I just want to know -
What was June doing inside WHF for 4.5 hours?
Was Sheila also alive?
How did Nevill get his 40+ non gun shot injuries?
Why did the police deliberately shoot a dead Sheila?
How many times was June shot by the police?
What happened to the police bullets fired into June?
Where was June shot?
Who put bloodied bed sheets and pillow cases on June's side of the bed if she was not shot there?
Who was managing the military crime scene stage of burning, cutting, lifting and moving?
What silencer did the police use when deliberately shooting Sheila?
Where was Taff?
Was the staging done so Bamber could be framed with a fit like a glove scenario?
Why would the police want to frame Bamber within minutes of entering WHF?
How does moving Nevill hide the fact that Sheila and June were shot upstairs?
Adam, do you really think this is serious response to the original post? I'm pretty sure you know it isn't. Please start responding properly to posts you have questions about.
Adam, do you really think this is serious response to the original post? I'm pretty sure you know it isn't. Please start responding properly to posts you have questions about.
I suspect Bubo's lengthy post raises many more questions than it answers. Adam's style may not win literary prizes but it's succinct in its address.
Adam, do you really think this is serious response to the original post? I'm pretty sure you know it isn't. Please start responding properly to posts you have questions about.
Bollocks is often succinct but rarely addresses the issues.
I suspect Bubo's lengthy post raises many more questions than it answers. Adam's style may not win literary prizes but it's succinct in its address.
I start with an apology to Zoso for a convoluted post and to Adam who will be more confused than he already is.PV25 & PV26 and the Magic PV20
Essex Police had their own photographic unit which serviced cameras, performed X-rays, issued and developed films etc. etc. A senior member of staff was Fred Carter and it was he that took the X-rays. He would have worked with SOCO photographers like DB
We see from the documents that these two bullets (PV25, PV26) changed into one bullet and some fragments. They had to swap PV25 because it did not come from any firearm at WHF.
To achieve this, they took one of the 30 rounds on the kitchen top which is why MF only received 29. The cartridge casing was used to replace the original TFG case and was found by DRH on the 9th August by the wardrobe saying it had been missed, (DRH43). MF received two bullets for PV25 and PV26 not a bullet and fragments, as described by PV.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4019.0;attach=29500;image
Please note his remarks about how he could not say it was fired from the Anschutz.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4019.0;attach=29505;image
Other anomalies from the autopsy.
The X-rays were ordered before autopsy. At autopsy PV found two stud earrings but the X-ray seen by MF states only one in his examination. All of Sheila’s other jewellery is listed with the exception of her Pendant and chain, where did it go?
Reasons to think x-ray might be a fake.
1 The necklace/choker was missing from the autopsy notes unlike the earrings, rings and watch and could be used to fabricate a fake, since the victim cannot be readily identified unless there are distinguishing features such as fillings.
2 The x-ray was a recent acquisition (last 13/14 years). If the defence had not had previous sight of this, whomever sent/produced it might have thought it alone would help Jeremy’s case.
3 The introduction of a fragmented bullet would afford a number of advantages to the police.
(a) It could be used to cover for a larger calibre round had one been used
.
(b) It could be used to cover for a round fired from another weapon of the same calibre but with different rifling marks.
(c) it could be used to insinuate that Sheila was ambulant for any storyline devised to cover any mistakes, when they were pursuing four murders and a suicide and body relocation was an issue.
(d) It could be used to enhance the argument that Jeremy failed at his first attempt and was reluctantly forced to stage a two shot suicide.
(e) It could be used to introduce a rogue fragment.
X-ray discussion
The number of fragments is noted by Fletcher on the GER. It is generally accepted that there are 3 large and around 14/15 smaller fragments. Some argue that some of these may be bone fragments. It is likely that PV viewed the x-ray on a light box to assist him at autopsy.
He makes no mention of bone fragments in the autopsy, the follow up report and trial testimony. He only mentions bullet fragmentation in the follow up report. His preoccupation as one would expect is concerned with anatomical damage.
It seems unlikely if bones had been fragmented he would not have reported this. He had three opportunities. He states fractures and lack of displacement only.
A problem with the x-ray is that it does not give a three dimensional view of the fragments and it is therefore difficult to assess each of the fragments in relation to the PV20 photo which itself is not three dimensional. I am not a ballistics expert but find it difficult to associate this with any of the three larger fragments, which given its relative size, are the only ones that are candidates.
The best way to view the fragments for shape is to use the image on the Bamber website and enlarge
The PV20 bullet was first sent to Taylor for examination of blood issues. (see GER) He passed it to MF stating lans and grooves were visible. Notice also that the bag contained blood and tissue which may represent yet another potential blood source for the silencer contamination which was undertaken.Proving the swap[/size]
A short thread. Note MT's remarks.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10645.msg492394.html#msg492394
No one can say what happened at WHF after Jeremy left but before the police entered. The Police may have been able to work out roughly what happened from the original crime scene they viewed.
There is no proof that June was shot in bed. I can prove she was not but that can be explained later if you wish.
There is no proof that Sheila killed them all in one go. Or for that matter that June was not hiding with or without some wounds. There is also a possibility of a Mexican standoff .
I believe the original scenario which they planned involved a restaging and included the shooting of Sheila by June in some manner. For this it required Sheila to be shot with two different weapons. They shot her in the neck after she had committed suicide calling it the first shot.
The fragmentation they constructed provided her with the ability to then go on and kill June because she (Sheila) had only been stunned. If it was known by any of those involved that June was alive either through telephone contact or if in response to the loud hailer, she then presented herself to be viewed. In such circumstances it would be essential to outline how she had died. The ‘met with no response’ record may have been in relation to a request to go to the phone.
I believe the Fragmentation X-ray may have been faked. They used Sheila’s necklace quite possibly on June or a n other superimposing the fragments. Did June have pierced ears?
I believe PV20 did lose some of its volume when hitting the bone but not to the extent displayed. The change to the parts list for PV20 is denoted by the carriage/tab return. The words ‘in cervical muscles’ has been added indicating some measure of fragmentation with the use of the plural.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=988.0;attach=4969;image
This has to have been inserted because other wordy descriptions show carriage/tab returns and additional/more lines of text.
When the case changed to five murders they had to move to a one gun crime. They could not let it be known that there was more than 1 rifle available and JB would not change guns mid event. This meant that they would need to go back to the slightly damaged bullet, the original PV20. However, this had lans and grooves associated with a weapon other than the Anschutz. It would have to be swapped.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10671.msg493051.html#msg493051
From this proposition/scenario we see that Vanezis did not take part in the framing of Jeremy but he was aware of what had happened. He knew. He trod a fine line and chose his words and descriptions with care.
The Samples list and Autopsy report were tweaked to hide a shot by the TFG (PV25 autopsy notes) and disguise a wound to create a different scenario (PV20 Samples list).
They forgot to change 'front of head' on the Samples list Both PV and MF say that the shot between the eyes was retrieved from the front of the head but the actual autopsy notes say it travelled through the brain and ended up with some fragments as the left side base of the skull.
