Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: nugnug on September 04, 2014, 02:31:PM
-
jeremy bambers finger prints were found on the riffle he cliamed this was becouse he was shoting rabbits.
but if he was the killer surely all he had to do was wipe the clean then place it in sheilas hand and only sheilas fingerprints would be on it.
that would make the case aginst sheila almost cast iron so why dident he.
-
nugnug in my opinion Jeremy Bamber needed his prints on the rifle had he been shooting rabbits as part of his plan to convince EP that Sheila was the culprit.
-
how does leaving his prints on the gun convince them that sheilas the culprit wouldent it better for there to be only her prints on it.
-
Jeremy didn't bother " wiping " any of his tracks. He didn't seem to bother/worry that he'd allegedly killed 5 people that he may have just left some sort of a clue,anything. He even handed over the keys to the place without first going in and checking,though it's been said that this created a diversion of sorts to make it look as though he hadn't been there since he left for home on the night of the tragedy.
-
i mean if he had just wiped the gun clean before placeing it in her hand he wouldn't need to make up any storys to explain how his prints got there because his prints wouldn't be there.
-
They don't look at things that way,nugs.Remember,they had to seal the deal and get a conviction by hook or by crook.Their livelihood depended on it !
-
Hi nugnug Jeremy told the police he loaded the rifle to shoot rabbits the night before and left the rifle and a box of ammunition out. IMO this was to convince EP that the rifle was ready for Sheila to use. I of course and others on the forum do not believe he was shooting rabbits at all but we do not have concrete proof neither does anyone else that he did shoot rabbits.
-
but he dident have to tell if he had wiped the gun clean he dident have to explains being on there if they werent there.
he dident have to tell the police he loaded the gun he could of said his father did
if he had wiped the gun so there was just sheilas prints on it surely then the only suspect would be her.
-
but he dident have to tell if he had wiped the gun clean he dident have to explains being on there if they werent there.
he dident have to tell the police he loaded the gun he could of said his father did
if he had wiped the gun so there was just sheilas prints on it surely then the only suspect would be her.
How would Neville have loaded the gun without leaving his finger prints on it and WHY would he have left a loaded gun laying around?
-
nevile could of being wearing gloves when he did it couldn't he.
Jeremy has no reason to tell them he loaded the gun i think he dosent even really have come up with an explanation as to why it was loaded he can just let the the police assume sheila loaded it.
-
nevile could of being wearing gloves when he did it couldn't he.
??? ??? ??? ???
-
nugnug it is documented that Jeremy told EP he had loaded the rifle the evening of the murders to shoot rabbits so his fingerprints had to be on the rifle not Ralph's. I for one have doubts about this by the way it was a story he made up to convince EP the rifle was loaded all ready for Sheila to use. Just as I see it. The reason I do not believe this story is because had it been true probably Ralph would have put the rifle away in a safe place from the children.
-
well he deosnt really have to explain why the gun was loaded anyway he could of just said to his knowledge it wasn't loaded
much better than admitting to handling it.
if he had just wiped the gun he dident need to tell any story.
-
April :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( is nugnug winding me up ;D
-
ip he wipes the gun clean places it in sheilas hands there will be only sheilas prints on it he doesn't have to tell them who loaded it he can say to his knowledge it wasn't or he dident see the gun so he doesn't know who loaded perfectly plausible explanation.
the police will probely assume sheila loaded it with only her prints on it what other conclusion can they come to.
-
ip he wipes the gun clean places it in sheilas hands there will be sheilas prints on it he doesn't have to tell them who loaded it he can say to his knowledge it wasn't or dident see the gun so he doesn't know loaded perfectly plausible explanation.
the police will probely assume sheila loaded it with only her prints on it what other conclusion can they come to.
Nugs, I think hindsight is a WONDERFUL thing. I wouldn't mind betting that Jeremy thinks so, too. :)
-
April :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( is nugnug winding me up ;D
Susan, whilst I actually DO see where Nugs is coming from -and it WOULD have made more sense if it HAD been done that way- I have enough problems getting my head round what we've got, without trying to get it round what we MAY have had....................................IF you see what I mean :D :D :D
-
Nugs, I think hindsight is a WONDERFUL thing. I wouldn't mind betting that Jeremy thinks so, too. :)
he would need hindsight to know he would be asked to explain anything.
it dosent take that much hindsight to know you shouldent leave your fingerprints on the murder weapon.
surely anyone with half a working brain knows its not a good idea to do that.
-
he would need hindsight to know he would be asked to explain anything.
it dosent take that much hindsight to know you shouldent leave your fingerprints on the murder weapon.
AH!! but it WASN'T a murder weapon when he -supposedly- BLOCK YOUR EARS, SUSAN!!! went out to bang bunnies, at which point, he didn't -supposedly- know it was going to be.
-
Hello April I concede defeat you and nugnug are the winners I am a looser and now going to eat ginger perkins to celebrate your victory and think I am off rabbits for life ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
why would anybody who was planning a murder deliberately leave there prints on the murder weapon nobody would.
-
why would anybody who was planning a murder deliberately leave there prints on the murder weapon nobody would.
D'ya know, Nugs, I've never actually got inside a murderer's mind so I can't give you an answer to that, but if Susan will allow me, I think I'll join her to eat ginger parkin and have a think about it. Like her, I'm becoming totally confused :)
-
April rabbits rabbits rabbits bet they would like ginger parkin but it is perkins I have just eaten. Sorry all gone ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
jeremy bambers finger prints were found on the riffle he cliamed this was becouse he was shoting rabbits.
but if he was the killer surely all he had to do was wipe the clean then place it in sheilas hand and only sheilas fingerprints would be on it.
that would make the case aginst sheila almost cast iron so why dident he.
How many times are you going to ask the same thing? This was answered multiple times in the past. You are as much of a broken record as Mike. It seems that the same nonsense is raised over and over pretending it had not been discussed in the past.
He didn't want to have to search for the casings to wipe them down. This story acocunted for if any of his prints were on the casings or the gun.
