Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Adam on March 20, 2014, 06:40:AM
-
My last two threads have come up with some interesting conclusions.
Jeremy certainly did not plan to phone the police. Ideally Neville, June, Daniel & Nicholas would have been shot & killed while asleep. Sheila woken up & got out of bed, before being shot & killed with one bullet. Having to fire so many bullets & a 6.4 farmer getting downstairs was certainly not part of the plan. Jeremy improvised, moving the phones & then phoning the police. The chaos inside would support his claim of a rampaging Sheila having a major psychotic episode.
Jeremys phone call to the police was very damaging to him. But something he did not have time to consider on the night. Jeremy & his OS have never said what Sheila could have been doing when Neville phoned him. Even his most loyal supporters recently refused point blank to answer this simple question. Or gave totally implausible explanations. The most popular answer being that Sheila was charging around outside with a shot gun. Neville calmed her down so well, he allowed Sheila to sit at the kitchen table with a rifle. With Sheila calm, Neville bizarrely then deciding to make his 'crazy' call to Jeremy before Sheila overpowers a fully fit Neville to get upstairs.
Hopefully this thread will explain why Jeremy got convicted and has failed to get released on a technicality. He had the best defence available at trial, with David Napley at the helm. Jeremy has been appealing constantly since conviction 29 years ago. He claims the police are still holding important documents although he has apparently millions of documents in his cell. Lawyers are constantly working with him, together with his own blog & a small amount of supporters assisting him on his Official Site. However three appeals have failed.
According to Jeremys supporters, lots of key witnesses changed their statements, lied under oath, falseified documents, changed their minds or were simply unreliable people, criminals, jilted former lovers or interested in financial gain. All looking to frame Jeremy. The Official site has the police & raid team lying from the start, saying that only one person was in the kitchen, when there were two. The silencer went around the houses, getting contaminated, although not sure how the police or relatives could get Sheila's, June's & Nevilles blood inside.
So after 29 years, why has Jeremy failed to get released on a technicality ?
-
Well Jeremy Bamber is hardly likely to retain bloodied exhibits for the purpose of contaminating a silencer. Nor is he likely to use bloodied deposits at the scene, for the same purpose.
-
Adam a small amount of supporters you got that wrong. The rest of your post makes no sense at all and I could not even make the slightest effort to respond to any of the nonsense you have posted. Your scenario's don't even make sense. As I have said manytimes you are on this forum to discredit Jeremy Bamber and any one associated with him including this forum. Fortunately nobody takes any notice of you so you are wasting your time. Take up another hobby like hill walking or Morris Dancing ;D
-
I very much doubt that any conclusions we may have arrived at will tally with yours.
There seems little point in trawling through and answering your over simplified and juvenile post in order to provide you with the opportunity of calling it implausible.
With an A level under your belt and the possibility of only just being old enough to vote and drive, you may take the view that anyone would want freedom at all/ANY cost. Release on a technicality ISN'T granting FREEDOM and an innocent person would still have the guilty verdict hanging over them. It doesn't mean there won't have been times when Jeremy wouldn't have cared and given ANYTHING to get out.
As for those persons who resorted to duplicity, I'm certain you know, from your own frequent employment of it, how difficult it is to prove, and the more time that passes, the more difficult it becomes. HOW does one prove something was/wasn't said? HOW does one prove another's feelings? The failure, on the part of Jeremy's defence, to ask the next, OBVIOUS question, did little, IMO, to help Jeremy and if what they gave him was the best they could offer, I would have hated to be on the receiving end of their worst, but at the end of the day, for them, it was just another job and a case of some you win, some you looses.
-
Why has Jeremy failed to get released on a technicality? Probably because he is only relying on the truth to come out as to why he's in prison in the first place?
-
As Grahame said,,Jeremy won't accept being released on a technicality.He is the type who is determined to get to the truth if it means staying where he is. He's doing the right thing to see this MOJ through.
-
Wasn't his first appeal based on the judges unfair summing up ?
That sounds like a technicality to me.
