Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: haughton on July 09, 2011, 11:39:AM
-
Neville was once an intellegence officer. It is possible that he made some enemies. Maybe this "hunched figure" was someone from his past, seeking revenge. farfetched ? perhaps. It seems that someone from Belgium named Dirrk Van Hussel knew about the murders. Is it known that Neville knew for sure that it was Shiela "gone berzerk with the gun"? Perhaps he heard the shots and assumed that it was Shiela!!
just corrected spelling typo in title. sorry, Grahame.
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
-
If Neville heard the shots without seeing the shooter, why would he not think that it was Shiela?
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?
-
If Neville heard the shots without seeing the shooter, why would he not think that it was Shiela?
haughton - I accept that what you suggest is possible. However Jeremy Bamber's account of the call from Nevill gives the clear impression that shooting had not started at the time the call was made.
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?
Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever. I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.
-
ngb, Neville said that Shiela has gone berzerk with the one of the guns. this would mean that she was firing it , would'nt you think.? and if they were in different rooms...........
-
would Neville have been able to phone JB while Shiela was in the room taking pot shots at him?
-
ngb, Neville said that Shiela has gone berzerk with the one of the guns. this would mean that she was firing it , would'nt you think.? and if they were in different rooms...........
haughton - I see the point you are making. I am not sure that the words attributed by Jeremy to Nevill conveyed the meaning that the weapon had yet been fired, and I believe Jeremy's impression was that it had not been. It is just possible that Nevill was under the mistaken belief that Sheila was responsible for whatever was causing him great concern, whereas it was in fact an intruder. However I do find that situation hard to visualise. Why would he have referred to Sheila without something directly indicating that it was Sheila who was behaving in a manner out of control, specifically involving a firearm? I also suspect that if the firing had started Nevill would not have called Jeremy. He would either have tried to intervene physically to defend his family or would have called the police. Calling Jeremy indicates to me that the situation, although difficult, had not become completely out of control and Nevill wanted to deal with it within the family.
I accept of course that I may be wrong on this and what you suggest is a theoretical possibility, albeit one I personally consider unlikely.
-
would Neville have been able to phone JB while Shiela was in the room taking pot shots at him?
No, obviously not. He would have tried to defend himself.
-
ngb 1066. I still believe in the 3rd party theory. Icould be wrong, but it's no worse than that of the EP !
-
ngb 1066. I still believe in the 3rd party theory. Icould be wrong, but it's no worse than that of the EP !
We can agree on that!
-
ngb 1066. I still believe in the 3rd party theory. Icould be wrong, but it's no worse than that of the EP !
Haughton, if a third party was involved, why would they have taken the trouble to lock the house after the event.
I also believe the house was bolted from the inside.
-
cliff, bang goes another theory
-
cliff, just remembered, how about the back stairs?
-
Haughton,there was a trap door in the roof that led into the main bedroom,if that helps your theory ;)
-
tyler, regardless of any theories that we may come up with the facts remain that there was never enough evidence to convict Jeremy!! but plenty to avoid a trial . ie 2 bodies in the kitchen, wet blood on Sheila, someone seen moving about in the house etc. If all this had been presented at the trial. I am sure there would have "benefit of the doubt"
-
ngb 1066. I still believe in the 3rd party theory. Icould be wrong, but it's no worse than that of the EP !
Haughton, if a third party was involved, why would they have taken the trouble to lock the house after the event.
I also believe the house was bolted from the inside.
Perhaps the third party was an escapologist? ::)
-
maybe. I understand that a well known contortionist was in the area- he said he was going to look up a few old friends
-
tyler, regardless of any theories that we may come up with the facts remain that there was never enough evidence to convict Jeremy!! but plenty to avoid a trial . ie 2 bodies in the kitchen, wet blood on Sheila, someone seen moving about in the house etc. If all this had been presented at the trial. I am sure there would have "benefit of the doubt"
Haughton,I totally agree with you.I was merely trying to help you with your scenario as to what may have happened.With all the doors bolted from the inside,the trap door is worth considering?
