Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Bambergate on June 25, 2014, 09:31:PM
-
http://www.theguardian.com/profile/robevans
I am aware of one who is tasked with reducing interest in the case I expect there are more.
I do not mind really its expected in today's world.
Mark
-
http://www.theguardian.com/profile/robevans
I am aware of one who is tasked with reducing interest in the case I expect there are more.
I do not mind really its expected in today's world.
Mark
Hi Mark, I agree no surprise at all.
-
Nothing surprises me either.
-
I am aware of one who is tasked with reducing interest in the case I expect there are more.
I hope you don't mean in the Bamber case? ;D
-
http://www.theguardian.com/profile/robevans
I am aware of one who is tasked with reducing interest in the case I expect there are more.
I do not mind really its expected in today's world.
Mark
I don't think police give a rat's ass about us. We are not a political group or other organization like those in the articles mentioned.
-
http://www.theguardian.com/profile/robevans
I am aware of one who is tasked with reducing interest in the case I expect there are more.
I do not mind really its expected in today's world.
Mark
how would they go about reducing interest in the case.
-
Since I don´t live in England, I don´t quite know just how much interest there is in the Bamber case. It is 30 years old, so I doubt it is that massive - actually I don´t think there is much interest at all. I could be wrong of course.
-
if they were going to watch anybody i think it would be the official campaign not this forum.
i think intrest in the case comes and goes.
-
Since I don´t live in England, I don´t quite know just how much interest there is in the Bamber case. It is 30 years old, so I doubt it is that massive - actually I don´t think there is much interest at all. I could be wrong of course.
I have found if you mention the case people know about it and its surprising how many think he may be innocent but most of the time they forget about it. Just my personal experience, Alias.
-
Since I don´t live in England, I don´t quite know just how much interest there is in the Bamber case. It is 30 years old, so I doubt it is that massive - actually I don´t think there is much interest at all. I could be wrong of course.
There is no interest. Most wouldn't even know who he is if stopped in the street. The media attention has died out over the years.
-
So three different opinions on that - I am none the wiser, but thanks! ;D
-
I have found if you mention the case people know about it and its surprising how many think he may be innocent but most of the time they forget about it. Just my personal experience, Alias.
I mention it. People know about it but not well enough to have an opinion on guilt or innocence.
The last person we spoke about it quite a bit.
I said his girlfriend said it was him who massacred his family because he 'apparently' jilted her. She looked at me as if to say 'uh, are you serious ?
-
Since I don´t live in England, I don´t quite know just how much interest there is in the Bamber case. It is 30 years old, so I doubt it is that massive - actually I don´t think there is much interest at all. I could be wrong of course.
Someone once told me I was being watched by the FBI. But since the FBI don't have any power in England I didn't take it seriously. Anyway, why would they be interested just because I broke into their database? ::)
-
I mention it. People know about it but not well enough to have an opinion on guilt or innocence.
The last person we spoke about it quite a bit.
I said his girlfriend said it was him who massacred his family because he 'apparently' jilted her. She looked at me as if to say 'uh, are you serious ?
A bit of advice Adam. Don't jilt your girlfriend. ;D
-
A bit of advice Adam. Don't jilt your girlfriend. ;D
If she is like this then you got real problems:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067588/
-
I mention it. People know about it but not well enough to have an opinion on guilt or innocence.
Do you mean not well enough to make an informed decision? While some people choose not to decide because they don't have enough facts quite a bunch tend to make uninformed decisions.
Having heard of the case or read about it once doesn't show that there is much interest though.
The cases that generate the most interest tend to involve celebrities or spawning literature/movies and I don't mean documentaries. When you reach folklore status like Jack the Ripper then you know you hit it big. But most people don't know the details about that either just the folklore.
-
I don't think police give a rat's ass about us. We are not a political group or other organization like those in the articles mentioned.
I wouldn't be too flippant about it if I were you. I was speaking to an ex-cop yesterday !!
-
Do you mean not well enough to make an informed decision? While some people choose not to decide because they don't have enough facts quite a bunch tend to make uninformed decisions.
Having heard of the case or read about it once doesn't show that there is much interest though.
The cases that generate the most interest tend to involve celebrities or spawning literature/movies and I don't mean documentaries. When you reach folklore status like Jack the Ripper then you know you hit it big. But most people don't know the details about that either just the folklore.
Personally I think people who have read about the case do think he might be innocent but there is still that little niggling feeling that they should not be brave and support the cause just in case they are defending and getting involved with a child murderer. I think that is just human nature . The case is complicated and nearly every question that is raised comes back with two versions/opinions.
Without the original file the truth is hard to find. IMO :)
-
Personally I think people who have read about the case do think he might be innocent but there is still that little niggling feeling that they should not be brave and support the cause just in case they are defending and getting involved with a child murderer. I think that is just human nature . The case is complicated and nearly every question that is raised comes back with two versions/opinions.
Without the original file the truth is hard to find. IMO :)
My experience is that most who actually have studied the case and evidence are convinced of his guilt whereas those who have only been exposed to his allegations of wrongdoing and not looked into how true those alelgations actually are feel he might be innocent.
Most though are uninformed of the details because it actually takes effort to become fully informed.
-
My experience is that most who actually have studied the case and evidence are convinced of his guilt whereas those who have only been exposed to his allegations of wrongdoing and not looked into how true those alelgations actually are feel he might be innocent.
Most though are uninformed of the details because it actually takes effort to become fully informed.
Then in my own opinion your experience appears to be very limited if you don't mind me saying so?
-
I have found if you mention the case people know about it and its surprising how many think he may be innocent but most of the time they forget about it. Just my personal experience, Alias.
Most of my friends hadn't heard of him and only know now because of my interest.
-
Most of my friends hadn't heard of him and only know now because of my interest.
If you look at the Bamber supporters page on facebook I think there were a couple of thousand. I cant be sure though as I haven't looked at it for about a year or so?
But as you imply the case is not that well known in the UK and most people don't take much interest in it.
-
Most of my friends hadn't heard of him and only know now because of my interest.
Depends who you speak to I suppose??
-
Then in my own opinion your experience appears to be very limited if you don't mind me saying so?
I welcome evidence to show that a good number of people investigate the case in fine detail but don't see that being the case.
I welcome evidence that those who investigate in fine detail tend to believe Jeremy is innocent and why they are conviced of such. But I don't see that either. Of the 50 or so people I have debated the case with the vast majority are convinced of Jeremy's guilt. The minority convinced of his innocence have done an extremely poor job of justifying their positions. Most of the time during the course of a debate I am fed the line they "have the right to believe anything they want" which basically means they can't defend their position and choose to believe what they feel like regardless of the evidence.
The only one to post much so far as reasoning is concerned is mike but he posts 500 alternative things many of which conflict but he can't seem to come up with support to actually establish any of this theories hold any water. He posts a lot of allegations but no evidence to support any of them just more allegations to try to support the prior allegations. He knows thus subjects them to scrutiny but posts anyway.
