Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: David1819 on July 22, 2015, 09:29:PM
-
Michael O'Brien spent many years in prison with Jeremy. Link below to a radio interview on July 16th discussing his experience
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdfmKI2IjEo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdfmKI2IjEo)
You can find more radio interviews on that youtube channel I have not go round to listening to them all yet
-
Michael O'Brien spent many years in prison with Jeremy. Link below to a radio interview on July 16th discussing his experience
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdfmKI2IjEo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdfmKI2IjEo)
You can find more radio interviews on that youtube channel I have not go round to listening to them all yet
He is on twitter as well - I am sure he would answer questions if anyone has any. His own story was sad.
-
well Michael seems convinced.
-
Is this the guy people think Harrison was referring to with the tale about how Jeremy tried to help Sheila avoid responsibility by disposing of her clothing?
-
Is this the guy people think Harrison was referring to with the tale about how Jeremy tried to help Sheila avoid responsibility by disposing of her clothing?
No Michael O'Brien is one of the Cardiff Newsagent 3 who was in prison for 11 years and a notorious MOJ, he spent about 7 years in the same prison as Jeremy and says he is definite that JB is innocent. He now works with Paddy Hill and his Miscarriage of Justice Organisation. Paddy Hill spent 16 years in prison as one of the Birmngham 6 and suffers from PTSD 20 years on from leaving prison.
-
well Jeremy convinced him
-
well Jeremy convinced him
Jeremy was his friend in prison, he's bound to be convinced by him.
-
Hypothetical question
If Jeremy did somehow prove he didn't do it. What would happen?
The police and the extended family would be in deep sh*t
Would be such a scandal
-
Jeremy was his friend in prison, he's bound to be convinced by him.
I don't quite see the logic of that - Do you have reason to believe he is a bad judge of character?
-
Is this the guy people think Harrison was referring to with the tale about how Jeremy tried to help Sheila avoid responsibility by disposing of her clothing?
Well we don't know do we because the letter was anonymous - I don't think so if you listen to the interview.
-
Jeremy was his friend in prison, he's bound to be convinced by him.
well micheal says theres new evedence im not sure what he means.
-
No Michael O'Brien is one of the Cardiff Newsagent 3 who was in prison for 11 years and a notorious MOJ, he spent about 7 years in the same prison as Jeremy and says he is definite that JB is innocent. He now works with Paddy Hill and his Miscarriage of Justice Organisation. Paddy Hill spent 16 years in prison as one of the Birmngham 6 and suffers from PTSD 20 years on from leaving prison.
I know who he is, I am asking if he is Harrison's anonymous source who Jeremy told the story to about making Sheila change and burning her clothing to help her get rid of evidence.
-
Hypothetical question
If Jeremy did somehow prove he didn't do it. What would happen?
The police and the extended family would be in deep sh*t
Would be such a scandal
In deep sh*t for what?
The only way a cop or family member would be in trouble would be if the reason he were proven innocent related to wrongdoing by a cop or the family member in question.
No one was in trouble for the Cardiff convictions, police and the jury believed a confession/testimony implicating co-criminals but later subsequent evidence about the mental stability of the witness made an Appeals court doubt it. There wasn't found to be any wrongdoing by police so no one got in trouble over it.
-
Hypothetical question
If Jeremy did somehow prove he didn't do it. What would happen?
The police and the extended family would be in deep sh*t
Would be such a scandal
well certanly the family would mean they planted the silencer
-
well certanly the family would mean they planted the silencer
No it wouldn't, it would just mean they found a silencer.
-
we are talking about if he was proved innocent i cant see he could be if they dident plant the silencer.
-
In deep sh*t for what?
The only way a cop or family member would be in trouble would be if the reason he were proven innocent related to wrongdoing by a cop or the family member in question.
No one was in trouble for the Cardiff convictions, police and the jury believed a confession/testimony implicating co-criminals but later subsequent evidence about the mental stability of the witness made an Appeals court doubt it. There wasn't found to be any wrongdoing by police so no one got in trouble over it.
