Jeremy Bamber Forum

JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Adam on August 02, 2014, 10:37:PM

Title: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 02, 2014, 10:37:PM
Jeremy started working on WHF in March 1984 (lots of 14/17 hour days)

Jeremy said Sheila hit her children but this was never reported ( until now).

The WS is mainly about Sheila.

Jeremy said he understood Sheila's problems (nutter, do lally, looney etc).

Jeremy spent one year in Australia. Then another three months in Australia & New Zealand (Generous parents).

Colin Caffell lost his job after the twins were born (perhaps Julie was right that Jeremy thought he would be doing Colin a favour).

Jeremy said there were discussions about Sheila taking over Jeremy's house ( I bet Jeremy would have loved that).

Jeremy said he had an amicable relationship with Sheila ( that's not what he told the police).

Jeremy said Sheila was non responsive when there were discussions about fostering (Andrew Hunter said there was a big row).

Jeremy said he fully loaded the magazine and breach. Then removed the magazine and breach ( does that mean Sheila had to load before firing the first shots).

Jeremy said he never saw Sheila  use a gun ( but he told the police she had).

On the massacre morning Jeremy said he arrived at WHF at 7.30am (meaning Jeremy arrived at WHF every morning, explaining the police phone call, which is better than being first on the scene). 

Jeremy said he last saw the family at 9.45pm. No one seemed distressed ( Sheila soon changed).

Jeremy said he immediately phoned the police after Neville phoned (Wrong. He got Neville's call at 3.10am but did not phone the police until 3.26am).

Jeremy said he phoned Julie to tell her 'something was wrong at the farm' (this corresponds with what Julie said. No mention of asking Julie for advice).

Jeremy said he phoned Julie at 3.25am (But the police received their call at 3.26am).



Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: grahameb on August 02, 2014, 11:12:PM
Some interesting points:

Jeremy spent one year in Australia. Then another three months in Australia & New Zealand (Generous parents).

Colin Caffell lost his job after the twins were born (perhaps Julie was right that Jeremy thought he would be doing Colin a favour).

Jeremy said there were discussions about Sheila taking over Jeremy's house ( I bet Jeremy would have loved that).

Jeremy said he had an amicable relationship with Sheila ( that's not what he told the police).

Jeremy said he fully loaded the magazine and breach. Then removed the magazine and breach ( does that mean Sheila had to load before firing the first shots).

Jeremy said he never saw Sheila  use a gun ( but he told the police she had).

On the massacre morning Jeremy said he arrived at WHF at 7.30am (meaning Jeremy arrived at WHF every morning, explaining the police phone call, which is better than being first on the scene). 

Jeremy said he last saw the family at 9.45pm. No one seemed distressed.

Jeremy said he immediately phoned the police after Neville phoned (thought he looked in a phone book).

Jeremy said he phoned Julie to tell her 'something was wrong at the farm' (no mention of asking Julie for advice).
Biased as usual. ::)
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 08:46:AM
Jeremy was unconvincing in court.

The judge repeatedly asking him to speak up. If he was innocent I thought he would be speaking up, confident in what he was saying.

His mask slipped after several hours of questioning when he said 'that is what you have to establish' when a prosecuting lawyer accused him of killing his family.

His Witness Statement is just as unconvincing.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 08:52:AM
Jeremy's parents went from one extreme to the other.

At first bringing him up. Paying for his private education, and then financing 15 months of travelling.

Then suddenly stopping the financing and telling Jeremy he has to work on the farm for his money.

Jeremy was outraged and tried to go it alone. Reluctantly returning to the farm after realising it was his best option. Later telling Julie he had 'too much to lose' by walking away.

Sheila and the twins meanwhile were living rent free in London. Eating away at any potential inheritance.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 08:58:AM
Was Jeremy's cottage big enough for Sheila and the twins ?

If so there is a possibility Jeremy was going to be told to move out and return to WHF. That would really affect his womanising and increase his resentment.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 09:02:AM
Jeremy told the police on the massacre night, Sheila was a 'nutter',  'looney', 'psychotic depressive' & said 'I don't like her and she does not like me'.

Years later he has also said he 'did not understand her illness'.

However his WS says he had an 'amicable relationship with Sheila'.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 09:06:AM
In court Jeremy said Sheila was 'non responsive' when the alleged  fostering conversation took place. The judge repeated this in court.

His WS confirms this.

So why does Andrew Hunter say there was a blazing row about fostering on the night ?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 09:09:AM
If Jeremy unloaded the magazine and breach before leaving, Sheila would have to re load before firing her first round of bullets.

Maybe Neville and June did not notice.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 09:13:AM
On the night Jeremy was clearly insinuating Sheila was capable of firing a weapon.

Firstly telling them how mad she was, telling them about Neville's phone call and saying Sheila was experienced with guns.

However in court and in his WS he says he had never seen Sheila use a gun.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 09:17:AM
Jeremy said he arrived at WHF at 7.30am on the morning before the massacre.

This explains the 3.26am phone call to the police. His only other option after the massacre was to arrive at WHF in the morning and discover the bodies. Or if he can't gain access, ring someone. Either way he is first on the scene.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 09:20:AM
Jeremy said he immediately phoned the police after Neville called.

But he also says Neville's call was 3.10am. The police logged Jeremy's call at 3.26am. Sixteen minutes later.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 09:26:AM
It does seem strange that Jeremy would phone Julie just to say 'something is wrong at the farm'. He does not say he needed her advice or support.

It was 3.00am. The phone may not be answered for a long time. Or may not be answered at all. Julie would be half asleep and not able or willing to give a competent answer. It also wastes valuble time.

Julie's WS supports Jeremy's WS. Agreeing that he did say 'there is something wrong at the farm'. However she also says Jeremy said 'everything is going well'.

It all suggests Jeremy was ringing Julie up to boast.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 09:28:AM
Oh look,you've got a page to yourself. You must be thrilled  ::)
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: JackiePreece on August 03, 2014, 09:39:AM
Colin Caffell lost his job after the twins were born (perhaps Julie was right that Jeremy thought he would be doing Colin a favour).

What value is that quote?

First he carried out the murders because of greed?

Now your quoting the master of deception saying he carried out the murders to do Colin a favour

Adam get a life
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: JackiePreece on August 03, 2014, 09:42:AM
Jeremy said there were discussions about Sheila taking over Jeremy's house ( I bet Jeremy would have loved that).

Have you asked Jeremy about this?

How do you know what he would have loved?

Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: No-Bits on August 03, 2014, 09:42:AM
Some interesting points:

Jeremy spent one year in Australia. Then another three months in Australia & New Zealand (Generous parents).