-
lookout I think Jeremy Bamber should accept release then prove his innocence or just get on with his life :(
-
lookout I think Jeremy Bamber should accept release then prove his innocence or just get on with his life :(
That is what he has been trying to do for 29 years.
He was disinherited upon conviction. Would he inherit again if released on a technicality ? If so he would have the finances to continue with his campaign. Continuing this on the outside will be much easier than in prison.
-
Wow Adam we agree ;D ;D ;D
-
lookout I think Jeremy Bamber should accept release then prove his innocence or just get on with his life :(
Susan,,I'm not sure that the law allows any continuation of a case once released on a technicality.We'll have to have ngb to explain this one.
-
Susan,,I'm not sure that the law allows any continuation of a case once released on a technicality.We'll have to have ngb to explain this one.
That is a bit unfair isn't it ?
Once released you are a free man. It is up to that person what they do.
-
Jeremy will certainly accept getting released on a technicality & has been trying for 29 years.
If he is innocent, & even if he isn't, why has he failed ? Most people on this forum say it was a corupt case.
-
That is a bit unfair isn't it ?
Once released you are a free man. It is up to that person what they do.
Well apparently the prosecution can find new evidence that proves that he did the crime and appeal for a retrial. That is where the modern laws have superceeded the Magna Carta which stated that a man cannot be tried for the same crime twice.
-
Jeremy will certainly accept getting released on a technicality & has been trying for 29 years.
If he is innocent, & even if he isn't, why has he failed ? Most people on this forum say it was a corupt case.
To be fair that could be applied to any moj. Just ask the Birmingham six and see how many years it took to clear them and to acknowledge that police corruption that sent them to prison in the first place. It is an interesting case and in some ways mirrors JB's case. I personally would like to see police corruption exposed in every moj and it appears that police corruption is always a factor in every moj.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Six
-
Well apparently the prosecution can find new evidence that proves that he did the crime and appeal for a retrial. That is where the modern laws have superceeded the Magna Carta which stated that a man cannot be tried for the same crime twice.
They can indeed.
There may be enough new evidence to put Jeremy straight back in the dock after a technical release. The new evidence would not prevent a release on a technicality if there has been a malpractice.
It is less likely Jeremy would be put back in the dock if the conviction was quashed. Unless new evidence appeared years later.
-
That is a bit unfair isn't it ?
Once released you are a free man. It is up to that person what they do.
The law works in " mysterious " ways,,and I'm really not sure whether someone who's been released on a technicality has the same rights in pursuing a case,,as one whose sentence has been overturned or quashed. i.e. making a claim on his estate.
-
Hello Grahame I have already told Adam about the Birmingham 6 the Guildford 4 the Cardiff 3 he is not interested at all as he does not want to believe police can be corrupt he lives in a fantasy world maybe it would do him good to read these cases along with many many more.
-
So Jeremy could be stuck between a rock & a hard place.
He has enough missed crossed 'T's on documents to get released on a technicality. But knows there is enough evidence to put him straight back into the dock. But he is not able to get the conviction quashed.
Realistically this is not the case. His 1989 appeal was based on a technicality. His 2002 & 2012 appeals were attempts to get released. He would have no control whether the COA released him on a technicality or completely quashed the conviction. He just wanted a release.
-
So the idea that Jeremy only wants to walk out of prison with a quashed conviction is fanciful.
So why has he not got released on a technicality ? Thought everyone connected to the investigation were dodgy to say the least.
-
If I was in the same situation as Jeremy I would take anything that would get me out of prison. Escape to a desert island and make a new life for myself. Sod society sod this corrupt system and sod the corrupt police force. I would just disappear and take the treasure map that the old man gave me whilst I was in the Bastille. Go to Monte Cristo Island and live forever on the wealth. Oops! sorry about that. Got carried away a bit then.
-
For all any of us know,,Jeremy could have refused point blank to go out on a technicality.Why should he ? He's fought this long for the truth so why accept anything less than for the case to be quashed. He knows in his own mind that he's innocent and because he's not your " regular criminal " he wishes for things to be open and above board.In other words,because he's told the truth all along,I'd imagine that his greatest wish would be for the world to know,,and to prove,, that he was imprisoned because of an enormous injustice and not because he murdered anyone.