-
tyler, regardless of any theories that we may come up with the facts remain that there was never enough evidence to convict Jeremy!! but plenty to avoid a trial . ie 2 bodies in the kitchen, wet blood on Sheila, someone seen moving about in the house etc. If all this had been presented at the trial. I am sure there would have "benefit of the doubt"
Hi Haughton, pleased to meet you! Good points here +1
-
tyler- I don't think that a trap door theory would help. As you say- all doors were bolted on the inside;I should have remembered that! However, it has been doubted that JB had used the window for exit-no marks etc. So, back to the drawing board
-
This mystery needs Miss Marples, she would have solved it by now
-
the mystery would have been solved long ago had evidence not been witheld for such a long time.
-
tyler- I don't think that a trap door theory would help. As you say- all doors were bolted on the inside;I should have remembered that! However, it has been doubted that JB had used the window for exit-no marks etc. So, back to the drawing board
Also bear in mind Haughton the Bambers had a dog,and had someone tried to get throuh the window the dog would have heard and barked the house down.
It is known that JB disliked the dog, because he had it put down shortly after the murders, yet when the police gained entry it was the only living thing there.
-
andrea- very true. But what will be revealed on 22 july next ? in the words of the Prophet "wait and see"
-
tyler- I don't think that a trap door theory would help. As you say- all doors were bolted on the inside;I should have remembered that! However, it has been doubted that JB had used the window for exit-no marks etc. So, back to the drawing board
Also bear in mind Haughton the Bambers had a dog,and had someone tried to get throuh the window the dog would have heard and barked the house down.
It is known that JB disliked the dog, because he had it put down shortly after the murders, yet when the police gained entry it was the only living thing there.
Weren't there two dogs?
-
tyler- I don't think that a trap door theory would help. As you say- all doors were bolted on the inside;I should have remembered that! However, it has been doubted that JB had used the window for exit-no marks etc. So, back to the drawing board
Also bear in mind Haughton the Bambers had a dog,and had someone tried to get throuh the window the dog would have heard and barked the house down.
It is known that JB disliked the dog, because he had it put down shortly after the murders, yet when the police gained entry it was the only living thing there.
Weren't there two dogs?
Yes Grahame, but one was kept outside, the other was a house dog.
-
tyler- I don't think that a trap door theory would help. As you say- all doors were bolted on the inside;I should have remembered that! However, it has been doubted that JB had used the window for exit-no marks etc. So, back to the drawing board
Also bear in mind Haughton the Bambers had a dog,and had someone tried to get throuh the window the dog would have heard and barked the house down.
It is known that JB disliked the dog, because he had it put down shortly after the murders, yet when the police gained entry it was the only living thing there.
Weren't there two dogs?
Yes Grahame, but one was kept outside, the other was a house dog.
I thought I read somewhere that Jeremy locked the outside dog in the shed?
-
tyler- I don't think that a trap door theory would help. As you say- all doors were bolted on the inside;I should have remembered that! However, it has been doubted that JB had used the window for exit-no marks etc. So, back to the drawing board
Also bear in mind Haughton the Bambers had a dog,and had someone tried to get throuh the window the dog would have heard and barked the house down.
It is known that JB disliked the dog, because he had it put down shortly after the murders, yet when the police gained entry it was the only living thing there.
Weren't there two dogs?
Yes Grahame, but one was kept outside, the other was a house dog.
I thought I read somewhere that Jeremy locked the outside dog in the shed?
Not sure about that Grahame, but the police were supposed to have put the house dog in a cupboard.
-
cliff, did the dog like Jeremy ?
-
cliff, did the dog like Jeremy ?
The house dog did,nt. Apparently it used to bite him.
-
cliff just liked the way he tasted
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?
Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever. I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.
ngb / Mike / jackie...
Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period? It can't have been all bad. He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?
Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever. I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.
ngb / Mike / jackie...
Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period? It can't have been all bad. He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?
I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now. Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS. I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him. It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.
-
andrea- very true. But what will be revealed on 22 july next ? in the words of the Prophet "wait and see"
Haughton,is that the day the CCRC will reveal their decision........or is that just the date for any final submissions to be made from JBs team?
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?
Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever. I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.
ngb / Mike / jackie...
Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period? It can't have been all bad. He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?
I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now. Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS. I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him. It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.
Thanks. We did get the two Italian professors' report. I thought it a little mischeivious to link Woodcock's 'leaking blood' statement with the time of 7.34am. Now the thing is, ironically, it was 7.34ish when they first saw her body. And it makes no difference whether it was 7.34 or 8.00am or 8.10am. Because none of those times, when worked backwards by way of 'not superior to two hours' ... has any affect on bamber becoming guilty for the crime. I like the two Italians.
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?
Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever. I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.
ngb / Mike / jackie...
Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period? It can't have been all bad. He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?
I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now. Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS. I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him. It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.
Thanks. We did get the two Italian professors' report. I thought it a little mischeivious to link Woodcock's 'leaking blood' statement with the time of 7.34am. Now the thing is, ironically, it was 7.34ish when they first saw her body. And it makes no difference whether it was 7.34 or 8.00am or 8.10am. Because none of those times, when worked backwards by way of 'not superior to two hours' ... has any affect on bamber becoming guilty for the crime. I like the two Italians.
Fair point - I had forgotten about that.
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?
Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever. I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.
ngb / Mike / jackie...
Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period? It can't have been all bad. He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?
I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now. Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS. I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him. It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.
A question for you NGB , what do you think Rivilin think's of the case today , i have been critical of him in the past , i shouldn't have been as i never knew he worked for JB for nothing at one time , i apologize for this , do you think he feel's anything on the subject ?
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?
Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever. I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.
ngb / Mike / jackie...
Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period? It can't have been all bad. He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?
I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now. Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS. I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him. It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.
----------------
I personally liked GDS, because as you rightly say, he did raise the profile of this miscarriage of justice case, and made everyone sit up and start to take notice. He truly believed in Jeremy's innocence, and but for the fact that some believe that he operated on the very fringes of the law, representing notorious defendants, and that he became known as "The Devils Advocate", I think he did as good a job as Jeremy's former solicitors had done, beforehand. I know that one or two of his approaches to defending Jeremy's case, appeared to be unorthodox, but in all the dealings I had with him, I was and would still have been prepared to carry out any research I could to back up and support those approaches, but as things turned out, Jeremy disposed of his services, and employed his current team, and that is that, there is no hard feelings, and like me, I feel that GDS still supports Jeremy's cause no matter what grounds Jeremy's case is fought on...
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?
Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever. I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.
ngb / Mike / jackie...
Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period? It can't have been all bad. He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?
I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now. Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS. I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him. It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.
----------------
I personally liked GDS, because as you rightly say, he did raise the profile of this miscarriage of justice case, and made everyone sit up and start to take notice. He truly believed in Jeremy's innocence, and but for the fact that some believe that he operated on the very fringes of the law, representing notorious defendants, and that he became known as "The Devils Advocate", I think he did as good a job as Jeremy's former solicitors had done, beforehand. I know that one or two of his approaches to defending Jeremy's case, appeared to be unorthodox, but in all the dealings I had with him, I was and would still have been prepared to carry out any research I could to back up and support those approaches, but as things turned out, Jeremy disposed of his services, and employed his current team, and that is that, there is no hard feelings, and like me, I feel that GDS still supports Jeremy's cause no matter what grounds Jeremy's case is fought on...
Along with emailing Shaw... I think we need to email the Devil's Advocate also. Now imagine those two both posting on here? 8)
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?
Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever. I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.
ngb / Mike / jackie...
Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period? It can't have been all bad. He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?
I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now. Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS. I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him. It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.
----------------
I personally liked GDS, because as you rightly say, he did raise the profile of this miscarriage of justice case, and made everyone sit up and start to take notice. He truly believed in Jeremy's innocence, and but for the fact that some believe that he operated on the very fringes of the law, representing notorious defendants, and that he became known as "The Devils Advocate", I think he did as good a job as Jeremy's former solicitors had done, beforehand. I know that one or two of his approaches to defending Jeremy's case, appeared to be unorthodox, but in all the dealings I had with him, I was and would still have been prepared to carry out any research I could to back up and support those approaches, but as things turned out, Jeremy disposed of his services, and employed his current team, and that is that, there is no hard feelings, and like me, I feel that GDS still supports Jeremy's cause no matter what grounds Jeremy's case is fought on...
Along with emailing Shaw... I think we need to email the Devil's Advocate also. Now imagine those two both posting on here? 8)
-----------------
I say, "go for it" - lets get everybody's opinion, I'm all for that...
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?
Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever. I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.
ngb / Mike / jackie...
Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period? It can't have been all bad. He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?
I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now. Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS. I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him. It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.
