Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
.... or maybe Richard hadn't misrepresented what he said. After all, Robert Boutflour said Jeremy said "I could kill my parents at any time".

If you look at the photos of Jeremy at the funeral, it is clear that he is faking mourning for them.

Jeremy denies that conversation ever took place. Jeremy says that in his entire lifetime he can not even pinpoint a time he had ever even had a one on one conversation with Robert Boutflour.

In regards to Richards it is a throwaway remark made by children, teens and twenty somethings that's been dressed up sinister.
12
I submit that the best, most plausible, defence theory is the original one.

At the trial, Jeremy's lawyers accepted the evidence that the sound moderator was used in the killings and that blood in the moderator was victim(s) of the shootings, but as the experts allowed a possibility (albeit a remote one) that the blood could be an intimate mixture of the parents, so Sheila could have shot the other family members with the sound moderator on and then removed it to kill herself.

Rivlin QC demonstrated that the time of Jeremy's call to the local police was 3:25 - not 3:36 as noted on a log - which allowed the possibility that he called Julie Mugford around 3:30 after the call to the police.

The defence against the Crown argument thats, e.g. Sheila did not have broken nails was these kinds of arguments were not conclusive either.

The defence only accused Julie Mugford of lying (plus a few others who said that Jeremy talked about killing his parents), which was quite sensible, rather than accusing half of Essex of lying as the Campaign Team do.

*********************

The reason why this theory has to be abandoned is because they need "new evidence" and new theories like "rabbits blood" or "Sheila's menstrual blood from her knickers" or accusing the police of framing Jeremy (despite the lack of evidence). With new evidence there can be no appeal.

1. This would mean Sheila attached the silencer on the gun
2. Shot June and Neville.
3. June and Nevills blood then ends up in the silencer despite not suffering contact wounds
4. Sheila and Nevill have an altercation while Neville can only use one arm. (One arm having a comminuted facture)
5. The altercation causes scratch marks behind a hung up jacket and does not fall down.
6. Sheila then removes the silencer before shooting the twins and herself. 
7. The blood in the silencer then gets misinterpreted.
8. The relatives find the silencer with blood and paint on but hold onto it for three days instead of taking it to the police straight away.

The list can go on.




13
The Judge echoed that very question to Jeremy Bamber at trial, but in a different phrase.

Jeremy Bamber said he believed that Richards had misinterpreted what he said ( oh my fucking parents) he also said that he was a friend of Julie's and was probably influenced by events.

Feasible? I believe so personally. From a lay point of view.

.... or maybe Richard hadn't misrepresented what he said. After all, Robert Boutflour said Jeremy said "I could kill my parents at any time".

If you look at the photos of Jeremy at the funeral, it is clear that he is faking mourning for them.
14
Other high profile cases / Re: The Lucy Letby trial
« Last post by nugnug on Yesterday at 10:29 PM »
why were the doctors really crying https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXNPAOf2yPU
15
Would that really be a strong enough motive for Richards to purge himself in a high-profile, multi-murder case?

The Judge echoed that very question to Jeremy Bamber at trial, but in a different phrase.

Jeremy Bamber said he believed that Richards had misinterpreted what he said ( oh my fucking parents) he also said that he was a friend of Julie's and was probably influenced by events.

Feasible? I believe so personally. From a lay point of view.
16
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: Bamber's bikes from 7 - 15 years old.
« Last post by ILB on Yesterday at 09:50 PM »
As far as I know he was only going slow when the cops passed him? If it was me I would have pulled over and stopped to let them pass.

It would take 8 minutes to get their and we don't know the exact time he left.

My point is if he knew calls could not be tracked why create what to some is a suspicious gap in the phone calls?

Do you mean the gap between getting nevills call and ringing the coppers or the travel gap from whf back to goldhanger?
17
Would that really be a strong enough motive for Richards to purge himself in a high-profile, multi-murder case?

Jeremy at trial said he said to Richards something along the lines of " oh my fucking parents" that was Jeremy's version of events.


I doubt how anybody could perjure themselves in any shape or form in a legal setting with such a miniscule throwaway remark as it can't be conclusively proved it happened or didn't happen in the context it was portrayed. In any event it was only used to bla ken Bambers character. It's not blatant lying or it's not attempting to provide an alibi. The conversation between the two did happen. I don't believe Richards to be a liar. But I think it's been dressed wrongly.

It's a throwaway conversation which has been used in a sinister light due to the circumstances. Richards probably only recalled the conversation at police probing. If I had a penny for the amount of times someone had said to me " I fucking hate someone " I'd be a wealthy man. It's a forgettable conversation. I don't believe Richards when he said in the theroux documentary " I remembered it because it had so much vehemence, it's bollocks, police probing and perhaps a conversation with Julie post Jeremy's arrest.
18
I submit that the best, most plausible, defence theory is the original one.

At the trial, Jeremy's lawyers accepted the evidence that the sound moderator was used in the killings and that blood in the moderator was victim(s) of the shootings, but as the experts allowed a possibility (albeit a remote one) that the blood could be an intimate mixture of the parents, so Sheila could have shot the other family members with the sound moderator on and then removed it to kill herself.

Rivlin QC demonstrated that the time of Jeremy's call to the local police was 3:25 - not 3:36 as noted on a log - which allowed the possibility that he called Julie Mugford around 3:30 after the call to the police.

The defence against the Crown argument thats, e.g. Sheila did not have broken nails was these kinds of arguments were not conclusive either.

The defence only accused Julie Mugford of lying (plus a few others who said that Jeremy talked about killing his parents), which was quite sensible, rather than accusing half of Essex of lying as the Campaign Team do.

*********************

The reason why this theory has to be abandoned is because they need "new evidence" and new theories like "rabbits blood" or "Sheila's menstrual blood from her knickers" or accusing the police of framing Jeremy (despite the lack of evidence). With new evidence there can be no appeal.
19
Was the conversation between Richards and Jeremy when they were just alone?

All I have heard with Jeremy's relationship with Richards is that they used to play monopoly together and Jeremy was a good player but didn't like losing.

At trial Jeremy said there was a problem between him and Richards over a girl at some point.

Would that really be a strong enough motive for Richards to purge himself in a high-profile, multi-murder case?
20
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: Bamber's bikes from 7 - 15 years old.
« Last post by Rob_ on Yesterday at 08:29 PM »
This is not my particular argument in regards to calls tracked but can be explored from the gulity camp.

His slow drive to the farmhouse and being overtook by cops can suggest he didn't believe calls could be tracked. ( IF he was driving slowly on purpose) ( gulit side)

As he would have no worries undertaking that practice if he believed calls could be tracked as he would believe that his call to West at 3.26am could show his location at home at goldhanger.

If he is gulity, he must have dawdled for a reason. ( the slow drive)

Why else would you dawdle? The only other argument was that you was genuinely terrified to arrive at the scene before the police because you were worried for your safety.

As far as I know he was only going slow when the cops passed him? If it was me I would have pulled over and stopped to let them pass.

It would take 8 minutes to get their and we don't know the exact time he left.

My point is if he knew calls could not be tracked why create what to some is a suspicious gap in the phone calls?
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10