Most people won't post their reasoning either because they don't want it subjected to scrutiny because they know it won't stand up or don't really have a set reasoning for their beliefs, they decided what they want to believe in general as far as guilt or innocence and as they go along look for tidbits they think they can use to support what they want to believe.
-
If you look at the Bamber supporters page on facebook I think there were a couple of thousand. I cant be sure though as I haven't looked at it for about a year or so?
But as you imply the case is not that well known in the UK and most people don't take much interest in it.
For a country the population size of the UK that is a pittance. Granted the US is larger but each minute there were over 3000 new supporters for the the boycott A&E Network until Phil Robertson is back on Duck Dynasty Facebook page. In the first 12 hours it was well over 500,000
The news will give people a fleeting interest in a case but rarely get a sizable number to get interested enough to become well informed.
This page would have a much larger number of active posters if it captivated a large audience.
If any of Mike's spectacular claims had evidentiary support the news would pick up on the claims and there would be more interest generated. But short of something big why would most peopel wrapped up in their own lives care?
Most people care about their everyday life and anything that impacts such but little else.
-
I welcome evidence to show that a good number of people investigate the case in fine detail but don't see that being the case.
I welcome evidence that those who investigate in fine detail tend to believe Jeremy is innocent and why they are conviced of such. But I don't see that either. Of the 50 or so people I have debated the case with the vast majority are convinced of Jeremy's guilt. The minority convinced of his innocence have done an extremely poor job of justifying their positions. Most of the time during the course of a debate I am fed the line they "have the right to believe anything they want" which basically means they can't defend their position and choose to believe what they feel like regardless of the evidence.
The only one to post much so far as reasoning is concerned is mike but he posts 500 alternative things many of which conflict but he can't seem to come up with support to actually establish any of this theories hold any water. He posts a lot of allegations but no evidence to support any of them just more allegations to try to support the prior allegations. He knows thus subjects them to scrutiny but posts anyway.
Most people won't post their reasoning either because they don't want it subjected to scrutiny because they know it won't stand up or don't really have a set reasoning for their beliefs, they decided what they want to believe in general as far as guilt or innocence and as they go along look for tidbits they think they can use to support what they want to believe.
I'm not convinced of Jeremy's innocence (or guilt) but I don't agree with anything you have just said. The only reason you think the innocent supporters have done a 'poor job' is because you don't agree with them. For some reason you seem to think you're the 'last word' as far as this case is concerned but for all of your bragging and boasting. you only have an opinion just like everyone else and you make mistakes in your assumptions - as we all have done. You're not the last word, simply a man with an opinion.
-
At one time perhaps but I don't think now the 1980s were a long time ago .
-
I'm not convinced of Jeremy's innocence (or guilt) but I don't agree with anything you have just said. The only reason you think the innocent supporters have done a 'poor job' is because you don't agree with them. For some reason you seem to think you're the 'last word' as far as this case is concerned but for all of your bragging and boasting. you only have an opinion just like everyone else and you make mistakes in your assumptions - as we all have done. You're not the last word, simply a man with an opinion.
You are one of those a coward to actually state what your views are and why. You said you leaned towards guilt, got attacked by people you like so went to your standby now of having basically no opinion either way.
You are the one who started the thread asking why others believe he is guilty or innocent but were refusing to give your reasoning.
It is a fact that those defending Jeremy do a poor job explaining any raitonal basis for their opinions there and in every other thread. I laid out my case in full which Jeremy supporters do so?
Unsupported opinions are worthles sin debates and yet that is all Jeremy supporters seem to have. You can try pretending they are so competent at debating and posting evidence and facts all you like the truth is that they are not.
Telling me I am wrong is nothing PROVE me wrong. Post EVIDENCE. You can't the only gloating that could be had was that I was wrong about an issue that favored Jeremy. I believed a lie I was told that there was proof a call was made. Prove me wrong on all the critical issues I raise like how the person who beat Nevill would have had gotten back spatter on his/her clothing, would have left prints on the blood that was on the rifle unless wearing gloves, would have damaged their hands unless wearing gloves (particularly as the rifle stock broke where the killer would have been holding it) and that a female with long nails would likely have damaged her nails during such an episode. The best any Jeremy supporters could do was say there was no struggle. They simply close their eyes to reality and say the police caused most of the damage and Nevill fell and hurt himself in the process. How do most people characterize these claims? As absurd baseless lies.
Those suggesting the blood evidence was planted have been thoroughly humilated and pretending otherwise is akin to denying there was a struggle in the kitchen. I even got PMs asking me to take is easy on Mike because he has mental problems though others say he is a filthy liar who deserves no mercy.
You and the others here hide behind the "we have the right to believe anything we feel like" claim as if posting baseless opinions means squat.
The way to win a debate requires making coherent arguments and backing them up with evidence. The facts of this case are on my side so for me it is easy to do that. The ones trying to go uphill are those asserting Jeremy was framed etc.
Still the ineptness at which such is attempted is quite mind boggling and even infamous Jeremy supporters like Lomax are at best morons and at worst liars with so many bogus claims including that Sheila stopped taking her medication.
The only way Bamber supporters will ever convince anyone rational to join their ranks is if they can come up with rational positions supported by evidence but the evidenc eis against them so they have to distort. That is really the heart of the matter.
-
I welcome evidence to show that a good number of people investigate the case in fine detail but don't see that being the case.
I welcome evidence that those who investigate in fine detail tend to believe Jeremy is innocent and why they are conviced of such. But I don't see that either. Of the 50 or so people I have debated the case with the vast majority are convinced of Jeremy's guilt. The minority convinced of his innocence have done an extremely poor job of justifying their positions. Most of the time during the course of a debate I am fed the line they "have the right to believe anything they want" which basically means they can't defend their position and choose to believe what they feel like regardless of the evidence.
The only one to post much so far as reasoning is concerned is mike but he posts 500 alternative things many of which conflict but he can't seem to come up with support to actually establish any of this theories hold any water. He posts a lot of allegations but no evidence to support any of them just more allegations to try to support the prior allegations. He knows thus subjects them to scrutiny but posts anyway.
Most people won't post their reasoning either because they don't want it subjected to scrutiny because they know it won't stand up or don't really have a set reasoning for their beliefs, they decided what they want to believe in general as far as guilt or innocence and as they go along look for tidbits they think they can use to support what they want to believe.
May I venture to say that that sounds exactly like yourself and your own reasoning. It all depends on known proveable facts about the case. Not witness statements about who said what. Bcause they all have the potential to be biased for one reason or another. Personally I am concerned about the unco-operation of the police for one thing in releasing the audio tapes of the raid team. I have an enquiring mind and wonder what could be the reason for their reluctance to reveal the contents of those tapes even to the CCRC? I have serious reservations about the whole case and the way it was handled to be entirely convinced of Bamber's guilt.
