Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Adam on January 05, 2015, 09:46:AM
-
If so that is potentially three crimes against his family pre massacre. So much for me saying inheritance killers commit zero or minimal crime prior to their killings.
There was the mentioned crime against Chris Neville's sister in New Zealand, Bamber leaving the country in a hurry. And the caravan break in which Bamber testified he did out of greed.
There are also rumours of stealing expensive watches while abroad, although this is not a crime against his family.
I joked about him stealing June's bike on another thread. And was called a liar by another poster. But the likelihood is the bike was taken by Bamber without permission.
When interviewed he said June and Neville knew about him taking the bike. June apparently did not 'get along with it'. Perhaps she should not have bought it then.
June's relationship with him had become non existent since 1978, Bamber said. Although there is a possibility it became non existent over ten years earlier. Jeremy agreeing with Mary Mugford's testimony that he never forgave June for sending him to boarding school.
June did not approve of Julies relationship with Jeremy. So unlikely to encourage it by giving Julie her bike.
Recent relationships with June would have just got worse. Neville and June financing Sheila and the twins in London, while making Bamber work long hours for his income.
June was also the person who refused to continue financing Bamber's extensive jaunts abroad. Sending him an airline ticket home, rather than more money he had demanded. After this he would have to work in order to get money from June & Neville. Or go it alone.
So it seems unlikely June would give Bamber her bike. He already had a car and free petrol. He could afford to buy his own bike. He had not bought a bike for himself to use. So what was Julie going to use the bike on her own for ? When she actually bothered to travel over in a declining relationship.
The bike was brought over just before the massacre. Bamber no doubt hoping no one noticed it had gone missing. Or if they did notice it missing, no one would suspect him. If it was found at his cottage before the massacre he could just say it was for Julie.
Do other people believe Bamber stole June's bike ?
-
If so that is potentially three crimes against his family pre massacre. So much for me saying inheritance killers commit zero or minimal crime prior to their killings.
There was the mentioned crime against Chris Neville's sister in New Zealand, Bamber leaving the country in a hurry. And the caravan break in which Bamber testified he did out of greed.
There are also rumours of stealing expensive watches while abroad, although this is not a crime against his family.
I jokedabout him stealing June's bike on another thread. And was called a liar by another poster. But the likelihood is the bike was taken by Bamber without permission.
When interviewed he said June and Neville knew about him taking the bike. June apparently did not 'get along with it'. Perhaps she should not have bought it then.
June's relationship with him had become non existent since 1978, Bamber said. Although there is a possibility it became non existent over ten years earlier. Jeremy agreeing with Mary Mugford's testimony that he never forgave June for sending him to boarding school.
June did not approve of Julies relationship with Jeremy. So unlikely to encourage it by giving Julie her bike.
Recent relationships with June would have just got worse. Neville and June financing Sheila and the twins in London, while making Bamber work long hours for his income.
June was also the person who refused to continue financing Bamber's extensive jaunts abroad. Sending him an airline ticket home, rather than more money he had demanded. After this he would have to work in order to get money from June & Neville. Or go it alone.
So it seems unlikely June would give Bamber her bike. He already had a car and free petrol. He could afford to buy his own bike. He had not bought a bike for himself to use. So what was Julie going to use the bike on her own for ? When she actually bothered to travel over in a declining relationship.
The bike was brought over just before the massacre. Bamber no doubt hoping no one noticed it had gone missing. Or if they did notice it missing, no one would suspect him. If it was found at his cottage before the massacre he could just say it was for Julie.
Do other people believe Bamber stole June's bike ?
Here is the entire post so that others can judge whether I called Adam a liar, or that I perceived a lie. Also tell me if anyone on the forum recognises Adams post as a joke?
Thought she had missed it. Inheritance killers have no or minimal criminal history.
Jeremy had some criminal history, notably against his family. And stole June's bike as well.
my answer:
Another lie I perceive? June was well aware that he borrowed her bike.
Now I think all will agree that from Christmas last year and into the new year that I have been very tolarant with Adam and have not been nasty or abusive with him in any way. But this post in my own judgment I would say as a deliberate attempt at goading me by telling people that I called him a liar. Now please judge for yourselves, did I call him a liar? Or did I judge his post as a lie? Furthermore I have reported Adam's thread as goading, especially as he has entitled his thread as "Did Bamber steal June's bike?". This in itself is positive proof that his former remark was indeed not a joke, but rather an attempt to goad and accuse me falsely. Moderators please note this thread.
-
I just said 'another poster' and didn't mention any names.
'Another lie' states I tell lies. Why would I lie on a discussion forum ? I can easily get found out. I always provide sources. Or twelve sources.
Yes in the last month you have not abused me or called me thick for having a different view to you. Which you had previously done over several months. Do you want a medal ?
Do you think Bamber stole the bike or June gave it to him ?
-
Adam I have always thought June loaned the bike to Jeremy but hey ho he may have just taken it without asking I am undecided.
-
Adam I have always thought June loaned the bike to Jeremy but hey ho he may have just taken it without asking I am undecided.
If June rarely used the bike she would not notice it gone if Bamber stole it just before the massacre.
If she used the bike often, she would tell Bamber to buy his own.
Or June could give him the bike after she had bought a replacement. But why should she ? Bamber could buy his own.
-
Cannot really see a situation where June would just give Bamber her bike.
My parents have never just given me a bike. Well not since I was 15.
-
I just said 'another poster' and didn't mention any names.
'Another lie' states I tell lies. Why would I lie on a discussion forum ? I can easily get found out. I always provide sources. Or twelve sources.
Yes in the last month you have not abused me or called me thick for having a different view to you. Which you had previously done over several months. Do you want a medal ?
Do you think Bamber stole the bike or June gave it to him ?
Adam you said it was a joke. But the fact that you have posted the same thing here proves that it was not a joke. Please do not accuse me of abusing you. I have of late been very tolerant of you. Moderators please take the appropriate action in my defense here.
-
Cannot really see a situation where June would just give Bamber her bike.
My parents have never just given me a bike. Well not since I was 15.
So you are confirming that your comment on the other thread was not a joke and that I judged right that it was a lie on your part. This thread should be boycotted on principle.
-
Yes I have created a thread on it.
Upon thinking about it further, it is something that has never been discussed on here. Thought it would make interesting discussion. No one had created a thread on it.
Do you think Bamber stole or was given the bike ?
-
The bicycle had been at Bamber's cottage for three weeks before the murders. I should think that something would have been said if he had stolen it? But as Tyler once said and I agree with her that the bicycle was a red herring, introduce by the prosecution in order to explain their theory of how Bamber had gotten to WHF and back.
-
The bicycle had been at Bamber's cottage for three weeks before the murders. I should think that something would have been said if he had stolen it? But as Tyler once said and I agree with her that the bicycle was a red herring, introduce by the prosecution in order to explain their theory of how Bamber had gotten to WHF and back.
It was brought over three days before the massacre.
Bamber himself saying it arrived a few days before the massacre. After a lot of pressure when interviewed.
Julie saying she saw the bike just before the massacre.
-
It was brought over three days before the massacre.
Bamber himself saying it arrived a few days before the massacre. After a lot of pressure when interviewed.
Julie saying she saw the bike just before the massacre.
Once and for all let us use your own words and say that it is time for closure on the bike myth. (1) You must prove that Bamber stole Junes bike. (2) You must prove that Bamber used the bike on the night of the murders.
As a guide line (1) The prosecution could not prove that the bike was used by Bamber that night. Robert Boutflour went to great lengths to prove it, but failed miserably. All the judge could say on the subject was to my mind very misleading. It was that it was not necessary for the jury to prove how Bamber got to WHF. It was only necessary to say that it could be done, or words to that effect. In my opinion that is yet another reason why the trial was a miscarriage of justice.
-
Come to think of it, I do not know any 24 year old men who have been given a ladies bike by their mum. For a girlfriend that occasionally visits.
Then again Bamber did write to June from abroad, demanding she send him £4,000.00 so he can do a diving course. What's a ladies bike between a mother and son who have not spoken in 7/15 years ?
-
Once and for all let us use your own words and say that it is time for closure on the bike myth. (1) You must prove that Bamber stole Junes bike. (2) You must prove that Bamber used the bike on the night of the murders.
As a guide line (1) The prosecution could not prove that the bike was used by Bamber that night. Robert Boutflour went to great lengths to prove it, but failed miserably. All the judge could say on the subject was to my mind very misleading. It was that it was not necessary for the jury to prove how Bamber got to WHF. It was only necessary to say that it could be done, or words to that effect. In my opinion that is yet another reason why the trial was a miscarriage of justice.
I cannot prove it. June was shot 8 times in the head and torso in 1985.
This is a discussion forum. People are allowed to give opinions. My opinion is it was stolen. Details in my thread post.
You believe June gave him the bike.
Every other poster is free to comment.
-
Come to think of it, I do not know any 24 year old men who have been given a ladies bike by their mum. For a girlfriend that occasionally visits.
Then again Bamber did write to June from abroad, demanding she send him £4,000.00 so he can do a diving course. What's a ladies bike between a mother and son who have not spoken in 7/15 years ?
That is just an irrelevant derogatory remark calculated only to show Bamber in a bad light. What's your point?
-
I cannot prove it. June was shot 8 times in the head and torso in 1985.
This is a discussion forum. People are allowed to give opinions. My opinion is it was stolen. Details in my thread post.
You believe June gave him the bike.
So you are willing to believe without any evidence whatsoever that he stole Junes bike are you? Well I hope you never get the chance to sit on a jury if you judge things according to your own whim as opposed to clear evidence young man.
-
So you are willing to believe without any evidence whatsoever that he stole Junes bike are you? Well I hope you never get the chance to sit on a jury if you judge things according to your own whim as opposed to clear evidence young man.
There is no evidence he was given it either.
My thread post, and other posts shows lots of reasons why he would have to steal it.
But appreciate that supporters have to say he was given the bike. Just before the massacre !
-
There is no evidence he was given it either.
My thread post, and other posts shows lots of reasons why he would have to steal it.
But appreciate that supporters have to say he was given the bike. Just before the massacre !
No proof. Just your opinion. Proof is needed in a court of law. That proof was not found. End of. Last comment.
-
No proof. Just your opinion. Proof is needed in a court of law. That proof was not found. End of. Last comment.
If you do not wish to comment further, feel free.
The bike was discussed a lot in court. It is quite possible the jury would have discussed whether Bamber stole it three days before the massacre. Just the possibility it was stolen enhances the prosecution case that Bamber needed it and used it on the night.
My thread post and other posts shows a lot of reasons it would have to be stolen. Anyway, the jury voted guilty.
-
Come to think of it, I do not know any 24 year old men who have been given a ladies bike by their mum. For a girlfriend that occasionally visits.
Then again Bamber did write to June from abroad, demanding she send him £4,000.00 so he can do a diving course. What's a ladies bike between a mother and son who have not spoken in 7/15 years ?
Adam - What is your basis for saying June and Jeremy had not spoken for that length of time . Please clarify because I do not believe that is true
-
Adam - What is your basis for saying June and Jeremy had not spoken for that length of time . Please clarify because I do not believe that is true
Do you think Jeremy stole or was given June's bike ?
Bamber said his relationship broke down with June in 1978. Source Wilkes's book. He interviewed Bamber.
However my 'Why did Jeremy hate June' thread, suggests it could have been a lot earlier.
-
Jeremy agreed with Mary Mugford's testimony about him and June.
Would you like me to find the thread ?
-
That is just an irrelevant derogatory remark calculated only to show Bamber in a bad light. What's your point?
I would be interested to know from where did documentary proof come of Jeremy's "demand" that June send him £4000. A rather strange request if, as is alleged, he hadn't spoken A WORD to her in 7/15 years., don't you agree?
-
Do you think Jeremy stole or was given June's bike.
Bamber said his relationship broke down with June in 1978. Source Wilkes's book. He interviewed Bamber.
However my 'Why did Jeremy hate June' thread, suggests it could have been a lot earlier.
Well you should read Jean Boutells evidence - and I have never seen any thing ever that said they were not speaking. It would be impossible for him to work on the farm and call into the house every day and not be speaking to her . And do you seriously think he would have been given shares in two family companies if that was the case? Not even the "family" made the claim that you have just done.
-
I would be interested to know from where did documentary proof come of Jeremy's "demand" that June send him £4000.
It is in Wilkes's book. Who interveiwed Bamber. Diving lessons do not come cheap.
Robert Boutflour read the letter sent to June. Saying it was almost threatening.
Bamber would of course speak to June if he wanted money.
Correction - it was £1,500.00. Which I believe is £4,000.00 today.
Do you believe Bamber stole or was given June's bike ?
-
It is in Wilkes's book. Who interveiwed Bamber. Diving lessons do not come cheap.
Robert Boutflour read the letter sent to June. Saying it was almost threatening.
Correction - it was £1,500.00. Which I believe is £4,000.00 today.
Do you believe Bamber stole or was given June's bike ?
I never commented on that . You stated as fact they had not spoken for 7 /15 years . I am asking you for the evidence to support that claim
-
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=PoiqVPPQGYvNygOH94CoCw&url=http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php%3Ftopic%3D5129.150&ved=0CB0QFjAA&usg=AFQjCNHobaArurCKjFfDzT4waTBxQLet2Q&sig2=YxXp2ll6Gp9DiKIK0-2Nrg
MM testimony is on page one. Bamber agreed with it when testifying.
Page 42 of Wilkes's book quotes Bamber as saying the relationship broke down when he was 17.
Take you're pick - 17, or 6 (when being sent to boarding school). Either way, a long time.
Do you believe Bamber stole or was given June's bike ?
-
It is in Wilkes's book. Who interveiwed Bamber. Diving lessons do not come cheap.
Robert Boutflour read the letter sent to June. Saying it was almost threatening.
Correction - it was £1,500.00. Which I believe is £4,000.00 today.
Do you believe Bamber stole or was given June's bike ?
So, in telling us "it's in Wilkes' book" are you saying that Jeremy told him he DEMANDED the money -having not spoken to his mother for 7/15 years OR is that your OWN interpretation? As NONE of us has seen the letter we can't say what was the tone, but would it not have been counter productive to write in a threatening tone, demanding money of the mother one hadn't spoken with for years?
-
So, in telling us "it's in Wilkes' book" are you saying that Jeremy told him he DEMANDED the money -having not spoken to his mother for 7/15 years OR is that your OWN interpretation? As NONE of us has seen the letter we can't say what was the tone, but would it not have been counter productive to write in a threatening tone, demanding money of the mother one hadn't spoken with for years?
I doubt that Jeremy told him this. RB would have told Wilkes this. As the book states.
He got the money from June. Maybe the capital letters he writes in scared her. And the threatening tone.
Do you think Bamber stole or was given the bike ?
-
I never commented on that . You stated as fact they had not spoken for 7 /15 years . I am asking you for the evidence to support that claim
I, too, would be interested to see the evidence...................especially so as you say Wilkes got the information from Jeremy.
-
I doubt that Jeremy told him this. RB would have told Wilkes this. As the book states.
