Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: nugnug on May 27, 2015, 02:09:PM
-
were is brett colins now and why has he never talked about the case.
-
were is brett colins now and why has he never talked about the case.
nugnug nobody seems to have heard of him I wonder if he is still alive or if he will be mentioned in either of the two new books coming out. I am sure he would have been the closest person to Jeremy and may know more than we think.
-
Some say he's dead and others say he's a garage-owner in New Zealand. Which of these is true,I don't know as so much is bandied about. I don't know anything about him at all. If he hadn't been in Greece at the time of the murders,would he have been staying with Jeremy ? I've often wondered that.
I didn't even know where he lived.
-
i wonder if he returned to newzealand after the murders.
im also wondering why nobody has ever tracked him down and asked for his story.
-
Some say he's dead and others say he's a garage-owner in New Zealand. Which of these is true,I don't know as so much is bandied about. I don't know anything about him at all. If he hadn't been in Greece at the time of the murders,would he have been staying with Jeremy ? I've often wondered that.
I didn't even know where he lived.
Lookout
I seem to remember Mason Doyle stated when he was on the forum his research took him to New Zealand could he have tracked down Brett we shall have to wait and see not long now.
-
Lookout
I seem to remember Mason Doyle stated when he was on the forum his research took him to New Zealand could he have tracked down Brett we shall have to wait and see not long now.
Hi Susan,you never know.I forgot about MD having gone there.
-
brett could of cashed in if he had wanted to i wonder why he dident.
-
brett could of cashed in if he had wanted to i wonder why he dident.
nugnug that is a good point I have been looking around and the best I came up with he was at Jeremy's side a couple of days after the murders then disappeared straight away after Jeremy was convicted I have read he is spoken about quite a bit in RB's diary. Jeremy met him in New Zealand and maybe Brett was just over here on an extended holiday. Will look to see if he is mentioned in any of the books.
-
nugnug that is a good point I have been looking around and the best I came up with he was at Jeremy's side a couple of days after the murders then disappeared straight away after Jeremy was convicted I have read he is spoken about quite a bit in RB's diary. Jeremy met him in New Zealand and maybe Brett was just over here on an extended holiday. Will look to see if he is mentioned in any of the books.
Just been reading about Brett who was devoted to Jeremy and convinced of his innocence after the trial he was totally broke so I guess he had no choice but to return to New Zealand.
-
COLLINS, Brett Eric
Last known residential address
5 *************** Surfdale
Date of birth
16 February 19**
MVT number
N/A
Trading name
N/A
Period of ban
Five years (until 5 December 2018)
Reason for ban
Pursuant to section 68(1)(a)(i) of the Motor Vehicle Sales Act 2003
Terms or conditions imposed by District Court
N/A
Any other particulars that may be prescribed
N/A
-
I seem to remember Brett going to the press after Jeremy was convicted,and telling them to write that he was innocent as he went ballistic and wanted it on the front page.
-
COLLINS, Brett Eric
Last known residential address
5 *************** Surfdale
Date of birth
16 February 19**
MVT number
N/A
Trading name
N/A
Period of ban
Five years (until 5 December 2018)
Reason for ban
Pursuant to section 68(1)(a)(i) of the Motor Vehicle Sales Act 2003
Terms or conditions imposed by District Court
N/A
Any other particulars that may be prescribed
N/A
Patti does that mean in short terms he was banned from driving or banned from selling cars ;D
-
I seem to remember Brett going to the press after Jeremy was convicted,and telling them to write that he was innocent as he went ballistic and wanted it on the front page.
lookout he went to the Sun think it was about the way EP questioned Jeremy think the story was front page this was after Jeremy was arrested.
-
Patti does that mean in short terms he was banned from driving or banned from selling cars ;D
I think he is banned from selling cars. He was banned back in 2010 as well.
Maybe he was into dodgy sales and deals? Not 100% sure but he is banned from trading.
-
lookout he went to the Sun think it was about the way EP questioned Jeremy think the story was front page this was after Jeremy was arrested.
Bits and pieces come to me as I think about it,and what you've posted seems about right.
-
Convicted under:
Section 96(1)(a) of the Motor Vehicle Sales Act 2003 for participating in the business of motor vehicle trading while a banned person.
Sentenced on 1 March 2010 to a fine of $10,000.00 and court costs of $130.00.