So a convicted criminal is released and perhaps compensated. Not because the evidence was wrong or fabricated. But because of supposed evidence about the mental stability of one witness.
Not surprised Jeremy is always looking for a loop hole.
-
In the VERY remote possibility that Jeremy was released because someone punctuated their evidence incorrectly, it would be on a technicality, NOT because he was innocent which would mean that a convicted child killer and family murderer was free. Those who want him freed at any price should consider this.
-
I know who he is, I am asking if he is Harrison's anonymous source who Jeremy told the story to about making Sheila change and burning her clothing to help her get rid of evidence.
I said no he wasn't, as far as we are aware. I then stated who he was. I'm sure you do know who he is but not everyone who reads the forum may know.
-
Jeremy was his friend in prison, he's bound to be convinced by him.
I doubt very much that anyone has " friends " in prison. They would have to be exceptional if that were ever the case,as once released,their true thoughts emerge.
-
I know who he is, I am asking if he is Harrison's anonymous source who Jeremy told the story to about making Sheila change and burning her clothing to help her get rid of evidence.
No - The guy in PH'd book i anonymous and thinks Bamber is guilty. Michael O'Brien is also someone who was in prison with Bamber and they were friends - hence he believes Jeremy's side of things.
-
I doubt very much that anyone has " friends " in prison. They would have to be exceptional if that were ever the case,as once released,their true thoughts emerge.
Well Lookout, the guy said himself that he is a FRIEND of Jeremy's. Not sure what you are basing your sweeping statement on this time but I would certainly agree that this friendship would certainly be one-sided.
-
No - The guy in PH'd book i anonymous and thinks Bamber is guilty. Michael O'Brien is also someone who was in prison with Bamber and they were friends - hence he believes Jeremy's side of things.
It would depend on what this guy knows that nobody else does. As I said------------nobody has friends in prison. There's no honesty among thieves,as the saying goes. Jeremy should proceed with caution about who his " friends " are.He's been bamboozled once,30 years ago !
-
It would depend on what this guy knows that nobody else does. As I said------------nobody has friends in prison. There's no honesty among thieves,as the saying goes. Jeremy should proceed with caution about who his " friends " are.He's been bamboozled once,30 years ago !
Lookout, this guy is a GENUINE MOJ. It's HIM whose been hoodwinked by a manipulative Jeremy Bamber - who is also a proven thief - so (as you say) there is no honour there!
-
he also works with people cliaming to be moj victems so he should be able to spot if somones a fake they get people cliaming innocence all the time and they mostly ignore them.
-
Lookout, this guy is a GENUINE MOJ. It's HIM whose been hoodwinked by a manipulative Jeremy Bamber - who is also a proven thief - so (as you say) there is no honour there!
Blimey,there a lots of thieves that go undetected,so Jeremy just because he'd admitted to his theft becomes a " proven thief ",just to add more notoriety to his profile.
This country would be idyllic if all those guilty of theft,owned up. I mean ALL,from the top to the bottom.
-
Blimey,there a lots of thieves that go undetected,so Jeremy just because he'd admitted to his theft becomes a " proven thief ",just to add more notoriety to his profile.
This country would be idyllic if all those guilty of theft,owned up. I mean ALL,from the top to the bottom.
Lookout, you're the one quoting things like 'no honour among thieves' - you're trying to set Jeremy apart from the other prisoners and perhaps that's where he is in your head however. he is very much a thief and only a MOJ according to him! Michael O'Brien has been PROVEN as an MOJ so it's not Jeremy who needs to be wary, it's Michael O'Brien!
-
Lookout, you're the one quoting things like 'no honour among thieves' - you're trying to set Jeremy apart from the other prisoners and perhaps that's where he is in your head however. he is very much a thief and only a MOJ according to him! Michael O'Brien has been PROVEN as an MOJ so it's not Jeremy who needs to be wary, it's Michael O'Brien!