Colin Caffell lost his job after the twins were born (perhaps Julie was right that Jeremy thought he would be doing Colin a favour).

Jeremy said there were discussions about Sheila taking over Jeremy's house ( I bet Jeremy would have loved that).

Jeremy said he had an amicable relationship with Sheila ( that's not what he told the police).

Jeremy said Sheila was non responsive when there were discussions about fostering (Andrew Hunter said there was a big row).

Jeremy said he fully loaded the magazine and breach. Then removed the magazine and breach ( does that mean Sheila had to load before firing the first shots).

Jeremy said he never saw Sheila  use a gun ( but he told the police she had).

On the massacre morning Jeremy said he arrived at WHF at 7.30am (meaning Jeremy arrived at WHF every morning, explaining the police phone call, which is better than being first on the scene). 

Jeremy said he last saw the family at 9.45pm. No one seemed distressed ( Sheila soon changed).

Jeremy said he immediately phoned the police after Neville phoned (thought he looked in a phone book).

Jeremy said he phoned Julie to tell her 'something was wrong at the farm' (no mention of asking Julie for advice).

These aren't your words are they Adam?

Are they copied and pasted from somewhere?  ???
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: grahameb on August 03, 2014, 09:43:AM
Jeremy was unconvincing in court.

The judge repeatedly asking him to speak up. If he was innocent I thought he would be speaking up, confident in what he was saying.

His mask slipped after several hours of questioning when he said 'that is what you have to establish' when a prosecuting lawyer accused him of killing his family.

His Witness Statement is just as unconvincing.
Yet you and others are always saying he was cocky and confident? But now you're saying that if he was innocent he should be confident. Make up your mind if you are going to condemn him at least be consistent.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 09:43:AM
The main reason he committed the massacre was to inherit what the judge said was a lot more than £436,000.

However there were lots of other supporting reasons. Thread already created. I will locate it for you. Although I have already posted it several times.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 09:44:AM
These aren't your words are they Adam?

Are they copied and pasted from somewhere?  ::)

These are my words. After reading Jeremy's WS.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: No-Bits on August 03, 2014, 09:45:AM
These are my words. After reading Jeremy's WS.

Oh okay, makes a change lol  :D
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: grahameb on August 03, 2014, 09:45:AM
The main reason he committed the massacre was to inherit what the judge said was a lot more than £436,000.

However there were lots of other supporting reasons. Thread already created. I will locate it for you. Although I have already posted it several times.
He has never confirmed that. The most you can say is that it was his "alleged" motive. Just because the prosecution decided that was the motive that does not mean that it was.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 09:46:AM
Other motivations (apart from over £436,000) to commit the massacre:

ALREADY IN PRISON ON THE FARM:

Was it 14 or 17 hour days on the farm ? Either way long days. At court Jeremy said he had seen his fathers will which tied him to working on the farm until Neville died. 


BOARDING SCHOOL: 

Mary Mugford said Jeremy 'never forgave June for sending him to boarding school. 


THINGS WERE SLIPPING AWAY: 

Jeremy was 24. It was the 'loads of money' era. Jeremy wanted to be a rich playboy based in London. But told Julie he had 'too much to lose' by walking away. He had neither the talent or determination to make it alone. 

Mary Mugford said in court Jeremy had told her June was going to amend her will in favour of the twins. 


OPPORTUNITY: 

As the previous thread showed. There was an opportunity and ready made scapegoat. 


HATRED: 

People testified how Jeremy hated his parents. Julie testified how Jeremy said Sheila upset him when younger. 


RESENTMENT: 

Sheila was living rent & work free in London. And would have inherited as much as Jeremy when Neville/June deceased. But how many hours had she worked on the farm ? And how many hours would she put in after inheriting ? 


DOING EVERYONE A FAVOUR: 

Neville was apparently 'ready to be put to pasture', June was a 'religious maniac', Sheila needed being 'put out of her misery' & the twins were bound to be effected by all this. Even Colin would benefit as he would have more time to look for work without the burden of two children. 


PROVING JULIE WRONG, AND IMPRESSING HER:  

Julie obviously never believed Jeremy would do something so horrendous. Even on the night she dismissed him. On TV she said Jeremy used to 'say things to shock people'. 


STATUS, POWER, FAME: 

Jeremy would instantly obtain these. He offered a 'Sun' journalist his life story prior to being charged. 


TO SHOW HE COULD ACHIEVE SOMETHING: 

The perfect crime and frame. Jeremy was so proud. Ringing Julie on the night. Then telling her later but giving himself a proxy. He later boasted to Liz Rimmington 'only I know what really happened that night'. 


ON THE DAY: 

Spending 14, or was it 17 hours working on the farm. Watching Sheila & the twins strolling around on their free holiday. A rare opportunity with everyone at WHF. Julies dismissal. Maybe Jeremy had an argument at WHF that night. BW said there was always a strained atmosphere when Jeremy was present. 


THE CARAVAN BREAK IN: 

BW said June & Neville knew about this. Further damaging their relationship with Jeremy. Was it now beyond repair ? Jeremy and June had not spoken for years according to Mary Mugford. 


ADOPTION: 

Jeremy was not related by blood. He was adopted and then sent to boarding school. Before persuading his parents to finance some jaunts abroad. Now he was a farm labourer. Complaining about his adoptive parents interfering in his life. Parents he did not like. 


THE BUSINESS: 

AE says Jeremy and Neville had a blazing row just before the murders. Neville would always have the final say as Jeremy only had a small share. This would have frustrated the 'would be' business executive Jeremy. 
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 09:48:AM
He has never confirmed that. The most you can say is that it was his "alleged" motive. Just because the prosecution decided that was the motive that does not mean that it was.

Jeremy cannot confirm he committed the massacre for money. He has always said he is innocent.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: JackiePreece on August 03, 2014, 09:52:AM
Jeremy said he had an amicable relationship with Sheila ( that's not what he told the police).

It's quite obvious that Jeremy's relationship with Sheila changed according to her illness

It is well documented that Sheila had problems with friendships/relationships because of her illness
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 09:52:AM
Yet you and others are always saying he was cocky and confident? But now you're saying that if he was innocent he should be confident. Make up your mind if you are going to condemn him at least be consistent.





It's what is known as being cock-sure of yourself. I think we've all had that feeling at some time in our lives when we've known we were right. I know I have !! Arrogant too might I add because I was so sure that I'd done the right thing. Only problem is,you can stick your neck out a bit too much and upset those who've doubted what you've said. These are the ones who won't admit defeat no matter what.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 09:53:AM
Yet you and others are always saying he was cocky and confident? But now you're saying that if he was innocent he should be confident. Make up your mind if you are going to condemn him at least be consistent.