-
If released on a technicality he would be free to protest his innocence to the world. Appear on television, be interviewed by newspapers. He could still legally try to get the conviction totally quashed.
But as I said, he has no choice about whether the COA decides to quash the conviction or release him on a techniality. At present the COA has done neither.
So if it such a corupt case why has he failed to get released on a technicality ?
-
If released on a technicality he would be free to protest his innocence to the world. Appear on television, be interviewed by newspapers. He could still legally try to get the conviction totally quashed.
But as I said, he has no choice about whether the COA decides to quash the conviction or release him on a techniality. At present the COA has done neither.
So if it such a corupt case why has he failed to get released on a technicality ?
It is hard to get released on a technicality when all of the physical evidence (almost all) has been ILLEGALLY destroyed and when, who knows what and how much is withheld under PII.
You don´t stand a chance, do you?
-
If released on a technicality he would be free to protest his innocence to the world. Appear on television, be interviewed by newspapers. He could still legally try to get the conviction totally quashed.
But as I said, he has no choice about whether the COA decides to quash the conviction or release him on a techniality. At present the COA has done neither.
So if it such a corupt case why has he failed to get released on a technicality ?
I've already tried to explain to you that I'm not sure that Jeremy would have the same rights if he was released on a technicality. This is why he doesn't want that,because he mightn't be permitted to take the case any further than if his sentence was overturned or quashed.Besides the fact that he wants the truth,,not some small blip that somebody happened to make,resulting in his conviction.
-
Another ridiculous title that doesn't even make sense. I honestly don't know why people keep responding! I have no problem with your stance but there is no rhyme or reason to any of your threads. People are supposed to keep on topic but I couldn't honestly ask anyone to do that on your threads because it's never clear what the topic is?
-
I've already tried to explain to you that I'm not sure that Jeremy would have the same rights if he was released on a technicality. This is why he doesn't want that,because he mightn't be permitted to take the case any further than if his sentence was overturned or quashed.Besides the fact that he wants the truth,,not some small blip that somebody happened to make,resulting in his conviction.
I have already told you Jeremy has no choice how he gets released. Prisoners don't.
Or did Jeremy make his 2012 application confident he would have his conviction totally quashed. Rather than being released on a technicality ? It could not have been that good as his application was not referred to the COA.
-
Another ridiculous title that doesn't even make sense. I honestly don't know why people keep responding! I have no problem with your stance but there is no rhyme or reason to any of your threads. People are supposed to keep on topic but I couldn't honestly ask anyone to do that on your threads because it's never clear what the topic is?
The topic is the title 'Why has Jeremy failed to get released on a technicality ?'
Try to contribute. My last two threads made important discoveries that Jeremy is certainly guilty & he did not plan to phone the police.
Hopefully this thread will also make some good discoveries.
-
The topic is the title 'Why has Jeremy failed to get released on a technicality ?'
Try to contribute. My last two threads made important discoveries that Jeremy is certainly guilty & he did not plan to phone the police.
Hopefully this thread will also make some good discoveries.
Whilst they may have made sense to your twisted logic, it, very doubtful that they made sense to anyone else.
-
The topic is the title 'Why has Jeremy failed to get released on a technicality ?'
Try to contribute. My last two threads made important discoveries that Jeremy is certainly guilty & he did not plan to phone the police.
Hopefully this thread will also make some good discoveries.
You're as much use to the case as a woodpecker with a rubber beak !
-
The topic is the title 'Why has Jeremy failed to get released on a technicality ?'
Try to contribute. My last two threads made important discoveries that Jeremy is certainly guilty & he did not plan to phone the police.
Hopefully this thread will also make some good discoveries.
Good grief! What a claim!. You probably discovered the Piltdown Man as well I suppose?