-
You are one of those a coward to actually state what your views are and why. You said you leaned towards guilt, got attacked by people you like so went to your standby now of having basically no opinion either way.
You are the one who started the thread asking why others believe he is guilty or innocent but were refusing to give your reasoning.
It is a fact that those defending Jeremy do a poor job explaining any raitonal basis for their opinions there and in every other thread. I laid out my case in full which Jeremy supporters do so?
Unsupported opinions are worthles sin debates and yet that is all Jeremy supporters seem to have. You can try pretending they are so competent at debating and posting evidence and facts all you like the truth is that they are not.
Telling me I am wrong is nothing PROVE me wrong. Post EVIDENCE. You can't the only gloating that could be had was that I was wrong about an issue that favored Jeremy. I believed a lie I was told that there was proof a call was made. Prove me wrong on all the critical issues I raise like how the person who beat Nevill would have had gotten back spatter on his/her clothing, would have left prints on the blood that was on the rifle unless wearing gloves, would have damaged their hands unless wearing gloves (particularly as the rifle stock broke where the killer would have been holding it) and that a female with long nails would likely have damaged her nails during such an episode. The best any Jeremy supporters could do was say there was no struggle. They simply close their eyes to reality and say the police caused most of the damage and Nevill fell and hurt himself in the process. How do most people characterize these claims? As absurd baseless lies.
Those suggesting the blood evidence was planted have been thoroughly humilated and pretending otherwise is akin to denying there was a struggle in the kitchen. I even got PMs asking me to take is easy on Mike because he has mental problems though others say he is a filthy liar who deserves no mercy.
You and the others here hide behind the "we have the right to believe anything we feel like" claim as if posting baseless opinions means squat.
The way to win a debate requires making coherent arguments and backing them up with evidence. The facts of this case are on my side so for me it is easy to do that. The ones trying to go uphill are those asserting Jeremy was framed etc.
Still the ineptness at which such is attempted is quite mind boggling and even infamous Jeremy supporters like Lomax are at best morons and at worst liars with so many bogus claims including that Sheila stopped taking her medication.
The only way Bamber supporters will ever convince anyone rational to join their ranks is if they can come up with rational positions supported by evidence but the evidenc eis against them so they have to distort. That is really the heart of the matter.
There you go again scipio. Judging people's characters whilst knowing nothing about the person to who you address your insults.
-
Like the ex-cop I was talking to yesterday,Grahame. He said EP need sorting out,badly ! The guy used to police Wales.
-
Like the ex-cop I was talking to yesterday,Grahame. He said EP need sorting out,badly ! The guy used to police Wales.
lookout the Met police have always been very critical of Essex police.
-
lookout the Met police have always been very critical of Essex police.
I'm not surprised,Grahame. More like the Keystone Kops !
-
You are one of those a coward to actually state what your views are and why. You said you leaned towards guilt, got attacked by people you like so went to your standby now of having basically no opinion either way.
You are the one who started the thread asking why others believe he is guilty or innocent but were refusing to give your reasoning.
It is a fact that those defending Jeremy do a poor job explaining any raitonal basis for their opinions there and in every other thread. I laid out my case in full which Jeremy supporters do so?
Unsupported opinions are worthles sin debates and yet that is all Jeremy supporters seem to have. You can try pretending they are so competent at debating and posting evidence and facts all you like the truth is that they are not.
Telling me I am wrong is nothing PROVE me wrong. Post EVIDENCE. You can't the only gloating that could be had was that I was wrong about an issue that favored Jeremy. I believed a lie I was told that there was proof a call was made. Prove me wrong on all the critical issues I raise like how the person who beat Nevill would have had gotten back spatter on his/her clothing, would have left prints on the blood that was on the rifle unless wearing gloves, would have damaged their hands unless wearing gloves (particularly as the rifle stock broke where the killer would have been holding it) and that a female with long nails would likely have damaged her nails during such an episode. The best any Jeremy supporters could do was say there was no struggle. They simply close their eyes to reality and say the police caused most of the damage and Nevill fell and hurt himself in the process. How do most people characterize these claims? As absurd baseless lies.
Those suggesting the blood evidence was planted have been thoroughly humilated and pretending otherwise is akin to denying there was a struggle in the kitchen. I even got PMs asking me to take is easy on Mike because he has mental problems though others say he is a filthy liar who deserves no mercy.
You and the others here hide behind the "we have the right to believe anything we feel like" claim as if posting baseless opinions means squat.
The way to win a debate requires making coherent arguments and backing them up with evidence. The facts of this case are on my side so for me it is easy to do that. The ones trying to go uphill are those asserting Jeremy was framed etc.
Still the ineptness at which such is attempted is quite mind boggling and even infamous Jeremy supporters like Lomax are at best morons and at worst liars with so many bogus claims including that Sheila stopped taking her medication.
The only way Bamber supporters will ever convince anyone rational to join their ranks is if they can come up with rational positions supported by evidence but the evidenc eis against them so they have to distort. That is really the heart of the matter.
What a foolish man you are! I think I have been one of the most open people on the forum. I do lean towards guilt but I still think he was framed, everyone knows what I think, I don't need to hammer my opinion down people's throats. I'm not like you, I won't flood the board with 'my opinion' and pass it off as evidence.
-
lookout the Met police have always been very critical of Essex police.
a bit of pot kettle and black there though.
-
May I venture to say that that sounds exactly like yourself and your own reasoning. It all depends on known proveable facts about the case. Not witness statements about who said what. Bcause they all have the potential to be biased for one reason or another. Personally I am concerned about the unco-operation of the police for one thing in releasing the audio tapes of the raid team. I have an enquiring mind and wonder what could be the reason for their reluctance to reveal the contents of those tapes even to the CCRC? I have serious reservations about the whole case and the way it was handled to be entirely convinced of Bamber's guilt.
My reasoning is sound.
1) Sheila had no reason to kill anyone and was unlikely to do so
2) Unlikely that Sheila would have the capablity to commit the murders because of her lack of coordination and not being familiar with the weapon. There is no reaosn to believe she would have known how to chamber a round even let alone known how to load 11 rounds which is how many the gun had when June and Nevill were shot in the bedroom
3) The time of night makes it unlikely for Sheila to suddenly become agitated, others would not have been awake to agitate her and she had no problems sleeping at the time because her medication made her drowsy and she had been sleeping well
4) It is extremely unlikely Jeremy would find the gun in the closet with the scope and suppressor reoved as he claims
5) it is extremely unlikely Jeremy would get the rifle out to shoot at rabbits at all let alone at 9PM at night
6) it is extremely unlikely Nevill and June would have left the rifle with the loaded magazine nearby at all but especially with the twins there.