He was cocky and confident and also unhelpful. Especially when being interviewed by the police. Thread created yesterday.

However standing up in a high court and confidently lying to everyone is a harder thing to do. He could also not afford to be cocky in front of a jury.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: grahameb on August 03, 2014, 09:56:AM
Jeremy told the police on the massacre night, Sheila was a 'nutter',  'looney', 'psychotic depressive' & said 'I don't like her and she does not like me'.

Years later he has also said he 'did not understand her illness'.

However his WS says he had an 'amicable relationship with Sheila'.
So who do you believe, the policeman who interviewed Bamber and said he told the he hated his sister? Or his own witness statement where he states that he got on well with her?
Question: Why would he lie about it anyway?
Question: If his official witness statement said he got on well with her. But a police officer said he told him the opposite, then who is most likely to be lying?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 09:56:AM
Jeremy said he had an amicable relationship with Sheila ( that's not what he told the police).

It's quite obvious that Jeremy's relationship with Sheila changed according to her illness

It is well documented that Sheila had problems with friendships/relationships because of her illness

On the massacre night he called her -

A nutter.

A looney.

A psychotic depressive.

He also said 'I don't like her and she doesn't like me'.


Does not sound very amicable to me.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 09:56:AM
These aren't your words are they Adam?

Are they copied and pasted from somewhere?  ???





Of course they're copied and pasted Harters. There's nothing inside his brain except sawdust. :)
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 10:00:AM
So who do you believe, the policeman who interviewed Bamber and said he told the he hated his sister? Or his own witness statement where he states that he got on well with her?
Question: Why would he lie about it anyway?
Question: If his official witness statement said he got on well with her. But a police officer said he told him the opposite, then who is most likely to be lying?

So how did Jeremy manage to persuade the police on the massacre night Sheila was capable of committing the massacre ? Creating the siege situation.

The police have no reason to lie. Other people have also commented on Jeremy's resentment of Sheila.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: grahameb on August 03, 2014, 10:00:AM
He was cocky and confident and also unhelpful. Especially when being interviewed by the police. Thread created yesterday.

However standing up in a high court and confidently lying to everyone is a harder thing to do. He could also not afford to be cocky in front of a jury.
But wasn't he supposed to have said to the prosecution something on the lines of, "That's for you to prove"? That's sounds cocky doesn't it? So what you're saying is that he was cocky out of court but not cocky in court, is that correct?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 10:02:AM
But wasn't he supposed to have said to the prosecution something on the lines of, "That's for you to prove"? That's sounds cocky doesn't it? So what you're saying is that he was cocky out of court but not cocky in court, is that correct?

No, he said 'that is what you have to establish'.

After several hours of questioning, the mask of a killer briefly slipped.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: JackiePreece on August 03, 2014, 10:03:AM
Jeremy said he phoned Julie to tell her 'something was wrong at the farm' (no mention of asking Julie for advice).


Probably one of the most important statements ever made in this case

Julie claimed Jeremy said tonight's the night! On the day of the murders!!

Why would he then phone her and say something is wrong at the farm? Why not say job done everybody is dead?

He had already told her tonight's the night????

If Jeremy is innocent the statement he made to Julie (something's wrong at the farm)
would be spot on !!!

Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 10:06:AM
Jeremy said he phoned Julie to tell her 'something was wrong at the farm' (no mention of asking Julie for advice).


Probably one of the most important statements ever made in this case

Julie claimed Jeremy said tonight's the night! On the day of the murders!!

Why would he then phone her and say something is wrong at the farm? Why not say job done everybody is dead?

He had already told her tonight's the night????

If Jeremy is innocent the statement he made to Julie (something's wrong at the farm)
would be spot on !!!

Both Julie and Jeremy confirm that he said 'something is wrong at the farm'.

Julie says Jeremy also said 'everything is going well'.

The 2002 appeal found it amazing that Jeremy phoned Julie at that time in his current situation.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: JackiePreece on August 03, 2014, 10:09:AM
I never doubted Jeremy said there is something wrong at the farm??

That's exactly what Jeremy would have said

It's the embellishment of everything's going well

It doesn't fit does it
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 10:14:AM
I never doubted Jeremy said there is something wrong at the farm??

That's exactly what Jeremy would have said

It's the embellishment of everything's going well

It doesn't fit does it

It does fit.

When interviewed Jeremy said 'no comment' when asked why he phoned Julie at 3.00am.

Earlier in the evening Jeremy said he phoned Julie. Julie said he said  'it's now or never'.

So it is perfectly plausible he would phone Julie later to boast that 'everything is going well, there is something wrong at the farm'.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: grahameb on August 03, 2014, 10:17:AM
No, he said 'that is what you have to establish'.

After several hours of questioning, the mask of a killer briefly slipped.
And of course after a second of cross examination Muggy's mask was floods of tears so the court had to be adjourned.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: grahameb on August 03, 2014, 10:19:AM
Both Julie and Jeremy confirm that he said 'something is wrong at the farm'.

Julie says Jeremy also said 'everything is going well'.

The 2002 appeal found it amazing that Jeremy phoned Julie at that time in his current situation.
Doesn't that seem a bit contradictory to you, as if the words are taken out of context. JM couldn't have thought it that strange because she told him to go back to bed?
Everything is going well. Something is wrong at the farm. I don't know about anybody else, but those words don't seem to fit together very well, as if they are taken out of context or something?
Something else ought to be queried as well. Doesn't this phone call rather indicate that Bamber was not at the farm?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 10:19:AM
He didn't want to feel a wally giving his reason why he rang Julie,,which was to ask what he should do.
Imagine acting all macho,then suddenly coming out with that ?
Pity there was a lack of understanding regarding people.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 10:23:AM
He didn't want to feel a wally giving his reason why he rang Julie,,which was to ask what he should do.
Imagine acting all macho,then suddenly coming out with that ?
Pity there was a lack of understanding regarding people.

Yes but his WS does not say he rang Julie for advice. His WS says he just rang and wasted valuable minutes to tell her 'something was wrong at the farm'.

He seemed to know what's what when he met the police. Telling them exactly what he thought was going down inside WHF. So don't know why he would ring Julie.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 10:28:AM
He also did not tell the police he rang Julie for advice.