He got the money from June. Maybe the capital letters he writes in scared her. And the threatening tone.
But you haven't said from where comes the information that Jeremy hadn't spoken with June for 7/15 years.
-
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=PoiqVPPQGYvNygOH94CoCw&url=http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php%3Ftopic%3D5129.150&ved=0CB0QFjAA&usg=AFQjCNHobaArurCKjFfDzT4waTBxQLet2Q&sig2=YxXp2ll6Gp9DiKIK0-2Nrg
MM testimony is on page one. Bamber agreed with it when testifying.
Page 42 of Wilkes's book quotes Bamber as saying the relationship broke down when he was 17.
Take you're pick - 17, or 6 (when being sent to boarding school). Either way, a long time.
Do you believe Bamber stole or was given June's bike ?
-
Chapter 31, page 220 of Wilkes's book -
Julies mother Mary Mugford followed her daughter into the witness box.
She said 'Jeremy hated his mother & blamed her for turning Sheila mad. And he resented her for loving the twins more than him. Jeremy disliked his mother intensely & I felt he was more affectionate to me'.
'He used to call me mummy all the time. He offerred me his mothers small car which had been bought that Christmas. This was just after the shooting. A list had been drawn up and he was going to keep no momentoes, which I thought very strange. He wanted to sell everthing'.
'Jeremy resented his mother because she sent him away to boarding school. He never forgave her for that.
'Apparently she was a religious maniac'.
'A few months before the murders Jeremy had told me her mother was thinking of changing her will in favour of her grandsons, on whom she doted'.
'Jeremy never spoke to his mother & she never showed any affection towards him'.
'He often spoke of this'.
_________________
In case no one clicked on my link.
If Bamber never forgave June for sending him to boarding school, then there is a possibility the relationship broke down when he was 6.
Bamber contradicts himself here. Testifying that he agreed with MM's testimony. But telling Wilkes it broke down when he was 17.
Either way, it was a long time and after robbing his parents it was not getting any better.
-
I doubt that Jeremy told him this. RB would have told Wilkes this. As the book states.
He got the money from June. Maybe the capital letters he writes in scared her. And the threatening tone.
Do you think Bamber stole or was given the bike ?
This is absurd and reveals with all clarity your irrational hate of Jeremy. It seems personal. Such an absurd statement also undermines your overall credibility.
-
It is in Wilkes's book. Who interveiwed Bamber. Diving lessons do not come cheap.
Robert Boutflour read the letter sent to June. Saying it was almost threatening.
Bamber would of course speak to June if he wanted money.
Correction - it was £1,500.00. Which I believe is £4,000.00 today.
Do you believe Barber stole or was given June's bike ?
I have read in Lomaxs book I think that Jeremy saved most of the money himself which he used for travelling however if he didn't as you point out Sheila had many bailouts et. So fair's, fair, make your mind up. Did Jeremy have a reason to resent Sheila? Yes driving lessons are expensive but something that many parents consider necessary expenditure on their children if they can afford it. I would imagine a driving licence and in time a HGV licence would be necessary to use him at his full capacity on the farm. In one breath you claim Jeremy resented Sheila getting all the financial help and a free flat in London while he has to slog on the farm the next minute he's being bank rolled on travels round the world, ??
-
I have read in Lomaxs book I think that Jeremy saved most of the money himself which he used for travelling however if he didn't as you point out Sheila had many bailouts et. So fair's, fair, make your mind up. Did Jeremy have a reason to resent Sheila? Yes driving lessons are expensive but something that many parents consider necessary expenditure on their children if they can afford it. I would imagine a driving licence and in time a HGV licence would be necessary to use him at his full capacity on the farm. In one breath you claim Jeremy resented Sheila getting all the financial help and a free flat in London while he has to slog on the farm the next minute he's being bank rolled on travels round the world, ??
After failing his 'A' levels he was financed for extensive jaunts abroad. But then the money stopped and Jeremy had to work.
Sheila was still getting financed. And the twins.
Jeremy was outraged.
Do you believe Jeremy stole or was given the bike ?
-
Since when did a "broken relationship" mean NOT speaking? During the timeframe you give, June would have been responsible for Jeremy's care when he was at home. The usual Mum things. Cooking, Washing. Clearing up after. Dispensing of pocket money/allowance(?) Social occasions such as Christmas and birthdays. I believe she and Neville accompanied Jeremy to his 21st birthday celebrations. All of this life being lived, Adam, and you would have us believe that not a word was spoken by Jeremy to his mother. According to Jeremy, his relationship with Julie had been "in decline" but they were still speaking
-
This is absurd and reveals with all clarity your irrational hate of Jeremy. It seems personal. Such an absurd statement also undermines your overall credibility.
Do you believe Jeremy stole or was given the bike ?
-
Chapter 31, page 220 of Wilkes's book -
Julies mother Mary Mugford followed her daughter into the witness box.
She said 'Jeremy hated his mother & blamed her for turning Sheila mad. And he resented her for loving the twins more than him. Jeremy disliked his mother intensely & I felt he was more affectionate to me'.
'He used to call me mummy all the time. He offerred me his mothers small car which had been bought that Christmas. This was just after the shooting. A list had been drawn up and he was going to keep no momentoes, which I thought very strange. He wanted to sell everthing'.
'Jeremy resented his mother because she sent him away to boarding school. He never forgave her for that.
'Apparently she was a religious maniac'.
'A few months before the murders Jeremy had told me her mother was thinking of changing her will in favour of her grandsons, on whom she doted'.
'Jeremy never spoke to his mother & she never showed any affection towards him'.
'He often spoke of this'.
_________________
In case no one clicked on my link.
If Bamber never forgave June for sending him to boarding school, then there is a possibility the relationship broke down when he was 6.
Bamber contradicts himself here. Testifying that he agreed with MM's testimony. But telling Wilkes it broke down when he was 17.
Either way, it was a long time and after robbing his parents it was not getting any better.
But this doesn't say from where come documentary evidence that Jeremy hadn't spoken to June for 7/14 years. Saying the relationship had broken down is NOT documentary evidence.
-
Since when did a "broken relationship" mean NOT speaking? During the timeframe you give, June would have been responsible for Jeremy's care when he was at home. The usual Mum things. Cooking, Washing. Clearing up after. Dispensing of pocket money/allowance(?) Social occasions such as Christmas and birthdays. I believe she and Neville accompanied Jeremy to his 21st birthday celebrations. All of this life being lived, Adam, and you would have us believe that not a word was spoken by Jeremy to his mother. According to Jeremy, his relationship with Julie had been "in decline" but they were still speaking
Well they probably spoke if they had to.
Jeremy may have even said 'pass the salt' to June on his rabbit shooting last supper.
I know Bamber was speaking to Julie. He rang her three times on the massacre night !
Do you think the bike was stolen or given ?
-
I have read in Lomaxs book I think that Jeremy saved most of the money himself which he used for travelling however if he didn't as you point out Sheila had many bailouts et. So fair's, fair, make your mind up. Did Jeremy have a reason to resent Sheila? Yes driving lessons are expensive but something that many parents consider necessary expenditure on their children if they can afford it. I would imagine a driving licence and in time a HGV licence would be necessary to use him at his full capacity on the farm. In one breath you claim Jeremy resented Sheila getting all the financial help and a free flat in London while he has to slog on the farm the next minute he's being bank rolled on travels round the world, ??
I've bailed out my children many times. I do it out of love for them. But I must add that I don't think any of them really appreciate the fact that I spend most of my money on them. I suspect it was the same where Jeremy and Sheila were concerned? The only difference I see here is that Adam is unjustly accusing Bamber of things that aren't true? It isn't just a matter of opinion because in this country at least proof is required to back up accusations and this is seriously lacking in Adam's case. On the contrary all I see in Adam's posts are a blood lust hatred for Bamber and anyone else who believe that there has been a miscarriage of justice.
It is a thread also in which he has accused me of calling him a liar because he was "joking" when he said in another thread that Bamber stole his mother's bike.
As usual it is unfortunate that the moderators have not taken my complaint seriously.
-
No proof. Just your opinion. Proof is needed in a court of law. That proof was not found. End of. Last comment.
-
But this doesn't say from where come documentary evidence that Jeremy hadn't spoken to June for 7/14 years. Saying the relationship had broken down is NOT documentary evidence.
What I find interesting is the fact of how quickly Mugford's mother changes towards Bamber at the very convenient same time Mugford did? Strange it is also that neither of them, mother nor daughter had anything GOOD to say about him. Yet she had been his girlfriend for over two years and expected to marry him. Oh how hate loves to manifest itself against those who feel betrayed. This lends proof to the fact that it was jealousy that caused both Mugfords to lie in court and yes I suggest they did lie through their teeth.
-
I've bailed out my children many times. I do it out of love for them. But I must add that I don't think any of them really appreciate the fact that I spend most of my money on them. I suspect it was the same where Jeremy and Sheila were concerned? The only difference I see here is that Adam is unjustly accusing Bamber of things that aren't true? It isn't just a matter of opinion because in this country at least proof is required to back up accusations and this is seriously lacking in Adam's case. On the contrary all I see in Adam's posts are a blood lust hatred for Bamber and anyone else who believe that there has been a miscarriage of justice.
It is a thread also in which he has accused me of calling him a liar because he was "joking" when he said in another thread that Bamber stole his mother's bike.
As usual it is unfortunate that the moderators have not taken my complaint seriously.
You couldn't bail me out could you ?
I want to buy a Porsche car. After a trip to St Tropez of course.
-
What I find interesting is the fact of how quickly Mugford's mother changes towards Bamber at the very convenient same time Mugford did? Strange it is also that neither of them, mother nor daughter had anything GOOD to say about him. Yet she had been his girlfriend for over two years and expected to marry him. Oh how hate loves to manifest itself against those who feel betrayed. This lends proof to the fact that it was jealousy that caused both Mugfords to lie in court and yes I suggest they did lie through their teeth.
Why did Jeremy agree with MM's testimony if she lied ?
MM said nice things when testifying. He called her 'mummy' and offered her June's car.
-
Why did Jeremy agree with MM's testimony if she lied ?
MM said nice things when testifying. He called her 'mummy' and offered her June's car.
Why don't you write to Jeremy and ask HIM. Nothing like getting information from the horse's mouth, is there. No need to be afraid -you can say all the things you say here- he's safely behind bars. I'm sure he'd love to hear from you. I'm told he replies to everybody.
-
Do you believe Jeremy stole or was given the bike ?
Jee, Adam, I don´t know, do you? There is a third possibility which you don´t mention, he could have borrowed it.
A question for you: why do you choose to be so annoying?
-
I have read in Lomaxs book I think that Jeremy saved most of the money himself which he used for travelling however if he didn't as you point out Sheila had many bailouts et. So fair's, fair, make your mind up. Did Jeremy have a reason to resent Sheila? Yes driving lessons are expensive but something that many parents consider necessary expenditure on their children if they can afford it. I would imagine a driving licence and in time a HGV licence would be necessary to use him at his full capacity on the farm. In one breath you claim Jeremy resented Sheila getting all the financial help and a free flat in London while he has to slog on the farm the next minute he's being bank rolled on travels round the world, ??
Bamber went abroad directly after failing his A levels in 1978. So not sure how he could support himself.
He returned to England for a period before going abroad again in 1983. In the middle of the summer harvest/17 hour days. Again, not sure how he could afford this on a low income.
Total time abroad was 20 months I believe.
Anyway, the financing for jaunts abroad stopped. Jeremy was outraged.
-
Bamber went abroad directly after failing his A levels in 1978. So not sure how he could support himself.
He returned to England for a period before going abroad again in 1983. In the middle of the summer harvest/17 hour days. Again, not sure how he could afford this on a low income.
Total time abroad was 20 months I believe.
Anyway, the financing for jaunts abroad stopped. Jeremy was outraged.
So what age would that have made him, 16, 17?
-
Jee, Adam, I don´t know, do you? There is a third possibility which you don´t mention, he could have borrowed it.
A question for you: why do you choose to be so annoying?
I am creating a thread on something the courts certainly discussed and the jury almost certainly discussed.
Borrowed it ? Yes perhaps he wanted to go on a summer
country bike ride. On a woman's bike. I have heard the seawall route was very pleasant in August.
-
So what age would that have made him, 16, 17?
Age 19. He re took his 'A' levels at college. Failing again.
-
Bamber went abroad directly after failing his A levels in 1978. So not sure how he could support himself.
He returned to England for a period before going abroad again in 1983. In the middle of the summer harvest/17 hour days. Again, not sure how he could afford this on a low income.
Total time abroad was 20 months I believe.
Anyway, the financing for jaunts abroad stopped. Jeremy was outraged.
I don't know how you quantify "low income". I certainly wouldn't have turned my (unpicked) nose up at that amount of POCKET MONEY -because that's what it amounted to- in the 1980's. Whilst you appear to set Jeremy apart from ALL his contemporaries, his life style was no different from any other young males of his class. You sound very resentful about your parents not gifting you new bikes.
-
I don't know how you quantify "low income". I certainly wouldn't have turned my (unpicked) nose up at that amount of POCKET MONEY -because that's what it amounted to- in the 1980's. Whilst you appear to set Jeremy apart from ALL his contemporaries, his life style was no different from any other young males of his class. You sound very resentful about your parents not gifting you new bikes.
Yes I was very upset that the last bike bought for me was when I was 15.
Jeremy got given bikes at 24. Women's bikes for a girlfriend that occasionally visited in a declining relationship.
Mind you if you don't ask...
-
Yes I was very upset that the last bike bought for me was when I was 15.
Jeremy got given bikes at 24. Women's bikes for a girlfriend that occasionally visited in a declining relationship.
Mind you if you don't ask...
So perhaps you should have........................on the other hand perhaps you'd gone off bikes by the time you were 15.
-
Bamber went abroad directly after failing his A levels in 1978. So not sure how he could support himself.
He returned to England for a period before going abroad again in 1983. In the middle of the summer harvest/17 hour days. Again, not sure how he could afford this on a low income.
Total time abroad was 20 months I believe.
Anyway, the financing for jaunts abroad stopped. Jeremy was outraged.
Neither yourself or I may know how he did it but apparently he did but if he didn't what of it? As I have said before it's normal enough behaviour for a young man with wealthy parents. It speaks volumes about Robert Boutflours narrow minded attitude IMO and what has it got to do with him who paid for Jeremy's flight. I don't know why you insist on calling Jeremy's travels 'jaunts' in that sarcastic way are you jealous of him? Don't believe a young man would ever use such an expression.
-
Chapter 31, page 220 of Wilkes's book -
Julies mother Mary Mugford followed her daughter into the witness box.
She said 'Jeremy hated his mother & blamed her for turning Sheila mad. And he resented her for loving the twins more than him. Jeremy disliked his mother intensely & I felt he was more affectionate to me'.
'He used to call me mummy all the time. He offerred me his mothers small car which had been bought that Christmas. This was just after the shooting. A list had been drawn up and he was going to keep no momentoes, which I thought very strange. He wanted to sell everthing'.
