Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Sparkfilms on August 18, 2011, 09:17:PM
-
Met someone today who knew Julie Mugford well in the years and months leading up to the murder and trial. I will contact her and see what comes up - if anything. She lIves in Tiptree which is a few miles from WHF.
This person was not aware of certain aspects of the case though, and seemed to be a little taken in by Mugford's version of events.
I explained that the angle of the bullets made this a very tough ask for any killer.
Did Mugford break the record at Essex Police in the 1980's for changing her story just about every time she was spoken to?
Mugford's friend mentioned that 'Julie was a real wildcard criminal' herself and that she has had no contact with her in 25 years.
-
Met someone today who knew Julie Mugford well in the years and months leading up to the murder and trial. I will contact her and see what comes up - if anything. She lIves in Tiptree which is a few miles from WHF.
This person was not aware of certain aspects of the case though, and seemed to be a little taken in by Mugford's version of events.
I explained that the angle of the bullets made this a very tough ask for any killer.
Did Mugford break the record at Essex Police in the 1980's for changing her story just about every time she was spoken to?
Mugford's friend mentioned that 'Julie was a real wildcard criminal' herself and that she has had no contact with her in 25 years.
I'll be interested in hearing her story.
-
Brilliant Sparkfilms I know stuff about the mother too but I will have to ask JB if I am allowed to put it up here. Could you ask about the mother and see if our views are the same.
It is a very important aspect to this case
-
nice one sparks :) and jack :)
-
Met someone today who knew Julie Mugford well in the years and months leading up to the murder and trial. I will contact her and see what comes up - if anything. She lIves in Tiptree which is a few miles from WHF.
This person was not aware of certain aspects of the case though, and seemed to be a little taken in by Mugford's version of events.
I explained that the angle of the bullets made this a very tough ask for any killer.
Did Mugford break the record at Essex Police in the 1980's for changing her story just about every time she was spoken to?
Mugford's friend mentioned that 'Julie was a real wildcard criminal' herself and that she has had no contact with her in 25 years.
I'll be interested in hearing her story.
Me too!
I've found the testimony of Timothy Ernest on jeremybambertestimony.co.uk interesting where he states regarding Julie:
"I also met Julie a few times but never understood why Jeremy was going with her as I thought of her as a sly and moody woman. She seemed inadequate as well as insecure and the pair were badly suited in my view."
-
Brilliant Sparkfilms I know stuff about the mother too but I will have to ask JB if I am allowed to put it up here. Could you ask about the mother and see if our views are the same.
It is a very important aspect to this case
It seems that both Shelia and June were suffering in their own different ways.
It appears that I was at the same house party as Mugford in Priory Street, Colchester around 1985. Didn't notice her. I may well have come across Jeremy when he was working at Sloppy Joe's in Colchester High Street as we knew the owner at the time, though no recall of this either.
Sloppy Joe's, the banks and the Town Hall are about all that remains in the high street from the 1980's.
-
Interesting, Sparkfilms!
-
In my view the police already knew about the cheque fraud with Battersby well prior to any claimed admittance by JM or Battersby. It may have been used to threaten her in the fear or favour manner to deliver evidence the police wanted as well as part of her reaction to being jilted. In my experience JM's admitted crimes are probably a small fraction of what she got up to.
-
Yes, Mugford was at a crossroads in her life. Had the police nailed her for obtaining money by deception then her preferred career path was at an end. I also believe the police traded with her in some way.
Mugford was perhaps the biggest influence in the case.
It does seem strange that Jeremy or anyone else would have confided in her with something of this magnitude, while playing the field, so to speak. That bit never added up.
Did the family really have enough on the police re. aspects of the raid to put them under pressure and was Mugford instrumental in a plot?
Some people believe that the two hour use of the loud hailer at WHF suggested that the police were in communication with Shelia, that would have been very difficult for the police to fabricate if there was anyone overhearing this, one assumes Jeremy would have heard this from his position. Someone might need to firm up on this for me.
Is this communication part of the hidden files?
-
It does seem strange that Jeremy or anyone else would have confided in her with something of this magnitude, while playing the field, so to speak. That bit never added up.