When they asked he said 'no comment'.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: grahameb on August 03, 2014, 10:31:AM
Doesn't that seem a bit contradictory to you, as if the words are taken out of context. JM couldn't have thought it that strange because she told him to go back to bed?
Everything is going well. Something is wrong at the farm. I don't know about anybody else, but those words don't seem to fit together very well, as if they are taken out of context or something?
Something else ought to be queried as well. Doesn't this phone call rather indicate that Bamber was not at the farm?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: grahameb on August 03, 2014, 10:32:AM
Yes but his WS does not say he rang Julie for advice. His WS says he just rang and wasted valuable minutes to tell her 'something was wrong at the farm'.

He seemed to know what's what when he met the police. Telling them exactly what he thought was going down inside WHF. So don't know why he would ring Julie.
No it didn't.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 10:33:AM
Doesn't that seem a bit contradictory to you, as if the words are taken out of context. JM couldn't have thought it that strange because she told him to go back to bed?
Everything is going well. Something is wrong at the farm. I don't know about anybody else, but those words don't seem to fit together very well, as if they are taken out of context or something?
Something else ought to be queried as well. Doesn't this phone call rather indicate that Bamber was not at the farm?

Well done Grahame. You are correct. Jeremy was not at the farm between 3.00am - 3.30am.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 10:33:AM
 I've just explained why he said " no comment "! D'oh. Would you admit to asking someone for advice ? NO,you wouldn't,if you're a 24 year old arrogant,cocky individual. One thing laughs at another.
God you.ve got a lot to learn. You're bloody hard work.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 10:36:AM
I've just explained why he said " no comment "! D'oh. Would you admit to asking someone for advice ? NO,you wouldn't,if you're a 24 year old arrogant,cocky individual. One thing laughs at another.
God you.ve got a lot to learn. You're bloody hard work.

He is being interviewed in connection to a murder. Best not to worry about embarressing yourself in front of two police officers.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 10:39:AM
I'm pretty sure Jeremy wasn't bothered, because he was telling the truth. I'm never bothered when I tell the truth,are you ?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 10:41:AM
How is saying 'no comment' telling the truth ?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 10:47:AM
 They are NOT obliged to answer any questions. Don't you watch crime docu's. ?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: maggie on August 03, 2014, 10:49:AM
I never doubted Jeremy said there is something wrong at the farm??

That's exactly what Jeremy would have said

It's the embellishment of everything's going well

It doesn't fit does it
I agree JAckie it doesn't make any sense at all. Saying there was something wrong at the farm is quit possibly correct but 'everything is going well' certainly seems to be out of context and doesn't make any sense in their so called conversation. Far from convincing IMO.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 10:52:AM
Jeremy said 'no comment' over 30 times when interviewed by the police.

He had obviously given up being their friend. It was a case of not making any slip ups & maintaining his innocence.

The police now believed he was guilty. Jeremy was not going to change that. The only thing that mattered now was what happened in court.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 10:56:AM
I agree JAckie it doesn't make any sense at all. Saying there was something wrong at the farm is quit possibly correct but 'everything is going well' certainly seems to be out of context and doesn't make any sense in their so called conversation. Far from convincing IMO.

If correct do you think it was strange that Jeremy rang Julie just to say 'there is something wrong at the farm '. Wasting valuble minutes.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 10:59:AM
Jeremy said 'no comment' over 30 times when interviewed by the police.

He had obviously given up being their friend. It was a case of not making any slip ups & maintaining his innocence.

The police now believed he was guilty. Jeremy was not going to change that. The only thing that mattered now was what happened in court.





I've just told you,clothears------------NOBODY is obliged to answer ANYTHING,so that's why they say " no comment " Jeremys' solicitor would have advised him to keep his mouth shut.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 11:02:AM




I've just told you,clothears------------NOBODY is obliged to answer ANYTHING,so that's why they say " no comment " Jeremys' solicitor would have advised him to keep his mouth shut.

Can you not keep making personal digs please. Just discuss the case.

The interview transcript had only one brief intervention from the present lawyer.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Jane on August 03, 2014, 11:03:AM
I agree JAckie it doesn't make any sense at all. Saying there was something wrong at the farm is quit possibly correct but 'everything is going well' certainly seems to be out of context and doesn't make any sense in their so called conversation. Far from convincing IMO.


Maggie, much depends on the order in which the sentences are said. Julie has said that she'd known for a year that Jeremy had murder in mind, so if Jeremy's words were "Everything is going well, something is wrong at the farm" it would have been an immediate confirmation of everything she said he had in mind...................but strange that she chose to do nothing. However, whist I believe both Julie and Jeremy say that he said "Something is wrong at the farm," I believe that only Julie says the words "Everything is going well" were said.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 11:06:AM

Maggie, much depends on the order in which the sentences are said. Julie has said that she'd known for a year that Jeremy had murder in mind, so if Jeremy's words were "Everything is going well, something is wrong at the farm" it would have been an immediate confirmation of everything she said he had in mind...................but strange that she chose to do nothing. However, whist I believe both Julie and Jeremy say that he said "Something is wrong at the farm," I believe that only Julie says the words "Everything is going well" were said.

There is no way Jeremy is going to admit to saying 'everything is going well'. It is admitting guilt.

Julie could not phone back. The phone at her place did not allow it. She lived in Lewisham. Not the sort of place to be wandering around looking for a phone box at 3.00am. So what could she do ?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: maggie on August 03, 2014, 11:21:AM
If correct do you think it was strange that Jeremy rang Julie just to say 'there is something wrong at the farm '. Wasting valuble minutes.
No I don't Adam. Jeremy was only 24 and 24 year old men are often very young in some ways We don't know his true personality therefore don't know if he was quite an indecisive personality. He may have been unsure what to do and turned to Julie, his closest confident especially as Brett Collins was away in Greece. It appears Julie was possibly quite assertive and more mature in many ways and Jeremy was used to taking her advice.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 11:29:AM
No I don't Adam. Jeremy was only 24 and 24 year old men are often very young in some ways We don't know his true personality therefore don't know if he was quite an indecisive personality. He may have been unsure what to do and turned to Julie, his closest confident especially as Brett Collins was away in Greece. It appears Julie was possibly quite assertive and more mature in many ways and Jeremy was used to taking her advice.

Yes but he did not say he rang Julie for advice.

Saying 'no comment' when the police asked him why he phoned Julie.  Then saying in his WS he just rang her to say 'there was something wrong at the farm'.

He also said in his WS he got Neville's call at 3:10am and immediately rang the police. However his call is logged at 3:26am. This suggests he phoned Julie before the police. Something at first he agreed he did. However eventually he said he phoned the police before phoning Julie.

So why call Julie if you have already made the decision to  call the police, and they have told him to go to WHF ?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Jane on August 03, 2014, 11:31:AM
There is no way Jeremy is going to admit to saying 'everything is going well'. It is admitting guilt.