-
COLLINS, Brett Eric
Last known residential address
5 *************** Surfdale
Date of birth
16 February 19**
MVT number
N/A
Trading name
N/A
Period of ban
Five years (until 5 December 2018)
Reason for ban
Pursuant to section 68(1)(a)(i) of the Motor Vehicle Sales Act 2003
Terms or conditions imposed by District Court
N/A
Any other particulars that may be prescribed
N/A
Thanks for that Patti. So he's still in the land of the living it would seem.
-
Thanks for that Patti. So he's still in the land of the living it would seem.
Of course. He is still wheeling and dealing by the sounds of it even after his conviction in 2010 if memory serves me right he was banned till 2015, but got caught trading in 2014 whilst still banned so now he has a further 4 year ban till 2018. He will then be 60 years old. ;D
-
I think he is banned from selling cars. He was banned back in 2010 as well.
Maybe he was into dodgy sales and deals? Not 100% sure but he is banned from trading.
Pattt it would seem that back in the eighties he was released from prison not sure what his offence was :'(
-
I said he was a bad influence.
-
I said he was a bad influence.
Birds of a feather...
-
Birds of a feather...
Although I fell for that one,it shows how easily led Jeremy was. JM wasn't backward in coming forward either when it came to " business ".It can't ALL be blamed on Jeremy,he wasn't the ringleader,nor would he have had it in him to murder anyone either.
-
Birds of a feather...
To be honest that's a bit unfair on Brett. ;D
-
Although I fell for that one,it shows how easily led Jeremy was. JM wasn't backward in coming forward either when it came to " business ".It can't ALL be blamed on Jeremy,he wasn't the ringleader,nor would he have had it in him to murder anyone either.
Lookout, thus far, I haven't been aware of you blaming ANYTHING on Jeremy. You don't seem to see him as being capable of anything worse than silly school boy pranks.
-
Lookout, thus far, I haven't been aware of you blaming ANYTHING on Jeremy. You don't seem to see him as being capable of anything worse than silly school boy pranks.
So ? This is my opinion of him. I don't see the problem that it clearly has with everyone else ? Just leave me to my own opinions and concentrate on yours. I don't argue against what you say,I couldn't care less to be honest. Do forgive me for not having the same mindset as yourself. ::)
-
To be honest that's a bit unfair on Brett. ;D
Hahaha Mat Brett did'ent wear a yellow ribbon but a feather ;D
-
So ? This is my opinion of him. I don't see the problem that it clearly has with everyone else ? Just leave me to my own opinions and concentrate on yours. I don't argue against what you say,I couldn't care less to be honest. Do forgive me for not having the same mindset as yourself. ::)
I fail to see anything stimulating about being a member of anything where people agree all the time. OK. You seem to think there would be nothing wrong with Jeremy trying to flog porny pics of his dead sister (because he didn't actually receive any money?) and yet you seem to throw up your hands in horror at the mere thought of Sheila allowing such to be taken. Don't blame me if you come up with thoughts which I consider to be discussion worthy.
-
Although I fell for that one,it shows how easily led Jeremy was. JM wasn't backward in coming forward either when it came to " business ".It can't ALL be blamed on Jeremy,he wasn't the ringleader,nor would he have had it in him to murder anyone either.
You blame everyone else for Jeremy's bad actions except Jeremy. Quite clearly he was the one who decided to rob the caravan site and not as you claim because Julie put him up to it- he dragged her there. But you would rather believe she corrupted him because you don't want to face he was bad. Brett didn't put up Jeremy to kill his family Jeremy decided to do so on his own. You close your eyes to the truth instead preferring to believe you know what Jeremy is really like based on things no more reliable than consulting some gypsy who claims to have a crystal ball. You use this totally unreliable fiction to discount solid evidence that proves his guilt in the meantime. It just shows some people willingly hide from reality rather than facing it.
-
I fail to see anything stimulating about being a member of anything where people agree all the time. OK. You seem to think there would be nothing wrong with Jeremy trying to flog porny pics of his dead sister (because he didn't actually receive any money?) and yet you seem to throw up your hands in horror at the mere thought of Sheila allowing such to be taken. Don't blame me if you come up with thoughts which I consider to be discussion worthy.
