Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Adam on October 22, 2021, 03:34:PM
-
What do think of the forensic evidence which got Bamber convicted in 1986 & has kept him in prison?
-
What forensic science is that ? Don't say they've found fibres, blood, sweat and snot ? Really ?
-
What forensic science is that ? Don't say they've found fibres, blood, sweat and snot ? Really ?
You are being deliberately ignorant again.
JackieD has never mentioned the evidence since joining in 2017. All her posts and threads are on Julie.
-
You are being deliberately ignorant again.
JackieD has never mentioned the evidence since joining in 2017. All her posts and threads are on Julie.
And you're not making any sense !
-
And you're not making any sense !
Do you have difficulty understanding things?
-
Everyone agrees there is no forensic evidence Adam. Though there would have been tons of it if your scenario was correct.
But there is evidence coming to light showing SC may have committed the crime:
Copper content of right hand matches copper content of two testers loading 18 bullets into a magazine.
Now I have found her hands were not perfectly clean as the jury were told, see my post.
-
Everyone agrees there is no forensic evidence Adam. Though there would have been tons of it if your scenario was correct.
But there is evidence coming to light showing SC may have committed the crime:
Copper content of right hand matches copper content of two testers loading 18 bullets into a magazine.
Now I have found her hands were not perfectly clean as the jury were told, see my post.
We don't know what forensic evidence may have been associated with Bamber had he come under scutiny from the start instead of a month later. He presented when he was ready to do so. On the other hand Sheila was found without any sort of debris on her other than obviously blood from her gunshot wounds.
-
Everyone agrees there is no forensic evidence Adam. Though there would have been tons of it if your scenario was correct.
But there is evidence coming to light showing SC may have committed the crime:
Copper content of right hand matches copper content of two testers loading 18 bullets into a magazine.
Now I have found her hands were not perfectly clean as the jury were told, see my post.
'Everyone agrees there is no forensic evidence'
----------
So that's why the COA said 'the more we have looked at the case, the more we believe the jury were right'.
-
Considering two of the jury disagreed and one was asleep ::)
-
Considering two of the jury disagreed and one was asleep ::)
10 agreed and 11 were awake job done.
-
We don't know what forensic evidence may have been associated with Bamber had he come under scutiny from the start instead of a month later. He presented when he was ready to do so. On the other hand Sheila was found without any sort of debris on her other than obviously blood from her gunshot wounds.
Are you and Adam the same person? starting a new case number went against JB in my view.
If Taff had lived and his notes were available ...
-
Are you and Adam the same person? starting a new case number went against JB in my view.
If Taff had lived and his notes were available ...
Do we look alike ::)
DCI Jones' notebook is in the forum library. Again the writing is awful.
-
Are you and Adam the same person? starting a new case number went against JB in my view.
If Taff had lived and his notes were available ...
Although they are two different people they've both frequented the Red Forum, but it must be quiet at the moment.
I've more or less mentioned notes on before it became a murder on another thread. The notes SHOULD be available as when something is forbidden suspicion sets in-----which it naturally has with many.
-
Do we look alike ::)
DCI Jones' notebook is in the forum library. Again the writing is awful.
No but you sound the same!
-
No but you sound the same!
All the guilters happen to be nasty for some unknown reason.
-
All the guilters happen to be nasty for some unknown reason.
No we respect you really. You're a barometer not a weathercock..
-
No we respect you really. You're a barometer not a weathercock..
Well there you are. That's novel.
-
It looks like JackieD is not going to discuss the forensic evidence.
Which is disappointing. You would expect some input since 2017.
-
It looks like JackieD is not going to discuss the forensic evidence.
Which is disappointing. You would expect some input since 2017.
Can you point me to it Adam I would like to see it?
-
Can you point me to it Adam I would like to see it?
;D
You are as bad as Lookout. Playing it dim & pretending not to be aware of the 74 pieces of 'sourced' forensic evidence.
-
;D
You are as bad as Lookout. Playing it dim & pretending not to be aware of the 74 pieces of 'sourced' forensic evidence.
That's your excuse, you're full of them !
-
;D
You are as bad as Lookout. Playing it dim & pretending not to be aware of the 74 pieces of 'sourced' forensic evidence.
Give me your top five or ten pieces of forensic evidence Adam and I will reply to them.
-
Give me your top five or ten pieces of forensic evidence Adam and I will reply to them.
There is no top 5 or 10. They all carry equal weight.
But appreciate Bamber has focused on the silencer since the mid 90's. Why? The relatives handed it in.
-
There is no top 5 or 10. They all carry equal weight.
But appreciate Bamber has focused on the silencer since the mid 90's. Why? The relatives handed it in.
If they all carry equal weight :)) then I will pick five at random
-
If they all carry equal weight :)) then I will pick five at random
Five is better than one, which the CT do.
Unfortunately all need to be negated. Which is why Lookout & JackieD won't discuss the forensic evidence & David just copies & pastes a weird paragraph.
-
Five is better than one, which the CT do.
Unfortunately all need to be negated. Which is why Lookout & JackieD won't discuss the forensic evidence & David just copies & pastes a weird paragraph.
I can't discuss something that clearly isn't there to discuss ::)