Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on July 26, 2011, 08:32:PM
-
Its only evidence, if it supports the prosecutions case
Anything that supports the defense case, its just a theory, or speculation...
-
No it's just the fact that evidence points to the truth.
-
No it's just the fact that evidence points to the truth.
-
So what is his explanation for altering the dates on his notebook?
-
So what is his explanation for altering the dates on his notebook?
No idea, but you can very clearly see that he hasn't tried to hide it.
-
So what is his explanation for altering the dates on his notebook?
No idea, but you can very clearly see that he hasn't tried to hide it.
... Hasn't tried to hide it? So, where is the missing five months worth of notes which should have been recorded, inside the cover of book 49? Jones was duty bound and governed by police regulations, to make daily contemporaneously written notes directly into his pocketbook, and he was only supposed to have access to one pocketbook at a time, and he could not obtain another pocketbook from a senior or a supervisory officer, until the one he was currently using was full. Regulations exist governing how pocketbooks shall be issued, and what a police officer is duty bound to do in so far as, what and when notes must be written up into the pocketbook, and so it should be clear to everyone, that Jones is responsible for very serious breachs of police regulations, and that the original notes in the cover of pocketbook 49, commenced on 5th November 1984, on a daily basis until the date in 1986, when according to the date on the front cover of 49, it concluded - yet, the first entries in 49, do not commence on 5th November 1984, but instead start in April 1985, and so there are five months worth of missing daily notes which were originally written up inside pocketbook cover 49, which Jones was duty bound to record between the covers of 49 for the relevant period, 5th November 1984 to April 1985. Basically put, he must have removed the staples and inner pages of 49, and replaced them with new pages, to enable him to re-write his notes to incorporate the false silencer evidence, and his involvment with the relatives, and Julie Mugford, in entries commencing August 1985. The original notes that were removed probably contained damning evidence abov the find of the silencer by Jones at the scene on 7th August, and police suspicions that the relatives were trying to frame Jeremy for the murders...
-
So what is his explanation for altering the dates on his notebook?
No idea, but you can very clearly see that he hasn't tried to hide it.
... Hasn't tried to hide it? So, where is the missing five months worth of notes which should have been recorded, inside the cover of book 49? Jones was duty bound and governed by police regulations, to make daily contemporaneously written notes directly into his pocketbook, and he was only supposed to have access to one pocketbook at a time, and he could not obtain another pocketbook from a senior or a supervisory officer, until the one he was currently using was full. Regulations exist governing how pocketbooks shall be issued, and what a police officer is duty bound to do in so far as, what and when notes must be written up into the pocketbook, and so it should be clear to everyone, that Jones is responsible for very serious breachs of police regulations, and that the original notes in the cover of pocketbook 49, commenced on 5th November 1984, on a daily basis until the date in 1986, when according to the date on the front cover of 49, it concluded - yet, the first entries in 49, do not commence on 5th November 1984, but instead start in April 1985, and so there are five months worth of missing daily notes which were originally written up inside pocketbook cover 49, which Jones was duty bound to record between the covers of 49 for the relevant period, 5th November 1984 to April 1985. Basically put, he must have removed the staples and inner pages of 49, and replaced them with new pages, to enable him to re-write his notes to incorporate the false silencer evidence, and his involvment with the relatives, and Julie Mugford, in entries commencing August 1985. The original notes that were removed probably contained damning evidence abov the find of the silencer by Jones at the scene on 7th August, and police suspicions that the relatives were trying to frame Jeremy for the murders...
Have you seen the notebook Mike? You have a photocopy of the cover, so I assume that you have? I was just wondering where the information came from that he removed the staples?
-
So what is his explanation for altering the dates on his notebook?
No idea, but you can very clearly see that he hasn't tried to hide it.