Julie could not phone back. The phone at her place did not allow it. She lived in Lewisham. Not the sort of place to be wandering around looking for a phone box at 3.00am. So what could she do ?



THAT was not my point.  The point I was making was if the words were said in the order I presented them, then there is ABSOLUTELY no question that Julie was 100% certain of his guilt. There was no ambiguity. There was no room for her to make any allowances. She could have saved herself a lot of trouble had she, instead of going back to bed, called the police -a 999 call could have been made from the phone in the house. She need never have seen Jeremy again........................but then again, she may have thought about what she would miss out on if she reported it. Perhaps she chose to forget that she believed he'd murdered his family because the expensive dinners, holidays abroad, raunchy sex and the prospect of being his wife was more important to her than the death of his family at his hands.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Caroline on August 03, 2014, 11:38:AM
If Jeremy unloaded the magazine and breach before leaving, Sheila would have to re load before firing her first round of bullets.

Maybe Neville and June did not notice.

He didn't say he 'unloaded the magazine' he said he removed it.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 11:39:AM


THAT was not my point.  The point I was making was if the words were said in the order I presented them, then there is ABSOLUTELY no question that Julie was 100% certain of his guilt. There was no ambiguity. There was no room for her to make any allowances. She could have saved herself a lot of trouble had she, instead of going back to bed, called the police -a 999 call could have been made from the phone in the house. She need never have seen Jeremy again........................but then again, she may have thought about what she would miss out on if she reported it. Perhaps she chose to forget that she believed he'd murdered his family because the expensive dinners, holidays abroad, raunchy sex and the prospect of being his wife was more important to her than the death of his family at his hands.

Jeremy is not the only man who could give an attractive young woman raunchy sex.

If Julie was worried about missing out on pre funeral lobster and champagne dinners, why did she turn down June's offer to buy her a house ?

Julie testified the phone could not make outside calls. So she could not ring Jeremy back.

Julie was in a deep sleep at 3am. Jeremy saying 'everything is going well and there is something wrong at the farm' may not have registered straight away. Anyway Julie said Jeremy liked to say things to shock people.

Julie did say later after his phone call that she realised what may have happened.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Caroline on August 03, 2014, 11:43:AM
Jeremy is not the only man who could give an attractive young woman raunchy sex.

If Julie was worried about missing out on pre funeral lobster and champagne dinners, why did she turn down June's offer to buy her a house ?

Julie testified the phone could not make outside calls. So she could not ring Jeremy back.

Julie was in a deep sleep at 3am. Jeremy saying 'everything is going well and there is something wrong at the farm' may not have registered straight away. Anyway Julie said Jeremy liked to say things to shock people.

Julie did say later after his phone call that she realised what may have happened.

Yeah  ::)
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: JackiePreece on August 03, 2014, 11:45:AM
Maggie is right

I believe that Jeremy thought Sheila was having an episode and wanted to tell Julie.
He was on his own and needed to tell someone
Once again I will state he had NO idea how serious things had got
Hence on being surprised when told all his family were dead
He had spoken to his dad a few hours earlier and obviously thought the family were still ok when him and Bewes saw movement in the house

Once again Adam

Jeremy told Julie there was something wrong at the farm

He would NOT have said those words of he had really said tonight's the night

By saying THOSE words he clearly had NO idea what was going down at WHF
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: JackiePreece on August 03, 2014, 11:47:AM
Once again because you obviously don't grasp what you

If someone says something's wrong at the farm means

Something's wrong at the farm but I am not sure what !!!
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Jane on August 03, 2014, 11:49:AM
Jeremy is not the only man who could give an attractive young woman raunchy sex.
ABSOLUTELY!!! BUT THEY MAY NOT HAVE HAD HIS POTENTIAL WEALTH

If Julie was worried about missing out on pre funeral lobster and champagne dinners, why did she turn down June's offer to buy her a house ?
ANGLING FOR CAVIAR OVER COCKLES?

Julie testified the phone could not make outside calls. So she could not ring Jeremy back.
CAN'T THINK WHY SHE'D WANT TO

Julie was in a deep sleep at 3am. Jeremy saying 'everything is going well and there is something wrong at the farm' may not have registered straight away. Anyway Julie said Jeremy liked to say things to shock people.
IF JEREMY HAD BEEN DROPPING HINTS ABOUT MURDER FOR THE PAST YEAR AND PHONED HER AT THAT TIME OF NIGHT, I THINK THE PENNY WOULD HAVE DROPPED IMMEDIATELY.

Julie did say later after his phone call that she realised what may have happened.
SO DOING NOTHING WAS HER CHOICE?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 11:54:AM
Maggie is right

I believe that Jeremy thought Sheila was having an episode and wanted to tell Julie.
He was on his own and needed to tell someone
Once again I will state he had NO idea how serious things had got
Hence on being surprised when told all his family were dead
He had spoken to his dad a few hours earlier and obviously thought the family were still ok when him and Bewes saw movement in the house

Once again Adam

Jeremy told Julie there was something wrong at the farm

He would NOT have said those words of he had really said tonight's the night

By saying THOSE words he clearly had NO idea what was going down at WHF

Why phone Julie ? Not for advice. He says he had already phoned the police (16 minutes after Neville's call) & was meeting them at WHF.

Jeremy at first claimed he phoned Julie before the police.  Probably to boast that 'everything is going well'. Independent witnesses support this and even show his call to Julie was before Neville's alleged phone call. Already discussed.

Eventually under police questioning he said he phoned Julie after the police. His reason - 'no comment'. His later WS said it was just to tell her 'something is wrong at the farm'.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 12:00:PM


Do you think Julie should have phoned  the police after Jeremy woke up her entire house to say 'everything is going well, something is wrong at the farm'.

Perhaps she thought Jeremy was dealing with it. It was his family and he was only 5 minutes away from WHF.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Caroline on August 03, 2014, 12:27:PM
Do you think Julie should have phoned  the police after Jeremy woke up her entire house to say 'everything is going well, something is wrong at the farm'.

Perhaps she thought Jeremy was dealing with it. It was his family and he was only 5 minutes away from WHF.

No, but she could have tried saying something during the year he was planning to kill them.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Jane on August 03, 2014, 12:42:PM
Do you think Julie should have phoned  the police after Jeremy woke up her entire house to say 'everything is going well, something is wrong at the farm'.

Perhaps she thought Jeremy was dealing with it. It was his family and he was only 5 minutes away from WHF.


Oh dear, I think my reply must have gone walk about. A shame, it was a good one.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Jane on August 03, 2014, 12:58:PM
Do you think Julie should have phoned  the police after Jeremy woke up her entire house to say 'everything is going well, something is wrong at the farm'.