I've been saying that for months. It's daft. In my opinion, the only way he would confide in her is if she is in on it. In on the deaths. In which case, as has been suggested by SteelMagnolia blog, his phone call to her is an attempted alibi for both of them. She then cannot stomach the results and turns him in. This scenario is possibly undermined though if he plays the field as you suggest Sparks. The only way that could hold water, again in my opinion, as if he is effectively saying to her 'look, there's f*** all you can say, you were in on it too". In which case he was sadly mistaken.
I think a useful thing to do is to try and put yourself in his shoes (as the murderer). It absurdly audacious, to execute five murders for inheritance, while retaining virtually no forensic link to the scene of crime, absolutely none on your person or in your home or in the surrounding area, in the time space in which he had to complete this grisly task. Conversely, given that the whole point of the murders is for inheritance, it is unrealistic that he would have an in built 'go to jail' clause in his plan, by spilling the beans to Mugford before and after the event? "Darling, I'm just off to kill my family. I'll call you when its' done".
Posters on here go on about defence conspiracy theories, as if there's never ever been any conspiracies in this country. As Ann Eaton might say "poppy cock".
Sorry for overusing the word... But the prosecution case is absurd.
-
Good post Rochford.
I've just written a short letter asking Mugford's friend for certain information. The bit I'm after relates to the Matt McDonald scenario and how / why Mugford got this into the mix.
I had contact with someone who shared a house with McDonald in Colchester at the time and got quite a bit of info. I never saw this info in the public domain.
My contact died of a drug o/d a few years ago.
Dare I say it, but I think I might be able to get more on this than others due to the close location to WHF and contacts with EP. So far my EP contacts are sticking to the official line - possibly taking this course until death as is the masonic way by some accounts.
Bews would not open up on the window thing when I spoke to him.
It is my belief that a person was seen alive inside WHF.
-
It does seem strange that Jeremy or anyone else would have confided in her with something of this magnitude, while playing the field, so to speak. That bit never added up.
I've been saying that for months. It's daft. In my opinion, the only way he would confide in her is if she is in on it. In on the deaths. In which case, as has been suggested by SteelMagnolia blog, his phone call to her is an attempted alibi for both of them. She then cannot stomach the results and turns him in. This scenario is possibly undermined though if he plays the field as you suggest Sparks. The only way that could hold water, again in my opinion, as if he is effectively saying to her 'look, there's f*** all you can say, you were in on it too". In which case he was sadly mistaken.
I think a useful thing to do is to try and put yourself in his shoes (as the murderer). It absurdly audacious, to execute five murders for inheritance, while retaining virtually no forensic link to the scene of crime, absolutely none on your person or in your home or in the surrounding area, in the time space in which he had to complete this grisly task. Conversely, given that the whole point of the murders is for inheritance, it is unrealistic that he would have an in built 'go to jail' clause in his plan, by spilling the beans to Mugford before and after the event? "Darling, I'm just off to kill my family. I'll call you when its' done".
Posters on here go on about defence conspiracy theories, as if there's never ever been any conspiracies in this country. As Ann Eaton might say "poppy cock".
Sorry for overusing the word... But the prosecution case is absurd.
Great post , for anyone to believe a man would kill five people and give his girlfriend a walking commentary , then ditch her , in my opinion insult's people's intelligence !!
-
I had contact with someone who shared a house with McDonald in Colchester at the time and got quite a bit of info. I never saw this info in the public domain.
What sort of information did you get Sparks?
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
Intriguing.
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
You still haven't PM'd me Jackie... what's the story?
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
You still haven't PM'd me Jackie... what's the story?
Are you a loyal supporter? ;) This is going to be in the newspapers believe me. It is groundbreaking.
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
You still haven't PM'd me Jackie... what's the story?
Are you a loyal supporter? ;) This is going to be in the newspapers believe me. It is groundbreaking.
Surely us loyal forum members deserve a heads up though Grahame regardless of colours? :D
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
You still haven't PM'd me Jackie... what's the story?
Are you a loyal supporter? ;) This is going to be in the newspapers believe me. It is groundbreaking.
Surely us loyal forum members deserve a heads up though Grahame regardless of colours? :D
Well she distinctly said JB supporters? ;D but it definitely will be headline news.
-
Aww please tell Jackie.Could do with some good news x
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
You still haven't PM'd me Jackie... what's the story?
Are you a loyal supporter? ;) This is going to be in the newspapers believe me. It is groundbreaking.