... Hasn't tried to hide it? So, where is the missing five months worth of notes which should have been recorded, inside the cover of book 49? Jones was duty bound and governed by police regulations, to make daily contemporaneously written notes directly into his pocketbook, and he was only supposed to have access to one pocketbook at a time, and he could not obtain another pocketbook from a senior or a supervisory officer, until the one he was currently using was full. Regulations exist governing how pocketbooks shall be issued, and what a police officer is duty bound to do in so far as, what and when notes must be written up into the pocketbook, and so it should be clear to everyone, that Jones is responsible for very serious breachs of police regulations, and that the original notes in the cover of pocketbook 49, commenced on 5th November 1984, on a daily basis until the date in 1986, when according to the date on the front cover of 49, it concluded - yet, the first entries in 49, do not commence on 5th November 1984, but instead start in April 1985, and so there are five months worth of missing daily notes which were originally written up inside pocketbook cover 49, which Jones was duty bound to record between the covers of 49 for the relevant period, 5th November 1984 to April 1985. Basically put, he must have removed the staples and inner pages of 49, and replaced them with new pages, to enable him to re-write his notes to incorporate the false silencer evidence, and his involvment with the relatives, and Julie Mugford, in entries commencing August 1985. The original notes that were removed probably contained damning evidence abov the find of the silencer by Jones at the scene on 7th August, and police suspicions that the relatives were trying to frame Jeremy for the murders...
Well as previously stated I am unable to take your word for it, particularly give the "FACT" that you have started modifying and/or removing some of my posts.
Post the evidence and we'll all look at it and see if there is anything to this, posting a poor quality photocopy of the front cover in every single recent thread does nothing but stifle any discussion which was taking place and shows you up to be a bit of a clown. IMO
-
No it's just the fact that evidence points to the truth.
Harterz, apologies in advance if I'm being thick, it has been known. But is there anyway you can flesh out your statement above? As I'm not sure exactly what is meant by it.
-
No it's just the fact that evidence points to the truth.
Harterz, apologies in advance if I'm being thick, it has been known. But is there anyway you can flesh out your statement above? As I'm not sure exactly what is meant by it.
That's fine, I've already discussed it with Grahame.
-
No it's just the fact that evidence points to the truth.
Harterz, apologies in advance if I'm being thick, it has been known. But is there anyway you can flesh out your statement above? As I'm not sure exactly what is meant by it.
That's fine, I've already discussed it with Grahame.
Right, Fair do's. I'm none the wiser but will leave it. Seems a bit tense on here at the mo but nowt new there ;D
-
Isn't it the case that The City of London Police were instructed to review the Essex Police investigation and also Scotland Yard officers have also reviewed it. Surely they had access to all relevent materials?
The Essex Police have been highly criticised for an almost incompetent investigation but deemed not to have conspired illegally as they accused of on here everyday.
Furthermore wasn't it descided that any faults did not materially effect the verdict or prejudice the trial?
And lastly haven't all these alligations been placed before the Appeal Courts and CCRC and the original verdict upheld everytime.
If that is all correct (?) .... why are you still going on and on about the Essex Police as if they were conspiring criminals?
The Essex Police originally believed Bamber's murder/suicide plan; they had to admit they were totally wrong when the truth came out. Therefore admitting mistakes .... are you seriously suggesting they changed their investigation just to 'get' Bamber?
-
Rochy it's a bit tense on here because Essex Police have in the last two weeks tried their very best to hamper Jeremys referral to the ccrc. I can't say whats happened but I expect Mike would definitely know but anyone who is honest and believes in justice would be disgusted and I hope everything is out in the public domain soon for people to make their own mind up about the deceit and corruption in this case.
You can be sure there will hardly be a person who believes Jeremy is guilty when the latest antics are revealed.
I am sure the relatives and friends of relatives are over the moon and quite cocky about the lengths Essex Police will go to so the truth never gets out
-
Rochy it's a bit tense on here because Essex Police have in the last two weeks tried their very best to hamper Jeremys referral to the ccrc. I can't say whats happened but I expect Mike would definitely know but anyone who is honest and believes in justice would be disgusted and I hope everything is out in the public domain soon for people to make their own mind up about the deceit and corruption in this case.