Perhaps she thought Jeremy was dealing with it. It was his family and he was only 5 minutes away from WHF.


What I think 30 years on is quite irrelevant. However, what Julie may have thought then can possibly give us a clue about the things which motivated her.

She was an intelligent girl. She would have known how to think and what question to ask. Giving her the benefit of the doubt, it may be that up to the point of THAT call, it had been an intellectual jigsaw which she can't NOT have thought about from time to time, but she didn't ask the questions presumably because she'd rather NOT know the answer. Better to think he liked to say shocking things. I CAN understand why she wouldn't want to believe he was serious. Who would?

His call, at the time of night it came, HAD to have changed everything. The last piece of the jigsaw must have fallen into pace and it's at this point that any sympathy I'd previously felt for her is diminished because I think it was here that she made a conscious decision about what course of action would deliver the most for her, putting her own wants above the lives of his family. I resolutely believe that if he'd married her she would have said nothing.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 01:17:PM
We will never know.

Jeremy's WS says Neville's 'mysterious' phone call was at 3.10am. He phoned the police at 3.26am.

What do you think he was doing for 16 minutes ?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Jan on August 03, 2014, 01:29:PM
We will never know.

Jeremy's WS says Neville's 'mysterious' phone call was at 3.10am. He phoned the police at 3.26am.

What do you think he was doing for 16 minutes ?

perhaps we will Adam .

The truth always comes out in the end.

It may be that all we need is for someone to put pressure on to get all those 200 boxes the EP refuse to release. And if there is nothing in there then at least it will keep Jeremy busy - if they have nothing to hide they have nothing to lose do they?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Jane on August 03, 2014, 01:44:PM
We will never know.

Jeremy's WS says Neville's 'mysterious' phone call was at 3.10am. He phoned the police at 3.26am.

What do you think he was doing for 16 minutes ?


Going back only 4 and a half years since I received one of "those" calls, I can only give approximations, time wise. The call came 5/10 minutes past 1am. I got up, threw clothes on, called my partner's brother, called his daughter in law -I had to look in my address book for both numbers-  found my car keys, grabbed my bag and pulled on a coat. It was 1.25 ish when I left.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 01:54:PM
Do you think Julie should have phoned  the police after Jeremy woke up her entire house to say 'everything is going well, something is wrong at the farm'.

Perhaps she thought Jeremy was dealing with it. It was his family and he was only 5 minutes away from WHF.





" Everything is going well ",could quite possibly have referred to the harvesting if Julie had asked how things were. It was that time of the year when Jeremy realised that he'd have to pull out all the stops if he was going to get on with his father and the farm in general. I think Neville had had words prior to Jeremy working on the farm after his " jaunts " abroad. Both June and Neville had said that Jeremy was lazy.
It HAS to do with how it's interpreted and what you read into it !
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 02:10:PM
Jeremy rang Julie up at 3.00am to tell her the harvesting is going well ?

Thank you. I just laughed.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Jane on August 03, 2014, 02:12:PM




" Everything is going well ",could quite possibly have referred to the harvesting if Julie had asked how things were. It was that time of the year when Jeremy realised that he'd have to pull out all the stops if he was going to get on with his father and the farm in general. I think Neville had had words prior to Jeremy working on the farm after his " jaunts " abroad. Both June and Neville had said that Jeremy was lazy.
It HAS to do with how it's interpreted and what you read into it !



Don't you find curious the juxtaposition of the two sentences given the time of the call?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 02:21:PM


Don't you find curious the juxtaposition of the two sentences given the time of the call?





No,not really. It was just unfortunate timing and bad luck on Jeremys' part that what happened,did.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 02:28:PM

Going back only 4 and a half years since I received one of "those" calls, I can only give approximations, time wise. The call came 5/10 minutes past 1am. I got up, threw clothes on, called my partner's brother, called his daughter in law -I had to look in my address book for both numbers-  found my car keys, grabbed my bag and pulled on a coat. It was 1.25 ish when I left.

But Jeremy in his WS said he phoned the police straight away.

It has already been posted on here that it is very suspicious that he did not phone 999, or the Folkes's. Jeremy said 'it did not occur to him'.  For some reason he looked up the phone number for a police station miles away. But that would not take 16 minutes to do.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Caroline on August 03, 2014, 02:31:PM




" Everything is going well ",could quite possibly have referred to the harvesting if Julie had asked how things were. It was that time of the year when Jeremy realised that he'd have to pull out all the stops if he was going to get on with his father and the farm in general. I think Neville had had words prior to Jeremy working on the farm after his " jaunts " abroad. Both June and Neville had said that Jeremy was lazy.
It HAS to do with how it's interpreted and what you read into it !

Why would Jeremy make a call to Julie after 3am having had a call from his father to say Sheila had the gun, to tell her that the harvest was going well 'before' calling the police?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 02:36:PM
Why would Jeremy make a call to Julie after 3am having had a call from his father to say Sheila had the gun, to tell her that the harvest was going well 'before' calling the police?

Perhaps he was too busy saying 'it's now or never' in his 10am call to Julie, and forgot to mention how the harvesting was going.

Julie would of course be worried about the harvesting and unable to sleep. Explaining the 3am call.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Jane on August 03, 2014, 02:47:PM
Perhaps he was too busy saying 'it's now or never' in his 10am call to Julie, and forgot to mention how the harvesting was going.

Julie would of course be worried about the harvesting and unable to sleep. Explaining the 3am call.



Perhaps the 10pm call was to sing "O solo mio" to his beloved. Julie being concerned about the harvest? You got it in one.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: susan on August 03, 2014, 02:48:PM
Caroline Hi  Jeremy would not call Julie in the middle of the night to tell her the harvest was going well just nonsense IMO.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: susan on August 03, 2014, 02:51:PM
Adam Caroline posted a very feasible explanation why he did not dial 999 and it made good sense to me.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Caroline on August 03, 2014, 02:54:PM
Caroline Hi  Jeremy would not call Julie in the middle of the night to tell her the harvest was going well just nonsense IMO.

 ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 03:33:PM
Why would Jeremy make a call to Julie after 3am having had a call from his father to say Sheila had the gun, to tell her that the harvest was going well 'before' calling the police?