It's not even a discussion.It's very one-sided that whatever I say is wrong anyway and before I know it I'm bombarded from all directions. Call that a discussion ?
-
It's not even a discussion.It's very one-sided that whatever I say is wrong anyway and before I know it I'm bombarded from all directions. Call that a discussion ?
Absolutely, Lookout. You give as good as you get, believe me ;)
-
Jeremy -
Grew and sold drugs.
Stole watches when abroad.
Boasted about smuggling heroin across to another country.
Robbed the caravan site.
Massacred five people.
Smuggled drugs from Amsterdam to England.
-
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=N_tlVcqZMcWwUbKMgeAD&url=http://content.wow.com/wiki/Jeremy_Bamber&ved=0CCsQFjAGOBQ&usg=AFQjCNGxICfpAFlZvE9Vl4Ub8NdglTOvrA&sig2=PqyAp4r3I4or6F4BAGchhA
-
You blame everyone else for Jeremy's bad actions except Jeremy. Quite clearly he was the one who decided to rob the caravan site and not as you claim because Julie put him up to it- he dragged her there. But you would rather believe she corrupted him because you don't want to face he was bad. Brett didn't put up Jeremy to kill his family Jeremy decided to do so on his own. You close your eyes to the truth instead preferring to believe you know what Jeremy is really like based on things no more reliable than consulting some gypsy who claims to have a crystal ball. You use this totally unreliable fiction to discount solid evidence that proves his guilt in the meantime. It just shows some people willingly hide from reality rather than facing it.
I am surprised you even bought that up . You have Julies version against Jeremys and so what if he did do it - it does not make him a murderer. If you are going to use that argument Julies past shows clearly she was a liar - and yet it was her evidence that was a main contribution to him being jailed. So fact- the principle witness was a liar and had committed fraud and was connected with drugs offences .
[/color]
-
I fail to see anything stimulating about being a member of anything where people agree all the time. OK. You seem to think there would be nothing wrong with Jeremy trying to flog porny pics of his dead sister (because he didn't actually receive any money?) and yet you seem to throw up your hands in horror at the mere thought of Sheila allowing such to be taken. Don't blame me if you come up with thoughts which I consider to be discussion worthy.
Where did lookout say that ? I don't think she accepts that they were pornographic - and she does not believe the Sun would not have published them if they existed?
Or did I misunderstand your posts Lookout?
And even Colin was shocked at the ones taken in her garden so I think Lookout is allowed to "throw her hands up in horror" if that is how you see it.
Question 1 - did Colin or anyone else then or since actually see the pictures that the Sun so graphically described and attributed the description to Jeremy?
-
back to thread
I would be interested to see any press articles about Brett after the trial.
-
How is Julie a liar ?
She lied early on in her WS. She was in a daze after Jeremy rudely woke her. Twice. Then summoned her over.
But she came good.
She didn't mention the 1984 cheque book fraud. There were more important issues. But she did mention the caravan break in.
-
How is Julie a liar ?
She lied early on in her WS. She was in a daze after Jeremy rudely woke her. Twice. Then summoned her over.
But she came good.
She didn't mention the 1984 cheque book fraud. There were more important issues. But she did mention the caravan break in.
She committed fraud - that makes her a liar
she was according to the official document involved in drug smuggling - you have to be a liar to do that
She lied in her first statement -
The bank said she lied about a policeman going in to the bank with her
Lies .
So check your facts before you post - idiot .
Go and support yourself you need it.
-
back to thread
I would be interested to see any press articles about Brett after the trial.
Go find them then.
Brett left the sinking ship. As far as I know quite early on.
There is no mention of him since the jolly up in St Tropez.
-
Where did lookout say that ? I don't think she accepts that they were pornographic - and she does not believe the Sun would not have published them if they existed?
Or did I misunderstand your posts Lookout?
And even Colin was shocked at the ones taken in her garden so I think Lookout is allowed to "throw her hands up in horror" if that is how you see it.
Question 1 - did Colin or anyone else then or since actually see the pictures that the Sun so graphically described and attributed the description to Jeremy?
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6696.msg308034.html#msg308034
-
I am surprised you even bought that up . You have Julies version against Jeremys and so what if he did do it - it does not make him a murderer. If you are going to use that argument Julies past shows clearly she was a liar - and yet it was her evidence that was a main contribution to him being jailed. So fact- the principle witness was a liar and had committed fraud and was connected with drugs offences .