Somehow I don't think Michael O'Brien would be fooled after having undergone needless punishment himself, and possibly going through the same nonsense as Jeremy as regards police/court/and a gormless jury,so being wary would come as second nature to the man.
-
Somehow I don't think Michael O'Brien would be fooled after having undergone needless punishment himself, and possibly going through the same nonsense as Jeremy as regards police/court/and a gormless jury,so being wary would come as second nature to the man.
Being wary might be something he does NOW but NOT when he was a scared naive freshly convicted inmate. This when he became friends with Bamber - I am sure Jeremy learned a lot of from him as a genuine MOJ. Michael O'Brian can't help but be influenced by his friendship with Bamber - no matter how long he's been working for a MOJ organisation - Jeremy had the best person to influence him, the very guy who is now campaigning for him!!
-
and contary to populer opion the organisian he founded does not exept anybodys cliams of innocene.
-
and contary to populer opion the organisian he founded does exept anybodys cliams of innocene.
I suspect you meant 'doesn't'? I'm sure old friends don't need an invitation!
-
I know who he is, I am asking if he is Harrison's anonymous source who Jeremy told the story to about making Sheila change and burning her clothing to help her get rid of evidence.
Then why would he say quite clearly he is innocent? the above scenario does not make Jeremy innocent.
-
micheal o brien wouldent talk anonymously hes got no reason to.
-
IT'S NOT THE SAME PERSON!!!! :o :o :o ;D ;D ;D 8)
-
micheal o brien wouldent talk anonymously hes got no reason to.
Michael O'Brian was introduced on public radio as being such. The guy was very open in saying that Jeremy was his friend and he believed him innocent. Unless you're happy with believing there are conspiracies everywhere, please give me one good reason why he -MICHAEL O'BRIAN- should write an anonymous letter to Paul Harrison stating that Jeremy is guilty.
-
thats what i just said.
-
I know Essex is a large county,but because this so-called " threat " which was made to PH had an Essex postmark it could have been anyone,as so far as I can gather MOST of Essex hate Jeremy and would also hate anyone else wherever they lived if they dared to be responsible for suggesting a hint of a MOJ or indeed the imminent release of him. So I wouldn't have said it had been a supporter,quite the contrary-----one posing,and opposing such.
I have my own personal thoughts on this by the way. Someone is doing their damndest in keeping Jeremy where he is. There's a lot riding on it.It'll serve them all right in the end.
-
I know Essex is a large county,but because this so-called " threat " which was made to PH had an Essex postmark it could have been anyone,as so far as I can gather MOST of Essex hate Jeremy and would also hate anyone else wherever they lived if they dared to be responsible for suggesting a hint of a MOJ or indeed the imminent release of him. So I wouldn't have said it had been a supporter,quite the contrary-----one posing,and opposing such.
I have my own personal thoughts on this by the way. Someone is doing their damndest in keeping Jeremy where he is. There's a lot riding on it.It'll serve them all right in the end.
Correction, lookout. MOST of Essex haven't a clue who is Jeremy Bamber and have never heard of the WHF massacre. Like Diana's death, there was a HUGE hoo ha at the time, but once the initial shock goes, memories start to fade.
You can be relied upon to have personal thoughts on just about everything ;)
-
Correction, lookout. MOST of Essex haven't a clue who is Jeremy Bamber and have never heard of the WHF massacre. Like Diana's death, there was a HUGE hoo ha at the time, but once the initial shock goes, memories start to fade.
You can be relied upon to have personal thoughts on just about everything ;)
I don't think you can make comparisons over Jeremy and Princess Diana,as her name will live forever in the minds of people,not only here but the world over.
-
I don't think you can make comparisons over Jeremy and Princess Diana,as her name will live forever in the minds of people,not only here but the world over.
Well, if Jeremy's name has all but disappeared from the memories of most of those in his own county, it says little for his chances of being remembered more widely.