'Jeremy resented his mother because she sent him away to boarding school. He never forgave her for that.
'Apparently she was a religious maniac'.
'A few months before the murders Jeremy had told me her mother was thinking of changing her will in favour of her grandsons, on whom she doted'.
'Jeremy never spoke to his mother & she never showed any affection towards him'.
'He often spoke of this'.
_________________
In case no one clicked on my link.
If Bamber never forgave June for sending him to boarding school, then there is a possibility the relationship broke down when he was 6.
Bamber contradicts himself here. Testifying that he agreed with MM's testimony. But telling Wilkes it broke down when he was 17.
Either way, it was a long time and after robbing his parents it was not getting any better.
Adam you insinuated that the information about JB and june not talking came from Jeremy - now it appears the OS was julies Mother ? So In other words the Fact that you presented that they had not talked for years came from the Mother of the star prosecution witness?
All Jeremy had ever said was that his relationship with June had been strained in the past but the couple of years before the murders their relationship had been better . Also Colin C who knew the family better NEVER said in his book that Jeremy and June never spoke to each other.
So your post was a misinterpretation of the facts.
And As for the title of your thread it is perfectly possible that Jeremy borrowed the bike from his Mother for Julie - so all you have is his word against hers - so any comments will be opinion only.
-
Age 19. He re took his 'A' levels at college. Failing again.
So how old was he when he was supposed to have murdered the family?
-
Age 19. He re took his 'A' levels at college. Failing again.
I didn't take any A levels, does that make me a failure too? You appear to scoff at people who fail their exams?
-
BTW I financed trips abroad for both my children at the ages of 18/19 So I am not quite sure what your point is ?
And why the sarcastic comment about Jeremy writing in capital letters - what has that got to do with anything?
Are you not aware that in a murder trial it is not the persons Character that is on trial -hence why past records are not revealed? It is a trial on the evidence.
-
I am creating a thread on something the courts certainly discussed and the jury almost certainly discussed.
Borrowed it ? Yes perhaps he wanted to go on a summer
country bike ride. On a woman's bike. I have heard the seawall route was very pleasant in August.
Why the sarcasm - can you not make a point without it?
-
Bamber went abroad directly after failing his A levels in 1978. So not sure how he could support himself.
He returned to England for a period before going abroad again in 1983. In the middle of the summer harvest/17 hour days. Again, not sure how he could afford this on a low income.
Total time abroad was 20 months I believe.
Anyway, the financing for jaunts abroad stopped. Jeremy was outraged.
Who says Jeremy was outraged?
And he was not on a low income .
-
Bamber went abroad directly after failing his A levels in 1978. So not sure how he could support himself.
He returned to England for a period before going abroad again in 1983. In the middle of the summer harvest/17 hour days. Again, not sure how he could afford this on a low income.
Total time abroad was 20 months I believe.
Anyway, the financing for jaunts abroad stopped. Jeremy was outraged.
If he was born in 1961 then that made him 17 in 1978. Why are you determined to make him seem a loser at the age of 17 Adam? Do you really hate him that much Adam?
-
Adam you insinuated that the information about JB and june not talking came from Jeremy - now it appears the OS was julies Mother ? So In other words the Fact that you presented that they had not talked for years came from the Mother of the star prosecution witness?
All Jeremy had ever said was that his relationship with June had been strained in the past but the couple of years before the murders their relationship had been better . Also Colin C who knew the family better NEVER said in his book that Jeremy and June never spoke to each other.
So your post was a misinterpretation of the facts.
And As for the title of your thread it is perfectly possible that Jeremy borrowed the bike from his Mother for Julie - so all you have is his word against hers - so any comments will be opinion only.
I also said Bamber told Wilkes the relationship broke down in 1978.
Bamber also testified that he agreed with MM's testimony.
So really he contradicts himself. When was the relationship breakdown, 1978 or 12 years earlier ?
-
I also said Bamber told Wilkes the relationship broke down in 1978.
Bamber also testified that he agreed with MM's testimony.
So really he contradicts himself. When was the relationship breakdown, 1978 or 12 years earlier ?
Another option of course is that seeing Wilkes wrote the book that perhaps he was he who twisted things a bit hoping that unthinking people will believe it?
-
Who says Jeremy was outraged?
And he was not on a low income .
Julie did in her 'ring of truth' witness statement.
And lots of other people. You know who.
-
Another option of course is that seeing Wilkes wrote the book that perhaps he was he who twisted things a bit hoping that unthinking people will believe it?
You think Wilkes interviewed Bamber and then lied in his book ?
-
I also said Bamber told Wilkes the relationship broke down in 1978.
Bamber also testified that he agreed with MM's testimony.
So really he contradicts himself. When was the relationship breakdown, 1978 or 12 years earlier ?
You have also ASSERTED very strongly on COUNTLESS occasions that Jeremy never spoke to June. More recently you have given a time frame of 7/14 years potentially meaning that despite that he hadn't spoken to June, when he was home from school, and was his main caregiver since he was 9 years old. I have repeatedly asked -POLITELY!!!!- for documentation regarding this. Your answer would be appreciated.
-
If he was born in 1961 then that made him 17 in 1978. Why are you determined to make him seem a loser at the age of 17 Adam? Do you really hate him that much Adam?
Just stating facts. He was sent to a top school. Failed his exams. Then spent a year at college and failed again.
-
You think Wilkes interviewed Bamber and then lied in his book ?
Have you ever researched Wilkes the author? I always find it a good thing to check out authors before I try to read their accounts of things.
Most people do not do this. They would rather drink in every word they read as long as it agrees with their own thoughts. Did you do this?
-
You have also ASSERTED very strongly on COUNTLESS occasions that Jeremy never spoke to June. More recently you have given a time frame of 7/14 years potentially meaning that despite that he hadn't spoken to June, when he was home from school, and was his main caregiver since he was 9 years old. I have repeatedly asked -POLITELY!!!!- for documentation regarding this. Your answer would be appreciated.
Do you have a beeper that beeps when I post ?
Documentation they did not speak ?
Well I said they spoke when they had to. But no WHF picnics. And no I have not got documentation saying this.
You know full well Bamber and June had an appalling long term relationship. Bamber telling James Richards 'I f___king hate my parents'. And yes Richards did testify.
-
Just stating facts. He was sent to a top school. Failed his exams. Then spent a year at college and failed again.
So why are you stating these "facts" Adam? What is your purpose? Are you endeavouring to show him a failure so as to make him look a bad character?
I can mention several people who here very highly intellectual, but at the same time some of the most evil people who ever walked the earth.
Are you saying that his low achievement is some how the reason he is a murderer, and that by implication all low achievers are potential murderers?
Or are you just mocking him as an under achiever and was somehow of low intelligence because of this?
-
Do you have a beeper that beeps when I post ?
Documentation they did not speak ?
Well I said they spoke when they had to. But no WHF picnics. And no I have not got documentation saying this.
You know full well Bamber and June had an appalling long term relationship. Bamber telling James Richards 'I f___king hate my parents'. And yes Richards did testify.
Then how do you know this then?
-
Do you have a beeper that beeps when I post ?
Documentation they did not speak ?
Well I said they spoke when they had to. But no WHF picnics. And no I have not got documentation saying this.
You know full well Bamber and June had an appalling long term relationship. Bamber telling James Richards 'I f___king hate my parents'. And yes Richards did testify.
Adam, I have NEVER tried to say they didn't but I can accept that there's a very wide gap between "an appalling" relationship and one in which someone hasn't spoken to another person -who they LIVE with- for 7/14 years.
-
So why are you stating these "facts" Adam? What is your purpose? Are you endeavouring to show him a failure so as to make him look a bad character?
I can mention several people who here very highly intellectual, but at the same time some of the most evil people who ever walked the earth.
Are you saying that his low achievement is some how the reason he is a murderer, and that by implication all low achievers are potential murderers?
Or are you just mocking him as an under achiever and was somehow of low intelligence because of this?
Well I created a thread on whether Bamber stole June's bike.
To be fair you eventually answered the thread question. Alias did to but seemed undecided suggesting he borrowed it. I bet he did ;D
April, Jan and Maggie refused to answer the thread question and the thread went off topic. I mentioned Bamber going abroad after failing his A level retakes. As that was where the thread was.
-
Well I created a thread on whether Bamber stole June's bike.
To be fair you eventually answered the thread question. Alias did to but seemed undecided suggesting he borrowed it. I bet he did ;D
April, Jan and Maggie refused to answer the thread question and the thread went off topic. I mentioned Bamber going abroad after failing his A level retakes. As that was where the thread was.
Erm, no you didn't. This actually what you said:
Bamber went abroad directly after failing his A levels in 1978[/color]
In 1978 Bamber was 17 years old. You said he went abroad after his retakes, which you state was at 19 years old. Perhaps you need to check on your facts and ask yourself whether you're right or not?
-
Then how do you know this then?
What a nice picture.
I don't know whether Jeremy and June went on lots of nice picnics.
I suspect not. Bamber was at boarding school. Then at college. Then abroad. Then living with other people as he did not want to work on the farm. Then on the farm for a short period. Then abroad again. Then in Goldhanger.
So not much time for picnics. He told the police she was a religious maniac. Source, AE's WS.
The hatred Bamber had came from lots of different areas.
-
Well I created a thread on whether Bamber stole June's bike.
To be fair you eventually answered the thread question. Alias did to but seemed undecided suggesting he borrowed it. I bet he did ;D
April, Jan and Maggie refused to answer the thread question and the thread went off topic. I mentioned Bamber going abroad after failing his A level retakes. As that was where the thread was.
It is not your place to "grade" other posters for whether they answer your strange questions or not. Annoying and rude - again.
About "WHF picnic" - lo and behold, June is also there, with Jeremy and all.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=37222;image)
Do they look like people who never talk?
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=6925;image)
-
What a nice picture.
I don't know whether Jeremy and June went on lots of nice picnics.
I suspect not. Bamber was at boarding school. Then at college. Then abroad. Then living with other people as he did not want to work on the farm. Then on the farm for a short period. Then abroad again. Then in Goldhanger.
So not much time for picnics. He told the police she was a religious maniac. Source, AE's WS.
The hatred Bamber had came from lots of different areas.
Certainly, not much time, and as children become teenagers, probably less because they have their own friends/social circle....................but it doesn't mean there were NONE and religious leanings generally aren't a bar to picnics.
-
You don't see many pics like that,grown-up sons with their mums' !. They usually back off. Looks normal to me.
-
It is not your place to "grade" other posters for whether they answer your strange questions or not. Annoying and rude - again.
About "WHF picnic" - lo and behold, June is also there, with Jeremy and all.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=37222;image)
Do they look like people who never talk?
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=6925;image)
Well whether Bamber stole June's bike is an important question.
If he stole it, it means he wanted to keep it secret that he was intending to use it. He would know that he could avoid being found with June's bike for the next two or three days.
Trying to steal it long term would not work.
Feel free to create discussion threads. I don't recall any. You are undecided so a thread should create good debate from both sides.
-
Well whether Bamber stole June's bike is an important question.
If he stole it, it means he wanted to keep it secret that he was intending to use it. He would know that he could avoid being found with June's bike for the next two or three days.
Trying to steal it long term would not work.
Feel free to create discussion threads. I don't recall any. You are undecided so a thread should create good debate from both sides.
Posters are not supposed to "grade" each other.
We will never know whether Jeremy borrowed, was given or stole June´s bike. We can discuss it till we are blue in the head, we will never know.
-
Posters are not supposed to "grade" each other.
We will never know whether Jeremy borrowed, was given or stole June´s bike. We can discuss it till we are blue in the head, we will never know.
It is a discussion thread. So people can give opinions.
It does seem very strange that June would allow Bamber to take the bike. And that he would ask. See thread post.
-
It is a discussion thread. So people can give opinions.
It does seem very strange that June would allow Bamber to take the bike. And that he would ask. See thread post.
I live in a bicycle country. People borrow each other´s bikes all the time. Nothing strange in it. You also try to make a point of it being a lady bike - so?
-
It is a discussion thread. So people can give opinions.
It does seem very strange that June would allow Bamber to take the bike. And that he would ask. See thread post.
So that's YOUR opinion. Some MAY share it. Others won't. End of. The point of the thread was WHAT, exactly?
-
Alias he borrowed the bike from his Mother for Julie to use why would he steal his Mothers bike no sense in that at all.
-
So that's YOUR opinion. Some MAY share it. Others won't. End of. The point of the thread was WHAT, exactly?
It is an important question. Which for some reason you refuse to give a 'yes' or 'no' answer to.
As a guilter you are allowed to say 'yes' or 'no'. Not that he brought the bike over for Julie :D
Or feel free to create you're own threads. I do not recall any. Ever.
-
Alias he borrowed the bike from his Mother for Julie to use why would he steal his Mothers bike no sense in that at all.
What was Julie going to use the bike for ?
-
Alias he borrowed the bike from his Mother for Julie to use why would he steal his Mothers bike no sense in that at all.
It would be such a stupid thing to do and so easy to find out, especially since it was parked outside his house!
-
It is an important question. Which for some reason you refuse to give a 'yes' or 'no' answer to.
As a guilter you are allowed to say 'yes' or 'no'. Not that he brought the bike over for Julie :D
Or feel free to create you're own threads. I do not recall any. Ever.
Adam, what is of GREAT importance to you Adam, may be of no consequence to the rest of us, as the limited number of replies to some of your threads will testify.
-
What was Julie going to use the bike for ?
Go to the bus stop so that Jeremy wouldn´t have to drive her every time, I´ve heard. He would be at the farm earlier than she left - might be a good explanation.
-
It would be such a stupid thing to do and so easy to find out, especially since it was parked outside his house!
It would be easy to steal it for two days.
If June did not use it much she would not notice. Or if she notice Bamber would not be a suspect. Why an earth would he take a woman's bike ?
-
It would be easy to steal it for two days.
If June did not use it much she would not notice. Or if she notice Bamber would not be a suspect. Why an earth would he take a woman's bike ?
How do you think he brought it to his home?
-
Alias exactly that would have caused more suspicion than just asking to borrow it.
-
The bicycle belonged to Jeremy's mother but had had been brought to Jeremy’s house for Julie Mugford to use so that she could cycle from Goldhanger to Toleshunt D'arcy, leaving the bike at the Red Lion Pub. She would then get the Osbourne's bus which runs from Tollesbury to Colchester.
From the OS.
Strange that after 18 months Bamber suddenly decided he could no longer drive her three miles. Or pay for a taxi.
I assume Julie visited when he was not working. What a gentleman.
-
What was Julie going to use the bike for ?
I'd hazard a guess at getting from A to B.
-
I also said Bamber told Wilkes the relationship broke down in 1978.
Bamber also testified that he agreed with MM's testimony.
So really he contradicts himself. When was the relationship breakdown, 1978 or 12 years earlier ?
A relationship breaking down does not mean that they were not speaking - So my point still stands.
And if it was that bad why were his parents funding some of his trips ( not all) ?
Why did June declare in her letter how much she loved Sheila and Jeremy?
-
It would be easy to steal it for two days.