 Dependant on what his father had said besides what we all knew,he'd have phoned,oblivious of the time,because he was obviously worried this time and because they both knew what his father was like regarding authority,he probably wanted the reassurance from her because she was the more " sensible " one in the relationship,who he thought would best advise him.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 03:42:PM
 Ordinarily when Sheila had one of her psychotic attacks,both Neville and Jeremy would have calmed her,so imagine police cars with sirens going,blue lights flashing turning up outside WHF where Neville was concerned. I can understand that Jeremy didn't want to undermine his father,as just because Neville said that she had one of his guns,he didn't mention about shooting or having shot anyone.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Caroline on August 03, 2014, 03:55:PM




 Dependant on what his father had said besides what we all knew,he'd have phoned,oblivious of the time,because he was obviously worried this time and because they both knew what his father was like regarding authority,he probably wanted the reassurance from her because she was the more " sensible " one in the relationship,who he thought would best advise him.

He knew it was after midnight and that at such a time Julie wouldn't be interested in how the harvest was going. Also if he was 'worried' why didn't he dial 999? None of us know Jeremy (other than Jackie) so we can't make assumptions about who was more sensible BUT if he called for advice on what to do, why didn't he actually tell her what the problem was? In neither Jeremy's or Julie's statement does it actually mention him telling her about the call from his father or Sheila having a gun - odd to say the least. Possible reason? They hadn't discussed what was actually going to happen and he didn't need to make up the call from his father in an explanation to Julie because he had already thought of the hitman story for her. He ONLY called Julie for the benefit of the other flatmates to seal his alibi.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: scipio_usmc on August 03, 2014, 04:16:PM
Ordinarily when Sheila had one of her psychotic attacks,both Neville and Jeremy would have calmed her,so imagine police cars with sirens going,blue lights flashing turning up outside WHF where Neville was concerned. I can understand that Jeremy didn't want to undermine his father,as just because Neville said that she had one of his guns,he didn't mention about shooting or having shot anyone.

When did Jeremy clam her down during a psychotic episode?  Nevill is the one who supposedly had a calming effect on her not Jeremy, she didn't even want Jeremy to drive her home from Colin's place.  You need to stop making things up.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 04:19:PM
He knew it was after midnight and that at such a time Julie wouldn't be interested in how the harvest was going. Also if he was 'worried' why didn't he dial 999? None of us know Jeremy (other than Jackie) so we can't make assumptions about who was more sensible BUT if he called for advice on what to do, why didn't he actually tell her what the problem was? In neither Jeremy's or Julie's statement does it actually mention him telling her about the call from his father or Sheila having a gun - odd to say the least. Possible reason? They hadn't discussed what was actually going to happen and he didn't need to make up the call from his father in an explanation to Julie because he had already thought of the hitman story for her. He ONLY called Julie for the benefit of the other flatmates to seal his alibi.





To be honest,Caroline,Julie didn't appear interested in his call at all. All flatmates had been drinking and she admitted to smoking cannabis as well,so wouldn't exactly have been " with it ".
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 04:23:PM
When did Jeremy clam her down during a psychotic episode?  Nevill is the one who supposedly had a calming effect on her not Jeremy, she didn't even want Jeremy to drive her home from Colin's place.  You need to stop making things up.





Listen who's talking,making things up. Trouble is,you believe what you say/post !!

Sheila had asked Jeremy to drive her home because of Colin having been drunk.

You don't know what you're talking about half the time. Empty vessels----------------------------
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Jane on August 03, 2014, 04:26:PM
When did Jeremy clam her down during a psychotic episode?  Nevill is the one who supposedly had a calming effect on her not Jeremy, she didn't even want Jeremy to drive her home from Colin's place.  You need to stop making things up.


To perhaps get it into perspective, who would you rather take home from a party, your sister or the woman you hoped to renew a relationship with?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: scipio_usmc on August 03, 2014, 04:30:PM
Caroline Hi  Jeremy would not call Julie in the middle of the night to tell her the harvest was going well just nonsense IMO.

He had no reason to call Julie at all but you are right that it is especially nonsense to try claiming he called to tell her harvesting was going well when he had already talked to her a few hours earlier about his work day.

The supposed context is that Nevill had phoned to say Sheila was raging with a gun come help.  So he calls Julie to take about harvesting?  Lookout is so desperate to make excuses for Jeremy that she never really thinks about how silly some of the things she comes up with truly are.

Someone who actually received a call from their father like Jeremy asserts occurred would not wake up their girlfriend at all.  he claims at first he did not think the situation was serious so that is why he didn't call 999 or call police right away. Calling your girlfriend before police still makes no sense. You wake your girfriend to say something may be wrong at WHF but you are not positive or not.  Why would you do that?  At best you call and wake her when you find out they are hurt for sure and you need someone to comfort you. 

The only explanation for his call is that it was to support his alibi.  He told police that proof he received the call from Nevill is that he phoned his girlfriend after receiving such call and told her about the call.  Indeed, he called her again at 6AM to tell her not to go to work because he needed her to talk to police and tell them about how he called her at 3AM.

I have never seen anyone come up with anything else as a plausible reason for that 3AM call.  Aside from the roomates saying it was at 3Am so well before the call to police it is obvious it can't have been after the call to police because he was on the phone with police for 11 minutes and had to rush out to meet police so didn't have time at that point and would have told her how he had called the police and had to go meet them but had not told her such.

Jeremy's staunchest defenders never really want to look in detial at how little sense his actions made.   

Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 05:21:PM
 Try understanding about people if it's humanely possible for you.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 08:25:PM
Jeremy in his WS says he phoned Julie at about 3:25am.


Mmmm
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: grahameb on August 03, 2014, 08:34:PM
Jeremy in his WS says he phoned Julie at about 3:25am.


Mmmm
And so did JM in her witness statement. And so did one of the other people who was staying in the same place she was.
Hmmmm.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 09:04:PM
How can he ring Julie at  3:25am and the police at 3:26am ?

I know, the conversation with Julie was very quick, less than a minute.

Julie's WS said Jeremy said 'everything is going well, there is something wrong at the farm, love you lots'. Julie told him to 'go back to bed' and put the phone down = 1 minute.

So Jeremy phoned Julie at 3:25am and the police at 3:26am. After spending 16 minutes looking for the phone number of a police station miles away.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: grahameb on August 03, 2014, 10:39:PM
How can he ring Julie at  3:25am and the police at 3:26am ?

I know, the conversation with Julie was very quick, less than a minute.

Julie's WS said Jeremy said 'everything is going well, there is something wrong at the farm, love you lots'. Julie told him to 'go back to bed' and put the phone down = 1 minute.

So Jeremy phoned Julie at 3:25am and the police at 3:26am. After spending 16 minutes looking for the phone number of a police station miles away.
So that must have been the reason JM changed the times then?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: scipio_usmc on August 03, 2014, 10:48:PM
So that must have been the reason JM changed the times then?