-
Then why would he say quite clearly he is innocent? the above scenario does not make Jeremy innocent.
The prisoner who told the story to Harrison viewed Jeremy as innocent of the murders. Such person saw Jeremy as killing her at request and her killing everyone else.
O'Brien didn't indicate what makes him think Jeremy is innocent in the interview. He was vague about claims of ballistic issues and "other" things. O'Brien seems to be unaware that the ballistic avenues Jeremy was pursuing were already rejected by the CCRC and thinking that Jeremy didn't submit all of them in his latest submission but rather saved some of the strongest for a future submission is odd to say the least.
My own sense is that O'Brien didn't scrutinize the evidence and claims and is simply being snowed.
-
No - The guy in PH'd book i anonymous and thinks Bamber is guilty. Michael O'Brien is also someone who was in prison with Bamber and they were friends - hence he believes Jeremy's side of things.
Oh I was under the misapprehension that the prisoner believed the story but that PH did not and viewed the letter as proof he was in fact involved in the murder only he lied to minimize his role.
-
The prisoner who told the story to Harrison viewed Jeremy as innocent of the murders. Such person saw Jeremy as killing her at request and her killing everyone else.
O'Brien didn't indicate what makes him think Jeremy is innocent in the interview. He was vague about claims of ballistic issues and "other" things. O'Brien seems to be unaware that the ballistic avenues Jeremy was pursuing were already rejected by the CCRC and thinking that Jeremy didn't submit all of them in his latest submission but rather saved some of the strongest for a future submission is odd to say the least.
My own sense is that O'Brien didn't scrutinize the evidence and claims and is simply being snowed.
No, that's not how it reads at all - the letter suggests that Jeremy orchestrated the killings and defo put him in the frame for killing the twins!!
-
The prisoner who told the story to Harrison viewed Jeremy as innocent of the murders. Such person saw Jeremy as killing her at request and her killing everyone else.
O'Brien didn't indicate what makes him think Jeremy is innocent in the interview. He was vague about claims of ballistic issues and "other" things. O'Brien seems to be unaware that the ballistic avenues Jeremy was pursuing were already rejected by the CCRC and thinking that Jeremy didn't submit all of them in his latest submission but rather saved some of the strongest for a future submission is odd to say the least.
My own sense is that O'Brien didn't scrutinize the evidence and claims and is simply being snowed.
Oh my mistake I thought he was there and took Sheilas clothes home to clean them and obviously hide them before the police got there - and did I get it wrong that Sheila asked him to shoot her or did she commit suicide?
And I thought O brien said he knew what the new evidence was - he wish he could reveal it but now is not the time?
-
Oh my mistake I thought he was there and took Sheilas clothes home to clean them and obviously hide them before the police got there - and did I get it wrong that Sheila asked him to shoot her or did she commit suicide?
And I thought O brien said he knew what the new evidence was - he wish he could reveal it but now is not the time?
You are right Jan, the exprisoner who wrote the letter said Jeremyvas with Sheila but he just loaded the rifle, shot Sheila when she begged him to and no comment on who shit the twins. He said he took Sheila's bloody clothes and left through the window, slamming it behind him.
-
You are right Jan, the exprisoner who wrote the letter said Jeremyvas with Sheila but he just loaded the rifle, shot Sheila when she begged him to and no comment on who shit the twins. He said he took Sheila's bloody clothes and left through the window, slamming it behind him.
OOOOOOPS!!!!! Freudian slip, Maggie? :o :o ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
this all sounds like harrsion bullshit i dont think any prisoner told him that.
-
this all sounds like harrsion bullshit i dont think any prisoner told him that.
Would you like to say a little more about why you think that, Nugs.