He was forced to elaborate on Sheila’s abilities after the introduced first shot. Initially he said she could have survived the Fragmented PV20 for about 30 minutes but when JB was charged this changed and he ruled out any meaningful activity.
These two documents (autopsy report and samples list) represent what they needed for the first case which should have been three murders, a suicide and an accidental shooting. Not 4 murders and a suicide). He did try to appear on JB’s side up to a point using some helpful comments like the ‘nutter’ remark. May be he had a guilty conscience or he wanted to distance himself from the police actions.
PV20 was damaged but was never as fragmented as shown on the x-ray. It did not become whole it was never that fragmented.
If Jeremy obtains justice, sooner or later there would have to be an enquiry, may be more than one. PV’s role in events would in all probability be exposed. Not only would it cast a shadow over UK cases he was involved with but he also had a role in the Autopsy of Princess Dianna, pronouncing she was not pregnant. Perhaps more importantly he was seconded from the Home office and played a lead role in the exhumations of mass graves in the former Yugoslavia.
Any damage or undermining of his credibility would have widespread ramifications not only for the UK justice system but also for International relations and our standing in the world.
To Summarise.
In the first instance they tried to cover up the TFG shooting of June by pretending SC had a survivable wound that would allow her having been shot by June only to recover and then kill June. They created a false Xray and administered a so called first shot to a dead SC with AP's Brno rifle. They also restaged SC's and June's bodies.
Later when JB was framed they had to swap PV20 back to the replacement round created by them to create a casing for the TFG shot and substitute a test fired round from MF's cache of test fired ammunition (the 29 he received) to disguise the shot between June's eyes by claiming it had fragmented when Travelling through her head. But MF's records show That PV25 and PV26 were both nearly whole
Bollocks is often succinct but rarely addresses the issues.
Oh I don't know! ;D - Sorry, couldn't resist.Happy indigestion. Would appreciate a considered rather than flippant response. ;)
June was shot in bed. The bullets went through the pillow.Given the level of manipulation adding bullets to a pillow as part of the deception is easy peasy. There are no drag stain marks on the pillow. You obviously ignored my previous help so here it is again,
Given the level of manipulation adding bullets to a pillow as part of the deception is easy peasy. There are no drag stain marks on the pillow. You obviously ignored my previous help so here it is again,For goodness' sake Bubo: spell it out..
https://www.bing.com/search?q=blood+stain+patterns+types&form=ANSPH1&refig=c1fa0a82587247f084ed9b8946f91f64&pc=U531&sp=2&ghc=1&lq=0&qs=LT&pq=blood+stain+patter&sk=OS1&sc=10-18&cvid=c1fa0a82587247f084ed9b8946f91f64
For goodness' sake Bubo: spell it out..You always want it on a plate. If she was shot in bed as she moved her blood soaked clothing would produce drag stain markings which are not present. Further if she was shot in the head twice it would result in a pooling of blood around her head. There is none that I can see. Many dramas on TV and films show this happening when the head is traumatised.
Feel free to discuss BuboBubo's thread post.
Have fun.
I start with an apology to Zoso for a convoluted post and to Adam who will be more confused than he already is.PV25 & PV26 and the Magic PV20
Essex Police had their own photographic unit which serviced cameras, performed X-rays, issued and developed films etc. etc. A senior member of staff was Fred Carter and it was he that took the X-rays. He would have worked with SOCO photographers like DB
We see from the documents that these two bullets (PV25, PV26) changed into one bullet and some fragments. They had to swap PV25 because it did not come from any firearm at WHF.
To achieve this, they took one of the 30 rounds on the kitchen top which is why MF only received 29. The cartridge casing was used to replace the original TFG case and was found by DRH on the 9th August by the wardrobe saying it had been missed, (DRH43). MF received two bullets for PV25 and PV26 not a bullet and fragments, as described by PV.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4019.0;attach=29500;image
Please note his remarks about how he could not say it was fired from the Anschutz.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4019.0;attach=29505;image
Other anomalies from the autopsy.
The X-rays were ordered before autopsy. At autopsy PV found two stud earrings but the X-ray seen by MF states only one in his examination. All of Sheila’s other jewellery is listed with the exception of her Pendant and chain, where did it go?
Reasons to think x-ray might be a fake.
1 The necklace/choker was missing from the autopsy notes unlike the earrings, rings and watch and could be used to fabricate a fake, since the victim cannot be readily identified unless there are distinguishing features such as fillings.
2 The x-ray was a recent acquisition (last 13/14 years). If the defence had not had previous sight of this, whomever sent/produced it might have thought it alone would help Jeremy’s case.
3 The introduction of a fragmented bullet would afford a number of advantages to the police.
(a) It could be used to cover for a larger calibre round had one been used
.
(b) It could be used to cover for a round fired from another weapon of the same calibre but with different rifling marks.
(c) it could be used to insinuate that Sheila was ambulant for any storyline devised to cover any mistakes, when they were pursuing four murders and a suicide and body relocation was an issue.
(d) It could be used to enhance the argument that Jeremy failed at his first attempt and was reluctantly forced to stage a two shot suicide.
(e) It could be used to introduce a rogue fragment.
X-ray discussion
The number of fragments is noted by Fletcher on the GER. It is generally accepted that there are 3 large and around 14/15 smaller fragments. Some argue that some of these may be bone fragments. It is likely that PV viewed the x-ray on a light box to assist him at autopsy.
He makes no mention of bone fragments in the autopsy, the follow up report and trial testimony. He only mentions bullet fragmentation in the follow up report. His preoccupation as one would expect is concerned with anatomical damage.
It seems unlikely if bones had been fragmented he would not have reported this. He had three opportunities. He states fractures and lack of displacement only.
A problem with the x-ray is that it does not give a three dimensional view of the fragments and it is therefore difficult to assess each of the fragments in relation to the PV20 photo which itself is not three dimensional. I am not a ballistics expert but find it difficult to associate this with any of the three larger fragments, which given its relative size, are the only ones that are candidates.
The best way to view the fragments for shape is to use the image on the Bamber website and enlarge
The PV20 bullet was first sent to Taylor for examination of blood issues. (see GER) He passed it to MF stating lans and grooves were visible. Notice also that the bag contained blood and tissue which may represent yet another potential blood source for the silencer contamination which was undertaken.Proving the swap[/size]
A short thread. Note MT's remarks.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10645.msg492394.html#msg492394
No one can say what happened at WHF after Jeremy left but before the police entered. The Police may have been able to work out roughly what happened from the original crime scene they viewed.
There is no proof that June was shot in bed. I can prove she was not but that can be explained later if you wish.
There is no proof that Sheila killed them all in one go. Or for that matter that June was not hiding with or without some wounds. There is also a possibility of a Mexican standoff .
I believe the original scenario which they planned involved a restaging and included the shooting of Sheila by June in some manner. For this it required Sheila to be shot with two different weapons. They shot her in the neck after she had committed suicide calling it the first shot.
