes some years ago ,

I then read Bamber S C Lomax a few years ago

and now I have just got out of the library The Murders at White House Farm - Carol Ann Lee

I do think the Wilkes book was very well written and the Lomax one not so much, will let you know my view on the Lee book when I've finished it

I'd try them all and make your own mind up - but would have avoided Lomax's book.

[David1819]

I would not recommend books for investigating this case. So much primary evidence is available on this forum. But here is my take -

I purchased CALs book simply because I was travelling abroad and needed something to read. All she does is present details at face value without any attempt to scrutinize or investigate further. 95% of the book is the leadup to the events and the trial. There are only a few paragraphs on the 2001 appeal and the 2012 CCRC submission and much exculpatory evidence is not mentioned. This is then followed by a half-baked crime reconstruction. Had she gone into more details of the appeals, readers would then realise her own crime reconstruction does not work at all. But to be fair you cannot get all this case into one book. I found the book rather boring as I already knew most of it but would probably be interesting to someone unfamiliar with the case.


Roger Wilkes book I have not read and I have no intentions of reading it. He does not give any citations for what he has written. He goes into some detail about Jeremys testimony at trial yet no transcript of Jeremys evidence exists. Mike Tesko gave him some material but none of this was used in the book. So I think he was heavily biased.


Paul Harrisons book. Deviant is persuasive fiction and is widley seen as a joke. He makes up evidence and conversations with witnesses who are all now dead and thus cannot expose his lies. Paul Harrison used to post on this forum and what transpired between him and NGB is somehow the inception for his crazy book and the peculiar events surrounding it.

Scott Lomax book is OK but is now outdated. Its a persuave non fiction book. But is outdated and several arguments no longer fit the bigger picture.


Colin Caffell book I have not read. But I really want to. Unlike all the other books this is a first hand account of a fairly important witness.

[IndigoJ]

I would not recommend books for investigating this case. So much primary evidence is available on this forum. But here is my take -

I purchased CALs book simply because I was travelling abroad and needed something to read. All she does is present details at face value without any attempt to scrutinize or investigate further. 95% of the book is the leadup to the events and the trial. There are only a few paragraphs on the 2001 appeal and the 2012 CCRC submission and much exculpatory evidence is not mentioned. This is then followed by a half-baked crime reconstruction. Had she gone into more details of the appeals, readers would then realise her own crime reconstruction does not work at all. But to be fair you cannot get all this case into one book. I found the book rather boring as I already knew most of it but would probably be interesting to someone unfamiliar with the case.


Roger Wilkes book I have not read and I have no intentions of reading it. He does not give any citations for what he has written. He goes into some detail about Jeremys testimony at trial yet no transcript of Jeremys evidence exists. Mike Tesko gave him some material but none of this was used in the book. So I think he was heavily biased.


Paul Harrisons book. Deviant is persuasive fiction and is widley seen as a joke. He makes up evidence and conversations with witnesses who are all now dead and thus cannot expose his lies. Paul Harrison used to post on this forum and what transpired between him and NGB is somehow the inception for his crazy book and the peculiar events surrounding it.

Scott Lomax book is OK but is now outdated. Its a persuave non fiction book. But is outdated and several arguments no longer fit the bigger picture.


Colin Caffell book I have not read. But I really want to. Unlike all the other books this is a first hand account of a fairly important witness.

I found the Wilkes book to be very good, I've read it a few times now but can appreciate if you are already familiar with the case it might not be as interesting, he was at the trial i understand and witnessed JB give evidence first hand,

I don't really want to read Colin's book , I do think that will be a biased view

The Lomax book was imo badly written with very little substance to what he was saying ,

[IndigoJ]

I'd try them all and make your own mind up - but would have avoided Lomax's book.

agree Lomax book has very little of any substance in it!

[IndigoJ]

May I refer you to one of the best threads on this site: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2787.0.html

gosh 144 pages 

[lookout]

I would not recommend books for investigating this case. So much primary evidence is available on this forum. But here is my take -

I purchased CALs book simply because I was travelling abroad and needed something to read. All she does is present details at face value without any attempt to scrutinize or investigate further. 95% of the book is the leadup to the events and the trial. There are only a few paragraphs on the 2001 appeal and the 2012 CCRC submission and much exculpatory evidence is not mentioned. This is then followed by a half-baked crime reconstruction. Had she gone into more details of the appeals, readers would then realise her own crime reconstruction does not work at all. But to be fair you cannot get all this case into one book. I found the book rather boring as I already knew most of it but would probably be interesting to someone unfamiliar with the case.


Roger Wilkes book I have not read and I have no intentions of reading it. He does not give any citations for what he has written. He goes into some detail about Jeremys testimony at trial yet no transcript of Jeremys evidence exists. Mike Tesko gave him some material but none of this was used in the book. So I think he was heavily biased.


Paul Harrisons book. Deviant is persuasive fiction and is widley seen as a joke. He makes up evidence and conversations with witnesses who are all now dead and thus cannot expose his lies. Paul Harrison used to post on this forum and what transpired between him and NGB is somehow the inception for his crazy book and the peculiar events surrounding it.

Scott Lomax book is OK but is now outdated. Its a persuave non fiction book. But is outdated and several arguments no longer fit the bigger picture.


Colin Caffell book I have not read. But I really want to. Unlike all the other books this is a first hand account of a fairly important witness.

Colin actually says very little about Jeremy. He writes of more anger toward June than anyone else as well as his dislike of SJ along with a remark about the relatives.

[David1819]

agree Lomax book has very little of any substance in it!

The problem for Lomax is libel. It would be impossible to publish a substancial persuastive nonfiction book arguing for Jeremy's innocence. Such a book would have to demonstrate an evil machiavellian plot involving real people. No publisher in their right mind would take it on while Jeremy's conviction remains upheld.


I don't think the lomax critics are very fair for this reason alone.