-
Adam doubt whether your new thread will make anymore discoveries as it has not made any upto now :'(
-
Ha Ha Ha nice one lookout he is so full of his own self importance it is unreal and think he is on the forum as the Jester ;D ;D ;D
-
In continuing to be immoveable in your wish for Jeremy to remain in prison,,you've NOT ONCE even bothered to look at every post,link,or anything else that gives a suggestion that things might not be as " cut and dried " as you imagine them to be.
So many anomalies within the police force itself should be questioned,,besides other departments who were also involved,,the pathologist,for instance.
So much held back from the defence in which to advance with their side of the case,,which made the case itself one-sided. Not only that,,but Michael Turner QC told the judges in Jeremys' 2002 appeal that, I quote " If non-disclosure is a fact,it would be difficult to conclude other than it was withheld deliberately " unquote. ( as said by a professional !)
Even a barristers hands were tied because of lack of evidence on the side of the defence.
There were no Human Rights at the time Jeremy was convicted,,but they can be easily pre-dated,,as the conviction was most definitely unsafe to say the least.
-
lookout excellent post. Adam has tunnel vision and is not interested in anything we have to say he is using this forum as a platform to spread his poison and be rude and abusive to other posters he behaves like a child seeking attention but in saying that he knows how far to go with his rudeness and abuse he takes it to the line but as yet has not gone over but he will.
-
Ha Ha Ha nice one lookout he is so full of his own self importance it is unreal and think he is on the forum as the Jester ;D ;D ;D
A demitasse would fit his head like a sombrero. ;D ;D ;D ;D
What a saddo,in a rush to make his OWN thread ! Notice how he sticks to them,rather than anyone else's ?? Mikes threads,for instance,,why doesn't he follow them ? Nah,,too difficult. No,,he'd rather stay with those in which he's pre-planned,,,like his OWN.
-
Ha Ha Ha nice one lookout he is so full of his own self importance it is unreal and think he is on the forum as the Jester ;D ;D ;D
Well, if we're forced to have a token idiot on the forum, I suppose he'll have to do, won't he.
-
lookout he makes his own threads :'( and thinks because he has created the thread everything he posts on it is evidence.
-
Well, if we're forced to have a token idiot on the forum, I suppose he'll have to do, won't he.
I suppose,April. ;D Glad to see he's not letting his education get in the way of his ignorance. ;D
-
A demitasse would fit his head like a sombrero. ;D ;D ;D ;D
What a saddo,in a rush to make his OWN thread ! Notice how he sticks to them,rather than anyone else's ?? Mikes threads,for instance,,why doesn't he follow them ? Nah,,too difficult. No,,he'd rather stay with those in which he's pre-planned,,,like his OWN.
Lookout, I suggested last night that he took himself over to Mike's thread but he didn't seem too keen.
-
Oh,,I see,April. I didn't see that. Interesting.
-
Lookout, I suggested last night that he took himself over to Mike's thread but he didn't seem too keen.
;D ;D ;D ;D Wonder why?
-
So the idea that Jeremy only wants to walk out of prison with a quashed conviction is fanciful.
So why has he not got released on a technicality ? Thought everyone connected to the investigation were dodgy to say the least.
Hi Adam, interestingly Jeremy could get out of Jail on a technicality, apparently Jeremy Bamber has information which if presented in court would result in his almost immediate release.
It seems there is a statute of law which rules there is a maximum of 28 days which is acceptable between being committed for trial and having the indictment signed. In Jeremy's case the indictment was signed 1 day too late ie. 29 days.
If the indictment was invalid then everything which followed it was invalid as well. Therefore this means Jeremy Bamber's conviction is void but he refuses to go down this route and is determined to prove himself innocent in the court of Appeal.
This is taken from Scott Lomax's book with quotes from Jeremy Bamber ... page 238.
-
Hi Adam, interestingly Jeremy could get out of Jail on a technicality, apparently Jeremy Bamber has information which if presented in court would result in his almost immediate release.
It seems there is a statute of law which rules there is a maximum of 28 days which is acceptable between being committed for trial and having the indictment signed. In Jeremy's case the indictment was signed 1 day too late ie. 29 days.