You can be sure there will hardly be a person who believes Jeremy is guilty when the latest antics are revealed.
I am sure the relatives and friends of relatives are over the moon and quite cocky about the lengths Essex Police will go to so the truth never gets out
I was quite furious when I heard of their latest antics in hindering JB's efforts to get justice. If the EP are so innocent then why are they resorting to these underhanded tactics?
-
Exactly Grahame,
I don't know how much you know about the latest stuff but it beggars belief Essex Poliice must now reign supreme as the most corrupt Police Force in Britain
-
What antics?
Talking in riddles and pretending you know something you obviously don't again eh Jackie?
Say what you mean so it can be considered in the forum or keep it in private.
Essex Police have always been and remain a thoroughly professional force.
I know a lot more about them than you ever will.
Good on them!
-
What antics?
Talking in riddles and pretending you know something you obviously don't again eh Jackie?
Say what you mean so it can be considered in the forum or keep it in private.
Essex Police have always been and remain a thoroughly professional force.
I know a lot more about them than you ever will.Good on them!
PB - Forgive me for asking, but how has your knowledge of Essex Police been obtained? Are you a police officer?
-
What antics?
Talking in riddles and pretending you know something you obviously don't again eh Jackie?
Say what you mean so it can be considered in the forum or keep it in private.
Essex Police have always been and remain a thoroughly professional force.
I know a lot more about them than you ever will.Good on them!
PB - Forgive me for asking, but how has your knowledge of Essex Police been obtained? Are you a police officer?
I shouldn't have said that really and I don't want to say anymore. Excuse me for respectfully declining to answer that question.
-
What antics?
Talking in riddles and pretending you know something you obviously don't again eh Jackie?
Say what you mean so it can be considered in the forum or keep it in private.
Essex Police have always been and remain a thoroughly professional force.
I know a lot more about them than you ever will.Good on them!
PB - Forgive me for asking, but how has your knowledge of Essex Police been obtained? Are you a police officer?
I shouldn't have said that really and I don't want to say anymore. Excuse me for respectfully declining to answer that question.
Fair enough PB. No doubt some will draw their own conclusions from your response, but I will not press you further on the point.
-
Essex Police are liars that is a fact it's not even up for discussion
-
So what is his explanation for altering the dates on his notebook?
No idea, but you can very clearly see that he hasn't tried to hide it.
... Hasn't tried to hide it? So, where is the missing five months worth of notes which should have been recorded, inside the cover of book 49? Jones was duty bound and governed by police regulations, to make daily contemporaneously written notes directly into his pocketbook, and he was only supposed to have access to one pocketbook at a time, and btain another pocketbook from a senior or a supervisory officer, until the one he was currently using was full. Regulations exist governing how pocketbooks shall be issued, and what a police officer is duty bound to do in so far as, what and when notes must be written up into the pocketbook, and so it should be clear to everyone, that Jones is responsible for very serious breachs of police regulations, and that the original notes in the cover of pocketbook 49, commenced on 5th November 1984, on a daily basis until the date in 1986, when according to the date on the front cover of 49, it concluded - yet, the first entries in 49, do not commence on 5th November 1984, but instead start in April 1985, and so there are five months worth of missing daily notes which were originally written up inside pocketbook cover 49, which Jones was duty bound to record between the covers of 49 for the relevant period, 5th November 1984 to April 1985. Basically put, he must have removed the staples and inner pages of 49, and replaced them with new pages, to enable him to re-write his notes to incorporate the false silencer evidence, and his involvment with the relatives, and Julie Mugford, in entries commencing August 1985. The original notes that were removed probably contained damning evidence abov the find of the silencer by Jones at the scene on 7th August, and police suspicions that the relatives were trying to frame Jeremy for the murders...
Well as previously stated I am unable to take your word for it, particularly give the "FACT" that you have started modifying and/or removing some of my posts.