He tried to wipe down the gun before the murders but didn't know if he successfully eliminated them all or not and during the course of beating Nevill the stock breaking pulled his glove off and he though he touched the gun with his bare hand somewhere. To wipe down the entire gun would result in all the blood being removed and whatever prints he tried staging prior to the murders.
You make it sound like it is easy to just plant aprint. As was alreayd discussed in the past it is not that easy especially nto for someone dead. They are dead so they are not sweating or exceting oils from their skin which are the main cause of prints. The other cause is some foreign substance on the hands or on the object which faciliates a print being left.
You are suggesting that after Sheila was dead he should have made the gun spotless so that there was no blood or anything on it then to try to plan her prints which would not be that easy in her dead state. It woudl also be extremey suspicious and consistent with a frame job because it woudl be obvious that all blood and prints had been wiped. Why would Sheila do that before killing herself? It woudl be extreme evidence she was being framed. Not even Jeremy wa sstupid enough to do that. Be happy you are not a murderer because you would be caught even more easily than Jeremy.
-
I get totally where nug nugs is coming from
If he was wearing gloves he had no need for any of his prints to be on the gun and there were always guns around the house not locked up anyway - so by the story which you think he made up , he made things look more suspicious that they were.
She could have gone to either cupboard at anytime and picked up a gun .
I thought the glove story was him telling Julie ( allegedly ) that the hitmans glove had come off - so it would be his prints anyway not Jeremys.
Don't forget she told the N.O.W that he never admitted he did it , ever.
-
How many times are you going to ask the same thing? This was answered multiple times in the past. You are as much of a broken record as Mike. It seems that the same nonsense is raised over and over pretending it had not been discussed in the past.
He didn't want to have to search for the casings to wipe them down. This story acocunted for if any of his prints were on the casings or the gun.
He tried to wipe down the gun before the murders but didn't know if he successfully eliminated them all or not and during the course of beating Nevill the stock breaking pulled his glove off and he though he touched the gun with his bare hand somewhere. To wipe down the entire gun would result in all the blood being removed and whatever prints he tried staging prior to the murders.
You make it sound like it is easy to just plant aprint. As was alreayd discussed in the past it is not that easy especially nto for someone dead. They are dead so they are not sweating or exceting oils from their skin which are the main cause of prints. The other cause is some foreign substance on the hands or on the object which faciliates a print being left.
You are suggesting that after Sheila was dead he should have made the gun spotless so that there was no blood or anything on it then to try to plan her prints which would not be that easy in her dead state. It woudl also be extremey suspicious and consistent with a frame job because it woudl be obvious that all blood and prints had been wiped. Why would Sheila do that before killing herself? It woudl be extreme evidence she was being framed. Not even Jeremy wa sstupid enough to do that. Be happy you are not a murderer because you would be caught even more easily than Jeremy.
so his glove falls of and he hasnt got the brians to put it back on agian and wipe the gun so his prints arnt on it.
-
How would Neville have loaded the gun without leaving his finger prints on it and WHY would he have left a loaded gun laying around?
Plus if he did leave a print on the bullet casings then such story would fall apart even more.
The only way to account for no prints at all from Nevill anywhere are either the gun was wiped down before the murders or Nevill didn't use the weapon recently. His story about Nevill using the gun repeatedly during the week before the murders and taking the scope and moderator off and putting them back on repeatedly during that week would surely result in prints being left. But that story came about afte rpolice said the last known user of the weapon was Anthony. He changed his story saying he used the gun repeatedly the week before the murders and so did Nevill precisely to prevent Anthony from being he last known user. There is scant evidence Nevill used the rifle ever let alone much. The only testimony of it being used by Nevill came from Jeremy. It was only purchased November 30, 1984. Nevill was no longe rinvolved in target shooting at this point. He got the gun for Jeremy. He had used 410 shotguns to shoot vermin for all of his time at WHF prior to buying the rifle and there is no evidence he stopped using it to shoot vermin and instead started using the rifle.
Anythony said the gun was in brand new condition when he found it so he this betrays any suggestions the gun was being used constantly to shoot vermin during the course of the summer. Anthony's prints and Jeremy's would be the ones most likely to be found. He was known to try to get Sheila to handle the weapon maybe he got her to touch it and put her prints on it before the murders. That in fact is what Julie wa sunde rth eimpression of because he told her he was scared they woudl realize his prints were more fresh than the ones planted. That suggests he made an attempt to planted her prints before. That doesn't mean he was successful though. He was known to try to get her to handle to magazine, probably to get her prints on it.
Saying he handled the gun right before the murders was a very simple way to account for any of his prints being found on the casings or the gun in case he left a print on it. Having to wipe off all the blood etc so the gun is immaculate before killing Sheila (which is the only way to be sure he would have gotten rid of all potential prints of his) would be extremely suspicious and in effect give away that she was being framed. In hindsight we know tha tno prints were on the casings but he didn't know that at the time and could not be sure so his story also helped out in that regard. Imagine if his print had been found on a casing, that would be extremely damning. Claiming he loaded the magazine before was a brilliant way to blunt such.
-
I get totally where nug nugs is coming from
If he was wearing gloves he had no need for any of his prints to be on the gun and there were always guns around the house not locked up anyway - so by the story which you think he made up , he made things look more suspicious that they were.
She could have gone to either cupboard at anytime and picked up a gun .
I thought the glove story was him telling Julie ( allegedly ) that the hitmans glove had come off - so it would be his prints anyway not Jeremys.
Don't forget she told the N.O.W that he never admitted he did it , ever.
im glad somone can
-
Scipio thank you for clarifying the situation regarding prints on the rifle :)
-
Plus if he did leave a print on the bullet casings then such story would fall apart even more.