If June did not use it much she would not notice. Or if she notice Bamber would not be a suspect. Why an earth would he take a woman's bike ?
Just as easy to ask if he could borrow it for a few days whilst Julie was there.
-
Jeremy's reason for bringing the bike is in post 93.
It was rotten luck that he brought it over three days before the massacre. And a curious co incidence.
Julie, AE, RB all believed he used it. And so did the prosecution. And so did the jury.
-
Well I created a thread on whether Bamber stole June's bike.
To be fair you eventually answered the thread question. Alias did to but seemed undecided suggesting he borrowed it. I bet he did ;D
April, Jan and Maggie refused to answer the thread question and the thread went off topic. I mentioned Bamber going abroad after failing his A level retakes. As that was where the thread was.
I did answer your thread and I will continue to challenge points that you make as facts that are not facts. Colin had lots of not very nice things to say about June and that's putting mildly - but he had known Jeremy for years and promised to support him after the murders. I am not saying he did not say about some things that disturbed him in retrospect but I repeat there is no evidence that Jeremy had not spoken to his Mother.
And it is a fact of life that many many :) children say they F hate their parents - that is a FACT of life.
-
It is an important question. Which for some reason you refuse to give a 'yes' or 'no' answer to.
As a guilter you are allowed to say 'yes' or 'no'. Not that he brought the bike over for Julie :D
Or feel free to create you're own threads. I do not recall any. Ever.
rude post.
-
The bicycle belonged to Jeremy's mother but had had been brought to Jeremy’s house for Julie Mugford to use so that she could cycle from Goldhanger to Toleshunt D'arcy, leaving the bike at the Red Lion Pub. She would then get the Osbourne's bus which runs from Tollesbury to Colchester.
From the OS.
Strange that after 18 months Bamber suddenly decided he could no longer drive her three miles. Or pay for a taxi.
I assume Julie visited when he was not working. What a gentleman.
But he said the relationship was in decline. He may have been p****d of with being her taxi service.
-
Jeremy's reason for bringing the bike is in post 93.
It was rotten luck that he brought it over three days before the massacre. And a curious co incidence.
Julie, AE, RB all believed he used it. And so did the prosecution. And so did the jury.
So he rode that bone shaker of a ladies bike down paths and across fields at night in the dark and then cleaned it when he returned ? Because the police and family were there in the morning - watching him - so that is what he would have had to do ?
Do you think that is likely ? And don't you think he would have thought of a better story if it was not?
-
I did answer your thread and I will continue to challenge points that you make as facts that are not facts. Colin had lots of not very nice things to say about June and that's putting mildly - but he had known Jeremy for years and promised to support him after the murders. I am not saying he did not say about some things that disturbed him in retrospect but I repeat there is no evidence that Jeremy had not spoken to his Mother.
And it is a fact of life that many many :) children say they F hate their parents - that is a FACT of life.
I did not read whether you thought Bamber stole June's bike.
I like you're determined fire fighting. Forty points, twenty points, twelve sources, you will be fighting poor Bamber's corner. Apart from when it becomes too much and you put me on ignore.
Well MM said they had not spoken for years. In court. But Bamber would have spoken when he needed money.
I told my mum I hated her when I was 7. But Bamber said this in his 20's.
-
But he said the relationship was in decline. He may have been p****d of with being her taxi service.
Yes it must tough for him to drive his girlfriend three miles. After she travelled over to see him.
Julie denies her cycling to the Red Lion Pub was ever discussed.
-
So he rode that bone shaker of a ladies bike down paths and across fields at night in the dark and then cleaned it when he returned ? Because the police and family were there in the morning - watching him - so that is what he would have had to do ?
Do you think that is likely ? And don't you think he would have thought of a better story if it was not?
Better story ?
Well it was possible to cycle to WHF. There were three routes across the fields. If it was not possible the prosecution would not say he did this.
The bike may have mud on. But so what ?
-
I did not read whether you thought Bamber stole June's bike.
I like you're determined fire fighting. Forty points, twenty points, twelve sources, you will be fighting poor Bamber's corner. Apart from when it becomes too much and you put me on ignore.
Well MM said they had not spoken for years. In court. But Bamber would have spoken when he needed money.
I told my mum I hated her when I was 7. But I believe Jeremy said this in his 20's.
Trust me Adam that is not the reason I put you on ignore . And I would appreciate it if you stopped referring to that as the reason. Or the phrase firefighting.
Your posts have the uncanny result of making me believe Jeremys innocence even more.
You talk as if you know him personally ? Unless you have been completely brainwashed by one book ?
I have never said JB was a nice person . I have never said they had a perfect family life . They are like a lot of other families a lot of ups and downs and probably problems they did not others to know about . Two women in the family who have had breakdowns - that can not be easy for any family . But the end result - I don't think anyone who knew them saw that coming.
-
Better story ?
Well it was possible to cycle to WHF. There were three routes across the fields. If it was not possible the prosecution would not say he did this.
The bike may have mud on. But so what ?
Did it though - I thought RB tried very hard to prove there was mud from the fields on it and even checked to see if he could find tracks - guess what nothing .
-
Yes it must tough for him to drive his girlfriend three miles. After she travelled over to see him.
Julie denies her cycling to the Red Lion Pub was ever discussed.
You really must learn to separate that which was Julie's responsibility from Jeremy's. It would have been nice if he'd ferried her around but by then it was a casual relationship and he was under no obligation to. That she had "Traveled over to see him" was HER responsibility. She COULD have cycled to the caravan park, to Mill Beach, to Heybridge or to Maldon. There was plenty for her to do.
-
You really must learn to separate that which was Julie's responsibility from Jeremy's. It would have been nice if he'd ferried her around but by then it was a casual relationship and he was under no obligation to. That she had "Traveled over to see him" was HER responsibility. She COULD have cycled to the caravan park, to Mill Beach, to Heybridge or to Maldon. There was plenty for her to do.
But in who's eyes?
-
But in who's eyes?
Yeh and I've said it SOOOOOOO often. Julie didn't believe/didn't WANT to believe/was in denial that it was now only a casual relationship.....................HOWZAT!!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
You really must learn to separate that which was Julie's responsibility from Jeremy's. It would have been nice if he'd ferried her around but by then it was a casual relationship and he was under no obligation to. That she had "Traveled over to see him" was HER responsibility. She COULD have cycled to the caravan park, to Mill Beach, to Heybridge or to Maldon. There was plenty for her to do.
What was Bamber doing when Julie was cycling three miles on busy roads ? Listening to his stereo equipment. Or on his sun bed ?
You're right, the relationship had been in decline for 6 months. Why should Bamber drive her anywhere ? Let her cycle. She had only travelled up from London.
Rotten luck Bamber made this decision just before his family was massacred.
-
What was Bamber doing when Julie was cycling three miles on busy roads ? Listening to his stereo equipment. Or on his sun bed ?
You're right, the relationship had been in decline for 6 months. Why should Bamber drive her anywhere ? Let her cycle.
Rotten luck Bamber made this decision just before his family was massacred.
Working probably.
Stereo, sun bed - you are envius and begrudge him the things he had. You remind me of someone.
-
What was Bamber doing when Julie was cycling three miles on busy roads ? Listening to his stereo equipment. Or on his sun bed ?
You're right, the relationship had been in decline for 6 months. Why should Bamber drive her anywhere ? Let her cycle.
Rotten luck Bamber made this decision just before his family was massacred.
Hmmmmm??? Errrr, working?
-
What was Bamber doing when Julie was cycling three miles on busy roads ? Listening to his stereo equipment. Or on his sun bed ?
You're right, the relationship had been in decline for 6 months. Why should Bamber drive her anywhere ? Let her cycle.
Rotten luck Bamber made this decision just before his family was massacred.
Adam, you could always write to him and ask but how Julie rode the bike WASN'T Jeremy's responsibility. Perhaps he thought the exercise would do her good.
-
Hmmmmm??? Errrr, working?
Best not travel up to see Bamber if he is spending 17 hours on WHF.
-
Best not travel up to see Bamber if he is spending 17 hours on WHF.
But her choice.
-
But her choice.
Yes she must put her (second) honours degree studying on hold to travel up to Goldhanger. Even though Bamber was working.
Jeremy leaving her a ready made meal and a bike.
-
Yes she must put her (second) honours degree studying on hold to travel up to Goldhanger. Even though Bamber was working.
Jeremy leaving her a ready made meal and a bike.
People do see each other though they are working - all the time, every day, all over the world. What is your point exactly? You have heard of evenings and weekend visits, haven´t you? Some weekend visits end Monday morning, when one of the partners needs to go to work and does not have time to drive the other.
Adam, this is so pointless. Time for closure on this one? :P
-
Yes she must put her (second) honours degree studying on hold to travel up to Goldhanger. Even though Bamber was working.
Jeremy leaving her a ready made meal and a bike.
A chance she was willing to take. Most uni work is done at home anyway. It doesn't matter WHOSE. When she'd finished there was a nice invigorating bike ride during which she could daydream about being Julie Bamber.
-
Alias he borrowed the bike from his Mother for Julie to use why would he steal his Mothers bike no sense in that at all.
If I remember rightly I read that , June never used the bike, she bought it but could never get on with it so she was happy for Julie to borrow it to ride to the station.
-
Maggie I have read that too. I had never heard about Jeremy stealing the bike before tonight :'(
-
People do see each other though they are working - all the time, every day, all over the world. What is your point exactly? You have heard of evenings and weekend visits, haven´t you? Some weekend visits end Monday morning, when one of the partners needs to go to work and does not have time to drive the other.
Adam, this is so pointless. Time for closure on this one? :P
Do you think it was a coincidence Bamber brought the bike over just before the massacre ?
And that the police and prosecution were wrong to claim he cycled to WHF ?
-
Well whether Bamber stole June's bike is an important question.
If he stole it, it means he wanted to keep it secret that he was intending to use it. He would know that he could avoid being found with June's bike for the next two or three days.
Trying to steal it long term would not work.
Feel free to create discussion threads. I don't recall any. You are undecided so a thread should create good debate from both sides.
Why is it? It was accepted at court by everyone that it was borrowed by Jeremy and if was accepted by all and sundry that it was borrowed then you have absolutely no foundation or ethical reason to suggest that it was stolen. So Why is it an important question?
Could I be permitted to say that it is an important thing to you alone? Why? Og because since you have been here you have waged a relentless war upon Bamber's character. And not only on Bamber's character but upon all to whom your term "supporters" of Bamber.
I suggest young man that this is the only reason that you are here. To methodically demolish Bamber's character bewfore the eyes of the world. I further suggest that you are nothing but a troll and have exhibited these characteristics from day one of your membership.
So please let us know why it is so important to you to believe that Bamber stole Junes Bike?
-
Maggie I have read that too. I had never heard about Jeremy stealing the bike before tonight :'(
June is dead.
My thread post suggests it is almost certain he stole the bike.
-
June is dead.
My thread post suggests it is almost certain he stole the bike.
No it doesn't Adam, it proves you believe Jeremy stole the bike and that is all. :)
-
A chance she was willing to take. Most uni work is done at home anyway. It doesn't matter WHOSE. When she'd finished there was a nice invigorating bike ride during which she could daydream about being Julie Bamber.
Oh yes. Dreaming of being the wife of farmer Bamber must have really put her off her (second) honours degree.
As you said, Julie would have kept quiet if he put a ring on her finger. Pity he didn't then.
-
But he said the relationship was in decline. He may have been p****d of with being her taxi service.
If it was in decline then why on earth would he share his plans of murder with her. Sorry April it just doesn't make any sense at all. ::)
-
Best not travel up to see Bamber if he is spending 17 hours on WHF.
If Jeremy wasn't that bothered about Julie, perhaps he just couldn't be arsed to pick her up and so the idea of the bike was to alleviate the burden. I don't believe Jeremy used the bike to travel home on the night of the murders, he would risk being seen - a walk across the fields is more likely.
-
Adam do you have a source which suggests Jeremy stole the bike. Thank you.
-
June is dead.
My thread post suggests it is almost certain he stole the bike.
OK you've convinced yourself. You seem to think it's important. It seems that most of us don't.
-
Do you think it was a coincidence Bamber brought the bike over just before the massacre ?
And that the police and prosecution were wrong to claim he cycled to WHF ?
Yes and yes.
-
If it was in decline then why on earth would he share his plans of murder with her. Sorry April it just doesn't make any sense at all. ::)
I think Jeremy is the only one who can answer that. He was the one who said it.
-
Oh yes. Dreaming of being the wife of farmer Bamber must have really put her off her (second) honours degree.
As you said, Julie would have kept quiet if he put a ring on her finger. Pity he didn't then.
It obviously didn't.
-
June is dead.
My thread post suggests it is almost certain he stole the bike.
And? June is dead and you have no idea if he stole it or not and you have no basis or argument for the accusation. Just yet another random thread really.
-
No it doesn't Adam, it proves you believe Jeremy stole the bike and that is all. :)
The only one who does, it seems.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Begrudging someone a stereo equipment is really weird if you ask me. Completely out there. Everone had stereo equipment in the eighties, but you paint a picture of it being something totally extravagant for Jeremy to have had one.
Is it because Jeremy was adopted and should walk around with hat in hand, bowing and scraping and being forever gratefiul while living off a stick?
You begrudge him everything - it is odd.
-
If Jeremy wasn't that bothered about Julie, perhaps he just couldn't be arsed to pick her up and so the idea of the bike was to alleviate the burden. I don't believe Jeremy used the bike to travel home on the night of the murders, he would risk being seen - a walk across the fields is more likely.
Couldn't be bothered to pick her up ?
I can see why Julie was so upset when they spilt up ;D
Wasn't it a similar route by bike. And a lot quicker.
-
Did it though - I thought RB tried very hard to prove there was mud from the fields on it and even checked to see if he could find tracks - guess what nothing .
Robert Boutflour it is said tried his hardest to find evidence of tyre tracks along the "muddy" sea wall and every other short cut but found none. Also the mud on the bike was tested forensically by the police and was found to be completely different from mud either on the sea wall or the other supposed short cuts. So unless someone is dead set on believing Bamber to have used that bike without any evidence whatsoever, then that is up to them. But neither Robert Boutflour or the prosecution were able to find any evidence whatsoever. So by deduction anyone who suggests that he used the bike is totally prejudiced and no amount of evidence will convince them. It also declares very clearly indeed that those particular people cannot be reasoned with, so it is a total waste of time to argue with them.
Note: We rely entirely upon FACTS and not whimsical fairytails like this silly suggestion that Bamber stol his mother's bike.
-
And? June is dead and you have no idea if he stole it or not and you have no basis or argument for the accusation. Just yet another random thread really.
We will NEVER know and any discussion is pure speculation. In any case, HOW he came by the bike seems to me to be of little importance. He HAD the bike.
-
If it was in decline then why on earth would he share his plans of murder with her. Sorry April it just doesn't make any sense at all. ::)
I will find the thread on why he told Julie. Loads of reasons.
-
Oh yes. Dreaming of being the wife of farmer Bamber must have really put her off her (second) honours degree.