Post the evidence and we'll all look at it and see if there is anything to this, posting a poor quality photocopy of the front cover in every single recent thread does nothing but stifle any discussion which was taking place and shows you up to be a bit of a clown. IMO
Hartley, if you're referring to Mike's thread regarding the view from the kitchen window, Grahame didn't delete that post, I did, because it was abusive to Mike. I deleted just one post, however, and have not modified any of your posts or anyone else's. I'm in my office and finishing a complex reconciliation at present. I do not have time to look at the forum just yet, so can't comment any further until later. I can't help you regarding the deletion of any other posts by anyone else, though I suspect it's just one post that was deleted.
-
Hartley, if you're referring to Mike's thread regarding the view from the kitchen window, Grahame didn't delete that post, I did, because it was abusive to Mike. I deleted just one post, however, and have not modified any of your posts or anyone else's. I'm in my office and finishing a complex reconciliation at present. I do not have time to look at the forum just yet, so can't comment any further until later. I can't help you regarding the deletion of any other posts by anyone else, though I suspect it's just one post that was deleted.
No I am not. As already indicated I have discussed this with Grahame. It has been dealt with.
-
i havent deleted any posts
-
Essex Police are liars that is a fact it's not even up for discussion
Are you upset with the police dear? I thought Bamber 'has everything he needs' in the slammer .... why are you so bothered?
And it is a fact Essex Police are liars because ...... Jackie said so!
You can't argue with that evidence now can you?
:D
-
Isn't it the case that The City of London Police were instructed to review the Essex Police investigation and also Scotland Yard officers have also reviewed it. Surely they had access to all relevent materials?
The Essex Police have been highly criticised for an almost incompetent investigation but deemed not to have conspired illegally as they accused of on here everyday.
Furthermore wasn't it descided that any faults did not materially effect the verdict or prejudice the trial?
And lastly haven't all these alligations been placed before the Appeal Courts and CCRC and the original verdict upheld everytime.
If that is all correct (?) .... why are you still going on and on about the Essex Police as if they were conspiring criminals?
The Essex Police originally believed Bamber's murder/suicide plan; they had to admit they were totally wrong when the truth came out. Therefore admitting mistakes .... are you seriously suggesting they changed their investigation just to 'get' Bamber?
PB is everything as straighforward as placing your trust in the justice system to have done right? Are there never any darker forces at play? The following quote by Lord Denning has been mentioned on the forum recently. And given how the Birmingham Six case finally turned out, it is quite a chilling quote...
Just consider the course of events if their [the Six's] action were to proceed to trial ... If the six men failed it would mean that much time and money and worry would have been expended by many people to no good purpose. If they won, it would mean that the police were guilty of perjury; that they were guilty of violence and threats; that the confessions were involuntary and improperly admitted in evidence; and that the convictions were erroneous. That would mean that the Home Secretary would have either to recommend that they be pardoned or to remit the case to the Court of Appeal. That was such an appalling vista that every sensible person would say, 'It cannot be right that these actions should go any further.' They should be struck out either on the ground that the men are stopped from challenging the decision of Mr. Justice Bridge, or alternatively that it is an abuse of the process of the court. Whichever it is, the actions should be stopped.[
They spent a further 10 years in prison after this quote.
-
I cannot wait to see Houdini of Essex police conjure up some threatening emails I alledgedly sent personally to a police officer.
That on it's own should be a sacking offence and that's just for starters.
And it's all about covering up for her mates
One down and god knows how many more will be following
Get rid of every single bent copper!!'
-
What antics?
Talking in riddles and pretending you know something you obviously don't again eh Jackie?
Say what you mean so it can be considered in the forum or keep it in private.
Essex Police have always been and remain a thoroughly professional force.
I know a lot more about them than you ever will.
Good on them!
In actual fact what Jackie says is true PB. But at this moment in time we cannot say too much. Having said that Jackie is in possession to a great deal of insider information. I don't know how she keeps it all private myself.