Surely us loyal forum members deserve a heads up though Grahame regardless of colours? :D
Well she distinctly said JB supporters? ;D but it definitely will be headline news.
If I came across 100% proof of JB's guilt I'd share it with you Grahame ;D ;D ;D
-
Aww please tell Jackie.Could do with some good news x
Me too!
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
You still haven't PM'd me Jackie... what's the story?
Are you a loyal supporter? ;) This is going to be in the newspapers believe me. It is groundbreaking.
Surely us loyal forum members deserve a heads up though Grahame regardless of colours? :D
Well she distinctly said JB supporters? ;D but it definitely will be headline news.
If I came across 100% proof of JB's guilt I'd share it with you Grahame ;D ;D ;D
Nothing to do with his guilt or innocence.
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
You still haven't PM'd me Jackie... what's the story?
Are you a loyal supporter? ;) This is going to be in the newspapers believe me. It is groundbreaking.
Surely us loyal forum members deserve a heads up though Grahame regardless of colours? :D
Well she distinctly said JB supporters? ;D but it definitely will be headline news.
If I came across 100% proof of JB's guilt I'd share it with you Grahame ;D ;D ;D
Nothing to do with his guilt or innocence.
Has he got married?
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
I know that you can't give out details, Jack, but is it the breakthrough you've been waiting for?
(And can I still come to the party?!!)
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
I know that you can't give out details, Jack, but is it the breakthrough you've been waiting for?
(And can I still come to the party?!!)
Wish I could tell but I can't.
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
I know that you can't give out details, Jack, but is it the breakthrough you've been waiting for?
(And can I still come to the party?!!)
Wish I could tell but I can't.
When can we expect the news to break?
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
I know that you can't give out details, Jack, but is it the breakthrough you've been waiting for?
(And can I still come to the party?!!)
Wish I could tell but I can't.
When can we expect the news to break?
I should think you will see it in the newspapers. How soon I cannot tell? It is just too risky to be public knowledge right now.
-
I have a sneaky feeling that JB has been offered some kind of deal?
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
You still haven't PM'd me Jackie... what's the story?
Are you a loyal supporter? ;) This is going to be in the newspapers believe me. It is groundbreaking.
It is alright. What great news!
-
Well, it's not good news from Mugford's friend.
The police were none to keen on her.
In fact the police were none to keen on the extended family.
It does appear that the police offered Mugford a deal but that there was nothing sinister or underhand in their actions.
They made it clear that if she was ever caught breaking the law again she would be dealt with just like anyone else.
Her friend has offered up a little more info, but nothing that would impact on anything much.
-
Well, it's not good news from Mugford's friend.
The police were none to keen on her.
In fact the police were none to keen on the extended family.
It does appear that the police offered Mugford a deal but that there was nothing sinister or underhand in their actions.
They made it clear that if she was ever caught breaking the law again she would be dealt with just like anyone else.
Her friend has offered up a little more info, but nothing that would impact on anything much.
That's only "not good news" if you have a specific agenda Sparks ;)
For the open-minded this is a fascinating new piece of information, and I applaud you (+1) for passing it on even though it is inconvenient to your usual position.
I look forward to hearing how it affects the commonly-held belief amongst many forum members that the police were thick-as-thieves with JM & the family...
-
In fact the police were none to keen on the extended family.
That's a little misleading. The extended family may have been seen as busy bodies when they were complaining about the police investigation and questioning their initial findings, but at some stage that clearly changed. Hence the drinking of whisky, employment of Ainsley and regular contact even today of some of the officers.
I think it's more the case that they weren't keen on being questioned rather than not keen on the individuals.
-
Done a statement analysis of JB's september interviews in which Stan Jones played a big part and looked at his contributions too.
my overview.. JB was being truthful ...the very few deceptive indicators present gave no cause for concern and pass off as some genuine confusion and doubting going on within JB as he was being framed .
Stan Jone's ....in my view he knew for sure that JB was innocent and that he was out to fabricate a false case to frame JB. I also have no doubts that he knew for sure that JM was lying her head off and that many of her claims were bogus. This all comes through in how he asked the questions.
-
Done a statement analysis of JB's september interviews in which Stan Jones played a big part and looked at his contributions too.
my overview.. JB was being truthful ...the very few deceptive indicators present gave no cause for concern and pass off as some genuine confusion and doubting going on within JB as he was being framed .