As you said, Julie would have kept quiet if he put a ring on her finger. Pity he didn't then.
See this bit here Adam, this is why you're accused of goading! It's snide and you know it.
-
I will find the thread on why he told Julie. Loads of reasons.
Your reasons so not relevant.
-
Couldn't be bothered to pick her up ?
I can see why Julie was so upset when they spilt up ;D
Wasn't it a similar route by bike. And a lot quicker.
An yet she was! Obviously is wasn't a similar route and OBVIOUSLY he would be less visible. ::)
-
I think Jeremy is the only one who can answer that. He was the one who said it.
No it can be established independently. If the relationship was in decline (1) Why would Mugford continue to go and see him? (2) Why would he allegedly discuss his murder plans with her? Those two things alone contradict her witness statement and if Bamber said it, it also contradicts his statement.
-
The only one who does, it seems.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Begrudging someone a stereo equipment is really weird if you ask me. Completely out there. Everone had stereo equipment in the eighties, but you paint a picture of it being something totally extravagant for Jeremy to have had one.
Is it because Jeremy was adopted and should walk around with hat in hand, bowing and scraping and being forever gratefiul while living off a stick?
You begrudge him everything - it is odd.
You are right I have noticed this, Adam does seem personally resentful of everything Jeremy possessed. Thought his theory was that Jeremy was jealous of Sheila but it sounds more , like Adam was jealous of Jeremy. Did you know Jeremy Bamber Adam?
-
An yet she was! Obviously is wasn't a similar route and OBVIOUSLY he would be less visible. ::)
Bews said he would not be seen in a million years if he cycled the seawall.
-
We will NEVER know and any discussion is pure speculation. In any case, HOW he came by the bike seems to me to be of little importance. He HAD the bike.
And my previous post proves he never used it.
-
No it can be established independently. If the relationship was in decline (1) Why would Mugford continue to go and see him? (2) Why would he allegedly discuss his murder plans with her? Those two things alone contradict her witness statement and if Bamber said it, it also contradicts his statement.
Jeremy did say it, when he was interviewed.
-
No it can be established independently. If the relationship was in decline (1) Why would Mugford continue to go and see him? (2) Why would he allegedly discuss his murder plans with her? Those two things alone contradict her witness statement and if Bamber said it, it also contradicts his statement.
Thread already created. Now on page one.
-
Maggie I think Adam posts certain stuff for effect to get a reaction.
-
Maggie I think Adam posts certain stuff for effect to get a reaction.
I know he's a bit of a prima donna ;D Arent you Adam?
-
Robert Boutflour it is said tried his hardest to find evidence of tyre tracks along the "muddy" sea wall and every other short cut but found none. Also the mud on the bike was tested forensically by the police and was found to be completely different from mud either on the sea wall or the other supposed short cuts. So unless someone is dead set on believing Bamber to have used that bike without any evidence whatsoever, then that is up to them. But neither Robert Boutflour or the prosecution were able to find any evidence whatsoever. So by deduction anyone who suggests that he used the bike is totally prejudiced and no amount of evidence will convince them. It also declares very clearly indeed that those particular people cannot be reasoned with, so it is a total waste of time to argue with them.
Note: We rely entirely upon FACTS and not whimsical fairytails like this silly suggestion that Bamber stol his mother's bike.
For Adam
-
You are right I have noticed this, Adam does seem personally resentful of everything Jeremy possessed. Thought his theory was that Jeremy was jealous of Sheila but it sounds more , like Adam was jealous of Jeremy. Did you know Jeremy Bamber Adam?
Know ? I live in London and am decades younger.
I read up on the case two years ago. With an open mind. Then deliberately bought the best reviewed, most unbiased book. Then joined the forum.
It is fascinating that a few people actually believe Bamber is innocent.
-
No it can be established independently. If the relationship was in decline (1) Why would Mugford continue to go and see him? (2) Why would he allegedly discuss his murder plans with her? Those two things alone contradict her witness statement and if Bamber said it, it also contradicts his statement.
It was Jeremy's opinion that the relationship was in decline. He'd gone off her. He didn't fancy her. But if she was willing to hang on he was quite willing to have sex with her. I imagine his plans had been discussed with her long before the relationship went South. We have to bear in mind that she may have encouraged him to talk about it in the hope of making them closer.
-
You are right I have noticed this, Adam does seem personally resentful of everything Jeremy possessed. Thought his theory was that Jeremy was jealous of Sheila but it sounds more , like Adam was jealous of Jeremy. Did you know Jeremy Bamber Adam?
I think it sounds like it.
I have seen several cases discussed on different forums, and people have been preoccuied with the crime, never heard anyone begrudging the people discussed their clothes, car, house, travels, stereo, sun bed, schooling, food, girlfriends, parties, looks, friends etc etc!
Very strange!
-
I have just found Julies statement where she admitted that she may have mentioned the bike for her use the previous summer. Strange because June had only just bought the bike. But it does show that Jeremys explanation was perfectly possible.
-
Know ? I live in London and am decades younger.
I read up on the case two years ago. With an open mind. Then deliberately bought the best reviewed, most unbiased book. Then joined the forum.
It is fascinating that a few people actually believe Bamber is innocent.
Which of course turned out to be the most biased book you could have bought. How do I know that? Oh because of the way you post almost everything you read in the book. No Adam you did not read with an OPEN mind, or you would not come up with the tripe you do just to try and demolish Bambers character. I for one am not fooled by you. ;)
-
Know ? I live in London and am decades younger.
I read up on the case two years ago. With an open mind. Then deliberately bought the best reviewed, most unbiased book. Then joined the forum.
It is fascinating that a few people actually believe Bamber is innocent.
From your phraseology and individual words us use you come across as being decades OLDER.
-
Know ? I live in London and am decades younger.
I read up on the case two years ago. With an open mind. Then deliberately bought the best reviewed, most unbiased book. Then joined the forum.
It is fascinating that a few people actually believe Bamber is innocent.
So you watch a lot of very old movies? John Wayne and all that stuff?
-
I have just found Julies statement where she admitted that she may have mentioned the bike for her use the previous summer. Strange because June had only just bought the bike. But it does show that Jeremys explanation was perfectly possible.
I think Tyler said it was brought round to Jeremy's three weeks before the murder and not three days, perhaps Tyler can confirm that?
-
I think it sounds like it.
I have seen several cases discussed on different forums, and people have been preoccuied with the crime, never heard anyone begrudging the people discussed their clothes, car, house, travels, stereo, sun bed, schooling, food, girlfriends, parties, looks, friends etc etc!
Very strange!
Deffinitely more than a hint of bitterness imo.
-
Which of course turned out to be the most biased book you could have bought. How do I know that? Oh because of the way you post almost everything you read in the book. No Adam you did not read with an OPEN mind, or you would not come up with the tripe you do just to try and demolish Bambers character. I for one am not fooled by you. ;)
Wilkes's book is the least biased book. Lomax's book is very biased. That is what Lomax does. Look for MOJ's.
Read the reviews on Amazon.
-
So you watch a lot of very old movies? John Wayne and all that stuff?
I have never mentioned John Wayne.
But I do like to look butch in my stetson.
-
Wilkes's book is the least biased book. Lomax's book is very biased. That is what Lomax does. Look for MOJ's.
Read the reviews on Amazon.
I'm just explaining as to why you are biased Adam. If his book was not biased logic tells me that neither would you be biased. Have you read Lomax's book?
-
I have never mentioned John Wayne.
But I do like to look butch in my stetson.
Indeed you have because it gave me pause to wonder if you were as young as you say.
-
I'm just explaining as to why you are biased Adam. If his book was not biased logic tells me that neither would you be biased. Have you read Lomax's book?
I would say Wilkes's book is less biased than Lomax's and I thought that while I believed Jeremy was innocent. Wilkes give no indication of whether he believes Jeremy is guilty or innocent - personally, I would say he was undecided - then. I think it's clear that Lomax thinks he is innocent or did at the time of writing the book.
-
I'm just explaining as to why you are biased Adam. If his book was not biased logic tells me that neither would you be biased. Have you read Lomax's book?
No because everyone's reviews said it was biased. And it got several 1 star reviews.
If there is a mountain of incriminating evidence in a case. Reading an unbiased book you can only come to one conclusion. Which is what happened when I read Wilkes's book.
-
I would say Wilkes's book is less biased than Lomax's and I thought that while I believed Jeremy was innocent. Wilkes give no indication of whether he believes Jeremy is guilty or innocent - personally, I would say he was undecided - then. I think it's clear that Lomax thinks he is innocent or did at the time of writing the book.
I think he still does Caroline. I was just wondering that if Wilkes was that unbaised why is it that he produced such an unbending totally biased person as Adam? My only conclusion is that he must have made up his mind to start with before reading the book?
-
Indeed you have because it gave me pause to wonder if you were as young as you say.
Glad you remember it too.
-
I think he still does Caroline. I was just wondering that if Wilkes was that unbaised why is it that he produced such an unbending totally biased person as Adam? My only conclusion is that he must have made up his mind to start with before reading the book?
Well, I think it unlikely he started with an open mind. He did say he had an open mind when he came here but has basically admitted that it wasn't quite the truth.
-
Well, I think it unlikely he started with an open mind. He did say he had an open mind when he came here but has basically admitted that it wasn't quite the truth.
But we can't use the L word, Caroline ;D
-
Well, I think it unlikely he started with an open mind. He did say he had an open mind when he came here but has basically admitted that it wasn't quite the truth.
How can I not start with an open mind ? I knew nothing about the case. Except the basics.
-
How can I not start with an open mind ? I knew nothing about the case. Except the basics.
How did you learn about it?
-
How can I not start with an open mind ? I knew nothing about the case. Except the basics.
All one needs are the basics and rumours to be prejudiced and biased.
-
How did you learn about it?
Hearsay ?
-
Would people please answer the question in the email notifications thread on the forum rules board? Cheers!
-
Hearsay ?
Totally OT, but I notice that you and Adam have a gap between a sentence and a ?
Is that the correct way of writing in English? We don´t do it here - I am just curious.
-
Adam I remember when you came on the forum you told me you had an open mind on the case and was not sure if he was guilty or innocent.
-
Totally OT, but I notice that you and Adam have a gap between a sentence and a ?
Is that the correct way of writing in English? We don´t do it here - I am just curious.
No Alias. The correct way is to ask a question is to have the question mark as the next letter when typing. In other words no space.
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/4645/is-it-ever-correct-to-have-a-space-before-a-question-or-exclamation-mark
-
Adam I remember when you came on the forum you told me you had an open mind on the case and was not sure if he was guilty or innocent.
Just for a few days Susan, then after a few days he was totally and utterly convinced of his guilt. Just read his introduction and you will see this.
-
No Alias. The correct way is to ask a question is to have the question mark as the next letter when typing. In other words no space.
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/4645/is-it-ever-correct-to-have-a-space-before-a-question-or-exclamation-mark
Not according to Adam who reprimanded me for not leaving a gap. OH!! SHOCK!!! HORROR!!!!! Could it POSSIBLY be that he was trying to distract me by changing the subject :o :o :o
-
Mr Gee I remember now I finished up getting the impression he had his mind made up before he came on the forum :'(
-
No Alias. The correct way is to ask a question is to have the question mark as the next letter when typing. In other words no space.
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/4645/is-it-ever-correct-to-have-a-space-before-a-question-or-exclamation-mark
Thanks. Then at least THAT is cleared up! ;D
-
Not according to Adam who reprimanded me for not leaving a gap. OH!! SHOCK!!! HORROR!!!!! Could it POSSIBLY be that he was trying to distract me by changing the subject :o :o :o
That was after you corrected my (rare) spelling mistake.
-
That was after you corrected my (rare) spelling mistake.
Now you know there is not supposed to be a gap, right? ;D
-
Mr Gee I remember now I finished up getting the impression he had his mind made up before he came on the forum :'(
You certainly joined with an open mind. As you had seen one documentary.
-
Totally OT, but I notice that you and Adam have a gap between a sentence and a ?
Is that the correct way of writing in English? We don´t do it here - I am just curious.
That's interesting,Alias.
-
That was after you corrected my (rare) spelling mistake.
You're in need of frequent correction of your your and you're.
-
That's interesting,Alias.
I think I only noticed you do it once - and Adam started doing it after he had reprimanded April for not doing it. Maybe you just did it by mistake (typo), but I started wondering if this was really the correct way in English! ;D
-
I think I only noticed you do it once - and Adam started doing it after he had reprimanded April for not doing it. Maybe you just did it by mistake (typo), but I started wondering if this was really the correct way in English! ;D
I've noticed it's an occurrence which seems to happen now and again------the gaps,that is,but the question marks are,I think,just a coincidence.
-
Adam I admitted I knew nothing about Jeremy Bamber and did watch a documentary and found it interesting googled it and hey ho here I am not knowing much more than when I started nearly three years ago. But of course I have learnt so much from all your threads and have now changed my stance.
-
I think I only noticed you do it once - and Adam started doing it after he had reprimanded April for not doing it. Maybe you just did it by mistake (typo), but I started wondering if this was really the correct way in English! ;D
Oh. It was obviously Adam's typo then. He never admits to being wrong. I've been waiting for him to admit he made up the story that Jeremy hadn't spoken to June for 7/14 years but he blames others for saying things which made him think it. Apparently Jeremy said he didn't have a good relationship with June. NAUGHTY Jeremy, misleading Adam like that.
-
Adam I admitted I knew nothing about Jeremy Bamber and did watch a documentary and found it interesting googled it and hey ho here I am not knowing much more than when I started nearly three years ago. But of course I have learnt so much from all your threads and have now changed my stance.
Susan! ::) Hahahaha
-
Alias ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Chapter 31, page 220 of Wilkes's book -
Julies mother Mary Mugford followed her daughter into the witness box.
She said 'Jeremy hated his mother & blamed her for turning Sheila mad. And he resented her for loving the twins more than him. Jeremy disliked his mother intensely & I felt he was more affectionate to me'.
'He used to call me mummy all the time. He offerred me his mothers small car which had been bought that Christmas. This was just after the shooting. A list had been drawn up and he was going to keep no momentoes, which I thought very strange. He wanted to sell everthing'.
'Jeremy resented his mother because she sent him away to boarding school. He never forgave her for that.
'Apparently she was a religious maniac'.
'A few months before the murders Jeremy had told me her mother was thinking of changing her will in favour of her grandsons, on whom she doted'.
'Jeremy never spoke to his mother & she never showed any affection towards him'.
'He often spoke of this'.
Jeremy agreed with MM testimony. And told Wilkes the relationship had broken down in 1978.
MM testimony said 'Jeremy never spoke to his mother'.
Lots of other sources exist. Perhaps even 12.
-
Adam I admitted I knew nothing about Jeremy Bamber and did watch a documentary and found it interesting googled it and hey ho here I am not knowing much more than when I started nearly three years ago. But of course I have learnt so much from all your threads and have now changed my stance.
You're a little tinker,Susan. ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Chapter 31, page 220 of Wilkes's book -
Julies mother Mary Mugford followed her daughter into the witness box.