Surprised I brought up lookouts ridiculous suggestion that Julie corrupted him? The only lies Julie told were to help out Jeremy. She didn't lie about the checks she admitted to it like she admitted to being with him when he burglarized the caravan site and admitted to using drugs.
You have not come up with anything to dent her testimony against Jeremy and a great deal of evidence in the case corroborates his guilt. Like lookout you have some ridiculous bias in favor of Jeremy and not the truth.
-
Surprised I brought up lookouts ridiculous suggestion that Julie corrupted him? The only lies Julie told were to help out Jeremy. She didn't lie about the checks she admitted to it like she admitted to being with him when he burglarized the caravan site and admitted to using drugs.
You have not come up with anything to dent her testimony against Jeremy and a great deal of evidence in the case corroborates his guilt. Like lookout you have some ridiculous bias in favor of Jeremy and not the truth.
That's your opinion - I know that because its all you ever say - you are like groundhog day . And I could not care one jot about you or what you think when you post like that.
-
I am surprised you even bought that up . You have Julies version against Jeremys and so what if he did do it - it does not make him a murderer. If you are going to use that argument Julies past shows clearly she was a liar - and yet it was her evidence that was a main contribution to him being jailed. So fact- the principle witness was a liar and had committed fraud and was connected with drugs offences .
No, but it does make him an absolute vile human being, the kind of human being who has no conscience, the kind who's greed knows no bounds, the kind that could kill his family and not bat and eyelid. In short - a complete psychopath.
-
well you seem to be cliaming he corupted the both burgeled the caravan site in law they were both equally guilty.
theres no way of saying for a fact that one corupted the other.
-
well you seem to be cliaming he corupted the both burgeled the caravan site in law they were both equally guilty.
theres no way of saying for a fact that one corupted the other.
I'd say they were equally guilty of the caravan burglary; but Jeremy killed his family and then tried to sell explicit pictures of his dead sister - a sister that he murdered. He took her children, her parents, her life, her reputation and finally, he tried to steal her dignity! Wadda guy!!
-
well you seem to be cliaming he corupted the both burgeled the caravan site in law they were both equally guilty.
theres no way of saying for a fact that one corupted the other.
He's the one who took her there and the one who stole the money. He took her because he thought she would be skinny enough to be able to reach inside to grab the key. He asked her to get the key but she could not reach it so then he broke in instead and stole the money. She was guilty of a failed attempt to help him enter. Because she was unsuccessful in her attempt he broke in and actually stole the money. In what way do you see their guilt equally? They are not equals in the eyes of the law.
In the meantime she had no need to tell police about her attempt to get the key she could have have said he brought her there and as she sat he broke in and stole the money and because his family owned it she didn't realize anything was wrong till later. She didn't lie and say such she admitted her unsuccessful attempt to help him.
-
Where did lookout say that ? I don't think she accepts that they were pornographic - and she does not believe the Sun would not have published them if they existed?
Or did I misunderstand your posts Lookout?
And even Colin was shocked at the ones taken in her garden so I think Lookout is allowed to "throw her hands up in horror" if that is how you see it.
Question 1 - did Colin or anyone else then or since actually see the pictures that the Sun so graphically described and attributed the description to Jeremy?
Actually Jan, Lookout has dismissed the attempts to sell the pictures as "hoo-ha" and suggested that as no money changed hands it somehow let Jeremy off the hook. She further suggested that Sheila would NEVER have posed for such pictures -quite how she knows this, she didn't say- and when I posited that if she'd been under the influence of drugs -on which she reputedly spent thousands- any inhibitions would have been diminished. Lookout responded by telling me that Sheila had some sort of immunity to the effects of (recreational) drugs -again, she omitted to say how she knew- and it was only her meds which caused bad reactions.
Colin was entitled to "throw up his hands in horror" which makes one suspect that they were more than "artistic" poses. Sheila had been his wife and remained the mother of his children.
-
Go find them then.
Brett left the sinking ship. As far as I know quite early on.
There is no mention of him since the jolly up in St Tropez.
Adam when Jeremy was arrested Brett contacted a reporter from the Sun and gave them some story about EP and how badly they were with Jeremy. It is in one of the books. Shall I go and find it for you.
-
Why isn't he in Rampton ?