The fragmentation they constructed provided her with the ability to then go on and kill June because she (Sheila) had only been stunned. If it was known by any of those involved that June was alive either through telephone contact or if in response to the loud hailer, she then presented herself to be viewed. In such circumstances it would be essential to outline how she had died. The ‘met with no response’ record may have been in relation to a request to go to the phone.
I believe the Fragmentation X-ray may have been faked. They used Sheila’s necklace quite possibly on June or a n other superimposing the fragments. Did June have pierced ears?
I believe PV20 did lose some of its volume when hitting the bone but not to the extent displayed. The change to the parts list for PV20 is denoted by the carriage/tab return. The words ‘in cervical muscles’ has been added indicating some measure of fragmentation with the use of the plural.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=988.0;attach=4969;image
This has to have been inserted because other wordy descriptions show carriage/tab returns and additional/more lines of text.
When the case changed to five murders they had to move to a one gun crime. They could not let it be known that there was more than 1 rifle available and JB would not change guns mid event. This meant that they would need to go back to the slightly damaged bullet, the original PV20. However, this had lans and grooves associated with a weapon other than the Anschutz. It would have to be swapped.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10671.msg493051.html#msg493051
From this proposition/scenario we see that Vanezis did not take part in the framing of Jeremy but he was aware of what had happened. He knew. He trod a fine line and chose his words and descriptions with care.
The Samples list and Autopsy report were tweaked to hide a shot by the TFG (PV25 autopsy notes) and disguise a wound to create a different scenario (PV20 Samples list).
They forgot to change 'front of head' on the Samples list Both PV and MF say that the shot between the eyes was retrieved from the front of the head but the actual autopsy notes say it travelled through the brain and ended up with some fragments as the left side base of the skull.
He was forced to elaborate on Sheila’s abilities after the introduced first shot. Initially he said she could have survived the Fragmented PV20 for about 30 minutes but when JB was charged this changed and he ruled out any meaningful activity.
These two documents (autopsy report and samples list) represent what they needed for the first case which should have been three murders, a suicide and an accidental shooting. Not 4 murders and a suicide). He did try to appear on JB’s side up to a point using some helpful comments like the ‘nutter’ remark. May be he had a guilty conscience or he wanted to distance himself from the police actions.
PV20 was damaged but was never as fragmented as shown on the x-ray. It did not become whole it was never that fragmented.
If Jeremy obtains justice, sooner or later there would have to be an enquiry, may be more than one. PV’s role in events would in all probability be exposed. Not only would it cast a shadow over UK cases he was involved with but he also had a role in the Autopsy of Princess Dianna, pronouncing she was not pregnant. Perhaps more importantly he was seconded from the Home office and played a lead role in the exhumations of mass graves in the former Yugoslavia.
Any damage or undermining of his credibility would have widespread ramifications not only for the UK justice system but also for International relations and our standing in the world.
To Summarise.
In the first instance they tried to cover up the TFG shooting of June by pretending SC had a survivable wound that would allow her having been shot by June only to recover and then kill June. They created a false Xray and administered a so called first shot to a dead SC with AP's Brno rifle. They also restaged SC's and June's bodies.
Later when JB was framed they had to swap PV20 back to the replacement round created by them to create a casing for the TFG shot and substitute a test fired round from MF's cache of test fired ammunition (the 29 he received) to disguise the shot between June's eyes by claiming it had fragmented when Travelling through her head. But MF's records show That PV25 and PV26 were both nearly whole
OK, I will have a go at your questions myself.
In your own time.
I'll get on it when I can. Don't know whether I'm coming or going at the moment.
I'm still not sure what substance Bubo was under the influence of when he started this thread.Do not start that issue again. Do not get into your denigration mode. I do not drink or smoke. I was drinking tea as it happens. Continue with this and I will report you to the moderators as I did the last time you started implying stuff. Go back to the UFO thread. Please delete this post.
Do not start that issue again. Do not get into your denigration mode. I do not drink or smoke. I was drinking tea as it happens. Continue with this and I will report you to the moderators as I did the last time you started implying stuff. Go back to the UFO thread. Please delete this post.From memory Mike Tesko always argued they replaced a fragmented bullet with a whole one, but why fake the X-rays and at what date was this accomplished?
From memory Mike Tesko always argued they replaced a fragmented bullet with a whole one, but why fake the X-rays and at what date was this accomplished?
From memory Mike Tesko always argued they replaced a fragmented bullet with a whole one, but why fake the X-rays and at what date was this accomplished?I can only assume that he did not think the Xray was a fake. PV does not say it fragmented to the extent that is shown. Please remember that this was probably produced in the early stages when they were looking to get past the coroner and inquest and would not be required for JB's trial. It is clear from the GER and examination by Taylor (see post) that it was a substantial size and not in at least 3 large pieces as per the Xray. Also note that in the thread Mike T agrees with my findings.
I can only assume that he did not think the Xray was a fake. PV does not say it fragmented to the extent that is shown. Please remember that this was probably produced in the early stages when they were looking to get past the coroner and inquest and would not be required for JB's trial. It is clear from the GER and examination by Taylor (see post) that it was a substantial size and not in at least 3 large pieces as per the Xray. Also note that in the thread Mike T agrees with my findings.
From memory Mike Tesko always argued they replaced a fragmented bullet with a whole one, but why fake the X-rays and at what date was this accomplished?They were trying to cover up the shooting of June. If as I suspect SC had already committed suicide and was dead on her own bed and and June had no or just a few injuries. The crime scene would look a bit out of kilter. What is more they would not know that the pathologist would help them with the cover-up at say 08.00am since none had been called.
Don't you mean you agree with Mike's findings? You do realise that that isn't an endorsement right?Perhaps I should have said in general terms but our thinking has differences.
Don't you mean you agree with Mike's findings? You do realise that that isn't an endorsement right?
From memory Mike Tesko always argued they replaced a fragmented bullet with a whole one, but why fake the X-rays and at what date was this accomplished?I would also point out that the PV20 examined by Taylor was accompanied by blood and tissues making a stronger case for the Xray being a fake. There would have to have been multiple fragements to support the Xray being Bona Fide.
They were trying to cover up the shooting of June. If as I suspect SC had already committed suicide and was dead on her own bed and and June had no or just a few injuries. The crime scene would look a bit out of kilter. What is more they would not know that the pathologist would help them with the cover-up at say 08.00am since none had been called.
The TOD would also be a factor. If the pathologist recorded a big difference between the TOD of the two women it would be even more problematic.
There may also have been information that June was alive but as we know they started a new case file and the original has never been disclosed.
From the magical PV20 and the Xray and other known facts it is possible to hypothesise how these factors fit together.
I think the initial plan (cover-up) was to say that June had shot SC with AP's Brno during some event (say a struggle over possession) SC is wounded but not dead because the bullet fragmented giving her the opportunity to recover herself sufficiently to kill June. Restage the bodies, PV is sympathetic to the accident and tailors his initial comments to facilitate this scenario.
To bolster this argument they fake an Xray showing a highly fragmented bullet.
This is then sent to the CT some years later because whoever sent it was trying sublimely to help JB
I should also point out that I had come to this on my own account before I read MT's views. I was communicating with a journalist in my early investigations and have the documentation. Mike had not produced any scientific evidence to prove the swap.