Stan Jone's ....in my view he knew for sure that JB was innocent and that he was out to fabricate a false case to frame JB. I also have no doubts that he knew for sure that JM was lying her head off and that many of her claims were bogus. This all comes through in how he asked the questions.
I've done statement analysis on the above and have determined that it is a blatent attempt to take this thread off-topic so that you don't have to address the inconvenient facts revealed by JM's friend (which is, of course the topic of this thread).
-
BOB the troll
-
Well, it's not good news from Mugford's friend.
The police were none to keen on her.
In fact the police were none to keen on the extended family.
It does appear that the police offered Mugford a deal but that there was nothing sinister or underhand in their actions.
They made it clear that if she was ever caught breaking the law again she would be dealt with just like anyone else.
Her friend has offered up a little more info, but nothing that would impact on anything much.
The underhanded and sinister bit was the deal itself. The fact remains she was not charged with being an accessory after the fact regarding the "murders".
-
Well, it's not good news from Mugford's friend.
The police were none to keen on her.
In fact the police were none to keen on the extended family.
It does appear that the police offered Mugford a deal but that there was nothing sinister or underhand in their actions.
They made it clear that if she was ever caught breaking the law again she would be dealt with just like anyone else.
Her friend has offered up a little more info, but nothing that would impact on anything much.
The underhanded and sinister bit was the deal itself. The fact remains she was not charged with being an accessory after the fact regarding the "murders".
Surely that is commonplace though Grahame? There are hundreds of examples of people being granted immunity in return for testifying against others. It is a question of whether it is in the interest of society to see the "greater" villain(s) put away in return for the lesser accomplice(s) walking free. Mostly that would seem like a reasonable approach for the CPS to take surely?
-
sinister or underhand may be opinions which may be formed from the context of what the matter was.
if it was not sinister or underhand then the persons involved would have been totally open and upfront about all aspects involved.
If they were not totally open, up front and honest about all aspects then it can be justly said that things were sinister and underhand.
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
I know that you can't give out details, Jack, but is it the breakthrough you've been waiting for?
(And can I still come to the party?!!)
Wish I could tell but I can't.
When can we expect the news to break?
I should think you will see it in the newspapers. How soon I cannot tell? It is just too risky to be public knowledge right now.
Hi Grahame, I have been away on hols and am just catching up. Has this news been in the papers or is it still to come out?
-
Well, it's not good news from Mugford's friend.
The police were none to keen on her.
In fact the police were none to keen on the extended family.
It does appear that the police offered Mugford a deal but that there was nothing sinister or underhand in their actions.
They made it clear that if she was ever caught breaking the law again she would be dealt with just like anyone else.
Her friend has offered up a little more info, but nothing that would impact on anything much.
The underhanded and sinister bit was the deal itself. The fact remains she was not charged with being an accessory after the fact regarding the "murders".
Surely that is commonplace though Grahame? There are hundreds of examples of people being granted immunity in return for testifying against others. It is a question of whether it is in the interest of society to see the "greater" villain(s) put away in return for the lesser accomplice(s) walking free. Mostly that would seem like a reasonable approach for the CPS to take surely?
Well my view rightly or wrongly is that if the law cannot be trusted in the least things, how can they be trusted in the greater things. The plain facts were Mugford "new" (according to her) about the "murders" long before she went to the cops. so that makes her an accessory after the fact. I don't think it is the police's job to be judge and jury and decide what crimes are greater than others. But as you say it is widespread. That and that alone leads me to the view that the police cannot be trusted. For they are not upright in the least of things. So they cannot be upright in the greater things.
-
I have just had some amazing news and I am beside myself with excitement
Hard work does pay off friends in high places etc
I will pm all JB s loyal supporters later this afternoon
I know that you can't give out details, Jack, but is it the breakthrough you've been waiting for?
(And can I still come to the party?!!)
Wish I could tell but I can't.
When can we expect the news to break?
I should think you will see it in the newspapers. How soon I cannot tell? It is just too risky to be public knowledge right now.
Hi Grahame, I have been away on hols and am just catching up. Has this news been in the papers or is it still to come out?