If the indictment was invalid then everything which followed it was invalid as well. Therefore this means Jeremy Bamber's conviction is void but he refuses to go down this route and is determined to prove himself innocent in the court of Appeal.
This is taken from Scott Lomax's book with quotes from Jeremy Bamber ... page 238.
No good Maggie. NOW, if WILKES had said it................................. ;D
-
No good Maggie. NOW, if WILKES had said it................................. ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
This is why the guilters hate Scott Lomax's book and claim it's biased. We know he supports Jeremy but that's because he researched the book and found the evidence stacked up in Jeremy's favour.
He also supported Barry George and he was right in that case.
I don't think Jeremy realised his trial and jail term was invalid until he'd been in prison for about 20 years. Interestingly, we don't ever hear this ever mentioned by the guilters.
-
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
This is why the guilters hate Scott Lomax's book and claim it's biased. We know he supports Jeremy but that's because he researched the book and found the evidence stacked up in Jeremy's favour.
He also supported Barry George and he was right in that case.
I don't think Jeremy realised his trial and jail term was invalid until he'd been in prison for about 20 years. Interestingly, we don't ever hear this ever mentioned by the guilters.
Maggie, perhaps we could start a new thread on all the things Adam never mentions or chooses to ignore..................................on second thoughts, perhaps we should just lock those he puts up that are a waste of space ;D ;D ;D
-
Maggie, perhaps we could start a new thread on all the things Adam never mentions or chooses to ignore..................................on second thoughts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;D ;D ;D
Maybe not, I don't find him that interesting,April. ;D ;D ;D
-
There were no Human Rights at the time Jeremy was convicted
If that were the case, why bother with a trial?
It seems there is a statute of law which rules there is a maximum of 28 days which is acceptable between being committed for trial and having the indictment signed. In Jeremy's case the indictment was signed 1 day too late ie. 29 days.
If 8th May is 1 day after 7th May, 4th June is 28 days after 7th May.
By the way, what has being released on a technicality got to do with the evidence?
-
Maggie cannot understand how you do not find Adam interesting he is the light of my life ;D ;D ;D
-
If that were the case, why bother with a trial?
If 8th May is 1 day after 7th May, 4th June is 28 days after 7th May.
By the way, what has being released on a technicality got to do with the evidence?
Hi Reader, I can only conclude 7th May is included in the calculation although I am just repeating what is written in Lomax's book and not claiming to be an expert.
It has nothing to do with him being innocent but is interesting that JB has never tried to use it to get out of prison on a technicality. :)
-
If that were the case, why bother with a trial?
If 8th May is 1 day after 7th May, 4th June is 28 days after 7th May.
By the way, what has being released on a technicality got to do with the evidence?
Exactly,Reader. A violation of a defendants right,and if what Michael Turner QC had said was right, about withheld documents which were deprived from the defence at the time,,then there should not have been a trial at all. If all the relevant information wasn't intact,,then the trial was an unfair one.
-
Exactly,Reader. A violation of a defendants right,and if what Michael Turner QC had said was right, about withheld documents which were deprived from the defence at the time,,then there should not have been a trial at all. If all the relevant information wasn't intact,,then the trial was an unfair one.
If the 7th May to 4th June is inclusive then the trial should never have gone ahead anyway and the trial was an unfair one.
-
Hi Adam, interestingly Jeremy could get out of Jail on a technicality, apparently Jeremy Bamber has information which if presented in court would result in his almost immediate release.
It seems there is a statute of law which rules there is a maximum of 28 days which is acceptable between being committed for trial and having the indictment signed. In Jeremy's case the indictment was signed 1 day too late ie. 29 days.
If the indictment was invalid then everything which followed it was invalid as well. Therefore this means Jeremy Bamber's conviction is void but he refuses to go down this route and is determined to prove himself innocent in the court of Appeal.
This is taken from Scott Lomax's book with quotes from Jeremy Bamber ... page 238.
Yes I remember reading that as well Maggie.
-
Yes I remember reading that as well Maggie.
Would be interested to hear Adam's thoughts on this Grahame but I would hazard a guess we won't, maybe because he doesn't have any?? ;) ;)
-
The topic is the title 'Why has Jeremy failed to get released on a technicality ?'