Scientific? Such as?I performed a series of calculations based on weights. Ok mathematical but a scientific approach.
Seems that Sheila was 'dead on her own bed'.Most likely after.
So the police moved her. Was that before or after they deliberatly shot her?
Most likely after.
Was Sheila with the rifle when lying on her bed? (A)
Or was June holding it when the police entered?(B)
A) most likely but June could have removed it and placed it by a window.
B) If June had hold of a weapon it more likely to be the Brno or a shotgun but the Anschutz cannot be ruled out even though her fingerprints were not on the gun it could have been wiped. I do not believe she was by SC's bed when shot no crime scene blood evidence.
A) most likely but June could have removed it and placed it by a window.I'm afraid I'm jumping through hoops again, and the tale is descending into a farce.
B) If June had hold of a weapon it more likely to be the Brno or a shotgun but the Anschutz cannot be ruled out even though her fingerprints were not on the gun it could have been wiped. I do not believe she was by SC's bed when shot no crime scene blood evidence.
Why did Sheila not kill June but shoot Nevill 8 times and brutally hit him?
Why would June move the rifle off Sheila after she had committed suicide?
Was June planning to shoot the police when they entered? A shot gun is a lethal weapon.
I'm afraid I'm jumping through hoops again, and the tale is descending into a farce.I get criticised when I do not respond and criticized when I do. Put me on ignore
I performed a series of calculations based on weights. Ok mathematical but a scientific approach.
I performed a series of calculations based on weights. Ok mathematical but a scientific approach.
If I remember correctly, this was a meticulous piece of work.
I get criticised when I do not respond and criticized when I do. Put me on ignoreI put your posts down to the exuberance of youth. When you've lived a few more decades you will recognize the evil in the world.
Now your getting silly.
It is a big house, maybe she was able to avoid her or by locking herself in a room for safety. Read my take on the box room. You can find it using the search facility. Maybe she was shot a few times anyway. We cannot know. Maybe she was able to evade her because SC ran out of Ammunition.
I do not know she may have been being ultra defensive because of pain or shock. She may have shouldered a weapon ready to shoot when she heard voices. We cannot know.
Do not start that issue again. Do not get into your denigration mode. I do not drink or smoke. I was drinking tea as it happens. Continue with this and I will report you to the moderators as I did the last time you started implying stuff. Go back to the UFO thread. Please delete this post.
This type of tea?
https://psychedelicspotlight.com/how-to-make-magic-mushroom-tea-an-easy-guide/ (https://psychedelicspotlight.com/how-to-make-magic-mushroom-tea-an-easy-guide/)
I put your posts down to the exuberance of youth. When you've lived a few more decades you will recognize the evil in the world.You have no idea how old I am. Your being sanctimonious. I am sure I am older that you and are you referring to yourself by any chance.
I don't see how you could do that without having access to the exhibits, CS photo's and all notes pertaining to Sheila's wounds? Any kind of 'scientific' experiment will be rudimentary at best - no matter how much effort is employed or impressive it 'looks'.It only involved two spent bullets and a couple of documents from the archives supplied by MT plus a few standard measurement tables. No wound data required. No crime scene photos required. One photo of a spent round with weight data.
A lot of 'may' and 'maybe' in there.
There should not be one.
The Bamber scenario just follows the crime scene evidence. No maybe's.As far as I am concerned your scenario does not follow the crime scene evidence Adam,it does not include the Aga burns which have been proven to my satisfaction.
As far as I am concerned your scenario does not follow the crime scene evidence Adam,it does not include the Aga burns which have been proven to my satisfaction.
Aga marks which Bubo pointed out to you years ago,so before the likes of Zoso,Jane,Steve and yourself try to pick holes in Bubos scenario I suggest you all supply a new JB scenario including the marks.
Any of you who do not supply an updated scenario including the Aga marks has no right whatsoever to continue telling Bubo that his thoughts are flawed or wrong in any way.
Lets have them please folks!
It does include the aga burns.Who's? Yours Adam?
As far as I am concerned your scenario does not follow the crime scene evidence Adam,it does not include the Aga burns which have been proven to my satisfaction.
Aga marks which Bubo pointed out to you years ago,so before the likes of Zoso,Jane,Steve and yourself try to pick holes in Bubos scenario I suggest you all supply a new JB scenario including the marks.
Any of you who do not supply an updated scenario including the Aga marks has no right whatsoever to continue telling Bubo that his thoughts are flawed or wrong in any way.
Lets have them please folks!
What a bucket load of rubbish. You are not addressing the central issue. Of course if used incorrectly kitchen equipment can cause injury. I have a gas hob and an electric oven. I use them every day but to my knowledge no one has collapsed in or on them and received burns. Neither I or Boyce are saying Agas are inherently dangerous. We are saying that in a certain set of circumstances an elderly man was shot and beaten and collapsed for an unknown time against an Aga which was running. This meant he was burnt. End of.
What's the point in writing fiction for your satisfaction, Snow? Those who don't use AGA's may be forgiven for accepting that these enormous cast iron beasts are capable of inflicting burns on the unwary from every part of their structure. Such is not the case. People bring their children up, quite safely, in homes fitted with AGA's. I've used one every day -oven and hob- for more than a year and have yet to sustain burns. Boyce and his theory, Bubo and his theory, and you, with your faith in them, can feel as self satisfied as you like regarding these 'findings', but I wonder how many of you use one at least three times a day.
What a bucket load of rubbish. You are not addressing the central issue. Of course if used incorrectly kitchen equipment can cause injury. I have a gas hob and an electric oven. I use them every day but to my knowledge no one has collapsed in or on them and received burns. Neither I or Boyce are saying Agas are inherently dangerous. We are saying that in a certain set of circumstances an elderly man was shot and beaten and collapsed for an unknown time against an Aga which was running. This meant he was burnt. End of.
I am sick and tired of posters such as yourself who will not address the points I make but prefer to heap ridicule. Like am I on drugs. I do not know evil because I have not lived long enough. I am mad. It goes on and on. If you addressed the points I make rather than seeking to denigrate or make blindingly obvious statements that do not take issue with the points I make you can expect to get curt replies. I am not on here for my health I am here to give my views on the WHF murders and unlike some I do have a life other than this forum.
You're as entitled to your theory just the same as the rest of us, although you're somewhat more forthcoming with the insults, towards those who don't accept them, than other posters.
I suppose you are right Jane,a JB scenario including the Aga burns may indeed sound like fiction! :))
What's the point in writing fiction for your satisfaction, Snow? Those who don't use AGA's may be forgiven for accepting that these enormous cast iron beasts are capable of inflicting burns on the unwary from every part of their structure. Such is not the case. People bring their children up, quite safely, in homes fitted with AGA's. I've used one every day -oven and hob- for more than a year and have yet to sustain burns. Boyce and his theory, Bubo and his theory, and you, with your faith in them, can feel as self satisfied as you like regarding these 'findings', but I wonder how many of you use one at least three times a day.
Who's? Yours Adam?