She said 'Jeremy hated his mother & blamed her for turning Sheila mad. And he resented her for loving the twins more than him. Jeremy disliked his mother intensely & I felt he was more affectionate to me'.
'He used to call me mummy all the time. He offerred me his mothers small car which had been bought that Christmas. This was just after the shooting. A list had been drawn up and he was going to keep no momentoes, which I thought very strange. He wanted to sell everthing'.
'Jeremy resented his mother because she sent him away to boarding school. He never forgave her for that.
'Apparently she was a religious maniac'.
'A few months before the murders Jeremy had told me her mother was thinking of changing her will in favour of her grandsons, on whom she doted'.
'Jeremy never spoke to his mother & she never showed any affection towards him'.
'He often spoke of this'.
Jeremy agreed with MM testimony. And told Wilkes the relationship had broken down in 1978.
MM testimony said 'Jeremy never spoke to his mother'.
Lots of other sources exist. Perhaps even 12.
It says nothing about them not speaking
And how long from 1978? one week? One year?
-
lookout ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
I've gone worse since I've got older,Susan. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Chapter 31, page 220 of Wilkes's book -
Julies mother Mary Mugford followed her daughter into the witness box.
She said 'Jeremy hated his mother & blamed her for turning Sheila mad. And he resented her for loving the twins more than him. Jeremy disliked his mother intensely & I felt he was more affectionate to me'.
'He used to call me mummy all the time. He offerred me his mothers small car which had been bought that Christmas. This was just after the shooting. A list had been drawn up and he was going to keep no momentoes, which I thought very strange. He wanted to sell everthing'.
'Jeremy resented his mother because she sent him away to boarding school. He never forgave her for that.
'Apparently she was a religious maniac'.
'A few months before the murders Jeremy had told me her mother was thinking of changing her will in favour of her grandsons, on whom she doted'.
'Jeremy never spoke to his mother & she never showed any affection towards him'.
'He often spoke of this'.
Jeremy agreed with MM testimony. And told Wilkes the relationship had broken down in 1978.
MM testimony said 'Jeremy never spoke to his mother'.
Lots of other sources exist. Perhaps even 12.
I think we're probably all sick to death of that particular piece of cut and paste. It actually proves nothing. MM is clearly not telling the truth. It is NOT true that "Jeremy never spoke to his mother" any more than it's true that he hadn't done so for 7/14 years.
-
Not according to Adam who reprimanded me for not leaving a gap. OH!! SHOCK!!! HORROR!!!!! Could it POSSIBLY be that he was trying to distract me by changing the subject :o :o :o
Well it's up to him if he wants to contradict professors of English. But hey he knows everything else, so maybe he's right on this as well? ;D
-
The Son of Scipio. He knew everything too. ::)
-
It says nothing about them not speaking
And how long from 1978? one week? One year?
Says nothing about him stealing a bike either. ;D
-
I think we're probably all sick to death of that particular piece of cut and paste. It actually proves nothing. MM is clearly not telling the truth. It is NOT true that "Jeremy never spoke to his mother" any more than it's true that he hadn't done so for 7/14 years.
It was jolly bad luck that mother and daughter lied in court. And that Bamber brought the bike over just before the massacre.
-
It was jolly bad luck that mother and daughter lied in court. And that Bamber brought the bike over just before the massacre.
As that in no way addresses my post I think you'd be better employed sorting out your you're from your your.
-
Coincidence. That's all. It happens to all of us at times,and usually at the most inopportune moment/time.
-
It was jolly bad luck that mother and daughter lied in court. And that Bamber brought the bike over just before the massacre.
Three weeks before it seems. Have you seen the statements Jan posted? Julie says that she had mentioned to Jeremy it would be handy with a bike while she stayed at his house. He had work, you know, and went by his car. Besides I don´t know whether Julie had a driver´s license - probably not. If she had, Jeremy would have left the car for her to use - he seemed very helpful and generous like that.
-
It was jolly bad luck that mother and daughter lied in court. And that Bamber brought the bike over just before the massacre.
Julie admitted she may have shown interest in using a bike in her statement on my THREAD that I have just started. Jeremy offered his mothers because she was not getting on with it.
AE bought a bike on 5/8 - next thing is you will be accusing her :)
Perhaps those ring of truth statements ( as I explained earlier ) applied to Julies mother as well . Who knows.
Wasn't JB generous in offering her his mothers car? - very out of character.
-
Three weeks before it seems. Have you seen the statements Jan posted? Julie says that she had mentioned to Jeremy it would be handy with a bike while she stayed at his house. He had work, you know, and went by his car. Besides I don´t know whether Julie had a driver´s license - probably not. If she had, Jeremy would have left the car for her to use - he seemed very helpful and generous like that.
great minds think alike :)
-
great minds think alike :)
;D
-
This case is where the saying of" blood being thicker than water",came into play,in more ways than one.
-
Three weeks before it seems. Have you seen the statements Jan posted? Julie says that she had mentioned to Jeremy it would be handy with a bike while she stayed at his house. He had work, you know, and went by his car. Besides I don´t know whether Julie had a driver´s license - probably not. If she had, Jeremy would have left the car for her to use - he seemed very helpful and generous like that.
Julie says she thinks she may have mentioned it. A year earlier.
Yes Jeremy was generous, allowing Julie to apparently cycle three miles when she goes home. And leave a pot noodle for her.
The bike was brought over just before the massacre.
-
I-----------generous to a fault,and look where it got him !
-
I-----------generous to a fault,and look where it got him !
Yes, he gave Brett Neville's Citroen.
-
Julie says she thinks she may have mentioned it. A year earlier.
Yes Jeremy was generous, allowing Julie to apparently cycle three miles when she goes home. And leave a pot noodle for her.
The bike was brought over just before the massacre. CURIOUS CO-INCIDENCE :)
-
Yes, he gave Brett Neville's Citroen.
So ?
-
Yes, he gave Brett Neville's Citroen.
Did he? I wonder how he got that back to New Zealand? :o
-
If so that is potentially three crimes against his family pre massacre. So much for me saying inheritance killers commit zero or minimal crime prior to their killings.
There was the mentioned crime against Chris Neville's sister in New Zealand, Bamber leaving the country in a hurry. And the caravan break in which Bamber testified he did out of greed.
There are also rumours of stealing expensive watches while abroad, although this is not a crime against his family.
I joked about him stealing June's bike on another thread. And was called a liar by another poster. But the likelihood is the bike was taken by Bamber without permission.
When interviewed he said June and Neville knew about him taking the bike. June apparently did not 'get along with it'. Perhaps she should not have bought it then.
June's relationship with him had become non existent since 1978, Bamber said. Although there is a possibility it became non existent over ten years earlier. Jeremy agreeing with Mary Mugford's testimony that he never forgave June for sending him to boarding school.
June did not approve of Julies relationship with Jeremy. So unlikely to encourage it by giving Julie her bike.
Recent relationships with June would have just got worse. Neville and June financing Sheila and the twins in London, while making Bamber work long hours for his income.
June was also the person who refused to continue financing Bamber's extensive jaunts abroad. Sending him an airline ticket home, rather than more money he had demanded. After this he would have to work in order to get money from June & Neville. Or go it alone.
So it seems unlikely June would give Bamber her bike. He already had a car and free petrol. He could afford to buy his own bike. He had not bought a bike for himself to use. So what was Julie going to use the bike on her own for ? When she actually bothered to travel over in a declining relationship.
The bike was brought over just before the massacre. Bamber no doubt hoping no one noticed it had gone missing. Or if they did notice it missing, no one would suspect him. If it was found at his cottage before the massacre he could just say it was for Julie.
Do other people believe Bamber stole June's bike ?
On account of the fact that I have never seen any evidence to suggest that he stole the bike, the only conclusion you can reach, is that he didn't, surely!
To conclude otherwise, demonstrates an inability to consider evidence in a reasonable and balanced manner.
-
On account of the fact that I have never seen any evidence to suggest that he stole the bike, the only conclusion you can reach, is that he didn't, surely!
To conclude otherwise, demonstrates an inability to consider evidence in a reasonable and balanced manner.
Well the bike was found at Bamber's cottage. So he either stole it or asked mummy if he can take it. But perhaps mummy needed to use it. After all she did buy it.
-
Well the bike was found at Bamber's cottage. So he either stole it or asked mummy if he can take it. But perhaps mummy needed to use it. After all she did buy it.
oops - sarcasm again . You really should answer polite posts with politeness.
-
Well the bike was found at Bamber's cottage. So he either stole it or asked mummy if he can take it. But perhaps mummy needed to use it. After all she did buy it.
Given that you can never know if he stole the bike or not, this thread is pretty redundant.
-
I think I only noticed you do it once - and Adam started doing it after he had reprimanded April for not doing it. Maybe you just did it by mistake (typo), but I started wondering if this was really the correct way in English! ;D
I have so much admiration for your English alias, no one would know it wasn't your first language. :)
-
Three points -
Bamber & June were 'barely' on speaking terms. The relationship breaking down years ago. June also disapproved of Julie's relationship with Jeremy. June had stopped financially supporting Bamber years ago. Would he ask to use her bike ? Would she say 'yes, or refuse outright, needing it for herself or just refuse because of the failed relationship ? Or both.
Is it realistic that Julie was supposed to make some of her way home on a bike ! Surely Bamber could fit in 15 minutes to drive her.
Is it a coincidence that the bike arrived just before the massacre.
-
Three points -
Bamber & June were 'barely' on speaking terms. The relationship breaking down years ago. June also disapproved of Julie's relationship with Jeremy. June had stopped financially supporting Bamber years ago. Would he ask to use her bike ? Would she say 'yes, or refuse outright, needing it for herself or just refuse because of the failed relationship ?
Is it realistic that Julie was supposed to make some of her way home on a bike ! Surely Bamber could fit in 15 minutes to drive her.
Is it a coincidence that the bike arrived just before the massacre.
So now you admit they were speaking? You said they weren't before. Julie admits that she may even have suggested the bike idea. You're on a hiding to nowhere with this.
-
So now you admit they were speaking? You said they weren't before. Julie admits that she may even have suggested the bike idea. You're on a hiding to nowhere with this.
I said early in the thread they had to speak. Things such as 'pass the salt' at the last supper. But no chit chat.
This thread has shown that it is almost certain Bamber stole the bike. Julie cycling three miles to get home ;D
-
Bikes are personal things. Big, expensive things to. Bamber was not just asking June for a 'mummy hug'. Not sure June would give that either.
-
I said early in the thread they had to speak. Things such as 'pass the salt' at the last supper. But no chit chat.
This thread has shown that it is almost certain Bamber stole the bike. Julie cycling three miles to get home ;D
No it hasn't, what it has shown is that the question is redundant.
-
Bikes are personal things. Big, expensive things to. Bamber was not just asking June for a 'mummy hug'. Not sure June would give that either.
Adam can you cut out the sarcastic comments, please.
This is an interesting discussion and you are actually joining in but it would be so much better without the unnecessary sarcasm.
-
Adam can you cut out the sarcastic comments, please.
This is an interesting discussion and you are actually joining in but it would be so much better without the unnecessary sarcasm.
Well said Maggie. I find the "Mummy" also bit a bit insulting to be honest. >:(
-
Yes, he gave Brett Neville's Citroen.
Where did you hear that? I ask because this is the first time I hear it.
Maggie, thanks for the kind words about language. :) Have a wonderful trip, I will miss you if you don´t find time to pop in. Big hug.
-
Where did you hear that? I ask because this is the first time I hear it.
Maggie, thanks for the kind words about language. :) Have a wonderful trip, I will miss you if you don´t find time to pop in. Big hug.
I'm not sure he 'gave' him it - he had the use of it which is quite different.
-
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=CjCrVIe3L-Xj7Qbft4HYDg&url=http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php%3Ftopic%3D6237.45&ved=0CB0QFjAA&usg=AFQjCNGefMt6YpgBW5K-5cC_vwijg1-euA&sig2=0hR6C0SXOSfUTgZs-toJ8g
It's in Wilkes's book. He offered Mary, June's car.
Bamber already had a car, but after the massacre spoke a lot about what car he was going buy. He was also keen on buying a jet ski.
Liz Rimmington testified she saw a lot of brochures for a Porsche at his cottage.
-
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=CjCrVIe3L-Xj7Qbft4HYDg&url=http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php%3Ftopic%3D6237.45&ved=0CB0QFjAA&usg=AFQjCNGefMt6YpgBW5K-5cC_vwijg1-euA&sig2=0hR6C0SXOSfUTgZs-toJ8g
It's in Wilkes's book. He offered Mary, June's car.
Bamber already had a car, but after the massacre spoke a lot about what car he was going buy. He was also keen on buying a jet ski.
Liz Rimmington testified she saw a lot of brochures for a Porsche at his cottage.
Yeah, that's just a link to one of your threads - where in Wilkes's book does it say he GAVE Brett the car? Page number would be helpful.
-
Bikes are personal things. Big, expensive things to. Bamber was not just asking June for a 'mummy hug'. Not sure June would give that either.
Adam, the more I read of your views of what you think a mother/child relationship is about, the more I wonder about your own experiences. You inject a two way hostility -with such vehemence- into Jeremy and June's relationship that it sounds personal. I can understand June's sadness, maybe even secret disappointment, that neither of her children had "turned out" according to her dreams for them, but it's a -thankfully- VERY rare mother who shows hostility to her child.
It has been suggested that you have a problem with adopted children because you seem to begrudge everything June gives to Jeremy. I get the feeling that you don't believe adopted children should be afforded the same status as biological children and should learn to be grateful for scraps. Is this learned behaviour I wonder. Is there something here which touches a nerve?
-
Adam, the more I read of your views of what you think a mother/child relationship is about, the more I wonder about your own experiences. You inject a two way hostility -with such vehemence- into Jeremy and June's relationship that it sounds personal. I can understand June's sadness, maybe even secret disappointment, that neither of her children had "turned out" according to her dreams for them, but it's a -thankfully- VERY rare mother who shows hostility to her child.
It has been suggested that you have a problem with adopted children because you seem to begrudge everything June gives to Jeremy. I get the feeling that you don't believe adopted children should be afforded the same status as biological children and should learn to be grateful for scraps. Is this learned behaviour I wonder. Is there something here which touches a nerve?
Oh yes. I have a problem with adopted children ;D
The last thing June gave Bamber was a ticket for a flight home. After he wrote to her requesting more money.
But she did give Bamber her bike (or did she). Bamber was much too busy to afford to spend 7 minutes driving her to the Red Lion Pub. 'On yer bike' Mugford.
-
Well the bike was found at Bamber's cottage. So he either stole it or asked mummy if he can take it. But perhaps mummy needed to use it. After all she did buy it.
Can't you see what Neil is saying Adam and you can't accuse him of being a supporter? That all he evidence and it was accepted in court points to the fact that Bamber never stole the bike. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?
-
Yeah, that's just a link to one of your threads - where in Wilkes's book does it say he GAVE Brett the car? Page number would be helpful.