No the news is still in its early stages. It's up to Jackie whether she feels the need to publicise it or not. What I will day though, it is a genuine turn up for the books and it isn't just sensationalism. Also it is up to the newspaper as to whether they think it is newsworthy when it is finally released. But without saying too much, I will say that it does involve top players.
-
Well, it's not good news from Mugford's friend.
The police were none to keen on her.
In fact the police were none to keen on the extended family.
It does appear that the police offered Mugford a deal but that there was nothing sinister or underhand in their actions.
They made it clear that if she was ever caught breaking the law again she would be dealt with just like anyone else.
Her friend has offered up a little more info, but nothing that would impact on anything much.
By extended family, are you referring to Mugford's or Jeremy's?
-
I'm only giving feedback on what has come back from Tiptree, and I'm using someone else's words to convey this.
I was hoping for something that we could all get our teeth into, but on this occasion, it was not forthcoming.
If anything, Mugford's friend had less general knowledge on the actual case than many of those who contribute to this forum.
She presumed Jeremy guilty I'm afraid and so did the close network that she hung out with.
If I may repeat - this is / was her take on events.
She's given me several other contacts but she didn't think they would stray much from her own opinions.
-
I'm only giving feedback on what has come back from Tiptree, and I'm using someone else's words to convey this.
I was hoping for something that we could all get our teeth into, but on this occasion, it was not forthcoming.
If anything, Mugford's friend had less general knowledge on the actual case than many of those who contribute to this forum.
She presumed Jeremy guilty I'm afraid and so did the close network that she hung out with.
If I may repeat - this is / was her take on events.
She's given me several other contacts but she didn't think they would stray much from her own opinions.
It's very decent of you to post this, Sparks. It probably isn't what most of the people on here want to read.
-
There is a fair bit more none of us will want to read.
I spoke about the case at the weekend to a retired EP DI.
We go back a long way as he represented Essex Police in both football and cricket, and the football team I captained were in opposition to the police ( only on the sports field ).
Anyway, enough of that.
Although he didn't work on the case he seemed well informed ( much better than the friend of Ms Mugford if she doesn't mind my saying ).
I asked him what I consider to be some of the key points.
He was not able to answer all of them, but he did admit that the body of Shelia was probably moved 'a number of times but not in any significant distance or direction', additionally, he confirmed that the police had then put the gun back 'more or less where they found it'. He said that the body may have moved a foot or so from its original resting place.
When I asked him about the loud hailer he said that they never had a response from inside the farm, but at the time they had reason to believe that Shelia was alive. I mentioned the 'in conversation with someone inside the farm' and he said that was how the thing got logged, but it was effectively a one way conversation.
He said members of the force were shocked and deeply upset by what they found.
-
There is a fair bit more none of us will want to read.
I spoke about the case at the weekend to a retired EP DI.
We go back a long way as he represented Essex Police in both football and cricket, and the football team I captained were in opposition to the police ( only on the sports field ).
Anyway, enough of that.
Although he didn't work on the case he seemed well informed ( much better than the friend of Ms Mugford if she doesn't mind my saying ).
I asked him what I consider to be some of the key points.
He was not able to answer all of them, but he did admit that the body of Shelia was probably moved 'a number of times but not in any significant distance or direction', additionally, he confirmed that the police had then put the gun back 'more or less where they found it'. He said that the body may have moved a foot or so from its original resting place.
When I asked him about the loud hailer he said that they never had a response from inside the farm, but at the time they had reason to believe that Shelia was alive. I mentioned the 'in conversation with someone inside the farm' and he said that was how the thing got logged, but it was effectively a one way conversation.
He said members of the force were shocked and deeply upset by what they found.
Thanks for this, Sparks.
What do you think, Mike?
-
Something else.
I asked him about the man and woman thing in the kitchen.
His reply was quite interesting.
He said something like - 'at first glance I don't think they could tell if it was a man or a woman' and he went on to say, that 'whoever it was there was only one of them'.
Over the months I have now spoken to Chris Bews, several members of Essex Police, a friend of Julie Mugford, two people who worked on the farm and at least 4 people who knew Jeremy Bamber.
Addionally, I have also been in contact with Eric Allison, Scott Lomax, newspaper reporters who worked on the case, Andrew Hunter and a number of others who support Jeremy.
So, I've done a fair bit, but nowhere near as much as Mike in particular.