Julie didn't change the time, she didn't know what time it was.  Her roomates told her what time it was. Two of her roomates were certain it was 3.  Her other roomate thought 3:15 though she was not positive and said it could have been as late as 3:30.  Jeremy was on the phone with police from 3:26-3:37 and then ran out to meet police so obviously he called before he called police. He initially lied to police saying he called her after but during questioning he admitted the truth then claimed he wasn't sure who he called first.  He wasn't sure what to do because his web enveloped him.

The most reliable time seems to be around 3AM since that is what the 2 roomates most certain say.  It hads nothign to do with Julie coming up with the time because she wasn't sure and is relying on her roomates.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 10:51:PM
They were all smashed ! Didn't know whether it was Christmas Day or Pancake Tuesday-----unreliable !
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on August 03, 2014, 10:59:PM
From the 2002 appeal:

101. At about 9.50 p.m. on Tuesday, 6 August the appellant telephoned Miss Mugford. During their conversation that evening he said he was "pissed off" and had been thinking about the crime all day and that it was going to be "tonight or never". The following morning she was awoken by a telephone call from the appellant to her lodgings in London. The appellant said to her, "Everything is going well. Something is wrong at the farm. I haven't had any sleep all night … bye honey and I love you lots". Miss Mugford did not take him seriously and went back to sleep. As to the timing of this call, Miss Mugford said in evidence said that it was between 3.00 and 3.30 a.m.

102. A number of Miss Mugford's housemates were disturbed by the telephone call and provided additional evidence as to timing. One, Helen Eaton, had been consulted by Julie Mugford, when the latter was first making a statement to the police about it. She put the time at 3.00 a.m. in evidence but agreed in cross-examination that it might have been as late as 3.30 a.m.

103. Another flat mate, Sue Battersby, said that she was positive that when she was disturbed, she had looked at her clock and the time shown was 3.12 a.m. However, she pointed out that she was in the habit of keeping her clock about 10 minutes early and police checks made on the clock confirmed this to be the case. If her evidence was right and if the clock was, as the evidence suggested, ten minutes fast, the time was probably no more than a minute or two after 3 a.m.

104. Joanna Woad gave evidence that when she heard the telephone, she looked at her digital clock and all that she noted was that the time was 2 something. This meant that according to her clock the time was between 2.00 and 2.59 a.m. If it was at the end of that bracket, it differed very little from the time suggested by Susan Battersby's evidence.


Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: lookout on August 03, 2014, 11:04:PM
 More C&P.zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: grahameb on August 03, 2014, 11:42:PM
From the 2002 appeal:

101. At about 9.50 p.m. on Tuesday, 6 August the appellant telephoned Miss Mugford. During their conversation that evening he said he was "pissed off" and had been thinking about the crime all day and that it was going to be "tonight or never". The following morning she was awoken by a telephone call from the appellant to her lodgings in London. The appellant said to her, "Everything is going well. Something is wrong at the farm. I haven't had any sleep all night … bye honey and I love you lots". Miss Mugford did not take him seriously and went back to sleep. As to the timing of this call, Miss Mugford said in evidence said that it was between 3.00 and 3.30 a.m.

102. A number of Miss Mugford's housemates were disturbed by the telephone call and provided additional evidence as to timing. One, Helen Eaton, had been consulted by Julie Mugford, when the latter was first making a statement to the police about it. She put the time at 3.00 a.m. in evidence but agreed in cross-examination that it might have been as late as 3.30 a.m.

103. Another flat mate, Sue Battersby, said that she was positive that when she was disturbed, she had looked at her clock and the time shown was 3.12 a.m. However, she pointed out that she was in the habit of keeping her clock about 10 minutes early and police checks made on the clock confirmed this to be the case. If her evidence was right and if the clock was, as the evidence suggested, ten minutes fast, the time was probably no more than a minute or two after 3 a.m.

104. Joanna Woad gave evidence that when she heard the telephone, she looked at her digital clock and all that she noted was that the time was 2 something. This meant that according to her clock the time was between 2.00 and 2.59 a.m. If it was at the end of that bracket, it differed very little from the time suggested by Susan Battersby's evidence.
But don't those alleged words of his rather imply that he was not at the farm that night? Why would he say "something's wrong at the farm"?
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: scipio_usmc on August 03, 2014, 11:56:PM
But don't those alleged words of his rather imply that he was not at the farm that night? Why would he say "something's wrong at the farm"?

He called her so that he coudl tell police he called her.

He told her that because that was what he wanted her to tell police she told him.

The ONLY reaosn he calle dher was to try to get her to bloster his bogus claim he received a call from nevill.

There was no other reason for him to actually call her and no other reason for him to call her at 6AM to tell her not to go to work but instead to stay home because she would need to tell police how he had called her earlier.

ONly a fool can't see he clale dher simply so she could say he called and try to bolster his claim that he had received a call from Nevill.  What he was trying to do was very transparent.

But then again you are too biased to even admit that he was using the call as an alibi so expecting you to face it would be silly, you are too biased to ever admit the truth.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Adam on December 28, 2014, 12:49:PM
For Grahame.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Mr. Gee on December 28, 2014, 01:54:PM
For Grahame.
Scipio used the word "biased" in referring to me. This is true. Although I would not say that I was "too" biased. The same of course is true of him and if I might be so bold to suggest, by you as well.
I will further add that there is nothing wrong with bias, as long as it is in agreement with truth.
The word that I would describe scipio as and begging your pardon you as well is "prejudiced". Now that is a word that has tremendous force behind it and carries with it a very negative trait within a person.
That is what scipio really meant when he called me biased and indeed too biased to see things correctly.
When in fact there is nothing to even suggest that Jeremy phoned Mugford to create an alibi. Except of course in scipio's own dastardly creative and destructive mind.
Title: Re: Jeremy's Witness Statement:
Post by: Jan on December 28, 2014, 01:59:PM
Scipio used the word "biased" in referring to me. This is true. Although I would not say that I was "too" biased. The same of course is true of him and if I might be so bold to suggest, by you as well.
I will further add that there is nothing wrong with bias, as long as it is in agreement with truth.
The word that I would describe scipio as and begging your pardon you as well is "prejudiced". Now that is a word that has tremendous force behind it and carries with it a very negative trait within a person.
That is what scipio really meant when he called me biased and indeed too biased to see things correctly.
When in fact there is nothing to even suggest that Jeremy phoned Mugford to create an alibi. Except of course in scipio's own dastardly creative and destructive mind.


When you are still asking questions - as we have been on Mikes threads - which certain people ignore ,then you are not biased.

Some posters never ask questions . they make their minds up whatever the replies to the posts are.

I think nearly all the posters on this forum are still investigating and still asking questions - note I said nearly all.