JB petition now has almost ten thousand signatures.

[Jane]

C'mon David, they're not likely to divulge anything with an ounce of truth in it are they---did they ?

Yours is a position almost as secure as Jeremy's present one, isn't it? You can't be unaware that negatives can't be proved -you KNOW Essex Police can't prove that a phone WASN'T received from Nevill so you cover that by saying "they're not likely to divulge" it- however, can you prove that Nevill made a call to them?

[lookout]

Yours is a position almost as secure as Jeremy's present one, isn't it? You can't be unaware that negatives can't be proved -you KNOW Essex Police can't prove that a phone WASN'T received from Nevill so you cover that by saying "they're not likely to divulge" it- however, can you prove that Nevill made a call to them?

Like I said, it will be proven----by those whose brains match their careers.

[Caroline]

It seems that David -rather than hold up his hands to his own guilt- is more than willing to back up his original lies with even bigger lies to try to make you appear guilty in the eyes of the forum.

Well, lets hear how I 'endorsed' and 'believed' PH's book. I have ALWAYS maintained that I changed my mind about Bamber because of my own communications with him - namely, how he knew what was in his fathers wallet. The PM from Maggie PROVES we were discussing this behind the scenes and that I went so far as to ask him about it (which I have also proved with letters). Maggie's response "I keep meaning to ask you' PROVES I had discussed my doubts even before Aug 6th 2013 and the first time I posted about my doubts was about (and ONLY ABOUT) the wallet. We discussed my change of heart behind the scenes and I decided to post about it to encourage debate.

As for PH's book, if numb nuts is suggesting I 'endorsed' and 'believed' it because he mentioned my name - then he would have to explain why a hard care innocent supporter is also mentioned and IF he is suggesting  I 'endorsed' and 'believed' it because he used some of what I had written on the forum, he would have to explain why the passage isn't about the wallet and is the bible, the hand print and the stain on the carpet - ALL of which argues from an innocent standpoint and seems out of place in his book. I had my own reasons for believing Bamber guilty and I have posted abut them. A subject close to David's own heart. 

Not even sure why I am fueling this discussion with a gas lighter such as David, he's been banged to rights lying, NGB has supported my stance in respect to discussions behind the scene that went on for some time so obviously when I posted about it, I was pretty sure that Bamber was guilty (although rejecting the silencer). His silly, immature arguments made him look like a fool before, carrying on with this will really set that in stone.

[David1819]

Simply having doubts and being a hardcore guilter are two different things entirely.

Caroline became a hardcore guilter shorty after PH did. Caroline believed and endorsed the incriminating fiction that PH wrote in his book when once it got released until it became indefensible.

Someone showing healthy scepticism and being open minded prior to being duped is nothing unexpected.

Moreover, making things up in order to make things fit the guilt narrative, even going as far as saying "Sheila being involved doesn't point to an innocent Jeremy". Are not the actions of someone simply doubtful or someone who is genuinely interested in the truth. They are the actions of someone who is snowed in and cannot swallow their pride.

[lookout]

'Please come over. Sheila's gone crazy and she's got the gun'.

---------

Strangest call I have ever heard about. And the only 4 second call I know of as well as the only 3am call.

If you heard/saw someone coming down the stairs brandishing a rifle, you'd cut the call too.

[David1819]

C'mon David, they're not likely to divulge anything with an ounce of truth in it are they---did they ?

If they never divulged on the subject, how can anyone know that EP know of the call in the first place 

If such call took place, DCI Jones and ACC Simpson would have told Robert Boutflour about it. Not that it would have prevented Robert Boutflour from claiming it was Jeremy impersonating his father.

[Jane]

Moreover, making things up in order to make things fit the guilt narrative, even going as far as saying "Sheila being involved doesn't point to an innocent Jeremy". Are not the actions of someone simply doubtful or someone who is genuinely interested in the truth. They are the actions of someone who is snowed in and cannot swallow their pride.

As you appear to be referring to yourself, I guess this might be the closest we get to getting an explanation and admission of your own guilt.

[lookout]

If they never divulged on the subject, how can anyone know that EP know of the call in the first place 

If such call took place, DCI Jones and ACC Simpson would have told Robert Boutflour about it. Not that it would have prevented Robert Boutflour from claiming it was Jeremy impersonating his father.

Nevill's call simply wasn't mentioned but I'm sure you'll understand why when it's explained by those who've studied the legalities of the case.
Common sense tells you that JB got an engaged tone when he tried to ring his father back----which was the time that Nevill was ringing EP.

[David1819]

As you appear to be referring to yourself, I guess this might be the closest we get to getting an explanation and admission of your own guilt.

I'm referring to your significant other (obviously).

[Caroline]

Moreover, making things up in order to make things fit the guilt narrative, even going as far as saying "Sheila being involved doesn't point to an innocent Jeremy". Are not the actions of someone simply doubtful or someone who is genuinely interested in the truth. They are the actions of someone who is snowed in and cannot swallow their pride.

Making things up David? That's your dept. Lying to NGB and insinuating that your report may be used in CCRC submissions. But Sheila being involved doesn't point to an innocent Jeremy. Personally, I don;t believe she was but the statement still stands!

You have no interest in the truth, you're bothered about trying to make yourself top detective - which just shows what an immature little twerp you really are!

[Jane]

I'm referring to your significant other (obviously).

Which would be nothing compared to the number backsides you've had your tongue in to try to gain ascendancy.

[David1819]

Nevill's call simply wasn't mentioned but I'm sure you'll understand why when it's explained by those who've studied the legalities of the case.
Common sense tells you that JB got an engaged tone when he tried to ring his father back----which was the time that Nevill was ringing EP.

Common sense tells you that only one emergency call being received shows only it was only Jeremy that contacted the police.

I have studied the legalities of the case. So has NGB, MTQC and Scott Lomax. They all think the idea is  absurd, and so do I.

I have been told by one of the names above. That once Jeremy had swallowed this misconception of Nevills 999 call. JB then became completely "obsessed" with it and wasted years going through everything in the case files hoping to find proof of it. Yet nothing was ever found. What does that tell you?

[Jane]

Nevill's call simply wasn't mentioned but I'm sure you'll understand why when it's explained by those who've studied the legalities of the case.
Common sense tells you that JB got an engaged tone when he tried to ring his father back----which was the time that Nevill was ringing EP.

It sounds as if you're saying that Essex Police , at a 'group hug' meeting, simply decided that a call, which they knew to have come from Nevill was simply erased from group memory. I'm guessing that they then took steps to obliterate all physical traces of it -JUST in case! Such being the case -incriminating call wiped off the face of the earth- the most that may be said by"those who've studied the legalities of the case" is that such a call MAY have been made. It fits with anything being possible. Not quite so much as it being probable, though, if it can't be proved to have happened. 

[Caroline]

Which would be nothing compared to the number backsides you've had your tongue in to try to gain ascendancy.

Well, he's descended now and ALL of his own making!

[Jane]

If you heard/saw someone coming down the stairs brandishing a rifle, you'd cut the call too.

Mmm, but unless he had a good view of the hall and stairs from where the phone was in the kitchen, as they were carpeted, he wouldn't have known anyone (with a gun) was coming -creeping?- down them until they were in the kitchen. If the shooter, hellbent on killing him anyway, had seen him with the phone in his hand they'd have taken the opportunity to shoot him there and then. Had Jeremy been on the other end he'd have heard the shot(s).