The only way to account for no prints at all from Nevill anywhere are either the gun was wiped down before the murders or Nevill didn't use the weapon recently. His story about Nevill using the gun repeatedly during the week before the murders and taking the scope and moderator off and putting them back on repeatedly during that week would surely result in prints being left. But that story came about afte rpolice said the last known user of the weapon was Anthony. He changed his story saying he used the gun repeatedly the week before the murders and so did Nevill precisely to prevent Anthony from being he last known user. There is scant evidence Nevill used the rifle ever let alone much. The only testimony of it being used by Nevill came from Jeremy. It was only purchased November 30, 1984. Nevill was no longe rinvolved in target shooting at this point. He got the gun for Jeremy. He had used 410 shotguns to shoot vermin for all of his time at WHF prior to buying the rifle and there is no evidence he stopped using it to shoot vermin and instead started using the rifle.
Anythony said the gun was in brand new condition when he found it so he this betrays any suggestions the gun was being used constantly to shoot vermin during the course of the summer. Anthony's prints and Jeremy's would be the ones most likely to be found. He was known to try to get Sheila to handle the weapon maybe he got her to touch it and put her prints on it before the murders. That in fact is what Julie wa sunde rth eimpression of because he told her he was scared they woudl realize his prints were more fresh than the ones planted. That suggests he made an attempt to planted her prints before. That doesn't mean he was successful though. He was known to try to get her to handle to magazine, probably to get her prints on it.
Saying he handled the gun right before the murders was a very simple way to account for any of his prints being found on the casings or the gun in case he left a print on it. Having to wipe off all the blood etc so the gun is immaculate before killing Sheila (which is the only way to be sure he would have gotten rid of all potential prints of his) would be extremely suspicious and in effect give away that she was being framed. In hindsight we know tha tno prints were on the casings but he didn't know that at the time and could not be sure so his story also helped out in that regard. Imagine if his print had been found on a casing, that would be extremely damning. Claiming he loaded the magazine before was a brilliant way to blunt such.
he doesnt need to acount for anything if he makes it makes it look convincingly like a suicide wich he would of done if theres was only sheilas prints on there wich there would be if he wiped the gun.
why would he wears gloves if he was going to leave his prints there anyway.
-
jansus he may not have been wearing gloves the evening before when he was loaded ready to shoot rabbits so prints would be on the rifle.
-
so his glove falls of and he hasnt got the brians to put it back on agian and wipe the gun so his prints on it.
He did put it back on but he already touched the weapon with his bare hand he beleived and was not sure where so that means he woudl have aot have cleaned off the whole rifle.
Once again you ignore the problem of a gun wiped clean after it being used to murder everyone. If the gun were spotless save for some prints from Sheila then that would be a sign she was being framed. The beating from Nevill and close shots would have resulted in medium and high velocity impact spatter. The lack of any impact spatter or other blood and evidence on the gun would mean it had been wiped down after the murders. Why would Sheila clean the weapon after killing everyone? A weapon nice and clean except for her prints would make it obvious someone killed everyone, cleaned it then planted her prints. Nevill's blood got all over the weapon and he needed it to stay there.
-
So the " marigolds " did come in handy afterall. They don't leave fibres ::)
-
jansus he may not have been wearing gloves the evening before when he was loaded ready to shoot rabbits so prints would be on the rifle.
I said he did not have to make up that story either -Sheila could have got hold of the gun from a gun cupboard that was not locked anyway. In fact it was reported that her prints were on the other guns in the house anyway.
I don't get the bit about him being scared about his prints being found anyway as attributed to Julie - as I said he never told her he did it anyway ( even though she knew that he had ::)
Why would he care about anthonys prints being on the gun ? he either handled it or he didn't?
-
He did put it back on but he already touched the weapon with his bare hand he beleived and was not sure where so that means he woudl have aot have cleaned off the whole rifle.
Once again you ignore the problem of a gun wiped clean after it being used to murder everyone. If the gun were spotless save for some prints from Sheila then that would be a sign she was being framed. The beating from Nevill and close shots would have resulted in medium and high velocity impact spatter. The lack of any impact spatter or other blood and evidence on the gun would mean it had been wiped down after the murders. Why would Sheila clean the weapon after killing everyone? A weapon nice and clean except for her prints would make it obvious someone killed everyone, cleaned it then planted her prints. Nevill's blood got all over the weapon and he needed it to stay there.
bye the time the raid team turned up it wouldn't notice that it had been cleaned as there first assumption was suicede sheilas prints and only hers would confirm that theory it wouldn't also mean they couldent prove anyone else picked up the gun not beyond reasonable doubt anyway.
-
Nugs, lookout and Jansus you are right
He is meant to have staged a suicide placing a bible at the right page, worn a wetsuit etc etc and then forget about something as silly as above
Poor illusional posters
He is meant to be very cunning ??
-
well its hardly likely he would clean away all traces of himself exept a fingerprint.
-
I said he did not have to make up that story either -Sheila could have got hold of the gun from a gun cupboard that was not locked anyway. In fact it was reported that her prints were on the other guns in the house anyway.
I don't get the bit about him being scared about his prints being found anyway as attributed to Julie - as I said he never told her he did it anyway ( even though she knew that he had ::)
Why would he care about anthonys prints being on the gun ? he either handled it or he didn't?
exactly hes got no reason to want to tell a story about shooting rabbits unless of course the story's true.
in fact by telling that storyhes droping himself right in it.
-
That's exactly what happened,nugs. Because he told the truth. That's why he was cocky and had attitude whilst being interviewed. The police conveniently took it the wrong way,unless they need brush-up lessons/re-training on what to expect from some of those who are innocent. Jeremy was trying his level best to get one over on the police because he was so sure of himself and kept his head high------but alas,it makes you think whether honesty was the best policy.Even today the police still can't tell if someone's lying or not.
I'd tell anyone who was innocently arrested to lie through their teeth,speak with a common accent and tell them you're as poor as a church mouse,you wouldn't be any worse off.
What a world we live in !!
If Jeremy had have kicked off,they'd have had him anyway,so either way he couldn't win.
-
bye the time the raid team turned up it wouldn't notice that it had been cleaned as there first assumption was suicede sheilas prints and only hers would confirm that theory it wouldn't also mean they couldent prove anyone else picked up the gun not beyond reasonable doubt anyway.