----------------
I personally liked GDS, because as you rightly say, he did raise the profile of this miscarriage of justice case, and made everyone sit up and start to take notice. He truly believed in Jeremy's innocence, and but for the fact that some believe that he operated on the very fringes of the law, representing notorious defendants, and that he became known as "The Devils Advocate", I think he did as good a job as Jeremy's former solicitors had done, beforehand. I know that one or two of his approaches to defending Jeremy's case, appeared to be unorthodox, but in all the dealings I had with him, I was and would still have been prepared to carry out any research I could to back up and support those approaches, but as things turned out, Jeremy disposed of his services, and employed his current team, and that is that, there is no hard feelings, and like me, I feel that GDS still supports Jeremy's cause no matter what grounds Jeremy's case is fought on...
Along with emailing Shaw... I think we need to email the Devil's Advocate also. Now imagine those two both posting on here? 8)
-----------------
I say, "go for it" - lets get everybody's opinion, I'm all for that...
Do you still have his addy Mike?
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?
Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever. I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.
ngb / Mike / jackie...
Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period? It can't have been all bad. He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?
I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now. Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS. I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him. It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.
----------------
I personally liked GDS, because as you rightly say, he did raise the profile of this miscarriage of justice case, and made everyone sit up and start to take notice. He truly believed in Jeremy's innocence, and but for the fact that some believe that he operated on the very fringes of the law, representing notorious defendants, and that he became known as "The Devils Advocate", I think he did as good a job as Jeremy's former solicitors had done, beforehand. I know that one or two of his approaches to defending Jeremy's case, appeared to be unorthodox, but in all the dealings I had with him, I was and would still have been prepared to carry out any research I could to back up and support those approaches, but as things turned out, Jeremy disposed of his services, and employed his current team, and that is that, there is no hard feelings, and like me, I feel that GDS still supports Jeremy's cause no matter what grounds Jeremy's case is fought on...
Along with emailing Shaw... I think we need to email the Devil's Advocate also. Now imagine those two both posting on here? 8)
-----------------
I say, "go for it" - lets get everybody's opinion, I'm all for that...
Do you still have his addy Mike?
-----------------
GDS?
(1) [email protected]
David Shaw?
(2) [email protected]>
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?
Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever. I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.
ngb / Mike / jackie...
Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period? It can't have been all bad. He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?
I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now. Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS. I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him. It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.
A question for you NGB , what do you think Rivilin think's of the case today , i have been critical of him in the past , i shouldn't have been as i never knew he worked for JB for nothing at one time , i apologize for this , do you think he feel's anything on the subject ?
As you know Geoffrey Rivlin QC has been a judge for some time now and he would be unlikely to make any public pronouncement on the case. I need to be careful what I say here because I have discussed this with Jeremy Bamber so I do know his views but I do not want to break a confidence. I have in the past expressed some surprise at the conduct of the defence at the original trial and I have discussed this with Jeremy. I do not think Jeremy would mind if I said that he does not view his trial barristers harshly, as he recognises that in conducting his defence they had effectively one hand tied behind their back because of the failure of Essex Police to disclose important evidence. It would be wrong for me to give my reasons for stating the following, which is that I believe that if Geoffrey Rivlin were to express a view privately on the case now he would support Jeremy's case being referred back to the Court of Appeal.
-
Cheer's NGB !!
-
jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.
Andrea - I agree with you. Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward. I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.
I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?
Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever. I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.
ngb / Mike / jackie...
Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period? It can't have been all bad. He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?
I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now. Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS. I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him. It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.
----------------
I personally liked GDS, because as you rightly say, he did raise the profile of this miscarriage of justice case, and made everyone sit up and start to take notice. He truly believed in Jeremy's innocence, and but for the fact that some believe that he operated on the very fringes of the law, representing notorious defendants, and that he became known as "The Devils Advocate", I think he did as good a job as Jeremy's former solicitors had done, beforehand. I know that one or two of his approaches to defending Jeremy's case, appeared to be unorthodox, but in all the dealings I had with him, I was and would still have been prepared to carry out any research I could to back up and support those approaches, but as things turned out, Jeremy disposed of his services, and employed his current team, and that is that, there is no hard feelings, and like me, I feel that GDS still supports Jeremy's cause no matter what grounds Jeremy's case is fought on...
Along with emailing Shaw... I think we need to email the Devil's Advocate also. Now imagine those two both posting on here? 8)
-----------------
I say, "go for it" - lets get everybody's opinion, I'm all for that...
Do you still have his addy Mike?
-----------------
GDS?
(1) [email protected]
David Shaw?
(2) [email protected]>
Thanks mike. They are going to be contacted.