Yes mine.Please dont say by heating a rifle barrel in the Aga Adam,you know I mean by Nevill lying against it.
Please dont say by heating a rifle barrel in the Aga Adam,you know I mean by Nevill lying against it.
I suppose you are right Jane,a JB scenario including the Aga burns may indeed sound like fiction! :))The problem for those who believe JB guilty is that for years the only real evidence against him has been the SM and the testimony of a jilted lover who is a proven liar and a fraud. The SM has been undone by many including myself, there was always 2 and it was the main plank of the prosecution case.
Looks like Adam,Jane and Zoso are in denial about the Aga burning Nevills back,I think Steve may have accepted the fact so may supply a JB scenario around it.He has the brains to do so if he so wishes.
I am sick and tired of posters such as yourself who will not address the points I make but prefer to heap ridicule. Like am I on drugs. I do not know evil because I have not lived long enough. I am mad. It goes on and on. If you addressed the points I make rather than seeking to denigrate or make blindingly obvious statements that do not take issue with the points I make you can expect to get curt replies. I am not on here for my health I am here to give my views on the WHF murders and unlike some I do have a life other than this forum.
Their lack of intellectual rigor is astounding. Just watch over the next few days as they snipe and sneer without any real evidence to support what they say.
..........They are now reduced to 'over the garden fence' tittle tattle and gossip with no evidential purpose.
They need to be put in a straight jacket and locked in a padded room.
Their lack of intellectual rigor is astounding. Just watch over the next few days as they snipe and sneer without any real evidence to support what they say..................
The problem for those who believe JB guilty is that for years the only real evidence against him has been the SM and the testimony of a jilted lover who is a proven liar and a fraud. The SM has been undone by many including myself, there was always 2 and it was the main plank of the prosecution case.
Overtime the remaining circumstantial evidence like bike rides on sea walls and windows has been chipped away. They are seen for what they are just stories made up to cast JB as ruthless money seeking killer.
They are now reduced to 'over the garden fence' tittle tattle and gossip with no evidential purpose.
He said this which means this. He did that which means this. It is all about how they know what people were thinking. Many of them act as if they are mind readers. On and on it goes, reheating the same old tropes and bad mouthing JB.
As soon as anyone dares to suggest innocence and puts forward a contradictory point they are verbally savaged. Look what has happened to Bill Robertson for example. They do not try to dismantle or challenge the idea/theory they hunt in a pack to beat down sensible suggestions that have some value without thought or reason. They behave as if innocence belief is the work of the devil and requires the protagonists be put in the stocks or burned at the stake. They need to be put in a straight jacket and locked in a padded room.
Their lack of intellectual rigor is astounding. Just watch over the next few days as they snipe and sneer without any real evidence to support what they say.
They are lost in a dark cynical world where they are totally right in their beliefs and everyone else is a heretic.
There are over 200 pieces of evidence. Eighty of it forensic. All sourced. Posted before.
But appreciate supporters will try to round it down.
Julie's WS & testimony was also comprehensive.
Your forensics is now eighty pieces of bullshit? This time last year you had only made up 75?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10866.msg521571.html#msg521571 (https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10866.msg521571.html#msg521571)
Its not a fact. And I don't believe it either.Do you think it was the rifle barrel Dave? What was the purpose of someone intentionally burning Nevills back?
When were you 'savaged'?On this thread Steve made the age comment David accused me of taking drugs and Jane made a contribution that did not address the issue but was more like a health and safety talk on Aga's .Adam has been told off for calling me mad. Jane thinks agreeing with one thing MT says undermines my argument. Just check their posts. It is all par for the course if you support innocence. It is all totally pointless jibeing. You mistakenly accused me of using science for my whole theory when I was only referring to the bullet swap. You all dash in without thought.
On this thread Steve made the age comment David accused me of taking drugs and Jane made a contribution that did not address the issue but was more like a health and safety talk on Aga's .Adam has been told off for calling me mad. Jane thinks agreeing with one thing MT says undermines my argument. Just check their posts. It is all par for the course if you support innocence. It is all totally pointless jibeing. You mistakenly accused me of using science for my whole theory when I was only referring to the bullet swap. You all dash in without thought.
Do you think it was the rifle barrel Dave? What was the purpose of someone intentionally burning Nevills back?
On this thread Steve made the age comment David accused me of taking drugs and Jane made a contribution that did not address the issue but was more like a health and safety talk on Aga's .Adam has been told off for calling me mad. Jane thinks agreeing with one thing MT says undermines my argument. Just check their posts. It is all par for the course if you support innocence. It is all totally pointless jibeing. You mistakenly accused me of using science for my whole theory when I was only referring to the bullet swap. You all dash in without thought.
On this thread Steve made the age comment David accused me of taking drugs and Jane made a contribution that did not address the issue but was more like a health and safety talk on Aga's .Adam has been told off for calling me mad. Jane thinks agreeing with one thing MT says undermines my argument. Just check their posts. It is all par for the course if you support innocence. It is all totally pointless jibeing. You mistakenly accused me of using science for my whole theory when I was only referring to the bullet swap. You all dash in without thought.It's not a Mexican standoff because we don't accept police shot Sheila. All the permutations the Defence has come up with over 38 years have failed, because rational people know they are falsifications.
You know why.I know what you think Adam.Besides I was asking Dave.
Not all of them have always been like this. If Paul Harrison never came to this forum, it would be a very different place today.Was Paul Harrison a member then Dave?
I know what you think Adam.Besides I was asking Dave.
Hopefully Dave answers.Religeous Adam?
Assume he thinks it's religious.
Why does it matter what others think of your theory? You're never going to get many (or any) guilty supporters to buy into them. It didn't bother Mike. I get jibed at all of the time - just ignore it and do you. It could be a LOT worse here and has been in the passed.It matters not to me but if I react to the crap that is thrown I am castigated and told to be civil. It seems civility is a one way street where only guilters are allowed to chide and goad but when an innocence supporter returns the favour we get our knuckles rapped. From what I observe it is always the guilters that instigate. Read the posts on this thread. Seems to me you view things from a guilter perspective. Wake up and see where the initial 'shit' is started.
It matters not to me but if I react to the crap that is thrown I am castigated and told to be civil. It seems civility is a one way street where only guilters are allowed to chide and goad but when an innocence supporter returns the favour we get our knuckles rapped. From what I observe it is always the guilters that instigate. Read the posts on this thread. Seems to me you view things from a guilter perspective. Wake up and see where the initial 'shit' is started.
It's not a Mexican standoff because we don't accept police shot Sheila. All the permutations the Defence has come up with over 38 years have failed, because rational people know they are falsifications.Ok I trust if I return the favour you will not respond and take it with a pinch of salt. The police did not shoot Sheila she committed suicide. They desecrated her corpse. Lets agree my position without distortion by language use. Thanks
I'm sure we're all sorry for the personal attacks. We've been on this site for years and take them with a pinch of salt.