You are living in fantasyland.
The police and worse the lab would have noticed that it had been wiped clean when the lab found nothing at all on thw weapon but her prints. The lack of blood would be a sure sign it had been wiped down.
Your claim that they would not have realized it was wiped down is bad enough but worse you insist Jeremy had a crystal ball and knew they would not figre out it had been wiped down so he would have wiped it down and woudl have wiped down all the shell casings so he had no need to make up the absurd story about tkaing the gun out to shoot rabbits.
You alos ignore the evidence that proves the bullets were not left out before the murders like he claimed but staged after the murders. That further demonstrates the entire tale was false.
All you are doing is embarrassing yourself making up stupid excuses that fall flat because you are to biased to admit any of Jeremy's obvious lies.
-
Aren't you biased too,Scipio,or are you just imagining it.?
-
it would of been better to wipe it down than leave a print on it without the print they couldn't prove anything.
Jeremy would have know way of knowing what a forensic lab can pick up not being a forensic expert.
Scorpio your assuming that jeremy bamber knows exactly what a forensic lab can and cant do.
wich he obviously wouldn't.
-
nugnug how does relaying the story about shooting rabbits drop him right in it. Sorry but rather confused about this incident of rabbits and rifles and prints :'(
-
You are living in fantasyland.
The police and worse the lab would have noticed that it had been wiped clean when the lab found nothing at all on thw weapon but her prints. The lack of blood would be a sure sign it had been wiped down.
Your claim that they would not have realized it was wiped down is bad enough but worse you insist Jeremy had a crystal ball and knew they would not figre out it had been wiped down so he would have wiped it down and woudl have wiped down all the shell casings so he had no need to make up the absurd story about tkaing the gun out to shoot rabbits.
You alos ignore the evidence that proves the bullets were not left out before the murders like he claimed but staged after the murders. That further demonstrates the entire tale was false.
All you are doing is embarrassing yourself making up stupid excuses that fall flat because you are to biased to admit any of Jeremy's obvious lies.
all ive done is point out a simple fact if hes using gloves it means he doesnt want hes fingerprints to be found he knows without those his fingerprints will be found so he knows if hes gloves fall of his prints are on the gun and he knows he doesnt want so what chioce does but to wipe the gun and take his chances he has know way of know weather they can find out weather its been wiped.
-
nugnug how does relaying the story about shooting rabbits drop him right in it. Sorry but rather confused about this incident of rabbits and rifles and prints :'(
because hes just admitted that it was him that loaded the gun.
his admited hes the last known person to have handeled the gun.
thats pretty incriminating.
-
If Scipio can't see HIMSELF as being biased,then there's something radically wrong with him. Those who IMAGINE that they're always right have a name attached to them-----------Narcissistic !! Without principles.
-
all ive done is point out a simple fact if hes using gloves it means he doesnt want hes fingerprints to be found he knows without those his fingerprints will be found so he knows if hes gloves fall of his prints are on the gun and he knows he doesnt want so what chioce does but to wipe the gun and take his chances he has know way of know weather they can find out weather its been wiped.
And after the gloves came off he thought he got his prints on the gun. At that point he was in a quandry wipe the gun off in which case it will be readily apparent it had been wiped down before being placed in Sheila's arms or invent a story to account for his prints. Your claim he coudl not know that the lab woudl figure out the gun was blood free, and in fact evidence free save for some prints from Sheila is absurd. Of course they y and the police would be able to figure out such and they woudl also know there would have been bood so it wa swiped down. Jeremy had blood on his clothing and saw the blood on the weapon so knew that police would know such would be present. He changed his clothign so they would not see it.
He also had added reason for making up the stupid tale. To account for his prints being on the casings in case his prints were found and ALSO to account for the gun sitting out already loaded for Sheial to find.
WHile you and other Jeremy supporters live in fantasy land willing to ignore all evidence against him and make and and all excuses no matte rhow ridiculous Jeremy knew that not everyone would be fools. The notion of Sheial going into a rage then going to seek out a gun let alone that particular gun which she never used before and didn't know how to use is hard to swallow. She would have went for something else if she wanted a weapon. His way of making it seem plausible is to make the weapon be out and thus available for her to grab as a weapon of opportunity smacking her in the face.
Woudl she go to the closet to get ammo though for it? Just grabbing the unloaded weapon would result in Nevill disarming her before she coudl do anything. Loading the magazine takes 2 hands. So his story said the magazine was already loaded so that the picture presented was her arguing with Nevill then grabbing the already loaded magazine and quickly placing it in the gun without him having the opportunity to do anything. Further we have extra bullets next to it so she knew she would have enough ammo to kill everyone and could easily reload.
Syaing he left it out loaded in the morning or afternoon would do no good because the family would have put it away. So he makde up the story of leaving it there late. He claimed he left it there right before going home. He staged the bullets and since they were still in the kitchen where he claimed he left them before going hom this was supposed to suggest the gun was likewise untouched. SOmeoen putting it away would have put the bullets away too.
If all he cared about was providing a reaosn for hims prints to be on the casings and gun he could have simply siad he used the gun for target practice the day before and he had touched many of the bullets as he put them back in the plastic tray. His goal was more than that. The story was crafted so that there was a weapon of opportunity smacking Sheila in the face.
You never want to address any of this or the fact that there is no question he staged the bullets after the murders. His claim that he took out a box containing 48-50 rounds, dumped it out in the kitchen, loaded the magazine and that these bullets were the ones used in the murders is not possible. If that were the case then there would have been 23-25 bullets remaining- there were 30. For his claims to be true SHeial had to use 18-20 rounds from the ammo in the kitchen then to suddenly decide to stop using that supply and go to the closet to get 5-7 more rounds. ABSURD!
Your excuses for Jeremy are pathetic and also pointless.
-
If Scipio can't see HIMSELF as being biased,then there's something radically wrong with him. Those who IMAGINE that they're always right have a name attached to them-----------Narcissistic !! Without principles.