-
Actually Jan, Lookout has dismissed the attempts to sell the pictures as "hoo-ha" and suggested that as no money changed hands it somehow let Jeremy off the hook. She further suggested that Sheila would NEVER have posed for such pictures -quite how she knows this, she didn't say- and when I posited that if she'd been under the influence of drugs -on which she reputedly spent thousands- any inhibitions would have been diminished. Lookout responded by telling me that Sheila had some sort of immunity to the effects of (recreational) drugs -again, she omitted to say how she knew- and it was only her meds which caused bad reactions.
Colin was entitled to "throw up his hands in horror" which makes one suspect that they were more than "artistic" poses. Sheila had been his wife and remained the mother of his children.
"Artistic" poses are provocative- they won't be a woman just standing nude like she would be posing for a painting. In some way shape or form they will be sexually suggestive by how you bend over or whatever.
The next level is when you touch yourself which could be as simple as holding your chest but could be as far as playing with yourself.
Sticking a toy in yourself or actual sex acts between 2 people is when you get to the hardcore level.
These sound like they didn't include much if any of the touching and probably more on the contorting in odd positions category. While she had no problem taking them she didn't allow them to be published for the public. To decide to publish them after her death is quite scummy. It is not as if she planned to leave them to her heirs, she probably would have destroyed them when old rather than let heirs find them.
That is before you even take into account the murders. It is just scummy in general to publish personal photos that someone else chose not to have published. Obviously though where there was a tragic death you would have another reason not to publish them. But if you already drag someone's name int he mud by falsely claiming they murdered your family you have no problem further dragging her in the mud by publishing such photos. This is why people are trying to find a way too pretend it never happened. They realize how damning it is against Jeremy. If he didn't commit the murders then it should not have crossed his mind to sell the photos. So supporters feel the need to pretend he didn't.
-
Why isn't he in Rampton ?
Why would he be in Rampton?
-
Why would he be in Rampton?
A dangerous " psychopath ",along with the schizophrenics.
-
A dangerous " psychopath ",along with the schizophrenics.
Given that you STILL don't know what a psychopath is, I shouldn't be surprised that you asked the question. ::)
-
Has Jeremy ever officially been diagnosed with any mental illness or personality disorder in his life by someone who has been studying him or a doctor of any kind ?
Simple question - yes or no?
-
Has Jeremy ever officially been diagnosed with any mental illness or personality disorder in his life by someone who has been studying him or a doctor of any kind ?
Simple question - yes or no?
He's a convicted killer - no one is studying him so it's not a simple question.
-
they both planned and excuted together so there both eqaully guilty anything else is just speculation.
-
"Artistic" poses are provocative- they won't be a woman just standing nude like she would be posing for a painting. In some way shape or form they will be sexually suggestive by how you bend over or whatever.
The next level is when you touch yourself which could be as simple as holding your chest but could be as far as playing with yourself.
Sticking a toy in yourself or actual sex acts between 2 people is when you get to the hardcore level.
These sound like they didn't include much if any of the touching and probably more on the contorting in odd positions category. While she had no problem taking them she didn't allow them to be published for the public. To decide to publish them after her death is quite scummy. It is not as if she planned to leave them to her heirs, she probably would have destroyed them when old rather than let heirs find them.
That is before you even take into account the murders. It is just scummy in general to publish personal photos that someone else chose not to have published. Obviously though where there was a tragic death you would have another reason not to publish them. But if you already drag someone's name int he mud by falsely claiming they murdered your family you have no problem further dragging her in the mud by publishing such photos. This is why people are trying to find a way too pretend it never happened. They realize how damning it is against Jeremy. If he didn't commit the murders then it should not have crossed his mind to sell the photos. So supporters feel the need to pretend he didn't.
Perhaps we make different use of "artistic." During WW11 a very famous theatre, The Windmill, remained open. The cast were semi naked/naked females displaying themselves in "artistic" poses whilst remaining perfectly still. The legend said "If it moves, it's rude."
-
Adam when Jeremy was arrested Brett contacted a reporter from the Sun and gave them some story about EP and how badly they were with Jeremy. It is in one of the books. Shall I go and find it for you.
what a shame we don't have all the old articles . I did try once in newspaper archives but failed.
-
what a shame we don't have all the old articles . I did try once in newspaper archives but failed.