Ok I trust if I return the favour you will not respond and take it with a pinch of salt. The police did not shoot Sheila she committed suicide. They desecrated her corpse. Lets agree my position without distortion by language use. Thanks
I've had loads of crap on here, when I thought Bamber innocent, it came from the guilty side. That changed when I changed my mind. Obviously, the people who don't agree with you are more likely to be the ones to goadLook where it starts is what I asked not a history lesson. I have never criticized your change in stance to my knowledge even though I think it is misplaced.
Its not a fact. And I don't believe it either.I am happy to take the view of a forensic expert with 39 years experience.
Ok I trust if I return the favour you will not respond and take it with a pinch of salt. The police did not shoot Sheila she committed suicide. They desecrated her corpse. Lets agree my position without distortion by language use. ThanksBut you said police shot her in the neck after she committed suicide. Why would they do that and can you name any of the protagonists in the case who agree that Sheila was suicidal?
But you said police shot her in the neck after she committed suicide. Why would they do that and can you name any of the protagonists in the case who agree that Sheila was suicidal?I am happy with that quote because it reflects my thinking. An improvement would be that they were going to say June had shot and wounded SC before she committed suicide.
Your post:
I believe the original scenario which they planned involved a restaging and included the shooting of Sheila by June in some manner. For this it required Sheila to be shot with two different weapons. They shot her in the neck after she had committed suicide calling it the first shot.
It matters not to me but if I react to the crap that is thrown I am castigated and told to be civil. It seems civility is a one way street where only guilters are allowed to chide and goad but when an innocence supporter returns the favour we get our knuckles rapped. From what I observe it is always the guilters that instigate. Read the posts on this thread. Seems to me you view things from a guilter perspective. Wake up and see where the initial 'shit' is started.
Was Paul Harrison a member then Dave?
I am happy with that quote because it reflects my thinking. An improvement would be that they were going to say June had shot and wounded SC before she committed suicide.I can't work out whether the Jeremy supporters genuinely believe in his innocence or spend hours working out a scenario which puts him in the clear.
I can't work out whether the Jeremy supporters genuinely believe in his innocence or spend hours working out a scenario which puts him in the clear.
The law in this country is well established.You're forgetting the purported telephone call from Nevill, to a man whom Nevill suspected was out to kill him. As for the legal process, I'm sure the British taxpayers are well aware how much Mr. Jeremy Bamber has already cost them.
The onus is on the prosecution to prove a case beyond reasonable doubt.
The only 'evidence' against him was his ex girlfriend, a silencer which had a blood grouping, and circumstanial evidence of his own apparent mishaps behaviour
I don't think the realms of the 1986 trial was fair.
The judge summed up in a biased manner. Reference the silencer.
The trial should have been held outside Essex.
Just one of a number of reasons
You're forgetting the purported telephone call from Nevill, to a man whom Nevill suspected was out to kill him. As for the legal process, I'm sure the British taxpayers are well aware how much Mr. Jeremy Bamber has already cost them.
It matters not to me but if I react to the crap that is thrown I am castigated and told to be civil. It seems civility is a one way street where only guilters are allowed to chide and goad but when an innocence supporter returns the favour we get our knuckles rapped. From what I observe it is always the guilters that instigate. Read the posts on this thread. Seems to me you view things from a guilter perspective. Wake up and see where the initial 'shit' is started.
Surely you have to see that if you call all JB's detractors comments as "crap", you're entitled to find yourself "castigated"? The above post is neither tongue in cheek or mildly sarcastic. It's downright hostile. May I suggest you stop playing victim.
But you said police shot her in the neck after she committed suicide. Why would they do that and can you name any of the protagonists in the case who agree that Sheila was suicidal?
Your post:
I believe the original scenario which they planned involved a restaging and included the shooting of Sheila by June in some manner. For this it required Sheila to be shot with two different weapons. They shot her in the neck after she had committed suicide calling it the first shot.
I can't work out whether the Jeremy supporters genuinely believe in his innocence or spend hours working out a scenario which puts him in the clear.
Look where it starts is what I asked not a history lesson. I have never criticized your change in stance to my knowledge even though I think it is misplaced.
Was Paul Harrison a member then Dave?
I do not mind who agrees with me or not as the case may be. Every one was mocking my NB burns were made by the Aga. Seems I might have been right all along. I wonder how many more of my ideas/theories might gain traction?
I can't work out whether the Jeremy supporters genuinely believe in his innocence or spend hours working out a scenario which puts him in the clear.
This type of tea?
https://psychedelicspotlight.com/how-to-make-magic-mushroom-tea-an-easy-guide/ (https://psychedelicspotlight.com/how-to-make-magic-mushroom-tea-an-easy-guide/)
You never know, they are pretty desperate for ideas.I think the start of this thread has plenty of ideas that are worthy of further examination. They are happy to plough on.
Or just confuses the backside out of everyone, that they give up!Wow now you are as confused as Adam. Try confused.com it is an interesting website for potential customers. I know you will not give up until JB is released.
Yes, but he wasn't.Yes AND no Zoso??
Yes AND no Zoso??
It matters not to me but if I react to the crap that is thrown I am castigated and told to be civil. It seems civility is a one way street where only guilters are allowed to chide and goad but when an innocence supporter returns the favour we get our knuckles rapped. From what I observe it is always the guilters that instigate. Read the posts on this thread. Seems to me you view things from a guilter perspective. Wake up and see where the initial 'shit' is started.
To Zoso
On this thread Steve made the age comment David accused me of taking drugs and Jane made a contribution that did not address the issue but was more like a health and safety talk on Aga's .Adam has been told off for calling me mad. Jane thinks agreeing with one thing MT says undermines my argument. Just check their posts. It is all par for the course if you support innocence. It is all totally pointless jibeing. You mistakenly accused me of using science for my whole theory when I was only referring to the bullet swap. You all dash in without thought.
I reply in a similar vain.
The problem for those who believe JB guilty is that for years the only real evidence against him has been the SM and the testimony of a jilted lover who is a proven liar and a fraud. The SM has been undone by many including myself, there was always 2 and it was the main plank of the prosecution case.
Overtime the remaining circumstantial evidence like bike rides on sea walls and windows has been chipped away. They are seen for what they are just stories made up to cast JB as ruthless money seeking killer.
They are now reduced to 'over the garden fence' tittle tattle and gossip with no evidential purpose.
He said this which means this. He did that which means this. It is all about how they know what people were thinking. Many of them act as if they are mind readers. On and on it goes, reheating the same old tropes and bad mouthing JB.
As soon as anyone dares to suggest innocence and puts forward a contradictory point they are verbally savaged. Look what has happened to Bill Robertson for example. They do not try to dismantle or challenge the idea/theory they hunt in a pack to beat down sensible suggestions that have some value without thought or reason. They behave as if innocence belief is the work of the devil and requires the protagonists be put in the stocks or burned at the stake. They need to be put in a straight jacket and locked in a padded room.
Their lack of intellectual rigor is astounding. Just watch over the next few days as they snipe and sneer without any real evidence to support what they say.
They are lost in a dark cynical world where they are totally right in their beliefs and everyone else is a heretic.