Biased because I am looking for the truth and face facts?
I don't have any bias against Jeremy. Nor do I have any bias in favor of anyone connected with the case.
You incontrast have tremendous bias in favor of Jeremy which results in you writing extremly stupid things such as Jeremy woudl nto have a bad word to say against anyone. In your warped mind he is an angel who cna do no wrong and thus he has to be innocent. Thus eveyrone else has to be lying and wrong. that effectively sums up all your posting on this website. Nothing constructinve, nothing fact based, nothing coherent or logical. You have no interest in knowing the actual facts of the cas eand thus can't discuss them at all. You post bogus claim after claim trying to pretend your biased view of Jeremy is reality. You are quite sad.
-
STFU,You ! Your excuses for him being guilty are EXACTLY the same !
-
Biased because I am looking for the truth and face facts?
I don't have any bias against Jeremy. Nor do I have any bias in favor of anyone connected with the case.
You incontrast have tremendous bias in favor of Jeremy which results in you writing extremly stupid things such as Jeremy woudl nto have a bad word to say against anyone. In your warped mind he is an angel who cna do no wrong and thus he has to be innocent. Thus eveyrone else has to be lying and wrong. that effectively sums up all your posting on this website. Nothing constructinve, nothing fact based, nothing coherent or logical. You have no interest in knowing the actual facts of the cas eand thus can't discuss them at all. You post bogus claim after claim trying to pretend your biased view of Jeremy is reality. You are quite sad.
all youve proved is your to stupid to know the diffrence between a fact and your own opinons
-
And after the gloves came off he thought he got his prints on the gun. At that point he was in a quandry wipe the gun off in which case it will be readily apparent it had been wiped down before being placed in Sheila's arms or invent a story to account for his prints. Your claim he coudl not know that the lab woudl figure out the gun was blood free, and in fact evidence free save for some prints from Sheila is absurd. Of course they y and the police would be able to figure out such and they woudl also know there would have been bood so it wa swiped down. Jeremy had blood on his clothing and saw the blood on the weapon so knew that police would know such would be present. He changed his clothign so they would not see it.
He also had added reason for making up the stupid tale. To account for his prints being on the casings in case his prints were found and ALSO to account for the gun sitting out already loaded for Sheial to find.
WHile you and other Jeremy supporters live in fantasy land willing to ignore all evidence against him and make and and all excuses no matte rhow ridiculous Jeremy knew that not everyone would be fools. The notion of Sheial going into a rage then going to seek out a gun let alone that particular gun which she never used before and didn't know how to use is hard to swallow. She would have went for something else if she wanted a weapon. His way of making it seem plausible is to make the weapon be out and thus available for her to grab as a weapon of opportunity smacking her in the face.
Woudl she go to the closet to get ammo though for it? Just grabbing the unloaded weapon would result in Nevill disarming her before she coudl do anything. Loading the magazine takes 2 hands. So his story said the magazine was already loaded so that the picture presented was her arguing with Nevill then grabbing the already loaded magazine and quickly placing it in the gun without him having the opportunity to do anything. Further we have extra bullets next to it so she knew she would have enough ammo to kill everyone and could easily reload.
Syaing he left it out loaded in the morning or afternoon would do no good because the family would have put it away. So he makde up the story of leaving it there late. He claimed he left it there right before going home. He staged the bullets and since they were still in the kitchen where he claimed he left them before going hom this was supposed to suggest the gun was likewise untouched. SOmeoen putting it away would have put the bullets away too.
If all he cared about was providing a reaosn for hims prints to be on the casings and gun he could have simply siad he used the gun for target practice the day before and he had touched many of the bullets as he put them back in the plastic tray. His goal was more than that. The story was crafted so that there was a weapon of opportunity smacking Sheila in the face.
You never want to address any of this or the fact that there is no question he staged the bullets after the murders. His claim that he took out a box containing 48-50 rounds, dumped it out in the kitchen, loaded the magazine and that these bullets were the ones used in the murders is not possible. If that were the case then there would have been 23-25 bullets remaining- there were 30. For his claims to be true SHeial had to use 18-20 rounds from the ammo in the kitchen then to suddenly decide to stop using that supply and go to the closet to get 5-7 more rounds. ABSURD!
Your excuses for Jeremy are pathetic and also pointless.
he was farmer not a forensic expert he wouldn't have a clue what the lab could or couldn't work out.
he would know its not a good idea to leave fingerprints there though as any idiot knows.
-
all youve proved is your to stupid to know the diffrence and your own opinons
You prove you are stupid each time you post so there is no need for me to even bother proving it though I could. I suggest you observe something attributed to Mark Twain among others, "Tis better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt"
-
The same phrase applies to you, saddo. Is that all you can do ? Insult,bully and abuse folk ? Failure !!
-
he was farmer not a forensic expert he wouldn't have a clue what the lab could or couldn't work out.
he would know its not a good idea to leave fingerprints there though as any idiot knows.
This is a good demonstration of your own stupidity.
Your argument explains WHY he would not have any clue that the lab would be able to figure out and prove that the moderator was used to fire the fatal shot into Sheila.
Your argument doens't address ANY of the arguments I presented though you did what you always do- you compeltely ignore all arguments that prove you worng and establish Jeremy's guilt and just hide in your glass house tossing stones.
One doesn't have to know much about forensics to figure out that ANYONE AND EVERYONE can figure out a gun was wiped down and then prints from one perosn planted if there is no blood or other evidence on it and it is spotless save for the few prints of the one person. Particuarly if one is claimign the gun had extensive use other prints should be found unless covered up by blood and other eivdnec eand it doens't take a forensic expert to figure out the gun would have been covere din blood he just had to look at it to see that it was.
Each time you get angry you write more stupid and ill considered things than the last but thanks for aditting Jeremy would have no clue what the lab woudl be able to figure out with respect to the moderator.
You again ignored all the valid points raised about why he made up the tale of leaving the gun out and the evidence that he didn't do so but merely claimed he did such as the staged bullets which demonstrate he just made up the tale.