Jan if we knew the date an article was published we could get it through our local Library I got old newspapers from them on the Neil Moss Tragedy which was well before the Bamber case. We would need the exact date cost was very minimal.
-
breet silence i think could mean things if jeremys guilty then hes some how involved.
or he belives that jeremy is innocent.
becouse if he thought he was guilty he would of told his story by now and made a few quid.
-
Perhaps we make different use of "artistic." During WW11 a very famous theatre, The Windmill, remained open. The cast were semi naked/naked females displaying themselves in "artistic" poses whilst remaining perfectly still. The legend said "If it moves, it's rude."
I think there was actually a law against nude dancers so in order to be nude they had to stay still. In any event, standing nude like they did and and the kinds of photos have little in common with those taken after the sexual revolution (where nude dancing and much more is legal) that are called artistic.
I personally don't like raunchy I would rather just see a woman in a normal pose not some contorted position or spreading etc but I am in the minority and you can tell that quite quickly if you actually look at the materials published. Publications that did what I like would go out of business even playboy doesn't do well because it is not raunchy enough for most. They do far better with their videos and such than with their magazine. Subtle has been out of style since the 60s.
-
I think there was actually a law against nude dancers so in order to be nude they had to stay still. In any event, standing nude like they did and and the kinds of photos have little in common with those taken after the sexual revolution (where nude dancing and much more is legal) that are called artistic.
I personally don't like raunchy I would rather just see a woman in a normal pose not some contorted position or spreading etc but I am in the minority and you can tell that quite quickly if you actually look at the materials published. Publications that did what I like would go out of business even playboy doesn't do well because it is not raunchy enough for most. They do far better with their videos and such than with their magazine. Subtle has been out of style since the 60s.
I entirely agree. There are certain areas in which less is very definitely MORE ;).................IMO subtlety is sexier.
-
breet silence i think could mean things if jeremys guilty then hes some how involved.
or he belives that jeremy is innocent.
becouse if he thought he was guilty he would of told his story by now and made a few quid.
Nugnug I do think Brett thought Jeremy was innocent of the murders but Jeremy was his meal ticket and when Jeremy was convicted he had no choice than go back to NZ and he had nothing to sell Jeremy was found guilty so nobody would have been interested in his story of Jeremy innocent.
-
I entirely agree. There are certain areas in which less is very definitely MORE ;).................IMO subtlety is sexier.
April I agree with you and I think most men think the same leave something to the imagination ;D
-
Nugnug I do think Brett thought Jeremy was innocent of the murders but Jeremy was his meal ticket and when Jeremy was convicted he had no choice than go back to NZ and he had nothing to sell Jeremy was found guilty so nobody would have been interested in his story of Jeremy innocent.
I agree and as he was not there at the time of the murders there was probably not a lot he could contribute to what the press wanted to hear.
The family asked for him to be investigated though .
-
breet silence i think could mean things if jeremys guilty then hes some how involved.
or he belives that jeremy is innocent.
becouse if he thought he was guilty he would of told his story by now and made a few quid.
I don't agree, I think initially he might have thought he was innocent - or may not of cared because he was getting a good time out of it. After Jeremy's conviction, I guess he thought he better split because of his association to Jeremy - what would he have had to tell them? If he didn't know if Jeremy was guilty or not, all he could have told them was how he helped spend his money and how he tried to help sell porn pictures of Sheila. That would have done him more harm than good.
-
I agree and as he was not there at the time of the murders there was probably not a lot he could contribute to what the press wanted to hear.
The family asked for him to be investigated though .
Jan I read today that RB's diary was full of Brett ;D guess he was harmless.
-
Jan if we knew the date an article was published we could get it through our local Library I got old newspapers from them on the Neil Moss Tragedy which was well before the Bamber case. We would need the exact date cost was very minimal.
All I have seen are articles that state Collins said Jeremy didn't get along with his family and that the surviving relatives are not supportive but he doesn't think Jeremy did it.
-
Jan I read today that RB's diary was full of Brett ;D guess he was harmless.
Perhaps RB thought JB had to have an accomplice for some reason - so they tried to get Brett involved - I am sure it was not just because they were homophobic. :)
-
I don't agree, I think initially he might have thought he was innocent - or may not of cared because he was getting a good time out of it. After Jeremy's conviction, I guess he thought he better split because of his association to Jeremy - what would he have had to tell them? If he didn't know if Jeremy was guilty or not, all he could have told them was how he helped spend his money and how he tried to help sell porn pictures of Sheila. That would have done him more harm than good.