7) It is extremely unlikely Sheila would use 18-20 bullets from the stockpile Jeremy claims to have left out but go the closet to get 5-7 additional (though 30 remained in the kitchen) and also to attach the moderator
8) Had Sheila actually killed anyone there would have been physical evidence to indicate it because unlike Jeremy she would not have worn gloves and would have no reason/ability to dispose of evidence after her death. So she would have had blood of the victims on her, her prints would have been left in their blood (especially the blood on outside of the rifle and she coudl have touched other things thus leaving her prints on objects in their blood), she would have had gunshot residue on her clothing and hands and also elevated levels of lead.
9) No physical evidence to indicate Sheila is the one who beat Nevill though such evidence would not be concealable because it would not only include his blood on her but also damaged hands not only nails but a cut to the hand that held the stock as it broke. If she wore gloves it would not be consistent with a crazy rage but rather planned execution and such gloves would have been found but none were located ever ever
10) the notion Nevill would phone Jeremy is absurd because
A) Nevill did not trust Jeremy he told the farm secretary he believed Jeremy wanted him dead
B) Sheila did not get a long well with Jeremy so instead of calming her down he would likely cause her to shoot, indeed Nevill was the adult who had acalming effect on her so was in the best position to calm her
C) Nevill was stronger than Jeremy so physically had as good or better ability to disarm Sheila than Jeremy did
D) Jeremy had an answering machine and his phone was on the ground level. He would be unlikely to hear the phone but even if he did hwake up and go to answer the answering machine would pick up before he could reach the phone. So at best he could expect to be able to leave a message and hope Jeremy would get up and to listen to it right away instead of waiting till morning.
E) It would take Jeremy time to answer the phone, dress, drive there and find a way in so something on the order of 20 minutes. Why would he want to wait to risk being shot while waiting those 20 minutes instead of trying to disarm her and save himself or his family?
F) Sheila seeing him on the phone would likely provoke her to fire. Why would he want to risk that instead of arming himself if scared to try to disarm her with his bare hands? There were guns, knives and other potential weapons nearby.
G) The shooting started in the master bedroom as he and June were shot 11 times. There is no rational explanation how Nevill would be using the phone, have Sheila catch him and not shoot him but instead to push the button down (exposing her to being disarmed but him failing to take advantage) then march him upstairs and shoot him in the bedroom with June. If in a crazy rage she would have shot him downstairs not marched him upstairs to do it and if he went up there himself why would he leave the phone off the hook?
11) Julie's testimony is credible
12) Sheila can't have killed herself because
A) She was shot with the moderator then after dead it was removed and placed in the closet
B) She was shot seated with her back against something then dragged flat while still bleeding
C) The bible was placed in a pool of her blood that formed after her death and was opened and closed before the blood dried
She can't have done any of these things after her death the killer had to do it.
13) Jeremy lied about various things like the gun not fitting in the closet with the accessories attached and kept changing his story as necessary to try to pretend he was innocent including changing from claiming he hadn't used the murder weapon after Anthony but claiming he used it multipl times the week prior to the murder when he needed ot pretend that the scope and suppressor were routinely taken off after use.
There are other things but these are the main foundations for my conclusion that Jeremy did it and provide a well supported basis for such conclusion.
-
You are one of those a coward to actually state what your views are and why. You said you leaned towards guilt, got attacked by people you like so went to your standby now of having basically no opinion either way.
You are the one who started the thread asking why others believe he is guilty or innocent but were refusing to give your reasoning...
What a foolish man you are! I think I have been one of the most open people on the forum. I do lean towards guilt but I still think he was framed, everyone knows what I think, I don't need to hammer my opinion down people's throats. I'm not like you, I won't flood the board with 'my opinion' and pass it off as evidence.
Caroline
The trouble is not that you are willing to ram it down people’s throats, but that you are unwilling to explain it at all. Here, you even give a percentage saying that you are 70/30 in favour of guilt.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5219.msg224669.html#msg224669
Yet you give no explanation for your opinion. Scipio, notwithstanding his typos, has a point.
How can you give a percentage without being able to give reasons?
It seems to me that assertions like that are meant to push the pro guilt message while saving you the trouble of justifying it. At least the likes of Adam and Scipio are up front with their views.
-
Scipio calling Caroline a coward is a rediculous statement, also do you not understand one of the basic laws of debate ie. Attack the subject not the person. If Caroline doesn't want to enter into a factual argument with you that doesn't make her a coward just a person who has something more important to do like watch paint dry.
Caroline was an ardent 100% supporter of Jeremy but for reasons she has explained her beliefs have shifted making her far more unsure. That doesn't make her a coward but rather someone who can see more than one side of an argument and it is her right to believe whatever she chooses without being subject to personal insults, neither does she HAVE to answer to you who seems to think he is number one most important person on this forum.
With respect, your arguments are mainly OPINIONS not facts however much you insist differently, yes you back these arguments up with examples and so called proof but in this case so few actual hard facts exist that any scenario can be bolstered by the opinions and supposition of others. Repeatedly using AE's unsubstantiated statements and opinions as hard fact doesn't really PROVE anything. To an open minded person, it can be taken on as a possibility but not solid evidence anymore than Jeremy's statements and opinions can be blindly believed without hard evidence.
Many of us on this site have been around too long and know the case too well for these arguments or this kind of bullying to succeed.. It becomes dreadfully boring to continually argue against others opinions put forward as facts and laced with insults towards anyone who has a different opinion, eventually you just give up and let them whitter on.
I would just like to add that references to the mental health of any poster, never mind the owner of the forum is totally unacceptable in any circumstances on this forum and speaks volumes about your own attitude. I would ask you to curb your language in the future.
With thanks Maggie
-
Caroline
The trouble is not that you are willing to ram it down people’s throats, but that you are unwilling to explain it at all. Here, you even give a percentage saying that you are 70/30 in favour of guilt.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5219.msg224669.html#msg224669
Yet you give no explanation for your opinion. Scipio, notwithstanding his typos, has a point.
How can you give a percentage without being able to give reasons?
It seems to me that assertions like that are meant to push the pro guilt message while saving you the trouble of justifying it. At least the likes of Adam and Scipio are up front with their views.
Ha, ha!! Talk about an opportunist!! I have made my position clear, the fact that you can't gasp it would be your problem. I believe Jeremy is most likely guilty BUT that he was framed because EP wanted to 'secure' a conviction. I don't believe they KNEW he was innocent and went ahead and framed him anyway - there would be no reason.
Ypu can now sit back on the sideline waiting for your next opportunity to have ago. Pathetic!
-
Scipio calling Caroline a coward is a rediculous statement, also do you not understand one of the basic laws of debate ie. Attack the subject not the person. If Caroline doesn't want to enter into a factual argument with you that doesn't make her a coward just a person who has something more important to do like watch paint dry.
Caroline was an ardent 100% supporter of Jeremy but for reasons she has explained her beliefs have shifted making her far more unsure. That doesn't make her a coward but rather someone who can see more than one side of an argument and it is her right to believe whatever she chooses without being subject to personal insults, neither does she HAVE to answer to you who seems to think he is number one most important person on this forum.