You can'trefute the evidence so just hide from it in your own world where you try to block out reality and then lash out childishly at those who try to bring you out into the real world.
-
its basic logic nobody planing on comiting the perfect murder delbraty leaves there fingerprints at the scene.
its basic logic that a farm hand would not understand complicated forensic issues but they would understand fingerprints.
-
.................... there is no need for me to even bother proving it though I could. "Tis better to remain silent....................."
EXACTLY SO! So just stop behaving like a child. Try living by what you've just written and GROW UP.
-
The same phrase applies to you, saddo. Is that all you can do ? Insult,bully and abuse folk ? Failure !!
But the things I say are not foolish. People say I am rude but I am rude to those who are rude to me so not everythone thinks that. I don't care if people think I am rude or not that is not being a fool. A fool is someone who says foolish things like the things you, nug and Jackie constantly write.
Some Jeremy supporters are smart enough not to post complete nonsense and pick their battles. Others post lies and nonsense which undermine their credibility completely and totally. You never post any substance at all just ad hominem or false claims like the lie about bloody fingerprints having been found.
When challeged on such claims your responses are mix of emotional tripe and ramblings considerably more incomprehensible than my worst typos.
-
EXACTLY SO! So just stop behaving like a child. Try living by what you've just written and GROW UP.
I am acting like a grown up. Lookout and nug are the immature ones and I have taken plenty from them without responding but at some point children need to be scolded and they need a lesson.
-
This is a good demonstration of your own stupidity.
Your argument explains WHY he would not have any clue that the lab would be able to figure out and prove that the moderator was used to fire the fatal shot into Sheila.
Your argument doens't address ANY of the arguments I presented though you did what you always do- you compeltely ignore all arguments that prove you worng and establish Jeremy's guilt and just hide in your glass house tossing stones.
One doesn't have to know much about forensics to figure out that ANYONE AND EVERYONE can figure out a gun was wiped down and then prints from one perosn planted if there is no blood or other evidence on it and it is spotless save for the few prints of the one person. Particuarly if one is claimign the gun had extensive use other prints should be found unless covered up by blood and other eivdnec eand it doens't take a forensic expert to figure out the gun would have been covere din blood he just had to look at it to see that it was.
Each time you get angry you write more stupid and ill considered things than the last but thanks for aditting Jeremy would have no clue what the lab woudl be able to figure out with respect to the moderator.
You again ignored all the valid points raised about why he made up the tale of leaving the gun out and the evidence that he didn't do so but merely claimed he did such as the staged bullets which demonstrate he just made up the tale.
You can'trefute the evidence so just hide from it in your own world where you try to block out reality and then lash out childishly at those who try to bring you out into the real world.
he doesnt have to cliam extensive youse of the gun he could say he knows nothing about it without his prints they cant prove otherwise even if they do suspect hes lying theres no way they can prove it.
-
I am acting like a grown up. Lookout and nug are the immature ones and I have taken plenty from them without responding but at some point children need to be scolded and they need a lesson.
like I said one of the rudest and most disgusting posters I have come across -now you are sounding like some kind of weirdo as well.
sick.
-
like I said one of the rudest and most disgusting posters I have come across -now you are sounding like some kind of weirdo as well.
sick.
Coming from one of the posters here most irrational and clueless that carries no force at all.
-
I am acting like a grown up. Lookout and nug are the immature ones and I have taken plenty from them without responding but at some point children need to be scolded and they need a lesson.
NO, you absolutely ARE NOT. You are sinking lower than those you claim to be so superior to. If you truly ARE so superior, you could afford to be magnanimus.
-
Coming from one of the posters here most irrational and clueless that carries no force at all.
I don't claim to carry any force and I have NEVER been rude to you before .
Like I said its not what you post its your rudeness and personal attacks like the one above that I cant stand . You chose to read it in a different way- I don't give a damn - I have made my opinion clear .
-
I don't claim to carry any force and I have NEVER been rude to you before .
Like I said its not what you post its your rudeness and personal attacks like the one above that I cant stand . You chose to read it in a different way- I don't give a damn - I have made my opinion clear .
You have indeed been rude to me in the past and severely lost in our debates and thus as a copout you say you refuse to read any posts of mine so that you can say that is why you failed to rebut my points- because you refused to read them. But as this makes clear you read my posts you just claim you don't and use that as an excuse for your inability to be able to refute them.
So on top of all your other problems you are dishonest. That is one of the things I am accused of being rude for- pointing out when people here are dishonest. If people don't want to have dishonesty pointed out then they should not resort to it- it is that simple.
-
I just won't tolerate it.It's as simple as that. He's a bully,and bullies are cowards.
-
You have indeed been rude to me in the past and severely lost in our debates and thus as a copout you say you refuse to read any posts of mine so that you can say that is why you failed to rebut my points- because you refused to read them. But as this makes clear you read my posts you just claim you don't and use that as an excuse for your inability to be able to refute them.
So on top of all your other problems you are dishonest. That is one of the things I am accused of being rude for- pointing out when people here are dishonest. If people don't want to have dishonesty pointed out then they should not resort to it- it is that simple.
Scipio, just because someone expresses a belief different from your own, it doesn't make them a liar. Calling them such is hurtful and unnecessary when you claim superior intellect. People tend NOT to change their beliefs when they feel kicked.
-
April do you have Nugs and Lookout on ignore?
-
April do you have Nugs and Lookout on ignore?
Mat, I can't put anyone on ignore. At the moment I'm not sure whether to bury my head in the sand....................................or cry :'(
-
Mat - although we agree to disagree - I have proved to you on one particular occasions that I am not dishonest - can you verify thatI am not a dishonest person . Just to put the records straight
-
Mat - although we agree to disagree - I have proved to you on one particular occasions that I am not dishonest - can you verify thatI am not a dishonest person . Just to put the records straight
Honestly, I found you to be very honest and fair in the dealing I had with you Janus.