Yeh, I get the impression that Brett was only a loyal and devoted friend for as long as he was getting something out of it. He and Jeremy probably suited each other.
-
I don't agree, I think initially he might have thought he was innocent - or may not of cared because he was getting a good time out of it. After Jeremy's conviction, I guess he thought he better split because of his association to Jeremy - what would he have had to tell them? If he didn't know if Jeremy was guilty or not, all he could have told them was how he helped spend his money and how he tried to help sell porn pictures of Sheila. That would have done him more harm than good.
Caroline you could have a point had Jeremy walked Brett would have been waiting for him but once convicted he would think he better leg it out of England before he was dragged into something. I have never read that he kept in touch with Jeremy with letters of support the fact they were such close friends one would have thought he would have kept in touch.
-
Jan if we knew the date an article was published we could get it through our local Library I got old newspapers from them on the Neil Moss Tragedy which was well before the Bamber case. We would need the exact date cost was very minimal.
Our village library only has the Derbyshire Times which goes up to 1959. Local studies libraries may have them in Sheffield or the Sheffield Archives may have them on film. I dare say that Kew will have them all on film.
I found a site earlier with loads of front pages on the Bamber case, but it costs to have a look at just under £8.00. I suppose when you weigh up the costs of traveling/parking etc it might be worth it. ;D
-
Caroline you could have a point had Jeremy walked Brett would have been waiting for him but once convicted he would think he better leg it out of England before he was dragged into something. I have never read that he kept in touch with Jeremy with letters of support the fact they were such close friends one would have thought he would have kept in touch.
perhaps he was just here on some kind of visa?
-
Our village library only has the Derbyshire Times which goes up to 1959. Local studies libraries may have them in Sheffield or the Sheffield Archives may have them on film. I dare say that Kew will have them all on film.
I found a site earlier with loads of front pages on the Bamber case, but it costs to have a look at just under £8.00. I suppose when you weigh up the costs of traveling/parking etc it might be worth it. ;D
Patti is that £8 for one paper or all of them. I got front pages of the Guardian and other big spreads from way back 50 years ago only cost me a few notes.
-
Caroline you could have a point had Jeremy walked Brett would have been waiting for him but once convicted he would think he better leg it out of England before he was dragged into something. I have never read that he kept in touch with Jeremy with letters of support the fact they were such close friends one would have thought he would have kept in touch.
I'm fairly sure he didn't keep in touch.
-
perhaps he was just here on some kind of visa?
Jan I did wonder about that he had not been out of prison long when Jeremy met him in NZ so he would have been here as a tourist.
-
I'm fairly sure he didn't keep in touch.
Caroline
I think that too and it seems odd to me they were suppose to be so close according to Julie ;D
-
And Julie didn't lie,did she ? :o
-
Patti is that £8 for one paper or all of them. I got front pages of the Guardian and other big spreads from way back 50 years ago only cost me a few notes.
I think the charge is for one day only, but during that period of time you can view what you want to.
The local libraries charge a small fee... I think I paid something like £1.20 for a copy. Other than that some libraries have their own printer and you can print them off for 20p...ordered copies are dearer. I'll try an find the link...
-
I'd say they were equally guilty of the caravan burglary; but Jeremy killed his family and then tried to sell explicit pictures of his dead sister - a sister that he murdered. He took her children, her parents, her life, her reputation and finally, he tried to steal her dignity! Wadda guy!!
They were not equally guilty.
Jeremy worked there and knew how to steal the money.
He probably needed a look out and chose Julie as his only option.
I doubt that Julie pushed him into it. Jeremy has never claimed this. He testified he did it out of greed. And spent the money quickly. Although he later claimed he did it to show security flaws. Either way Julie was probably not told about her allocated role until minutes before.
-
They were not equally guilty.
Jeremy worked there and knew how to steal the money.
He probably needed a look out and chose Julie as his only option.
I doubt that Julie pushed him into it. Jeremy has never claimed this. He testified he did it out of greed. And spent the money quickly. Although he later claimed he did it to show security flaws. Either way Julie was probably not told about her allocated role until minutes before.