Try to contribute. My last two threads made important discoveries that Jeremy is certainly guilty & he did not plan to phone the police.
Hopefully this thread will also make some good discoveries.
You haven't made ANY important discoveries in ANY of your threads, you just repeat the same old crap under a different title that usually doesn't make sense!!
What exactly do you want me to contribute to? The title doesn't make any sense (unsurprisingly).
-
You haven't made ANY important discoveries in ANY of your threads, you just repeat the same old crap under a different title that usually doesn't make sense!!
What exactly do you want me to contribute to? The title doesn't make any sense (unsurprisingly).
Caroline, he has a HUGELY overblown sense of his own value and importance. He CLAIMS to have made important discoveries but appears to be the only one who thinks so. Sadly there is presently no treatment for grandiose personality disorders.
-
Would be interested to hear Adam's thoughts on this Grahame but I would hazard a guess we won't, maybe because he doesn't have any?? ;) ;)
Perhaps Wilkes forgot to mention it?
-
Would be interested to hear Adam's thoughts on this Grahame but I would hazard a guess we won't, maybe because he doesn't have any?? ;) ;)
Maggie, I don't believe Adam is capable of an original thought. Just about everything his laid before us are other peoples' thoughts, written without quotes, to try and convince us that they're his.
-
April I can think of a very appropriate treatment for Adam ;D ;D ;D
-
April I can think of a very appropriate treatment for Adam ;D ;D ;D
Yes, but THAT'S not allowed over here, Susan, although I understand it's done frequently in Thailand ;D
-
April great minds think alike ;D ;D ;D
-
Caroline, he has a HUGELY overblown sense of his own value and importance. He CLAIMS to have made important discoveries but appears to be the only one who thinks so. Sadly there is presently no treatment for grandiose personality disorders.
He has made one - he's JUST found out that Neil is an Admin on the forum and NOT a mysterious man!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D. Other than that - his discoveries = 0
-
He has made one - he's JUST found out that Neil is an Admin on the forum and NOT a mysterious man!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D. Other than that - his discoveries = 0
Well, that is brilliant, we´ve got to give him that! :P
-
Well, that is brilliant, we´ve got to give him that! :P
;D
-
He has made one - he's JUST found out that Neil is an Admin on the forum and NOT a mysterious man!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D. Other than that - his discoveries = 0
Caroline, you are one of the regular 15 -20 posters on here. Together with the one supporter on the red forum & the one or two people who work on Jeremys OS, that
is not much support for Jeremy In the country.
You have refused to say how Sheila committed the crime.
You have refused to say what Sheila was doing when Neville made his mysterious call to Jeremy.
You have refused to say whether Jeremy planned to phone the police.
You have said nothing constructive on this thread. Apart from focusing on me again.
You must improve in assisting Jeremy in his campaign for freedom. Jeremy needs you're support.
-
Maggie, I don't believe Adam is capable of an original thought. Just about everything his laid before us are other peoples' thoughts, written without quotes, to try and convince us that they're his.
Give me an original thought.
Tell me what Sheila could have been doing when Neville made his mysterious call to Jeremy. Or you can't ?
-
Caroline, he has a HUGELY overblown sense of his own value and importance. He CLAIMS to have made important discoveries but appears to be the only one who thinks so. Sadly there is presently no treatment for grandiose personality disorders.
You must improve April.
Jeremy has badly failed in three appeals. Just coming on here and posting about me will not assist him.
-
In continuing to be immoveable in your wish for Jeremy to remain in prison,,you've NOT ONCE even bothered to look at every post,link,or anything else that gives a suggestion that things might not be as " cut and dried " as you imagine them to be.
So many anomalies within the police force itself should be questioned,,besides other departments who were also involved,,the pathologist,for instance.
So much held back from the defence in which to advance with their side of the case,,which made the case itself one-sided. Not only that,,but Michael Turner QC told the judges in Jeremys' 2002 appeal that, I quote " If non-disclosure is a fact,it would be difficult to conclude other than it was withheld deliberately " unquote. ( as said by a professional !)