Mat, I can't put anyone on ignore. At the moment I'm not sure whether to bury my head in the sand....................................or cry :'(
You do seem to not see their attacks... and pull Scipio up a lot more. but I can see you're in a bad position at the moment so wish I hadn't said anything.
-
janus everybody who matters knows your not dishonest no need to worry about that im sure everyone would confirm it if asked.
i think this threads gone a bit off the rails.
-
Honestly, I found you to be very honest and fair in the dealing I had with you Janus.
You do seem to not see their attacks... and pull Scipio up a lot more. but I can see you're in a bad position at the moment so wish I hadn't said anything.
Mat, you may be right. I do notice Scipio more because he shouts louder and he loves an argument. I've started to think that they enjoy hurling insults at each other so perhaps, if no one else is bothered by it, I should just leave them to it.............................and may the best man/woman win ;) ;D
-
I know I am not dishonest - and some posters seem to be unaware of the forum rules or just ignore them.
Yes back to your point.
It seems that people doubt his story about shooting rabbits and saying it is how he "set the scene " for Sheila grabbing the gun . But like you said there was no need really as she could have got the gun anyway. There would have been various prints on the gun anyway . But what he really would have wanted to do would be get her prints on the gun and that would have been done immediately after death so I don't buy the fact that it would have been difficult because she certainly would have sweat on her hands because she would have been terrified.
-
april yes just let them get on with it I think they enjoy it. Mat hope the toothache is a little better :)
-
April do you have Nugs and Lookout on ignore?
Take a run,you big girls' blouse. Just because I tell the truth ??
-
Scipio, just because someone expresses a belief different from your own, it doesn't make them a liar. Calling them such is hurtful and unnecessary when you claim superior intellect. People tend NOT to change their beliefs when they feel kicked.
I don't call people liars for having different opinions. I call people liars when they represent something as a true fact that they reason to know is false.
When Mike makes up seeing a photo or documents that clearly doesn't exist for instance that is lying. jansus for mor ethan a month has been claiming to refuse to rea dmy posts but repsonds to them periodically demonstrating otherwise. Thus it is a lie and just an excuse used to not repsonsd substnatively to y posts. Posting that there are bloody fingerprints that were found when the perosn making it can't back up their claim and known they have no evidence at all to justify making the claim results in it being a lie. A lie has nothing to do with opinions (except that one can lie about holding an opinion they actually don't hold) it has to do with making claims that are known to have no basis in fact.
Whether a claim is absurd or not has nothing at all to do with me disagreeing with it either. There are plenty of claims that I disagree with that do not rise to the level of absurdity. The term is reserved for those claims that are totally irrational and implausible. If I called everyone I disagreed with a liar and eveyr claim I take issue with absurd that would result in eveyrone here being called a liar and at least 1 claim by everyone as absurd because not even Harters and I have agreed fully on everything. We had a lively debate over what caused the wounds to Nevill's arms. It ended with me getting the better of things. To Harters credit he did not whine or try responding with some silly argument or a flase claim to try to refute what I wrote. He accepted I made some valid points and left things at that. He doesn't have an agenda so is willing to see things in a different light as am I when evidence and logic dictate.
Partisans are not willing to change. They will maintain nonsense to the bitter end and worse some of them will make things up to support their beliefs. They will misrepresent what people wrote in statements, including falsely claiming Davidson stated he fingerprinted the moderator on August 9, 1985, and make up things out of thin air. All too often they are allowed to get away with it so keep doing it. Unless someone points out that their credibility is shot in the process and that nothing they say is going to be believed they will keep doing it. I think it is even worse to snicker at people behind their back and just consider them loons than to tell them to knock off the lying and join the rest of us in a real debate.
Sometimes they don't research the issue and don't realize their claims are untrue but once it is pointed out to them if they still keep making it then they can no longer claim they are unaware it was made up and it becomes actively lying to keep making a claim. People have been saying lately it seems like we are going around in circles and the site is like a broken record. That is because the same claims already debunked keep surfacing again and again.
-
jansus nobody on this forum would ever think you dishonest you are one very straight talking lady who would not revert to telling lies to win a point. :)
-
Jansus,I'm afraid I can see a pattern looming here.
-
april yes just let them get on with it I think they enjoy it. Mat hope the toothache is a little better :)
Someone cancelled their appointment so I was called in today at lunch time and had it removed. ;D ;D ;D It HURT!
Take a run,you big girls' blouse. Just because I tell the truth ??
You certainly don't.
Mat, you may be right. I do notice Scipio more because he shouts louder and he loves an argument.
He is American - so I think you have a point. ;D
-
I know I am not dishonest - and some posters seem to be unaware of the forum rules or just ignore them.
Yes back to your point.
It seems that people doubt his story about shooting rabbits and saying it is how he "set the scene " for Sheila grabbing the gun . But like you said there was no need really as she could have got the gun anyway. There would have been various prints on the gun anyway . But what he really would have wanted to do would be get her prints on the gun and that would have been done immediately after death so I don't buy the fact that it would have been difficult because she certainly would have sweat on her hands because she would have been terrified.
hes much better if he says as litle as possble about the gun saying he dosent know how she got hold of it or who loaded and that he dident load it and dident see it that day and thats all he knows.
-
Mat good to get it out only hurts for a second or two better than the constant toothache. :)
-
Mat good to get it out only hurts for a second or two better than the constant toothache. :)
He should have come to me,I'd have knocked it out for him------for nothing. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
HaHaHa lookout you are so funny think you and Mat are in love ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D he will drag you around the cave with your long hair after you have knocked his teeth out ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
I don't call people liars for having different opinions. I call people liars when they represent something as a true fact that they reason to know is false.
When Mike makes up seeing a photo or documents that clearly doesn't exist for instance that is lying. jansus for mor ethan a month has been claiming to refuse to rea dmy posts but repsonds to them periodically demonstrating otherwise. Thus it is a lie and just an excuse used to not repsonsd substnatively to y posts. Posting that there are bloody fingerprints that were found when the perosn making it can't back up their claim and known they have no evidence at all to justify making the claim results in it being a lie. A lie has nothing to do with opinions (except that one can lie about holding an opinion they actually don't hold) it has to do with making claims that are known to have no basis in fact.