Of course they were!! They both took part and they both benefited. ;D ;D ;D
You can't have it both ways!! The fraud committed buy SB and JM was Julie's idea and YOU try to argue that it was the fault of SB. Cherry picking again Adam!!
-
Of course they were!! They both took part and they both benefited. ;D ;D ;D
You can't have it both ways!! The fraud committed buy SB and JM was Julie's idea and YOU try to argue that it was the fault of SB. Cherry picking again Adam!!
Well Jeremy was charged. Some supporters claim Julie made him do it. But have no proof.
-
I wonder why he did not testify that Julie made him commit the caravan break in ? True or false there was no harm in trying to discredit Julie further.
He told his lawyers about the 1984 cheque book fraud & accused her of lying because he jilted her. He might as well blame her for the caravan break in as well.
-
Well Jeremy was charged. Some supporters claim Julie made him do it. But have no proof.
Well, 'some' might say that - however, I didn't. I said they were equally responsible.
-
I think it was last year when someone claimed to be a friend of Brett Collins. I have no reason to believe he was lying because he only made a few posts asking if we had any idea where he might be. He did mention that Brett was a nice guy but a bit of a wide boy.
-
I think it was last year when someone claimed to be a friend of Brett Collins. I have no reason to believe he was lying because he only made a few posts asking if we had any idea where he might be. He did mention that Brett was a nice guy but a bit of a wide boy.
I remember that Caroline.
-
I think it was last year when someone claimed to be a friend of Brett Collins. I have no reason to believe he was lying because he only made a few posts asking if we had any idea where he might be. He did mention that Brett was a nice guy but a bit of a wide boy.
THINK he was a New Zealander.
-
if bret was just using jeremy for money why wouldent of cashed in on his friends new fame.
why wasnt he selling his story after the conviction.
-
if bret was just using jeremy for money why wouldent of cashed in on his friends new fame.
why wasnt he selling his story after the conviction.
Coz if they'd have taken the trouble to verify it, it's possible that there would have been revealed things about him he'd rather NOT be known.
-
I think he would have done if enough people had listened,or read his story,but the fact of the matter was that Jeremy had been convicted and after that everyones interests waned.
-
if bret was just using jeremy for money why wouldent of cashed in on his friends new fame.
why wasnt he selling his story after the conviction.
Nugnug nothing for him to sell really because he thought Jeremy was innocent he did get the Sun on the case after Jeremy was arrested.
-
Coz if they'd have taken the trouble to verify it, it's possible that there would have been revealed things about him he'd rather NOT be known.
i thought that as well but there also the posbility that wasnt as bad as has been painted.
-
i thought that as well but there also the posbility that wasnt as bad as has been painted.
Or worse, perhaps? Which ever, it was his story to tell, or not, as he saw fit.
-
He had to be made to look the ogre or nobody would have got paid or had promotion.
-
Lookout it says on twitter next submission should be within weeks and there is a link to the current campaign team.
Not sure if the time scale is correct though as I have heard that before . Hopefully someone will let us know.
-
Oh right,Jan.I'll await any more news,though I had an idea that things were rolling.
-
Oh right,Jan.I'll await any more news,though I had an idea that things were rolling.
let me know if you hear anything.
-
let me know if you hear anything.
Will do.
-
Oh right,Jan.I'll await any more news,though I had an idea that things were rolling.
Wish I had a quid for every time I hear that! ;D ;D ;D
-
Wish I had a quid for every time I hear that! ;D ;D ;D
Never underestimate what I DO know.
-
Never underestimate what I DO know.
::) ::) ::). I promise not to underestimate what you are willing to believe! ;)
-
::) ::) ::). I promise not to underestimate what you are willing to believe! ;)
Even " straight from the horse's mouth ?"No books,no forums,no files/documents. No gossip. 8)
-
Even " straight from the horse's mouth ?"No books,no forums,no files/documents. No gossip. 8)
Yeah, been there Lookout, many have before and many will after but don't hold your breath!
-
In the know eh?
Lookout it says on twitter next submission should be within weeks and there is a link to the current campaign team.
Not sure if the time scale is correct though as I have heard that before . Hopefully someone will let us know.
Oh right,Jan.I'll await any more news,though I had an idea that things were rolling.
Yeah, totally in the loop!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Oh dear. :D