I'm glad I've listened to both sides.
-
Something else.
I asked him about the man and woman thing in the kitchen.
His reply was quite interesting.
He said something like - 'at first glance I don't think they could tell if it was a man or a woman' and he went on to say, that 'whoever it was there was only one of them'.
Over the months I have now spoken to Chris Bews, several members of Essex Police, a friend of Julie Mugford, two people who worked on the farm and at least 4 people who knew Jeremy Bamber.
Addionally, I have also been in contact with Eric Allison, Scott Lomax, newspaper reporters who worked on the case, Andrew Hunter and a number of others who support Jeremy.
So, I've done a fair bit, but nowhere near as much as Mike in particular.
I'm glad I've listened to both sides.
Great work Sparks.
-
Something else.
I asked him about the man and woman thing in the kitchen.
His reply was quite interesting.
He said something like - 'at first glance I don't think they could tell if it was a man or a woman' and he went on to say, that 'whoever it was there was only one of them'.
Over the months I have now spoken to Chris Bews, several members of Essex Police, a friend of Julie Mugford, two people who worked on the farm and at least 4 people who knew Jeremy Bamber.
Addionally, I have also been in contact with Eric Allison, Scott Lomax, newspaper reporters who worked on the case, Andrew Hunter and a number of others who support Jeremy.
So, I've done a fair bit, but nowhere near as much as Mike in particular.
I'm glad I've listened to both sides.
You're doing sterling work Sparks. Do you think you'll get a documentary out of this? I guess it would only really be worth doing if you firmly believed there is a miscarriage of justice. Is that still your position, or have you moved a bit in light of the information you have gathered from your interviews?
-
Sparkfilms, thank you for your info. I don't believe that Jeremy is guilty, but strangely, your accounts correspond very well with what I think about the case - almost exactly in fact, except for the fact that it has been proven that Julie Mugford lied about there not being a police officer with her in the bank when she and her friend went to talk to the bank manager about the check-fraud. There was - and that indicates some sort of deal between police and JM, in my opinion. Something fishy was going on there. There is a post about it here somewhere with the documents to prove her lies. I don´t have time to find it now.
A good documentary would raise awareness about this case.
-
I have just been sitting in Culver Square, Colchester with my dog and several people approached me to ask if I had heard the news this morning about Jeremy - which I hadn't.
All they were able to say is that it was mentioned on the radio and referred to his sentence.
I won't be making a docu myself on this but if anyone else is doing so then I have mobile numbers for members of EP and they are quite willing to help.
Chris Bews lives three miles away.
-
Sorry ABS - missed your post in the rush - I am in no doubt that a deal was brokered between EP and Mugford but it was ring-fenced.
I am also fairly sure now that some evidence was 'given a bit more flesh' ( I think that's how it was put ).
Evidence was 'moulded to save ******* about' was another term used I think, but I have to say that my source told me in no uncertain terms that he couldn't see how 'the Caffell girl pulled the trigger'.
He thought the shootings may have occurred between 1am and 2am.
But to repeat - my contact did not work on that case, though he did work on a number of other high profile Essex Murders ( inc. Rettendon ).
-
I have just been sitting in Culver Square, Colchester with my dog and several people approached me to ask if I had heard the news this morning about Jeremy - which I hadn't.
All they were able to say is that it was mentioned on the radio and referred to his sentence.
I won't be making a docu myself on this but if anyone else is doing so then I have mobile numbers for members of EP and they are quite willing to help.
Chris Bews lives three miles away.
What news is that Sparks?
-
Sorry, didn't really catch it with dogs barking & kids screaming - hoping someone else starts a new thread on it as I would be interested to know what the content was.
What happened to that 'Good News' thing - did I miss something or is there a link via the airwaves?
-
On Bambertweets it says: "Apparently Freedom Fortnight just mentioned on Essex Radio".
-
Sorry, didn't really catch it with dogs barking & kids screaming - hoping someone else starts a new thread on it as I would be interested to know what the content was.
What happened to that 'Good News' thing - did I miss something or is there a link via the airwaves?
Don't know yet. If you pm Jackie Preece she may give you the information? It isn't anything too dramatic. But it does involve someone very well known?
-
What agegroup does JM teach? If they are larger kids, they´d know about her past, easy peasy on the internet these days.