-
OOOOOOPS!!!!! Freudian slip, Maggie? :o :o ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Maggie no bad language on this forum not suitable for my delicate ears please amend ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Maggie no bad language on this forum not suitable for my delicate ears please amend ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
OOOOOOPS!!!!! Freudian slip, Maggie? :o :o ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
;D :D ;D ;D
-
I would say that PH's book is a very tongue-in-cheek job.
-
Would you like to say a little more about why you think that, Nugs.
well the idea jeremy and sheila did it together as this seems to imply sounds ridiculous to me.
even more ridiculous is the idea that after lying to everybody for years he would suddenly disclose this to another prisoner.
-
Shouldn't/wouldn't that be headline news now ? By way of a confession ?
-
well you would think so.
-
well the idea jeremy and sheila did it together as this seems to imply sounds ridiculous to me.
even more ridiculous is the idea that after lying to everybody for years he would suddenly disclose this to another prisoner.
Thanks for that, Nugs. It isn't an altogether shocking idea to me but we have to bear in mind that it MAY be something similar to what Jeremy told Julie about MM being the hit-man. He MAY have been fooling BUT he may just have been hit with an overwhelmin g desire to let someone know how clever HE believed he'd been.
-
and this prisoner has not chosen to tell anyone else other than paul harrison funny that.
-
Thanks for that, Nugs. It isn't an altogether shocking idea to me but we have to bear in mind that it MAY be something similar to what Jeremy told Julie about MM being the hit-man. He MAY have been fooling BUT he may just have been hit with an overwhelmin g desire to let someone know how clever HE believed he'd been.
If I was that ex-prisoner I'd be hurtling to the press with my hand out. Wouldn't you ?
Hey,guess what,blah blah blah.
-
yes i would of though that as well lookout.
-
and this prisoner has chosen to tell anyone else other than paul harrison funny that.
NO Nugs, THIS ex prisoner is innocent and told James Whale and the whole of Radio Essex land that he thinks Jeremy is innocent. The ex prisoner who wrote anonymously to Paul Harrison says that Jeremy confessed his guilt.
-
im talking about the amoumous prisoner.
i know who micheal o brien is i dont need to be told.
i do not belive this amous prisoner really exists.
-
NO Nugs, THIS ex prisoner is innocent and told James Whale and the whole of Radio Essex land that he thinks Jeremy is innocent. The ex prisoner who wrote anonymously to Paul Harrison says that Jeremy confessed his guilt.
Paul Harrison states a few times in the book that he believes Sheila and Jeremy did it together. :-\
-
im talking about the amoumous prisoner.
i know who micheal o brien is i dont need to be told.
i do not belive this amous prisoner really exists.
Well, as you believe Jeremy is innocent it makes sense for you to refute everything which suggests he's guilty.
-
thats got to be daftest theory i have ever heard why would they.
-
Well, as you believe Jeremy is innocent it makes sense for you to refute everything which suggests he's guilty.
i refute it becouse to me its obvios rubbish and its been cliamed by somone who i know doesnt resarch properly.
and made up a story about threatned when he couldent of been.
and ive allways been open to suggestions of guilt as my threads prove.
-
thats got to be daftest theory i have ever heard why would they.
Somebody did it so I suppose anything is possible :-\
-
i refute it becouse to me its obvios rubbish and its been cliamed by somone who i know doesnt resarch properly.
and made up a story about threatned when he couldent of been.
and ive allways been open to suggestions of guilt as my threads prove.
Perhaps you'd like to expand that a little, Nugs. It's a very strong accusation you're making there. Is it just your opinion or can you provide proof, both about the author's lack of research AND the story you say he made up.
-
its perfectly true one witch i can back have you heard of his other book jack the ripper mystory solved you can google or i can post the link.
-
its perfectly true one witch i can back have you heard of his other book jack the ripper mystory solved you can google or i can post the link.
Enlighten us. I am interested.
-
its perfectly true one witch i can back have you heard of his other book jack the ripper mystory solved you can google or i can post the link.
I agree with you about Jack the Ripper nugs, I remember it being advertised as having solved the mystery of who he was..... still don't know the answer to that.