-
Rochy it's a bit tense on here because Essex Police have in the last two weeks tried their very best to hamper Jeremys referral to the ccrc. I can't say whats happened but I expect Mike would definitely know but anyone who is honest and believes in justice would be disgusted and I hope everything is out in the public domain soon for people to make their own mind up about the deceit and corruption in this case.
You can be sure there will hardly be a person who believes Jeremy is guilty when the latest antics are revealed.
I am sure the relatives and friends of relatives are over the moon and quite cocky about the lengths Essex Police will go to so the truth never gets out
I'm not privvy to that kind of info but I have absolutely no qualms whatsoever in suspecting that there has been sustained and deliberate obsfucation on the part of EP and possibly DPP in this case. I suppose each person must decide what is morally right or wrong, regarding the administration of this case, via the relevant agencies involved. But I believe there are some cases which become extremely political and potentially nationally sensitive. The administration of such cases does not seem to fall inside the normal parameters of the law and as such maybe it is wrong to apply the same kind of thinking that you would normally employ when trying to fathom criminal cases. Surely the bamber case falls in to this bracket?
These are my opinions and I do not wish to seem preachy. Others can decide for themselves.
-
Isn't it the case that The City of London Police were instructed to review the Essex Police investigation and also Scotland Yard officers have also reviewed it. Surely they had access to all relevent materials?
The Essex Police have been highly criticised for an almost incompetent investigation but deemed not to have conspired illegally as they accused of on here everyday.
Furthermore wasn't it descided that any faults did not materially effect the verdict or prejudice the trial?
And lastly haven't all these alligations been placed before the Appeal Courts and CCRC and the original verdict upheld everytime.
If that is all correct (?) .... why are you still going on and on about the Essex Police as if they were conspiring criminals?
The Essex Police originally believed Bamber's murder/suicide plan; they had to admit they were totally wrong when the truth came out. Therefore admitting mistakes .... are you seriously suggesting they changed their investigation just to 'get' Bamber?
PB is everything as straighforward as placing your trust in the justice system to have done right? Are there never any darker forces at play? The following quote by Lord Denning has been mentioned on the forum recently. And given how the Birmingham Six case finally turned out, it is quite a chilling quote...
Just consider the course of events if their [the Six's] action were to proceed to trial ... If the six men failed it would mean that much time and money and worry would have been expended by many people to no good purpose. If they won, it would mean that the police were guilty of perjury; that they were guilty of violence and threats; that the confessions were involuntary and improperly admitted in evidence; and that the convictions were erroneous. That would mean that the Home Secretary would have either to recommend that they be pardoned or to remit the case to the Court of Appeal. That was such an appalling vista that every sensible person would say, 'It cannot be right that these actions should go any further.' They should be struck out either on the ground that the men are stopped from challenging the decision of Mr. Justice Bridge, or alternatively that it is an abuse of the process of the court. Whichever it is, the actions should be stopped.[
They spent a further 10 years in prison after this quote.
It is a very famous quote and it is chilling. This was a statement made by Lord Denning when he was Master of the Rolls (i.e. the head of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division) in the civil action brought by the Birmingham 6 for assault. Denning was one of the most senior and respected judges at that time. I remember it well as barristers from my chambers were involved. The evidence of the assaults was overwhelming. Denning never apologised for these remarks, in the same way that he said he had never had a moment's regret about any of those he had sentenced to death in his time as a High Court Judge. As I have said several times before, our judiciary have a very poor record in righting miscarriages of justice.
-
What antics?
Talking in riddles and pretending you know something you obviously don't again eh Jackie?
Say what you mean so it can be considered in the forum or keep it in private.
Essex Police have always been and remain a thoroughly professional force.
I know a lot more about them than you ever will.
Good on them!
It is obvious that you haven't had dealings with them then? On several occasions I have had some strange encounters with then at times. I must also emphasise that the general impression of the Essex police is that they do a reasonable job considering the cuts. Oh did I also mention that the Met boys think they are pratts. ;)
-
I cannot wait to see Houdini of Essex police conjure up some threatening emails I alledgedly sent personally to a police officer.