BTW, could you imagine having her as a teacher? Poor kids. Like having Mrs. Danvers as your teacher. ???
-
What agegroup does JM teach? If they are larger kids, they´d know about her past, easy peasy on the internet these days.
BTW, could you imagine having her as a teacher? Poor kids. Like having Mrs. Danvers as your teacher. ???
I was wondering the same thing earlier today abs!
I always assumed she would be a primary school teacher.
If you Google her name it mentions elementary schools, which I think is the same as primary in UK. It seems she is now a principal - if it's the same person.
I find it hard to think of her as a teacher too. It's hard to reconcile the two sides of JM - one as a petty, drug-taking criminal, with her 'respectable' teacher trainee side. Wouldn't like her teaching my kids that's for sure.
It's interesting that she was on anti-depressants and sleeping pills due to the stress of her teacher training.
-
You don't believe in rehabilitation then abs?
-
What agegroup does JM teach? If they are larger kids, they´d know about her past, easy peasy on the internet these days.
BTW, could you imagine having her as a teacher? Poor kids. Like having Mrs. Danvers as your teacher. ???
Ve haff veys off making zem tok.
-
The children she taught might not know her history here in England, there again the older ones may have been on the web, she seems in another world in the 2nd picture.
-
The children she taught might not know her history here in England, there again the older ones may have been on the web, she seems in another world in the 2nd picture.
They must model cabbage patch dolls on her?
-
im not sure Grahame even those dolls had some standards!
-
Whenever I feel guilty about some of the comments I make on here, you guys step up to the plate and make me realise how reasonable I actually am...
-
would she pass a polygraph test??
-
What agegroup does JM teach? If they are larger kids, they´d know about her past, easy peasy on the internet these days.
BTW, could you imagine having her as a teacher? Poor kids. Like having Mrs. Danvers as your teacher. ???
I think she is head or assistant head of the school?
http://ww.wsd1.org/contacts/contacts.htm
-
You don't believe in rehabilitation then abs?
I don't know. I believe in character though.
-
Whenever I feel guilty about some of the comments I make on here, you guys step up to the plate and make me realise how reasonable I actually am...
We've had very good teachers. ;)
-
Whenever I feel guilty about some of the comments I make on here, you guys step up to the plate and make me realise how reasonable I actually am...
;)
Good for you! I am feeling very unreasonable tonight! 8)
-
the fact is Bob there is good reason to take a look at her and question , there is no positive proof that Jeremy said anything to the words of tonights the night or anything else, a month or so was it before she went to the police with her story, plenty of time to get her story right.
-
I wonder if she still believes with communicating with the dead?
How would she now explain first blaming Sheila, then a hitman and finally Jeremy?
-
her last choice would work
-
Something else.
I asked him about the man and woman thing in the kitchen.
His reply was quite interesting.
He said something like - 'at first glance I don't think they could tell if it was a man or a woman' and he went on to say, that 'whoever it was there was only one of them'.
Over the months I have now spoken to Chris Bews, several members of Essex Police, a friend of Julie Mugford, two people who worked on the farm and at least 4 people who knew Jeremy Bamber.
Addionally, I have also been in contact with Eric Allison, Scott Lomax, newspaper reporters who worked on the case, Andrew Hunter and a number of others who support Jeremy.
So, I've done a fair bit, but nowhere near as much as Mike in particular.
I'm glad I've listened to both sides.
I doubt many of Sparkfilms claims...but supposing a police officer did know a little and what Sparkfilms says the police officer said was true.
'at first glance I don't think they could tell if it was a man or a woman
the key word being "they" so if indeed some officers looked through a window it was not Collins on his own but Delgado as well. That ties up with other statements which have both looking though the window though the sighting claim was only attributed to Collins.
Its far harder to pass off a wrong sighting by 2 officers as easily as a wrong sighting by one officer.
There is an issue with many things sparkfilms claims and his "stories" have holes in them and his angle on some things gives other things away that suggest his claims are unreliable and lack credibility.
Thus info sourced just from Sparkfilms in my view cannot be trusted.
-
Yes but "they" also had a second glance. When they entered the property they reported "twice" one dead male one dead female.
I think sparks is too easily persuade by people on the ani side. These people are not neutral, but all have a vested interest in the case in one way or another.