To Zoso
Look where it starts is what I asked not a history lesson. I have never criticized your change in stance to my knowledge even though I think it is misplaced.
I hear your anger. I hear your frustration. You clearly don't believe your points are being taken seriously. But you're not helpless. You have a choice and several alternatives. As I suggested you do with Adam, ie put him on ignore, I suggest you do with all of us -and it appears there are many such- who are causing you offence. That way, you'll have just a small, select team of those who agree with you, and you won't have to waste time in dealing with those of us who disagree with you and making reports to moderators. However, you will have to ignore those offending posts which get quoted otherwise there's little point.
Of course, you could choose to accept, as we all have to, that there will be those with whom we disagree. Even some of those on 'our' side. We are a diverse group, as is every group, be it religious, political, horticultural, historical or hysterical. We can either find ways to be comfortable within the group, or, as the saying goes, if we can't take the heat, we're better off being out of the kitchen.
He mentions Bill. I believe the forum would be a better place with Bill posting. I would say the same about Curious Essex who was a very good guilt supporter with expertise in telecoms. My point is, I'm not being one sided by supporting Bill. Some members need to realise that not all other members are keen on being mocked, disparaged etc.
It's horses for courses on here. Not one size fits all.
He mentions Bill. I believe the forum would be a better place with Bill posting. I would say the same about Curious Essex who was a very good guilt supporter with expertise in telecoms. My point is, I'm not being one sided by supporting Bill. Some members need to realise that not all other members are keen on being mocked, disparaged etc.
It's horses for courses on here. Not one size fits all.
Bill has brought the mockery on himself with all the crazy claims and predictions he kept making. Hence he now posts his lunacy on an external site with the comments blocked so he cannot be mocked directly.
This is exactly what I am talking about David. Although you are a valued member who has researched the case and can produce brilliant posts, you seem unable to control your urges to mock people you disagree with. I'm sure Bill is able to navigate having his opinions and claims challenged in the right way. But you choose to do it in the wrong way, repeatedly.That is only half the point I am making. Guilters are almost always the genesis behind bust ups and if you reply in kind you are chastised for being uncivil. There is no way innocence supporters can escape their antics.
I know you mock other posters also, for example Jane.
He was on here until he got banned. Reasons in the link belowThanks Dave.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5844.msg259924.html#msg259924 (https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5844.msg259924.html#msg259924)
Thanks Dave.It was this language use that spelled trouble and I never believed a word he posted. I saw him as an interloper trying to gain favour from innocence members.
Perry Mason,Conan Doyle?
It was this language use that spelled trouble and I never believed a word he posted. I saw him as an interloper trying to gain favour from innocence members.I dont really get it Bubo,was Harrison on the guilty side or the innocence side?
Thanks Dave.
Perry Mason,Conan Doyle?
If you want to know anything about MD being a member here, then you shouldn't be asking a member who wasn't even here at the time and knows nothing of what went on. Also, you're allowing another member to goad.I dont understand Zoso,who is being goaded? I am not looking to cause any trouble,I am a friend to everyone who will have me,you know this Zoso.
I dont really get it Bubo,was Harrison on the guilty side or the innocence side?
I haven't read any of his posts,are they still on the forum? Seems once someone is banned they get a guest number which makes it difficult to find their posts.
Have got his book,didn't think much of the JB/Sheila scenario.
I dont really get it Bubo,was Harrison on the guilty side or the innocence side?
I haven't read any of his posts,are they still on the forum? Seems once someone is banned they get a guest number which makes it difficult to find their posts.
Have got his book,didn't think much of the JB/Sheila scenario.
I dont understand Zoso,who is being goaded? I am not looking to cause any trouble,I am a friend to everyone who will have me,you know this Zoso.
I dont goad or cause hurt to anyone.
If you want to know anything about MD being a member here, then you shouldn't be asking a member who wasn't even here at the time and knows nothing of what went on. Also, you're allowing another member to goad.Wrong again and totally up the Swaney with this. I used this site and the red forum to gain access to case documents etc. I was a longstanding guest. I would follow posting from time to time but did my own analysis and thinking. I did not want my conclusions to be clouded by the likes of Caroline who for the second day in a row jumps in with an answer that is rubbish and shows just how biased she has become. The two sites were my best chance of finding facts.
I dont understand Zoso,who is being goaded? I am not looking to cause any trouble,I am a friend to everyone who will have me,you know this Zoso.Be careful Snow only guilters are allowed to goad and if you do you will be hauled over the coals.
I dont goad or cause hurt to anyone.
Oh COME ON! Snow, you're NOT that naïve?The problem you caused was because you bringing up the issue in an enquiring manner allowed David1819 to tease Zoso about her being taken in by this rogue and contributing to his discredited work on the case by way of providing information that was published in his paperback.
I dont really get it Bubo,was Harrison on the guilty side or the innocence side?
If you have got his book, you must know if he is on the guilty or innocence side.Well he says it was both JB AND Sheila Adam,he says he believes this to be true.
The problem you caused was because you bringing up the issue in an enquiring manner allowed David1819 to tease Zoso about her being taken in by this rogue and contributing to his discredited work on the case by way of providing information that was published in his paperback.Ah,I see Bubo. Well I AM that naive,I didn't know any of this,how could I?
He started out writing a book that would be pro innocence but then changed to guilty when he fell out with the CT and Stan Jones died.Thanks Dave.I think I will leave it there as far as Harrison is concerned to avoid opening up old wounds,which is not my intention.I will simply read Harrisons book again at my leasure.
His MO was to make claims based on dead people who couldn't deny what was written about them. Hence he promptly informed NGB about an impressive volume of interview notes involving Stan Jones shortly after Stan Jones died despite making no such claims prior.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5042.msg215709.html#msg215709 (https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5042.msg215709.html#msg215709)
Thanks Dave.I think I will leave it there as far as Harrison is concerned to avoid opening up old wounds,which is not my intention.I will simply read Harrisons book again at my leasure.
Wrong again and totally up the Swaney with this. I used this site and the red forum to gain access to case documents etc. I was a longstanding guest. I would follow posting from time to time but did my own analysis and thinking. I did not want my conclusions to be clouded by the likes of Caroline who for the second day in a row jumps in with an answer that is rubbish and shows just how biased she has become. The two sites were my best chance of finding facts.
The problem you caused was because you bringing up the issue in an enquiring manner allowed David1819 to tease Zoso about her being taken in by this rogue and contributing to his discredited work on the case by way of providing information that was published in his paperback.
David's secret forensic evidence breakthrough.
What a breakthrough that was.
If Nevill lay on the aga door, he would have brought it up decades earlier.EXACTLY Adam,I have pointed this out before!
To claim the police moved Nevill.
Bamber says the burns were caused by rifle minus silencer.As you say Adam,this means Bamber had no idea that Nevill was lying against the Aga.Hence this points to innocence surely.
It was the basis of his 2012 CCRC application.
As you say Adam,this means Bamber had no idea that Nevill was lying against the Aga.Hence this points to innocence surely.Why would Jeremy broach the subject? He can't afford to let on he knew anything about what occurred from the time he pulled away in the car on the Tuesday evening.