That on it's own should be a sacking offence and that's just for starters.
And it's all about covering up for her mates
One down and god knows how many more will be following
Get rid of every single bent copper!!'
Unfortunately the police will always take the word of a police officer over the word of a member of the public.
-
Isn't it the case that The City of London Police were instructed to review the Essex Police investigation and also Scotland Yard officers have also reviewed it. Surely they had access to all relevent materials?
The Essex Police have been highly criticised for an almost incompetent investigation but deemed not to have conspired illegally as they accused of on here everyday.
Furthermore wasn't it descided that any faults did not materially effect the verdict or prejudice the trial?
And lastly haven't all these alligations been placed before the Appeal Courts and CCRC and the original verdict upheld everytime.
If that is all correct (?) .... why are you still going on and on about the Essex Police as if they were conspiring criminals?
The Essex Police originally believed Bamber's murder/suicide plan; they had to admit they were totally wrong when the truth came out. Therefore admitting mistakes .... are you seriously suggesting they changed their investigation just to 'get' Bamber?
PB is everything as straighforward as placing your trust in the justice system to have done right? Are there never any darker forces at play? The following quote by Lord Denning has been mentioned on the forum recently. And given how the Birmingham Six case finally turned out, it is quite a chilling quote...
Just consider the course of events if their [the Six's] action were to proceed to trial ... If the six men failed it would mean that much time and money and worry would have been expended by many people to no good purpose. If they won, it would mean that the police were guilty of perjury; that they were guilty of violence and threats; that the confessions were involuntary and improperly admitted in evidence; and that the convictions were erroneous. That would mean that the Home Secretary would have either to recommend that they be pardoned or to remit the case to the Court of Appeal. That was such an appalling vista that every sensible person would say, 'It cannot be right that these actions should go any further.' They should be struck out either on the ground that the men are stopped from challenging the decision of Mr. Justice Bridge, or alternatively that it is an abuse of the process of the court. Whichever it is, the actions should be stopped.[
They spent a further 10 years in prison after this quote.
It is a very famous quote and it is chilling. This was a statement made by Lord Denning when he was Master of the Rolls (i.e. the head of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division) in the civil action brought by the Birmingham 6 for assault. Denning was one of the most senior and respected judges at that time. I remember it well as barristers from my chambers were involved. The evidence of the assaults was overwhelming. Denning never apologised for these remarks, in the same way that he said he had never had a moment's regret about any of those he had sentenced to death in his time as a High Court Judge. As I have said several times before, our judiciary have a very poor record in righting miscarriages of justice.
I never did like Lord Denning. He always seemed more adamant that the process of the law be observed instead of considering whether a person was the victim of a miscarriage of justice. In his eyes a verdict must never be questioned. A bit like PB in fact. He had "total faith" in the process of the law. To my mind he often made some pretty dumb decisions.
-
Lord Denning. He always seemed more adamant that the process of the law be observed instead of considering whether a person was the victim of a miscarriage of justice. In his eyes a verdict must never be questioned. A bit like PB in fact. He had "total faith" in the process of the law.
::) Aye... I think a lot of people fall in to the trap of making assumptions, as opposed to having their eyes opened.
-
Lord Denning. He always seemed more adamant that the process of the law be observed instead of considering whether a person was the victim of a miscarriage of justice. In his eyes a verdict must never be questioned. A bit like PB in fact. He had "total faith" in the process of the law.
::) Aye... I think a lot of people fall in to the trap of making assumptions, as opposed to having their eyes opened.
Haha great post !!
-
Lord Denning. He always seemed more adamant that the process of the law be observed instead of considering whether a person was the victim of a miscarriage of justice. In his eyes a verdict must never be questioned. A bit like PB in fact. He had "total faith" in the process of the law.
::) Aye... I think a lot of people fall in to the trap of making assumptions, as opposed to having their eyes opened.
Haha great post !!