With respect, your arguments are mainly OPINIONS not facts however much you insist differently, yes you back these arguments up with examples and so called proof but in this case so few actual hard facts exist that any scenario can be bolstered by the opinions and supposition of others. Repeatedly using AE's unsubstantiated statements and opinions as hard fact doesn't really PROVE anything. To an open minded person, it can be taken on as a possibility but not solid evidence anymore than Jeremy's statements and opinions can be blindly believed without hard evidence.
Many of us on this site have been around too long and know the case too well for these arguments or this kind of bullying to succeed.. It becomes dreadfully boring to continually argue against others opinions put forward as facts and laced with insults towards anyone who has a different opinion, eventually you just give up and let them whitter on.
I would just like to add that references to the mental health of any poster, never mind the owner of the forum is totally unacceptable in any circumstances on this forum and speaks volumes about your own attitude. I would ask you to curb your language in the future.
With thanks Maggie
Thanks Maggie, the man is a jerk but at least it gave Martin the opportunity to leave my profile alone for 5 minutes and actually post something (unconstructive) ;D ;D ;D ;D. It seems if you're not sure about guilt or innocence, it's an even worse crime to Martin than promoting guilt. Irrational as ever ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
a bit of pot kettle and black there though.
Yes it is a bit,nugs.,
-
a bit of pot kettle and black there though.
Yes. there has always been ravalry between them.
-
Scipio calling Caroline a coward is a rediculous statement, also do you not understand one of the basic laws of debate ie. Attack the subject not the person. If Caroline doesn't want to enter into a factual argument with you that doesn't make her a coward just a person who has something more important to do like watch paint dry.
Caroline was an ardent 100% supporter of Jeremy but for reasons she has explained her beliefs have shifted making her far more unsure. That doesn't make her a coward but rather someone who can see more than one side of an argument and it is her right to believe whatever she chooses without being subject to personal insults, neither does she HAVE to answer to you who seems to think he is number one most important person on this forum.
With respect, your arguments are mainly OPINIONS not facts however much you insist differently, yes you back these arguments up with examples and so called proof but in this case so few actual hard facts exist that any scenario can be bolstered by the opinions and supposition of others. Repeatedly using AE's unsubstantiated statements and opinions as hard fact doesn't really PROVE anything. To an open minded person, it can be taken on as a possibility but not solid evidence anymore than Jeremy's statements and opinions can be blindly believed without hard evidence.
Many of us on this site have been around too long and know the case too well for these arguments or this kind of bullying to succeed.. It becomes dreadfully boring to continually argue against others opinions put forward as facts and laced with insults towards anyone who has a different opinion, eventually you just give up and let them whitter on.
I would just like to add that references to the mental health of any poster, never mind the owner of the forum is totally unacceptable in any circumstances on this forum and speaks volumes about your own attitude. I would ask you to curb your language in the future.
With thanks Maggie
Caroline is one of the best investigators on the forum. She has the ability to see the whole picture. By "the whole picture" I mean that although she has views about Bamber's guilt she can also see the inconsistences in the case.
-
Ha, ha!! Talk about an opportunist!! I have made my position clear, the fact that you can't gasp it would be your problem. I believe Jeremy is most likely guilty BUT that he was framed because EP wanted to 'secure' a conviction. I don't believe they KNEW he was innocent and went ahead and framed him anyway - there would be no reason.
Ypu can now sit back on the sideline waiting for your next opportunity to have ago. Pathetic!
Your positions are contradictory not clear and you have presented no basis to support these views.
What evidence do you think was planted and why? What evidence do you rely on to establsh that such things were planted and he was framed?
What evidence makes you think he is guilty when you remove the evidnece that you say was planted?
You never layed out any of this since I have been here and looking at your older posts I have found nothing of the sort either.
I have repeatedly summarized the basis for my views including in this thread. I never see you do the same.
I have no idea if you think Jeremy is guilty for a valid reason or not. I have no idea if you have a valid reaosn for believing Jeremy was framed. Since you won't provide your basis there is no way to assess it which seems to be the way you want things to stay.
Mike is out there trying to prove Sheila had only 1 wound as of Dr Craig's visit and thus the second shot had to be fired after. His supposed proof is falling apart under scrutiny but at least there is an actual debate going on because he is putting his views out there and evidence is being debated.
-
Your positions are contradictory not clear and you have presented no basis to support these views.
What evidence do you think was planted and why? What evidence do you rely on to establsh that such things were planted and he was framed?
What evidence makes you think he is guilty when you remove the evidnece that you say was planted?
You never layed out any of this since I have been here and looking at your older posts I have found nothing of the sort either.
I have repeatedly summarized the basis for my views including in this thread. I never see you do the same.
I have no idea if you think Jeremy is guilty for a valid reason or not. I have no idea if you have a valid reaosn for believing Jeremy was framed. Since you won't provide your basis there is no way to assess it which seems to be the way you want things to stay.
Mike is out there trying to prove Sheila had only 1 wound as of Dr Craig's visit and thus the second shot had to be fired after. His supposed proof is falling apart under scrutiny but at least there is an actual debate going on because he is putting his views out there and evidence is being debated.
Master scipio you must realise that some people do not have fixed views on this case, quite simply because they have doubts and not views. Their minds are not made up as yours apparently is. You have made some very good points, such as the question did Sheila know how to chamber a bullet and a few other points, which I personally have taken on board. But some just cannot make up their mind or have any fixed thoughts about what happened. Probably because there are various questions with which they are not satisfied with.
It doesn't mean they're hypocrites, or liars or even cowards. They are questioning and considering different things for themselves and if I may be so bold to say so, they do not like to be bullied into accepting someone else's opinions if it doesn't seem right to them?
-
Grahame very well said some posters on this forum have not made up their minds whether Jeremy is guilty or not some suffer from tunnel vision I for one don't and am always prepared to have evidence presented to me proving he is guilty and so far Mr Scipio has not done that neither as Adam so I will hang in there with an open mind till somebody does convince one way or another. I aint no coward (well maybe a little one) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Better a live coward than a dead hero,Susan. ;D
-
lookout ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Your positions are contradictory not clear and you have presented no basis to support these views.
What evidence do you think was planted and why? What evidence do you rely on to establsh that such things were planted and he was framed?
What evidence makes you think he is guilty when you remove the evidnece that you say was planted?
You never layed out any of this since I have been here and looking at your older posts I have found nothing of the sort either.
I have repeatedly summarized the basis for my views including in this thread. I never see you do the same.
I have no idea if you think Jeremy is guilty for a valid reason or not. I have no idea if you have a valid reaosn for believing Jeremy was framed. Since you won't provide your basis there is no way to assess it which seems to be the way you want things to stay.
Mike is out there trying to prove Sheila had only 1 wound as of Dr Craig's visit and thus the second shot had to be fired after. His supposed proof is falling apart under scrutiny but at least there is an actual debate going on because he is putting his views out there and evidence is being debated.