Even a barristers hands were tied because of lack of evidence on the side of the defence.
There were no Human Rights at the time Jeremy was convicted,,but they can be easily pre-dated,,as the conviction was most definitely unsafe to say the least.
What was held from the defence ? Sources with you're answers please. Don't just make it up.
I will repost my question on another thread. You failed to answer. It is important you can prove you know what was said in court as you keep saying what the jury were told or not told.
Is that the 2002 appeal where the COA said 'The more we look at the case, the more we beleive the jury were right' ?
-
lookout excellent post. Adam has tunnel vision and is not interested in anything we have to say he is using this forum as a platform to spread his poison and be rude and abusive to other posters he behaves like a child seeking attention but in saying that he knows how far to go with his rudeness and abuse he takes it to the line but as yet has not gone over but he will.
When have I been rude on this thread ?
Try to contribute to the thread. You rarely make any valuble contribution. You just post about me.
-
Good grief! What a claim!. You probably discovered the Piltdown Man as well I suppose?
Yes Jeremy is guilty.
The phone call to the police saying Neville phoned him was very incriminating.
But why did Jeremy phone ? As already said it was a decision made on the night to explain Neville being in the kitchen.
-
Adam I will really try harder and start some interesting threads like you just be patient with me I will get there promise :'( ;D ;D ;D you are not rude at all just downright ignorant.
-
lookout he makes his own threads :'( and thinks because he has created the thread everything he posts on it is evidence.
When was you're last thread ?
Maybe you will create one in 2015 after you have read Mason Doyles book.
-
Adam just have to answer your post again you are cracking me up are you for real or just a programmed parrot ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Adam we have enough with you boring the forum to death without me starting and I might say driving posters away with your utter rubbish. Have you been sacked or what you usually go to work ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Hi Adam, interestingly Jeremy could get out of Jail on a technicality, apparently Jeremy Bamber has information which if presented in court would result in his almost immediate release.
It seems there is a statute of law which rules there is a maximum of 28 days which is acceptable between being committed for trial and having the indictment signed. In Jeremy's case the indictment was signed 1 day too late ie. 29 days.
If the indictment was invalid then everything which followed it was invalid as well. Therefore this means Jeremy Bamber's conviction is void but he refuses to go down this route and is determined to prove himself innocent in the court of Appeal.
This is taken from Scott Lomax's book with quotes from Jeremy Bamber ... page 238.
So Jeremy could get released tomorrow. But refuses to.
He has his Campaign for Freedom site, blog & Youtube videos which seems to contradict this.
His 2012 application for freedom did not get referred to the COA. He should get this release & continue to protest his innocence. Which would be easier outside. After 29 years inside you would think he would want to get out.
-
Adam we have enough with you boring the forum to death without me starting and I might say driving posters away with your utter rubbish. Have you been sacked or what you usually go to work ;D ;D ;D ;D
I have a week off work.
Do you work ?
-
Adam thank God you are back to work next week. Of course I don't work I am 82 years of age :'(
-
So Jeremy could get released tomorrow. But refuses to.
He has his Campaign for Freedom site, blog & Youtube videos which seems to contradict this.
His 2012 application for freedom did not get referred to the COA. He should get this release & continue to protest his innocence. Which would be easier outside. After 29 years inside you would think he would want to get out.
What a rubbish reply, all waffle, is that the best you can do?
-
What a rubbish reply, all waffle, is that the best you can do?
If he is innocent, why not get released on this technicality ? He should not feel guilty about it as he was unfairly convicted.
He can then speak to the media & amend his campaign to 'Campaign for Conviction quash'. However the police could put the case straight back to retrial.
-
Adam thank God you are back to work next week. Of course I don't work I am 82 years of age :'(
You must be in good shape if men pinch you're butt.
-
Adam but I have not told you the age of the men who pinch my butt ;D but it is still very enjoyable ;D ;D ;D
-
You must be in good shape if men pinch you're butt.