Jon... I still keep meaning to do my scale of guilt diagram. I'm not sure if you and VORTEX will still be closest to me on it. I'm sliding towards 10% guilt. ;D
-
Isn't it the case that The City of London Police were instructed to review the Essex Police investigation and also Scotland Yard officers have also reviewed it. Surely they had access to all relevent materials?
The Essex Police have been highly criticised for an almost incompetent investigation but deemed not to have conspired illegally as they accused of on here everyday.
Furthermore wasn't it descided that any faults did not materially effect the verdict or prejudice the trial?
And lastly haven't all these alligations been placed before the Appeal Courts and CCRC and the original verdict upheld everytime.
If that is all correct (?) .... why are you still going on and on about the Essex Police as if they were conspiring criminals?
The Essex Police originally believed Bamber's murder/suicide plan; they had to admit they were totally wrong when the truth came out. Therefore admitting mistakes .... are you seriously suggesting they changed their investigation just to 'get' Bamber?
PB is everything as straighforward as placing your trust in the justice system to have done right? Are there never any darker forces at play? The following quote by Lord Denning has been mentioned on the forum recently. And given how the Birmingham Six case finally turned out, it is quite a chilling quote...
Just consider the course of events if their [the Six's] action were to proceed to trial ... If the six men failed it would mean that much time and money and worry would have been expended by many people to no good purpose. If they won, it would mean that the police were guilty of perjury; that they were guilty of violence and threats; that the confessions were involuntary and improperly admitted in evidence; and that the convictions were erroneous. That would mean that the Home Secretary would have either to recommend that they be pardoned or to remit the case to the Court of Appeal. That was such an appalling vista that every sensible person would say, 'It cannot be right that these actions should go any further.' They should be struck out either on the ground that the men are stopped from challenging the decision of Mr. Justice Bridge, or alternatively that it is an abuse of the process of the court. Whichever it is, the actions should be stopped.[
They spent a further 10 years in prison after this quote.
It is a very famous quote and it is chilling. This was a statement made by Lord Denning when he was Master of the Rolls (i.e. the head of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division) in the civil action brought by the Birmingham 6 for assault. Denning was one of the most senior and respected judges at that time. I remember it well as barristers from my chambers were involved. The evidence of the assaults was overwhelming. Denning never apologised for these remarks, in the same way that he said he had never had a moment's regret about any of those he had sentenced to death in his time as a High Court Judge. As I have said several times before, our judiciary have a very poor record in righting miscarriages of justice.
I never did like Lord Denning. He always seemed more adamant that the process of the law be observed instead of considering whether a person was the victim of a miscarriage of justice. In his eyes a verdict must never be questioned. A bit like PB in fact. He had "total faith" in the process of the law. To my mind he often made some pretty dumb decisions.
Grahame - I agree with you entirely. Denning was the great proponent of "judge made law" and for some unjustified reason he tended to be regarded as forward thinking and progressive. In fact his judgements tended to reflect his own very reactionary prejudices and some of his decisions were absolute stinkers. He was finally forced to go (there was no compulsory retirement age for judges then so he carried on well past his sell by date) when he started to embarrass even some of his fellow senior judges.
-
Jesus Christ!
I just wrote a really long post agreeing with the Denning stuff; even quoting the Timothy Evans case and I post it and it's dissappeared into the effing ether!
It's a conspiracy!!!!! ;D :-\
-
Jesus Christ!
I just wrote a really long post agreeing with the Denning stuff; even quoting the Timothy Evans case and I post it and it's dissappeared into the effing ether!
It's a conspiracy!!!!! ;D :-\
I saw that you were writing and i was thinking 'this must be a long post coz he's been at it for ages' ;D
Maybe you got timed out?
-
Jesus Christ!
I just wrote a really long post agreeing with the Denning stuff; even quoting the Timothy Evans case and I post it and it's dissappeared into the effing ether!
It's a conspiracy!!!!! ;D :-\
Not sure what happened to your post PB. I haven't deleted anything. Perhaps it was Jesus Christ? ;D