Errr, I think I have mentioned more times then I care to remember that the silencer was faked and you know it or is your memory that bad? You aren't interested in anyone's opinion, only your own. You don't read what people have to say properly and when you're proven WRONG (remember the lock on the gun cupboard?), you don't even have the grace to admit it unless pushed.
I don't need to defend my position to you, my reasoning to me is valid so your opinion on my opinion is worth Jack.
-
Errr, I think I have mentioned more times then I care to remember that the silencer was faked and you know it or is your memory that bad? You aren't interested in anyone's opinion, only your own. You don't read what people have to say properly and when you're proven WRONG (remember the lock on the gun cupboard?), you don't even have the grace to admit it unless pushed.
I don't need to defend my position to you, my reasoning to me is valid so your opinion on my opinion is worth Jack.
Well that just means that you are unable to support your opinion that the suppressor was faked and don't have a vlaid basis becuase if you did then you owuld present your case.
Mike's evidence falls apart but at leas the tries, that is more than most here do.
-
Well that just means that you are unable to support your opinion that the suppressor was faked and don't have a vlaid basis becuase if you did then you owuld present your case.
Mike's evidence falls apart but at leas the tries, that is more than most here do.
Ha, ha!! It doesn't mean that at all - I have presented my case (as you pompously put it) MANY TIMES!!!! I can once again list why I think it was faked, thn you'll blather on about how ordinary police officers and the family couldn't fake the fine spray found inside the silencer (although only you have described it in that way) and I will tell you once again that EP had their own SOCO lab with police who were trained in scenes of crime - then you will ignore that point and the fact that 3 samples were taken from Sheila but only two were used.
-
Ha, ha!! It doesn't mean that at all - I have presented my case (as you pompously put it) MANY TIMES!!!! I can once again list why I think it was faked, thn you'll blather on about how ordinary police officers and the family couldn't fake the fine spray found inside the silencer (although only you have described it in that way) and I will tell you once again that EP had their own SOCO lab with police who were trained in scenes of crime - then you will ignore that point and the fact that 3 samples were taken from Sheila but only two were used.
You haven't provided a complete list so the "again" is is nonsense. But it is plainly obvious yo uwon't list it because yo uare admitting I alreadd shredded the points you would try to present and will do so in detail in one post if you list your basis so you are not going to put yorself through the humilation.
I didn't ignore your nonsense about the samples. I addressed it and you ran away from the debate. Your simplistic argument is that there was a source of blood that COULD potentially be available for use to have been planted by police before the moderator was sent to the lab.
You ignored:
1) that to your knowledge only 2 were used and all you are going by is that 2 had designated purposes listed as to why they were taken the 3rd didn't so you presume it was never used but have no idea
2) the evidence available estbalishes all 3 were transferred to the lab without any of the seals having been tampered with so you have no basis at all to suggest police siphoned any blood from any of the samples before they reached the lab
that's as far as your argument gets. That you suspect they coudl have potentially siphoned blood, no evidence at all they did and your claim they coudl have is not even supportable because you have no idea if the sample was even used.
That argument would be worthless and flunk if attmepted ot be used in the legla arena and fares no better in informal debates.
-
You haven't provided a complete list so the "again" is is nonsense. But it is plainly obvious yo uwon't list it because yo uare admitting I alreadd shredded the points you would try to present and will do so in detail in one post if you list your basis so you are not going to put yorself through the humilation.
I didn't ignore your nonsense about the samples. I addressed it and you ran away from the debate. Your simplistic argument is that there was a source of blood that COULD potentially be available for use to have been planted by police before the moderator was sent to the lab.
You ignored:
1) that to your knowledge only 2 were used and all you are going by is that 2 had designated purposes listed as to why they were taken the 3rd didn't so you presume it was never used but have no idea
2) the evidence available estbalishes all 3 were transferred to the lab without any of the seals having been tampered with so you have no basis at all to suggest police siphoned any blood from any of the samples before they reached the lab
that's as far as your argument gets. That you suspect they coudl have potentially siphoned blood, no evidence at all they did and your claim they coudl have is not even supportable because you have no idea if the sample was even used.
That argument would be worthless and flunk if attmepted ot be used in the legla arena and fares no better in informal debates.
You haven't shredded anything, not in the entire time you have been here. There is no evidence to show that ALL 3 samples were sent to the lab - quantity isn't mentioned. I would never run away from a debate with you, only you rate yourself so highly most don't bother to read your long winded self absorbed posts. You don't answer when you get stuck or are proven wrong, like with the lock and the telephone call.
Someone should actually tell you that we're not in a legal arena so you can stop playing to the gallery - most of them are asleep! ::)
-
You haven't shredded anything, not in the entire time you have been here. There is no evidence to show that ALL 3 samples were sent to the lab - quantity isn't mentioned. I would never run away from a debate with you, only you rate yourself so highly most don't bother to read your long winded self absorbed posts. You don't answer when you get stuck or are proven wrong, like with the lock and the telephone call.
Someone should actually tell you that we're not in a legal arena so you can stop playing to the gallery - most of them are asleep! ::)
The bottles were all sealed in the same bag and were recorded by the lab as being received without anyone noting any tampering. The burden rests on you to demonstrate otherwise. You can't though. You need evidence from thoe lab stating there is evidence of misisng samples, doctored samples or the like. You have no such evidence you thus don't even have a basis to be suspicious let alone a basis to say in a court of law that police could have taken blood fromt he samples and planted it. You need documentary or testimonial evidence that suggests blood wa sin fact missing or tampered with to make such charges. In the real world you also need such evidence to have a reasonable basis to suggest blood was diverted from a sample. Otherwise all you have is wild unsupported speculation and tha tin fact is the basis of your positoon- wild unsupported speculation.
You can deny reality all you like and try pretending your claims have not been shredded but you couldn't win a debate with me on your best day and my worst. Stop being a coward and go toe to toe with me. Post in full your complete claims about the supposed planting- present your full case including the basis of each and every claim with all your supporting evidence and let's see how it holds up to scrutiny.
I have never seen you even try to explain why you think Jeremy is guilty. Surely you would be able to explain the various reasons why and a basis for each of the things that convince you. Some I might agree with. But alas, your friends here will see on which issues you disagree and might not like you anymore and might attack you if you did that so you won't do it.
I would like to see how one can suggest that Jeremy is guilty and yet he was framed and to have a rational basis for both positions. To me it seems like a fence sitting non-commital position where one tries to straddle both camps to remain friendly with both- because if one can prove to me Jeremy was framed then much of the evidence used by me against him is gone and there would then be basis to believe he is innocent.
If you are not scared and see me as no threat then try to embarrass me toe to toe prove me wrong and post your full positions and the basis for those positions.