Whether a claim is absurd or not has nothing at all to do with me disagreeing with it either. There are plenty of claims that I disagree with that do not rise to the level of absurdity. The term is reserved for those claims that are totally irrational and implausible. If I called everyone I disagreed with a liar and eveyr claim I take issue with absurd that would result in eveyrone here being called a liar and at least 1 claim by everyone as absurd because not even Harters and I have agreed fully on everything. We had a lively debate over what caused the wounds to Nevill's arms. It ended with me getting the better of things. To Harters credit he did not whine or try responding with some silly argument or a flase claim to try to refute what I wrote. He accepted I made some valid points and left things at that. He doesn't have an agenda so is willing to see things in a different light as am I when evidence and logic dictate.
Partisans are not willing to change. They will maintain nonsense to the bitter end and worse some of them will make things up to support their beliefs. They will misrepresent what people wrote in statements, including falsely claiming Davidson stated he fingerprinted the moderator on August 9, 1985, and make up things out of thin air. All too often they are allowed to get away with it so keep doing it. Unless someone points out that their credibility is shot in the process and that nothing they say is going to be believed they will keep doing it. I think it is even worse to snicker at people behind their back and just consider them loons than to tell them to knock off the lying and join the rest of us in a real debate.
Sometimes they don't research the issue and don't realize their claims are untrue but once it is pointed out to them if they still keep making it then they can no longer claim they are unaware it was made up and it becomes actively lying to keep making a claim. People have been saying lately it seems like we are going around in circles and the site is like a broken record. That is because the same claims already debunked keep surfacing again and again.
Thanks for that, Scipio. I read it with interest and found myself wondering, as you seem to view lying as a far greater crime/sin than others and are far less forgiving of it, what you may have learned about what happened to those who lied.
I'll hold my hands up and admit to very possibly having "bent and stretched" certain facts. I suspect that many of us have because it's hard to avoid with so many contradictory viewpoints. You seem to think that each perceived "bend and stretch" is a personal attack against you but it probably is no more than someone trying to prove a point. THIS isn't a classroom but you sound. at times, like the child who has done more research/homework than the rest of the class and wants everyone to know it. The rest of the class tend not to like it and making them feel humiliated and demoralized and put down ISN'T going to change them.
I'll finish by offering you an apology. Mat has pointed out to me that whilst I single you out, you come in for plenty of stick from others, something which I've overlooked. Unless one is trying to qualify for sainthood, turning the other cheek ALL the time is wearing.
-
Someone cancelled their appointment so I was called in today at lunch time and had it removed. ;D ;D ;D It HURT!
You certainly don't.
He is American - so I think you have a point. ;D
Mat, I hope it's starting to feel better now. As for your last point, ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Mat, I hope it's starting to feel better now. As for your last point, ;D ;D ;D ;D
It's swollen on one side, like a chipmunk cheek. But it feels a million times better than it did this morning. I found myseld self medicating with vodka and painkillers last night so was very relieved to get in today. ;D
-
April very well said and I agree I also thank you for being honest and standing up and being counted and to apologise. Very well done my friend xxx
-
April very well said and I agree I also thank you for being honest and standing up and being counted and to apologise. Very well done my friend xxx
Ta for that, Susan :)
-
Thanks for that, Scipio. I read it with interest and found myself wondering, as you seem to view lying as a far greater crime/sin than others and are far less forgiving of it, what you may have learned about what happened to those who lied.
I'll hold my hands up and admit to very possibly having "bent and stretched" certain facts. I suspect that many of us have because it's hard to avoid with so many contradictory viewpoints. You seem to think that each perceived "bend and stretch" is a personal attack against you but it probably is no more than someone trying to prove a point. THIS isn't a classroom but you sound. at times, like the child who has done more research/homework than the rest of the class and wants everyone to know it. The rest of the class tend not to like it and making them feel humiliated and demoralized and put down ISN'T going to change them.
I'll finish by offering you an apology. Mat has pointed out to me that whilst I single you out, you come in for plenty of stick from others, something which I've overlooked. Unless one is trying to qualify for sainthood, turning the other cheek ALL the time is wearing.
I am constantly being bullied by this rambling energizer bunny. Glad I´ll have a break from the nasty place this board has become!
Yesterday he called me "stubborn" for not agreeing with something he claimed. Shortly after he claimed a friend of his, a doctor and a lawyer looked at the matter and generally agreed with what I had said.
But I had to go through being called "stubborn" for having a reasonable opinion.
I´ve very soon had it with this s#!%hole
-
For any future toothaches I recommend Anbesol. Its a liquid that is rubbed on the gum,our family swear by it. However,don't do as I did the first time I bought it. Went in the chemist and asked for Anusol!
-
For any future toothaches I recommend Anbesol. Its a liquid that is rubbed on the gum,our family swear by it. However,don't do as I did the first time I bought it. Went in the chemist and asked for Anusol!
Tyler, I can't see to type. I'm laughing so much, I'm crying ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Ha Ha Ha tyler hope you did not use it on your tooth ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Susan,apparently anusol is great on face wrinkles. When I acquire some (wrinkles that is) I'm gonna give it a go lol x
-
Morning tyler
yes I knew that I use it all the time but did not want to admit it very good for around the eye area all the TV stars use it. Since I started using it I look 10 years younger ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D kidding I am going to grow old gracefully ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Susan,apparently anusol is great on face wrinkles. When I acquire some (wrinkles that is) I'm gonna give it a go lol x
Too late for me,I need Polyfilla--------by the bucketload.!
-
Morning lookout
hahaha I know that is not true I have heard about your youthful looks :) and beautiful hair.Think the forum is keeping you young ;D ;D ;D
-
Morning Susan,you're so kind. ;D ;D ;D ;D Yes,the forum is a " friend ",sad as it may sound. It keeps the brain alert,I'll say that much.
-
lookout that is not sad it is great you have an interest with such passionX