Bamber had his own car and was looking to buy a Porsche. Brett was using Neville's Citroen.
Brett was here for the long haul jolly up if Bamber remained free. Travelling around England and Europe with Bamber over a month long period. He had no businesses to go back to.
If Brett were to abandon the jolly up, Bamber would let him keep the car. Unless a second hand Citroen was worth something.
-
It was jolly bad luck that mother and daughter lied in court. And that Bamber brought the bike over just before the massacre.
If they lied it wasn't "jolly bad luck", it was perjury
-
Given that you can never know if he stole the bike or not, this thread is pretty redundant.
That's what I said way back Caroline, but he didn't take any notice.
-
I said early in the thread they had to speak. Things such as 'pass the salt' at the last supper. But no chit chat.
This thread has shown that it is almost certain Bamber stole the bike. Julie cycling three miles to get home ;D
No it hasn't it's just your own idea.
-
Bikes are personal things. Big, expensive things to. Bamber was not just asking June for a 'mummy hug'. Not sure June would give that either.
It was an old sit up and beg bike. It wasn't a new expensive bike. He didn't steal it so get over it.
-
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=CjCrVIe3L-Xj7Qbft4HYDg&url=http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php%3Ftopic%3D6237.45&ved=0CB0QFjAA&usg=AFQjCNGefMt6YpgBW5K-5cC_vwijg1-euA&sig2=0hR6C0SXOSfUTgZs-toJ8g
It's in Wilkes's book. He offered Mary, June's car.
Bamber already had a car, but after the massacre spoke a lot about what car he was going buy. He was also keen on buying a jet ski.
Liz Rimmington testified she saw a lot of brochures for a Porsche at his cottage.
What a kind man he was it appears. Would you condemn a person who gives gifts? He could easily have sold it and Ralph's car as well and made a bit of money for himself. But he didn't he thought he would give them away. So why are you condemning him for giving away what was basically his? Excuse me Adam, but you are sounding a bit like a Pharisee.
-
Oh yes. I have a problem with adopted children ;D
The last thing June gave Bamber was a ticket for a flight home. After he wrote to her requesting more money.
But she did give Bamber her bike (or did she). Bamber was much too busy to afford to spend 7 minutes driving her to the Red Lion Pub. 'On yer bike' Mugford.
Not really Adam. A bike would give her freedom to go where and when she wanted. It was all done out in the open so that in itself proves that he borrowed her bike and did not steal it as you accuse him of.
-
It was an old sit up and beg bike. It wasn't a new expensive bike. He didn't steal it so get over it.
There is no evidence whether he stole or Mum gave him her bike.
Bamber hated June, and June knew it. So not sure Bamber would ask her to 'give him' her bike. She would say errr 'no'.
It is almost certain he stole the bike. Get over it.
-
Bamber had his own car and was looking to buy a Porsche. Brett was using Neville's Citroen.
Brett was here for the long haul jolly up if Bamber remained free. Travelling around England and Europe with Bamber over a month long period. He had no businesses to go back to.
If Brett were to abandon the jolly up, Bamber would let him keep the car. Unless a second hand Citroen was worth something.
The words "jolly up" is an old man's term. How come you talk like an old man?
-
Not really Adam. A bike would give her freedom to go where and when she wanted. It was all done out in the open so that in itself proves that he borrowed her bike and did not steal it as you accuse him of.
Bamber's OS says it was for her to cycle three miles to the Red Lion Pub, on her way home.
Could Bamber not have been able to spare 5 minutes to drive her there ?
As you said, generous.
-
There is no evidence whether he stole or Mum gave him her bike.
Bamber hated June, and June knew it. So not sure Bamber would ask her to 'give him' her bike. She would say errr 'no'.
It is almost certain he stole the bike. Get over it.
Why have you contradicted yourself Adam?
-
Bamber's OS says it was for her cycle three miles to the Red Lion Pub, on her way home.
Could Bamber not have been able to spare 5 minutes to drive her there ?
As you said, generous.
I'm glad you agree with me at last.
-
It was jolly bad luck that Bamber decided it was too much for him to drive Julie for 5 minutes when she went home.
And jolly bad luck the bike ended up at his cottage just before the massacre.
Oh and bad luck Julie and MM lied under oath. Although Bamber claims everyone else lied under oath. Why ? The press had painted a bad picture of him. Although the press were only allowed to report on the trial, pre verdict.
-
It was jolly bad luck that Bamber decided it was too much for him to drive Julie for 5 minutes when she went home.
And jolly bad luck the bike ended up at his cottage just before the massacre.
Oh and bad luck Julie and MM lied under oath. Although Bamber claims everyone else lied under oath. Why ? The press had painted a bad picture of him. Although the press were only allowed to report on the trial, pre verdict.
I thought you said he agreed with MM?
-
I thought you said he agreed with MM?
No, Bamber agreed with MM when he testified. And told Wilkes his reletionship with June had broken down in 1978. Talk about seven year itch.
You are the one who said MM lied.
-
No, Bamber agreed with MM when he testified. And told Wilkes his reletionship with June had broken down in 1978. Talk about seven year itch.
You are the one who said MM lied.
You said that Bamber said everyone lied under oath. But then you said he agreed with MM's testimony. Make up your mind Adam. Either he did or he didn't agree with MM?
-
You said that Bamber said everyone lied under oath. But then you said he agreed with MM's testimony. Make up your mind Adam. Either he did or he didn't agree with MM?
Good point. He agreed with MM's testimony, which as you read was very damning. But also testified that people saying bad things about him had been brain washed by the media portrayal of him.
Witnesses were taking a risk. Lying under oath just because the papers said horrible things about him. I would tell the truth under oath. There is no reason to lie and risk perjury charges.
But the papers could only report on the trial evidence ?
-
Good point. He agreed with MM's testimony, which as you read was very damning. But also testified that people saying bad things about him had been brain washed by the media portrayal of him.
Witnesses were taking a risk. Lying under oath just because the papers said horrible things about him. I would tell the truth under oath. There is no reason to lie and risk perjury charges.
But the papers could only report on the trial evidence ?
So Adam do you agree with the defense that Bamber's trial should have been at the Old Bailey rather than at Chelmsford as Chelmsford was too near his home town?
-
Adam, you said that you do have a problem with adopted children.
Why?
-
Adam, you said that you do have a problem with adopted children.
Why?
;D
-
One of the relatives,maybe ?? That would be your only reason,yes ?
-
;D
I am afraid I don´t understand your response.
-
Bamber's OS says it was for her to cycle three miles to the Red Lion Pub, on her way home.
Could Bamber not have been able to spare 5 minutes to drive her there ?
Surely the whole point of the exercise was about him NOT having to leave whatever -and wherever- just to drive Julie on a 5 minute journey. You can bet your life the one time he was late she'd have missed the bus to something important. The bike gave her independence.
-
Good point. He agreed with MM's testimony, which as you read was very damning. But also testified that people saying bad things about him had been brain washed by the media portrayal of him.
Witnesses were taking a risk. Lying under oath just because the papers said horrible things about him. I would tell the truth under oath. There is no reason to lie and risk perjury charges.
But the papers could only report on the trial evidence ?
As you appear to tell us what you want to believe ie. Jeremy hadn't spoken to June for 7/14 years.Saying experts said things they didn't. Jeremy thought................I would have thought remote the possibility of you, under oath, telling "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth."
-
;D
Don't you understand the question ?
-
;D
Touched a nerve, did it Adam? Smirks/silences disguise a multitude of feelings.
-
As you appear to tell us what you want to believe ie. Jeremy hadn't spoken to June for 7/14 years.Saying experts said things they didn't. Jeremy thought................I would have thought remote the possibility of you, under oath, telling "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth."
I am afraid I quote from sources, and books. Sometimes I find 12 sources to close a case.
You never find any useful information for the forum. Or create threads. So never have to provide sources. Just claim that I don't provide them. Calling me ageist, sexist and racist. Now saying I would lie under oath. Eh ?
Why ? Everyone needs a purpose in life. You need a new purpose after 29 years of supporting Bamber. Wrongly as you say. Glad to be you're new purpose in life.
Oh & Bamber & June were not talking. Unless they had to. Dozens of sources available.
-
I am afraid I quote from sources, and books. Sometimes I find 12 sources to close a case.
You never find any useful information for the forum. Or create threads. So never have to provide sources. Just claim that I don't provide them. Calling me ageist, sexist and racist. Now saying I would lie under oath. Eh ?
Why ? Everyone needs a purpose in life. You need a new purpose after 29 years of supporting Bamber. Wrongly as you say. Glad to be you're new purpose in life.
Oh & Bamber & June were not talking. Unless they had to. Dozens of sources available.
So where did the quote come from that said Jeremy certainly stole June's bike?
-
There is no evidence whether he stole or Mum gave him her bike.
Bamber hated June, and June knew it. So not sure Bamber would ask her to 'give him' her bike. She would say errr 'no'.
It is almost certain he stole the bike. Get over it.
-
Almost certain.
-
You quote your own post where you contradict yourself. OK
-
I am afraid I quote from sources, and books. Sometimes I find 12 sources to close a case.
You never find any useful information for the forum. Or create threads. So never have to provide sources. Just claim that I don't provide them. Calling me ageist, sexist and racist. Now saying I would lie under oath.
Why ? Everyone needs a purpose in life. You need a new purpose after 29 years of supporting Bamber. Wrongly as you say. Glad to be you're new purpose in life.
Oh & Bamber & June were not talking. Unless they had to. Dozens of sources available.
1. I guess you should be afraid when you make sweeping statements about your ability to close a case
2. Perhaps you could provide me with proof of where I've claimed you don't provide sources, especially as all it says is that you've not provided -indeed, probably CAN'T provide- anything which someone else hasn't said first. As for calling you ageist, I seem to recall some mean insult about a respected member's mode of transport. You have been abominably rude and sarcastic to female posters and have made hurtful references to the nationality of another member.
3. As you so rightly say, Adam. We all need a purpose in life. So much more satisfying than a lost cause.
4. Once again I'm asking for documentary proof that Jeremy and June weren't talking. "Unless they had to" simply DOESN'T count.
-
Surely the whole point of the exercise was about him NOT having to leave whatever -and wherever- just to drive Julie on a 5 minute journey. You can bet your life the one time he was late she'd have missed the bus to something important. The bike gave her independence.
The question is when he was working his 17 hour days - how would he have time to run her around at her slightest whim? ;)
-
I am afraid I quote from sources, and books. Sometimes I find 12 sources to close a case.
You never find any useful information for the forum. Or create threads. So never have to provide sources. Just claim that I don't provide them. Calling me ageist, sexist and racist. Now saying I would lie under oath. Eh ?
Why ? Everyone needs a purpose in life. You need a new purpose after 29 years of supporting Bamber. Wrongly as you say. Glad to be you're new purpose in life.
Oh & Bamber & June were not talking. Unless they had to. Dozens of sources available.
Why don't you post on threads you have not created?
And I do not believe it is true that Bamber and june were not talking since 1978 .
This is not verified in statements from other people who knew them .
-
The question is when he was working his 17 hour days - how would he have time to run her around at her slightest whim? ;)
Spending 5 minutes driving her to TD when she goes home, is not her every whim. She had travelled over to see him.
-
Spending 5 minutes driving her to TD when she goes home, is not her every whim. She had travelled over to see him.
Defending Julie again - Just as if she was a friend of yours.
-
Defending Julie again - Just as if she was a friend of yours.
Do you not agree that Bamber could have made the effort to spend 5 minutes to take her to TD when she went home ?
-
Spending 5 minutes driving her to TD when she goes home, is not her every whim. She had travelled over to see him.
I am sorry, Adam, but this is absurd. We all know how generously Jeremy drove people around, but he did have a job. Can you act as chauffeur for other people while you are at work?
Say Julie was visiting, Jeremy went to work. She was in his cottage. She found that she needed something from a store - a bicycle would come in very handy in such a situation. As Julie said.
Or are you suggesting that Julie should call Jeremy at the farm, have June, who was most likely to be in the farm house (no cel phones), go out and find Jeremy somewhere in the fields. Then either ask him to come to the house because there was a call - or tell him that Julie needed him to drive her to the store.
Jeremy leaves his chores, jumps in his car, drives to Goldhanger to pick her up.
Drives her to the store she could reach in five minutes by bike. Julie hops into store, buys her chewing gum or whatever she needs, gets in the car. Jeremy drives her to his cottage, then back to the farm.
-
I am sorry, Adam, but this is absurd. We all know how generously Jeremy drove people around, but he did have a job. Can you act as chauffeur for other people while you are at work?
Say Julie was visiting, Jeremy went to work. She was in his cottage. She found that she needed something from a store - a bicycle would come in very handy in such a situation. As Julie said.
Or are you suggesting that Julie should call Jeremy at the farm, have June, who was most likely to be in the farm house (no cel phones), go out and find Jeremy somewhere in the fields. Then either ask him to come to the house because there was a call - or tell him that Julie needed him to drive her to the store.
Jeremy leaves his chores, jumps in his car, drives to Goldhanger to pick her up.
Drives her to the store she could reach in five minutes by bike. Julie hops into store, buys her chewing gum or whatever she needs, gets in the car. Jeremy drives her to his cottage, then back to the farm.
Yes but his OS says it was so Julie could cycle three miles when going home.
Oh sorry I forgot people are now saying he cannot even his OS. I will find my thread on what Julie was going to use the bike for.
-
Do you not agree that Bamber could have made the effort to spend 5 minutes to take her to TD when she went home ?
Might have. Would have. Could have. On occasions he MAY have. On others, he didn't. All totally irrelevant.
-
Yes but his OS says it was so Julie could cycle three miles when going home.
Oh sorry I forgot people are now saying he cannot even his OS. I will find my thread on what Julie was going to use the bike for.
She would be free to go when she wanted, not early in the morning before Jeremy went to work - and be free to go to the store quickly. Don´t you understand that Julie said herself that a bike would be handy when she was visiting? I don´t care that she said it the previous summer, she said it.
Probably June hadn´t tired of her bike when Julie said this, but she had a year later.
-
Might have. Would have. Could have. On occasions he MAY have. On others, he didn't. All totally irrelevant.
It is not irrelevant as after 29 years Bamber has still not provided a credible reason why he stole/asked June for the bike. Just before the massacre.
The prosecution successfully suggested he rode to WHF.
-
It is not irrelevant as after 29 years Bamber has still not provided a credible reason why he stole/asked June for the bike. Just before the massacre. [color=red]He has you just don't believe it . Strangely enough JM was very clever in half verifying what he said - I would say her statement in respect of the bike had a "ring of truth"
[/color]
The prosecution successfully suggested he rode to WHF. Correct they did SUGGEST . But there was no actual evidence whatsoever that he did. And in that respect personally I feel they were stretching the legal process IMO
-
It is not irrelevant as after 29 years Bamber has still not provided a credible reason why he stole/asked June for the bike. Just before the massacre.
The prosecution successfully suggested he rode to WHF.
But you're (correctly spelled) not focusing on the bike, are you, Adam? You're asking childish questions about whether we think Jeremy should have made time to give Julie a lift.