-
The bottles were all sealed in the same bag and were recorded by the lab as being received without anyone noting any tampering. The burden rests on you to demonstrate otherwise. You can't though. You need evidence from thoe lab stating there is evidence of misisng samples, doctored samples or the like. You have no such evidence you thus don't even have a basis to be suspicious let alone a basis to say in a court of law that police could have taken blood fromt he samples and planted it. You need documentary or testimonial evidence that suggests blood wa sin fact missing or tampered with to make such charges. In the real world you also need such evidence to have a reasonable basis to suggest blood was diverted from a sample. Otherwise all you have is wild unsupported speculation and tha tin fact is the basis of your positoon- wild unsupported speculation.
You can deny reality all you like and try pretending your claims have not been shredded but you couldn't win a debate with me on your best day and my worst. Stop being a coward and go toe to toe with me. Post in full your complete claims about the supposed planting- present your full case including the basis of each and every claim with all your supporting evidence and let's see how it holds up to scrutiny.
I have never seen you even try to explain why you think Jeremy is guilty. Surely you would be able to explain the various reasons why and a basis for each of the things that convince you. Some I might agree with. But alas, your friends here will see on which issues you disagree and might not like you anymore and might attack you if you did that so you won't do it.
I would like to see how one can suggest that Jeremy is guilty and yet he was framed and to have a rational basis for both positions. To me it seems like a fence sitting non-commital position where one tries to straddle both camps to remain friendly with both- because if one can prove to me Jeremy was framed then much of the evidence used by me against him is gone and there would then be basis to believe he is innocent.
If you are not scared and see me as no threat then try to embarrass me toe to toe prove me wrong and post your full positions and the basis for those positions.
OK Scip, when I have time (sometime this week), I will post my scenario (although I hate scenario's) - including why I believe Jeremy might be guilty but framed.
-
OK Scip, when I have time (sometime this week), I will post my scenario (although I hate scenario's) - including why I believe Jeremy might be guilty but framed.
Great. I am particularly interested in the basis for each point you think to be the case and noting when there are alternative possibilities because the evidence is ambiguous.
By way of example, Nevill was shot first in the bedroom and then later shot in the kitchen after being severely beaten. He obviously could not have been beaten and killed in the kitchen then shot upstairs later so this proves he was shot first in the bedroom. Plus there was blood on the walls and drips in the rug that indicate his path to the kitchen.
It makes no sense for things to have proceeded to the kitchen unless the gun was empty. Likewise it makes no sense for the struggle to have taken place in the kitchen unless the gun was empty. The killer had to beat Nevill unconscious to be able to reload in peace and be able to finish him off. There were 11 bullets fired in the bedroom at June and Nevill which is the maximum load. With 11 bullets fired the gun would be empty and thus there would be a reason for things to proceed to the kitchen and for there to be a struggle there until Nevill was unconscious, the killer could reload and kill him.
There are 2 possibilities that the evidence doesn't provide any clear answer on. Nevill could have ran to the kitchen with the killer chasing him or Nevill could have chased his killer. Either way in the kitchen they rumbled so it is not an issue of major importance but one must be clear in admitting when the evidence can't provide a clear answer and there are different possibilities.
To aid you keep these things in mind:
1) Vanezis placed the blood in a bottle that he placed seals on so that one can see if they are tampered with.
2) Each bottle was then place in a bag with a seal and exhibit number.
3) Davidson filled out a CID6 form to record the blood and other evidence taken from Vanezis and personally took possession of the blood from Vanezis and brougth it to the evidence fridge at Chelmsford the police station
4) Davidson filled out 3 Holab3 forms to effect transfer of the 3 blood samples to HQ and they were taken by badge 1038.
5) A courier brought the blood samples from HQ to the lab. The lab received the 3 samples and returned a copy of the Holab3 form to Davidson to indicate receipt had occurred.
So the evidence COPL had in it possession was that all 3 samples successfully arrived at the lab.
So all 3 arrived and there was no evidence COLP developed of the lab reporting that any of the seals on these samples had been broken prior to arriving at the lab.
That prompted the investigators to ask Davidson if he knew of anyone else taking any samples besides these 3 or if he took any samples covertly himself while at the morgue which of course he answered no to.
I have not seen any COLP interviews where the lab was asked about what happened to 3 blood samples after being placed in their possession.
Unless one subscribes to the view that Davidson illicitly took blood extra blood while at the morgue the lab personnel would be the only ones in the position to illicitly use Sheila's own blood for invalid purposes.
-
What evidence makes you think he is guilty when you remove the evidence that you say was planted?
"Your positions are contradictory not clear and you have presented no basis to support these views.
What evidence do you think was planted and why? What evidence do you rely on to establsh that such things were planted and he was framed?
What evidence makes you think he is guilty when you remove the evidence that you say was planted?
You never layed out any of this since I have been here and looking at your older posts I have found nothing of the sort either.
I have repeatedly summarized the basis for my views including in this thread. I never see you do the same.
I have no idea if you think Jeremy is guilty for a valid reason or not. I have no idea if you have a valid reaosn for believing Jeremy was framed. Since you won't provide your basis there is no way to assess it which seems to be the way you want things to stay.
Scipio
"Mike is out there trying to prove Sheila had only 1 wound as of Dr Craig's visit and thus the second shot had to be fired after. His supposed proof is falling apart under scrutiny but at least there is an actual debate going on because he is putting his views out there and evidence is being debated."
These are good points and should be properly debated. I did not think Grahame really addressed them in his reply to Scipio.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5524.msg240865.html#msg240865
-
I'm of the belief that NO framing took place,but sheer incompetence on the part of EP,who'd made MISTAKES,knew it,and just dug themselves an even deeper hole in trying to justify them. It DOES go on whether people like to believe it or not.
It was,in a way,disbelief on the part of EP as to who DID commit the murders,but however they'd " partly " made up their minds,but it didn't take much to change them once the relatives put their sixpenn'orth in.
My views are controversial,but no way am I going to commit myself on an open forum.
-
I'm of the belief that NO framing took place,but sheer incompetence on the part of EP,who'd made MISTAKES,knew it,and just dug themselves an even deeper hole in trying to justify them. It DOES go on whether people like to believe it or not.
It was,in a way,disbelief on the part of EP as to who DID commit the murders,but however they'd " partly " made up their minds,but it didn't take much to change them once the relatives put their sixpenn'orth in.
My views are controversial,but no way am I going to commit myself on an open forum.
I tend to agree that the police made mistakes and the old saying about a tangled web is very apt here. However having dug a great big crater I do suspect it became necessary to add some manipulation into the mix. I cannot accept that silencer was found the way it was claimed complete with blood, red paint and grey hair, too pat, so gauche. Imo.
-
I tend to agree that the police made mistakes and the old saying about a tangled web is very apt here. However having dug a great big crater I do suspect it became necessary to add some manipulation into the mix. I cannot accept that silencer was found the way it was claimed complete with blood, red paint and grey hair, too pat, so gauche. Imo.
Admittedly,Maggie,the " finding " of the silencer was,or appeared to be a ploy,especially the way the exclamation appeared from DB on its discovery.