Now we are thinking alike.
EXACTLY Adam,I have pointed this out before!
Why would Jeremy broach the subject? He can't afford to let on he knew anything about what occurred from the time he pulled away in the car on the Tuesday evening.
Why would Jeremy broach the subject? He can't afford to let on he knew anything about what occurred from the time he pulled away in the car on the Tuesday evening.I covered this in the 'Three hour Aga burns' Steve.
I covered this in the 'Three hour Aga burns' Steve.Only because it suited his agenda.
If bamber knew that the police moved Nevill he could have hinted in a round about way that the Aga may have made the marks,he could have sworn to his defence team that he did not burn Nevills back with the rifle and that the only other source of heat was the Aga,yet he said NOTHING and let the accusations of torturing Nevill or whatever stand.
Doesn't sit right does it Steve? The Aga burns will cause a whole lot of awkward questions Steve that will bug you and bug you untill the seed of doubt is firmly planted in your mind.
Dont fight it Steve,let logical Steve take over.
Considering the fact he is the root cause of two members here trolling this forum to this day. He will always be relevant so long as them two continue to post pro-guilt nonsense on here. It makes sense.
I cant see why even if gulity he would torture his father.He had to check his father was dead, the man who had dominated his life for so long and under whose shadow he had been living, the paterfamilias he could never hope to emulate, and whom for the first time in his life he had the upper hand. In Jeremy's mind his father and mother had driven him to this state of affairs: it was their fault he lost control momentarily and pumped bullet after bullet in him, saving the last shot for mother, targeted right between the eyes. As he told Julie during one of his deliberations on the killings: "For the way they have treated me they have forfeited the right to live."
Nevill was the person he was closest to in the family unit.
I can understand if gulity he couldn't torture Shelia. June would be the most likely candidate if indeed it was torture
Of course it could be argued on the flipside he was angered by nevills fight when he was expecting a clean killing spree and he exacted revenge via this way
Only because it suited his agenda.Dont understand Steve??
Dont understand Steve??Well the trial judge summed up: it was either Sheila or Jeremy. It suited Jeremy's agenda to let his legal team et al think Sheila had gone berserk with a gun.
He had to check his father was dead, the man who had dominated his life for so long and under whose shadow he had been living, the paterfamilias he could never hope to emulate, and whom for the first time in his life he had the upper hand. In Jeremy's mind his father and mother had driven him to this state of affairs: it was their fault he lost control momentarily and pumped bullet after bullet in him, saving the last shot for mother, targeted right between the eyes. As he told Julie during one of his deliberations on the killings: "For the way they have treated me they have forfeited the right to live."
Well the trial judge summed up: it was either Sheila or Jeremy. It suited Jeremy's agenda to let his legal team et al think Sheila had gone berserk with a gun.
Well the trial judge summed up: it was either Sheila or Jeremy. It suited Jeremy's agenda to let his legal team et al think Sheila had gone berserk with a gun.But why didn't Bamber hint to his defence team that the Aga made the burns Steve if he knew the police moved the body and he didn't make the marks himself with the rifle?
But why didn't Bamber hint to his defence team that the Aga made the burns Steve if he knew the police moved the body and he didn't make the marks himself with the rifle?
Snow a bloke on trial for murder can't say that for clarity and claim innocence at the same time can he......Yes,I know ILB,but if Bamber was guilty and the police moved Nevill couldn't JB have hinted to his defence team that the Aga must have made the marks because he certainly didn't? Why bother trying to prove that the marks were made by the rifle barrel at appeal if he knew the Aga made them?
It opens the floodgates to " how would you know?
If I may just mention Mr Harrisons book one more time,concerning the burns to Nevills back,or should I say the lack of any mention of them at all.
Now I cant remember if they are spoken about anywhere else in the book,but they dont seem to be mentioned in the scenario which was sent to Harrison from the ex-con.
Now,I know I keep going on about the importance of the Aga causing the burns,but I really do think that if this 'theory' is accepted it has far wider implications than you may think ie,none of the witnesses mention Nevill lying against the Aga.Harrisons informant says that Nevill ran down stairs and was manhandled into a chair before being beaten and shot,no mention of burns at all that I can see,and definately no mention of Nevill lying on the floor for any length of time.
Now it is the same with Julie's statement,McDonald tells JB that the old man put up a fearsome fight,but no mention of him lying on the floor beside the Aga for a spell.
Now,I dont know who thinks Harrisons informant is reliable,but if you do,how do you account for the omission of the Aga burns? An activity which would have seen Nevill lying against the Aga for a considerable length of time.
The informant does not mention JB and Sheila knocking Nevill to the floor and then moving him away from the Aga several minutes later.Why didn't JB tell the informant this detail? Doesn't this discredit Harrisons book completely?
Ok,ok,only if you believe the Aga made the marks you are screaming.Well,I think the Aga marks will be accepted by the CCRC for reasons already given.If so,I think we can write off the alleged ex-con story.
And what about Julie,cant the same be said about her? What about the police scenario?
The thing is,none of the scenarios put forward mention a break in the massacre while Nevill is lying against the Aga. Every one has Nevill simply beaten then shot.
It is a very,very uncomfortable event to insert into a JB scenario indeed,an inconvenience as Roch put it.
In a nutshell,no one mentions Nevill lying against the Aga,not JB,not the ex-con,not Julie and not the police.Is this because the only person to see Nevill lying against the Aga was Sheila?
Now I know that Bubo and the campaign team claim that the police knew about Nevill lying against the Aga and moved him onto the chair, but does this make sense?
If the police moved Nevill wouldn't they have known that the Aga caused the burns? Did they hide this knowledge? Did Vanezis know? Has the police known from the start what caused the burns?
Still,they were small marks,so Nevill may have been moved without anyone noticing them.
No matter how you look at it,the ex-con and Sheila are totally unreliable witnesses by omitting the fact that Nevill was lying by the Aga mid massacre for several minutes or maybe even hours.
David I think you should retract this remark. Trolling is way to strong a term. You can argue that Mason Doyle had an impact on posters regarding a change of position, but that would just be your position, not necessarily fact. To label them as trolls is inaccurate and uncalled for.
David I think you should retract this remark. Trolling is way to strong a term. You can argue that Mason Doyle had an impact on posters regarding a change of position, but that would just be your position, not necessarily fact. To label them as trolls is inaccurate and uncalled for.
I covered this in the 'Three hour Aga burns' Steve.
If bamber knew that the police moved Nevill he could have hinted in a round about way that the Aga may have made the marks,he could have sworn to his defence team that he did not burn Nevills back with the rifle and that the only other source of heat was the Aga,yet he said NOTHING and let the accusations of torturing Nevill or whatever stand.
Doesn't sit right does it Steve? The Aga burns will cause a whole lot of awkward questions Steve that will bug you and bug you untill the seed of doubt is firmly planted in your mind.
Dont fight it Steve,let logical Steve take over.
He knew the police had not moved Nevill. And that he had burnt Nevill's back.Mind reading of the highest order
What I wrote is (according to my judgement) wholly accurate.