-
But you're (correctly spelled) not focusing on the bike, are you, Adam? You're asking childish questions about whether we think Jeremy should have made time to give Julie a lift.
That relates to the bike.
Even Lookout says Bamber was the laziest man alive. But saving himself 5 minutes of driving and making his girlfriend cycle 3 miles when she goes home is too unrealistic. Anyway he still had to collect the bike from the pub.
-
It is not irrelevant as after 29 years Bamber has still not provided a credible reason why he stole/asked June for the bike. Just before the massacre.
The prosecution successfully suggested he rode to WHF.
There just is no proof of that - the relatives looked and looked and looked again. There was none.
-
So lazy was Jeremy,that he couldn't have ever mustered up the energy to run up and down 3 flights of stairs at WHF,killing five people. It took him all his time to get his backside off the sofa to start work.
Most of the arguments between Jeremy and his parents were about his laziness.
-
Yes but his OS says it was so Julie could cycle three miles when going home.
Oh sorry I forgot people are now saying he cannot even his OS. I will find my thread on what Julie was going to use the bike for.
People ie ngb are not just saying he cannot access his official website. They are telling the truth. Don't you think that denying a well know truth is being a bit childish? Adam grow up son you're looking a but silly now lad.
-
That relates to the bike.
Even Lookout says Bamber was the laziest man alive. But saving himself 5 minutes of driving and making his girlfriend cycle 3 miles when she goes home is too unrealistic. Anyway he still had to collect the bike from the pub.
No Adam, it DOESN'T. Neither does the fact that Jeremy may have been the laziest man alive. However, perhaps you could provide us with the documentation which gives us the time and dates that Jeremy picked the bike up from the pub.
-
What a silly discussion this has become. Like most of Adam's threads.
-
So lazy was Jeremy,that he couldn't have ever mustered up the energy to run up and down 3 flights of stairs at WHF,killing five people. It took him all his time to get his backside off the sofa to start work.
Most of the arguments between Jeremy and his parents were about his laziness.
He somehow summoned the energy. It's amazing what a million pounds (in today's money) can do.
-
Mr Gee Hahaha I am sat here reading the forum and thinking what a silly discussion this has become ;D ;D ;D
-
No Adam, it DOESN'T. Neither does the fact that Jeremy may have been the laziest man alive. However, perhaps you could provide us with the documentation which gives us the time and dates that Jeremy picked the bike up from the pub.
Julie never rode the bike. Bamber never picked it up from the pub
There was a massacre just after it arrived at his cottage.
-
He somehow summoned the energy. It's amazing what a million pounds (in today's money) can do.
I'm afraid that all you answers are getting a bit pathetic now Adam. Isn't it time for your bed time story and cocoa?
-
That relates to the bike.
Even Lookout says Bamber was the laziest man alive. But saving himself 5 minutes of driving and making his girlfriend cycle 3 miles when she goes home is too unrealistic. Anyway he still had to collect the bike from the pub.
Julie never rode the bike. Bamber never picked it up from the pub
There was a massacre just after it arrived at his cottage.
But Adam, as you can see, you said very clearly "making his girlfriend cycle 3 miles.................Anyway he still had to collect the bike from the pub" yet "Julie never rode the bike. Bamber never picked it up from the pub" So "Mr. I would never lie under oath", you can't have it both ways.
-
I think the summary is
Jeremy said he got it from his mother for Julie to use
Julie admitted in her statement that in the past she had said it might be useful .
There was NO forensic evidence to show he rode the bike in the dark across fields and paths
Because there were no witnesses to him leaving home , arriving at the farm , leaving the farm , arriving home , then the method of transport is nothing than an assumption of something that could fit the timings . Nothing more , nothing less.
-
I think the summary is
Jeremy said he got it from his mother for Julie to use
Julie admitted in her statement that in the past she had said it might be useful .
There was NO forensic evidence to show he rode the bike in the dark across fields and paths
Because there were no witnesses to him leaving home , arriving at the farm , leaving the farm , arriving home , then the method of transport is nothing than an assumption of something that could fit the timings . Nothing more , nothing less.
In other words only the pig ignorant still hold that he did use the bike that night. ;)
-
This is not strictly true. There was yellow sulphurous mud on the tyres,which locals will know comes from that area. I don't see a woman glorying in riding a bike through mud for any purpose,whilst a man might well for recreation or dare I say it other reasons.
-
This is not strictly true. There was yellow sulphurous mud on the tyres,which locals will know comes from that area. I don't see a woman glorying in riding a bike through mud for any purpose,whilst a man might well for recreation or dare I say it other reasons.
Steve, I believe that came from RWB. The police found nothing.
-
This is not strictly true. There was yellow sulphurous mud on the tyres,which locals will know comes from that area. I don't see a woman glorying in riding a bike through mud for any purpose,whilst a man might well for recreation or dare I say it other reasons.
I am afraid you underestimate women and have a wee bit too romantic an approach. Here we see women (and men) on bikes in all kinds of weather and terrains - all the time.
-
Steve, I believe that came from RWB. The police found nothing.
I have a feeling it's mentioned in "Blood Relations" when the bike is noticed in Jeremy's back yard by Ann Eaton days after the massacre.
-
I have a feeling it's mentioned in "Blood Relations" when the bike is noticed in Jeremy's back yard by Ann Eaton days after the massacre.
Hmm, I think you're right.
-
This is not strictly true. There was yellow sulphurous mud on the tyres,which locals will know comes from that area. I don't see a woman glorying in riding a bike through mud for any purpose,whilst a man might well for recreation or dare I say it other reasons.
Anyone that has read up the case knows there was mud on the wheels. Only the 'pig ignorant' don't.
Do you believe Bamber stole the bike. Or he said 'pretty' please and 'thanks a lot mum' to June after she very kindly gave him a bike ?
Anyway, Bamber's reason for getting the bike (just before the massacre) is simply too weak. Hardcore supporters will fight tooth and nail to defend it. Just as they did with the kitchen window after I provided twelve sources !
Bamber was a very lazy and an unpleasant person. Even his supporters say this. But getting the bike so Julie could cycle three miles when going home. To save himself five minutes of driving, is simply ridiculous.
-
Hmm, I think you're right.
If you have read 'Blood Relations' how an earth could you have believed Bamber innocent ?
It is an unbiased book that just reports on the facts. But the mountain of incriminating evidence shows his guilt. As the five star reviews on Amazon say.
-
If you have read 'Blood Relations' how an earth could you have believed Bamber innocent ?
It is an unbiased book that just reports on the facts. But the mountain of incriminating evidence shows his guilt. As the five star reviews on Amazon say.
I think the most the Defence can hope for now bar a miracle is for Jeremy's conviction to be quashed on some technicality,which I believe is the purpose of Mike's Eureka moment thread.
-
If you have read 'Blood Relations' how an earth could you have believed Bamber innocent ?
It is an unbiased book that just reports on the facts. But the mountain of incriminating evidence shows his guilt. As the five star reviews on Amazon say.
It´s just a true crime book. A genre with often dubious authors. You cannot put credence into a true crime book.
I have only read one book on the case, and that is Colin´s, which is interesting because he was so directly connected to the case.
Of course an author will claim to have good knowledge of the case - they want to sell books, but they weren´t there and basically don´t know any more or any less than any other person with an interest in the case.
I have seen some true crime documentaries on the case - they are all vastly incorrect for the most part. The books too is my guess.
-
It´s just a true crime book. A genre with often dubious authors. You cannot put credence into a true crime book.
I have only read one book on the case, and that is Colin´s, which is interesting because he was so directly connected to the case.
Of course an author will claim to have good knowledge of the case - they want to sell books, but they weren´t there and basically don´t know any more or any less than any other person with an interest in the case.
I have seen some true crime documentaries on the case - they are all vastly incorrect for the most part. The books too is my guess.
Well he interviewed everyone. Including Bamber, excluding Julie.
He wrote the book in 1996. So was not jumping on the trial band wagon. In fact at that time Bamber's fame was probably at an all time low. So he was not writing the book for a quick buck. He is an investigative author.
Bamber is now a lot more famous. Reports of three books now being written is not a coincidence.
-
Well he interviewed everyone. Including Bamber, excluding Julie.
He wrote the book in 1996. So was not jumping on the trial band wagon. In fact at that time Bamber's fame was probably at an all time low. So he was not writing the book for a quick buck. He is an investigative author.
Bamber is now a lot more famous. Reports of three books now being written is not a coincidence.
It was still all sifted through his brain. I have no need to read any of the books.
-
It was still all sifted through his brain. I have no need to read any of the books.
I read everything online, on two forums and all the Youtube videos. Together with one book.
Might buy a new book. Will read reviews first.
-
If you have read 'Blood Relations' how an earth could you have believed Bamber innocent ?
It is an unbiased book that just reports on the facts. But the mountain of incriminating evidence shows his guilt. As the five star reviews on Amazon say.
Adam, I read a lot of historical biographies. Some authors treat the same subject so differently that they might be different people they're writing about. One gets to know what an author thinks of a character OR what he/she wants the reader to believe of a character. At the end of the day, it's just another person's opinion.
-
Anyone that has read up the case knows there was mud on the wheels. Only the 'pig ignorant' don't.
Do you believe Bamber stole the bike. Or he said 'pretty' please and 'thanks a lot mum' to June after she very kindly gave him a bike ?
Anyway, Bamber's reason for getting the bike (just before the massacre) is simply too weak. Hardcore supporters will fight tooth and nail to defend it. Just as they did with the kitchen window after I provided twelve sources !
Bamber was a very lazy and an unpleasant person. Even his supporters say this. But getting the bike so Julie could cycle three miles when going home. To save himself five minutes of driving, is simply ridiculous.
Watch your words Adam you are bordering on being rude again - There is a difference between mud and forensic evidence. As they would have been making assumptions about what route he might have taken then how do you know what type of mud they were looking for - and it would be blood from the crime that would be forensic evidence. The mud could have come from when he rode the bike from the farm it proves nothing.
-
If you have read 'Blood Relations' how an earth could you have believed Bamber innocent ?
It is an unbiased book that just reports on the facts. But the mountain of incriminating evidence shows his guilt. As the five star reviews on Amazon say.
Perhaps it was written before some "evidence " that was previously unknown has come to light.
-
Watch your words Adam you are bordering on being rude again - There is a difference between mud and forensic evidence. As they would have been making assumptions about what route he might have taken then how do you know what type of mud they were looking for - and it would be blood from the crime that would be forensic evidence. The mud could have come from when he rode the bike from the farm it proves nothing.
Another poster said 'pig ignorant' before me.
-
I think the most the Defence can hope for now bar a miracle is for Jeremy's conviction to be quashed on some technicality,which I believe is the purpose of Mike's Eureka moment thread.
I concur entirely. I think the ONLY way Jeremy will be released IS on a technicality, which there probably is scope for because of the way the exhibits were handled -excuse the pun- and the trial was conducted. I will just add that this has ALWAYS been my opinion, believing him guilty doesn't alter it.
-
I think it is too late for Jeremy to have a life worth talking about should he be released. Think about how much the world has changed. It is nothing like it was in the eighties - dramatic changes.
Also cannot imagine what 30+ years behind bars does to a person. How would he cope in the real and changed world?
I think Jeremy will be very unhappy if he is not freed and very unhappy if he is freed. There is no win for him.
I hope he is guilty, I really do.
-
Jeremy won't be happy with a technicality at all,but if it remains his only " get out of jail free " card,then he has no option.If he demands the truth,then he'll be kept in,as with a technicality, I'm not sure you can take a case any further once you're released,unless it's a High Court job. I'm not sure. This includes not being able to pursue the relatives for lost revenue,etc,etc.
-
Another poster said 'pig ignorant' before me.
So you feel you have to copy everything we do. That could be useful. However, the other poster didn't make sarcastic comments about the tone Jeremy may have taken with his mother.
-
I think it is too late for Jeremy to have a life worth talking about should he be released. Think about how much the world has changed. It is nothing like it was in the eighties - dramatic changes.
Also cannot imagine what 30+ years behind bars does to a person. How would he cope in the real and changed world?
I think Jeremy will be very unhappy if he is not freed and very unhappy if he is freed. There is no win for him.
I hope he is guilty, I really do.
I totally agree - if he is released on a technicality then what life will he have .
And I agree with you because if he is innocent then his is one of the worst MOJ ever.
-
I totally agree - if he is released on a technicality then what life will he have .
And I agree with you because if he is innocent then his is one of the worst MOJ ever.
Trouble is Jan there has been lots of technicalities already raised in two appeals and in three submissions to the CCRC.
One would think if he was going to get out on a technicality, then he would already be out on a technicality.
But, who knows, more technicalities might be found? It could be, that, new evidence has arrived via EP? or could the 30 year rule of holding evidence under PII be imminent for release?
I know this sounds sad, but I feel there is no loop hole or new technicality for Jeremy. He is where he is and in my opinion he is likely to stay there. I have my reasons for saying that. Innocent or guilty I think all avenues have been exhausted.
I also think that any information that someone may hold that would help Jeremy will never be known.
I hope he keeps on fighting and I honestly believe he was stitched up, but believing is not evidence enough to get him released. :( :-\ :-\ :-\
-
This is not strictly true. There was yellow sulphurous mud on the tyres,which locals will know comes from that area. I don't see a woman glorying in riding a bike through mud for any purpose,whilst a man might well for recreation or dare I say it other reasons.
Steve the bike was forensically tested and the mud on it was not from that area. That is a fact and is well documented. The police dismissed it as evidence although the prosecution still hammered it home to the jury without any kind of evidence that it was mind you that it was used. But forensic examination says quite categorically that it wasn't.
-
This is not strictly true. There was yellow sulphurous mud on the tyres,which locals will know comes from that area. I don't see a woman glorying in riding a bike through mud for any purpose,whilst a man might well for recreation or dare I say it other reasons.
Also RWB did his very best to look for tyre tracks but could not find anything. But that didn't stop him from pressing it home that the bike was used. In fact all these crazy theories including the ridiculous suggestion hat a wet suit was used all came from Robert Boutflour.
-
Trouble is Jan there has been lots of technicalities already raised in two appeals and in three submissions to the CCRC.
One would think if he was going to get out on a technicality, then he would already be out on a technicality.
But, who knows, more technicalities might be found? It could be, that, new evidence has arrived via EP? or could the 30 year rule of holding evidence under PII be imminent for release?
I know this sounds sad, but I feel there is no loop hole or new technicality for Jeremy. He is where he is and in my opinion he is likely to stay there. I have my reasons for saying that. Innocent or guilty I think all avenues have been exhausted.
I also think that any information that someone may hold that would help Jeremy will never be known.
I hope he keeps on fighting and I honestly believe he was stitched up, but believing is not evidence enough to get him released. :( :-\ :-\ :-\
Appeal courts always assume someone guilty already before looking at any new evidence. They also lean towards the original judge in this case they did not find anything that proved that the judge said anything to sway the jury towards a guilty verdict. They were wrong in my opinion as I have shown several things where he definately did lead the jury in that direction.