Do give the man credit that IF he is innocent he may want to clear his name. Also it may not be safe for Jeremy Bamber to be freed but still believed by some to be guilty. There's always a psychopath happy to carry out their own execution.
-
Adam,,instead of picking holes and passing remarks all the time,,would you kindly read the posts that you haven't yet bothered with,,such as the spoken truth on Mikes threads,that way,you might just learn that there are indeed TWO sides to a story. Otherwise,,you're a waste of damn space.
Bambergate is another poster whose posts are well worth reading,as he does a lot of " personal " research to which his posts are actually " straight from the horse's mouth ". ( meeting people,etc )
There are also others here who live in Essex,and who know certain people there who also give their personal views about the families and so have a feel of the situation.
The idea is to study the case,which takes more than 5 minutes in your case ! You've jumped in feet-first,without bothering to find out how some of us have come to the innocent conclusion.
Thank God we still don't employ the hangman with people like you around.
-
Adam,,instead of picking holes and passing remarks all the time,,would you kindly read the posts that you haven't yet bothered with,,such as the spoken truth on Mikes threads,that way,you might just learn that there are indeed TWO sides to a story. Otherwise,,you're a waste of damn space.
Bambergate is another poster whose posts are well worth reading,as he does a lot of " personal " research to which his posts are actually " straight from the horse's mouth ". ( meeting people,etc )
There are also others here who live in Essex,and who know certain people there who also give their personal views about the families and so have a feel of the situation.
The idea is to study the case,which takes more than 5 minutes in your case ! You've jumped in feet-first,without bothering to find out how some of us have come to the innocent conclusion.
Thank God we still don't employ the hangman with people like you around.
Lookout - even if he did read Bambergate there is NO WAY he will change his mind - he is totally blinkered and will not consider anyones views except his own. And is very full of his own importance as well , not a pleasant combination.
-
Lookout - even if he did read Bambergate there is NO WAY he will change his mind - he is totally blinkered and will not consider anyones views except his own. And is very full of his own importance as well , not a pleasant combination.
Don't worry,Jansus.As the old saying goes " Pride comes before a Fall ".He's got plenty of time yet. ;D
I agree though,,not a pleasant combination. He's probably only 5ft 4,,has a fast car and all that to make up the shortfall ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Don't worry,Jansus.As the old saying goes " Pride comes before a Fall ".He's got plenty of time yet. ;D
I agree though,,not a pleasant combination. He's probably only 5ft 4,,has a fast car and all that to make up the shortfall ;D ;D ;D ;D
I am six feet and cannot drive.
-
Who said you couldn't drive ? You drive us mad !
-
I am six feet and cannot drive.
you did not answer my post about my bet ?
If he is found innocent - then you will come and apologise for your rudeness and posts and I will donate to the charity of your choice .
-
you did not answer my post about my bet ?
If he is found innocent - then you will come and apologise for your rudeness and posts and I will donate to the charity of your choice .
What rudeness ?
People are rude to me.
-
What rudeness ?
People are rude to me.
avoiding the question again?
-
Adam thank God you are back to work next week. Of course I don't work I am 82 years of age :'(
What? You told me that you were 28 and on benefits. Just for that you can take your engagement ring back. >:(
-
What? You told me that you were 28 and on benefits. Just for that you can take your engagement ring back. >:(
:o :o :o :o :o :o ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
well you kept that quiet
x
-
:o :o :o :o :o :o ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
well you kept that quiet
x
;D ;D
-
Hahahahahahahahahaha.
-
Ha Ha Ha Grahame you have blown my cover been down to sign on this afternoon are we still an item :'(
-
Ha Ha Ha Grahame you have blown my cover been down to sign on this afternoon are we still an item :'(
Yeah! Even though I'm 91, very rich and have a dicky ticker.
-
Yeah! Even though I'm 91, very rich and have a dicky ticker.
Just the sort of guy I'm looking for. ;D ;D ;D ;D One with a short cough.
-
Grahame great news I can get off benefits ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Grahame great news I can get off benefits ;D ;D ;D ;D
Half my money consists of benefits. My pension. ;D