It was typical of a " clutching at straws " investigation,when things should have been left as they were initially as " Taff " Jones found the scene.
I cannot understand why they made a meal of this case.It doesn't make sense to me at all.
-
Great. I am particularly interested in the basis for each point you think to be the case and noting when there are alternative possibilities because the evidence is ambiguous.
By way of example, Nevill was shot first in the bedroom and then later shot in the kitchen after being severely beaten. He obviously could not have been beaten and killed in the kitchen then shot upstairs later so this proves he was shot first in the bedroom. Plus there was blood on the walls and drips in the rug that indicate his path to the kitchen.
It makes no sense for things to have proceeded to the kitchen unless the gun was empty. Likewise it makes no sense for the struggle to have taken place in the kitchen unless the gun was empty. The killer had to beat Nevill unconscious to be able to reload in peace and be able to finish him off. There were 11 bullets fired in the bedroom at June and Nevill which is the maximum load. With 11 bullets fired the gun would be empty and thus there would be a reason for things to proceed to the kitchen and for there to be a struggle there until Nevill was unconscious, the killer could reload and kill him.
There are 2 possibilities that the evidence doesn't provide any clear answer on. Nevill could have ran to the kitchen with the killer chasing him or Nevill could have chased his killer. Either way in the kitchen they rumbled so it is not an issue of major importance but one must be clear in admitting when the evidence can't provide a clear answer and there are different possibilities.
To aid you keep these things in mind:
1) Vanezis placed the blood in a bottle that he placed seals on so that one can see if they are tampered with.
2) Each bottle was then place in a bag with a seal and exhibit number.
3) Davidson filled out a CID6 form to record the blood and other evidence taken from Vanezis and personally took possession of the blood from Vanezis and brougth it to the evidence fridge at Chelmsford the police station
4) Davidson filled out 3 Holab3 forms to effect transfer of the 3 blood samples to HQ and they were taken by badge 1038.
5) A courier brought the blood samples from HQ to the lab. The lab received the 3 samples and returned a copy of the Holab3 form to Davidson to indicate receipt had occurred.
So the evidence COPL had in it possession was that all 3 samples successfully arrived at the lab.
So all 3 arrived and there was no evidence COLP developed of the lab reporting that any of the seals on these samples had been broken prior to arriving at the lab.
That prompted the investigators to ask Davidson if he knew of anyone else taking any samples besides these 3 or if he took any samples covertly himself while at the morgue which of course he answered no to.
I have not seen any COLP interviews where the lab was asked about what happened to 3 blood samples after being placed in their possession.
Unless one subscribes to the view that Davidson illicitly took blood extra blood while at the morgue the lab personnel would be the only ones in the position to illicitly use Sheila's own blood for invalid purposes.
Who died and made you teacher ::)? This isn't a freakin essay and if you're interested in my take, why am I hearing more about what YOU think?. I'll be writing MY OPINION MY WAY. But thanks for the exam paper - it's not required though!
-
Hello Caroline
I for one am looking forward to reading your take on this case as I know you research everything available to you and don't just post up rubbish like some :'(
-
Hello Caroline
I for one am looking forward to reading your take on this case as I know you research everything available to you and don't just post up rubbish like some :'(
Do you agree Sheila would not have heard anything. Giving Jeremy the opportunity to carry or lead her into the main bedroom ?
Or do you think Sheila woke and ended up petrified and retreating to the far corner, when seeing a gunman ?
-
Do you agree Sheila would not have heard anything. Giving Jeremy the opportunity to carry or lead her into the main bedroom ?
Or do you think Sheila woke and ended up petrified and retreating to the far corner, when seeing a gunman ?
I believe she was awake and instigated the whole thing.
-
Susan is still considering my question.
-
Am I sorry what is the question? I am not paying attention to your posts :'( Repeat please.
-
Adam I will be totally honest with you I just don't know what to believe anymore this is why I am looking forward to Caroline's take on the murders as it will be kinda new and maybe give us more to think about.
-
i watched a very intresting video last night.
i think bambergate might be on to somthing here ill go and finding it agian.
-
Who died and made you teacher ::)? This isn't a freakin essay and if you're interested in my take, why am I hearing more about what YOU think?. I'll be writing MY OPINION MY WAY. But thanks for the exam paper - it's not required though!
I figured I will help you get some of your facts straight since you demonstrated you had them messed up with your prior claims about the issue where you erroenously suggested the 3rd sample sat forever at the police station.
-
Ha, ha!! Talk about an opportunist!! I have made my position clear, the fact that you can't gasp it would be your problem. I believe Jeremy is most likely guilty BUT that he was framed because EP wanted to 'secure' a conviction. I don't believe they KNEW he was innocent and went ahead and framed him anyway - there would be no reason.
You can now sit back on the sideline waiting for your next opportunity to have a go. Pathetic!
The above post is abusive in a gratuitous way and uncalled for. There was nothing in my post to justify such a response. Admittedly I should, with hindsight, have edited out Scipio’s paragraph containing the word "coward". But that had nothing to do with the point I was making.
Am I to assume that, henceforth, any reply from me will be responded to in a similar way or else just ignored?
-
The above post is abusive in a gratuitous way and uncalled for. There was nothing in my post to justify such a response. Admittedly I should, with hindsight, have edited out Scipio’s paragraph containing the word "coward". But that had nothing to do with the point I was making.
Am I to assume that, henceforth, any reply from me will be responded to in a similar way or else just ignored?
Martin why don't you and Caroline kiss and make up?.......Well make up at least? :)
-
There's little that can be done when personalities clash,Grahame-----------as in EP with Jeremy,and because EP were who they were and had the upper hand,,they won,albeit in a wrong way.
There are some that immediately get your back up and where you have two strong characters,neither one,rightly or wrongly,will give in. That's human nature for you. :-[ Just grin and bear it. ;D
-
There's little that can be done when personalities clash,Grahame-----------as in EP with Jeremy,and because EP were who they were and had the upper hand,,they won,albeit in a wrong way.
There are some that immediately get your back up and where you have two strong characters,neither one,rightly or wrongly,will give in. That's human nature for you. :-[ Just grin and bear it. ;D
It all started when Caroline expressed her doubt about Jeremy's innocence. The Martin accused her of being a 5th columnist. Come on guys you're both worth your weight in gold and are two of the best posters on this forum. ;)
-
It all started when Caroline expressed her doubt about Jeremy's innocence. The Martin accused her of being a 5th columnist. Come on guys you're both worth your weight in gold and are two of the best posters on this forum. ;)
I honestly don't think I can read anything into what gets said/posted. It's just two people at cross purposes,nothing more.
-
I honestly don't think I can read anything into what gets said/posted. It's just two people at cross purposes,nothing more.
Yes very cross. :)
-
Yes very cross. :)
Hey,,I'm trying to give the benefit of the doubt here. ;D ;D