-
Somebody did it so I suppose anything is possible :-\
but what would them both decide to kill there parents dont you think it sounds just a bit far fetched.
-
but what would them both decide to kill there parents dont you think it sounds just a bit far fetched.
No more far fetched than Sheila committing the murders and then a cast of hundreds stitching Bamber up - but you believe that one.
-
Enlighten us. I am interested.
ok mat be give me a few minutes and ill post the link
-
but what would them both decide to kill there parents dont you think it sounds just a bit far fetched.
Yes however if you accept that they were possibly both seriously damaged people because of their adoption and possibly later trauma from further abandonment such as being sent to boarding school etc. it doesn't seem any more improbable than Jeremy Bamber dashing across ploughed fields in the pitch black, climbing through windows etc. imo. Actually, I found the letter quite plausible and I don't know why because in theory it is crazy and doesn't even make sense.
-
here we are.
http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=6781
-
Yes however if you accept that they were possibly both seriously damaged people because of their adoption and possibly later trauma from further abandonment such as being sent to boarding school etc. it doesn't seem any more improbable than Jeremy Bamber dashing across ploughed fields in the pitch black, climbing through windows etc. imo. Actually, I found the letter quite plausible and I don't know why because in theory it is crazy.
I find it quite plausible that Jeremy told such to another prisoner. I don't find the story in the letter plausible though- the part about him taking away Sheila's evidence stained clothing in particular is not in the least bit credible.
-
If this is true about the Jack The Ripper book.... It's embaressing for PH...
"Yes, but Harrison researched the wrong Barnett. The book is largely ignored now."
I find it quite plausible that Jeremy told such to another prisoner. I don't find the story in the letter plausible though- the part about him taking away Sheila's evidence stained clothing in particular is not in the least bit credible.
Agreed. I don't believe what Jeremy said will be true, but I do believe he may have said it.
-
I find it quite plausible that Jeremy told such to another prisoner. I don't find the story in the letter plausible though- the part about him taking away Sheila's evidence stained clothing in particular is not in the least bit credible.
I agree with that but the letter writer may have mixed that part up, I do agree and noticed that myself when I first read it that it makes no sense to remove the clothes when leaving them there would have completely got him off the hook. I don't believe it's the whole truth but there may be something in it but chances are there isn't. Keeping an open mind :)
-
cell mate confessions are dubious at the best of times anomalous one are beyond even that,
-
I think there are several issues here.
A. Do we believe a letter was sent
B. Do we believe it's contents
C. Do we believe Jeremy made the confession
D Do we believe the author of the letter made up Jeremy's confession
E Do we think the whole thing is a publicity stunt
Apologies if this sounds like one of Adam's polls.
-
well the idea jeremy and sheila did it together as this seems to imply sounds ridiculous to me.
even more ridiculous is the idea that after lying to everybody for years he would suddenly disclose this to another prisoner.
But the idea that Jeremy is innocent and he was framed by EP, the relatives, Julie Mugford, the Sun Newspaper, the lab, the prosecution team, Julie's friends, his friends, the establishment, Babs Wilson ..... (please feel free to add to the list) makes perfect sense ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ::) ::)
-
But the idea that Jeremy is innocent and he was framed by EP, the relatives, Julie Mugford, the Sun Newspaper, the lab, the prosecution team, Julie's friends, his friends, the establishment, Babs Wilson ..... (please feel free to add to the list) makes perfect sense ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ::) ::)
well its one thats suported by a lot of experts in there field were as the other one is the teory of one auther allefedly backed an anoumous letter/
-
well its one thats suported by a lot of experts in there field were as the other one is the teory of one auther allefedly backed an anoumous letter/
Paid 'experts' can say anything they like though, the COA and the CCRC cut through their gaffs.
-
they got no reason to lie its not like there short of work.
-
Yes however if you accept that they were possibly both seriously damaged people because of their adoption and possibly later trauma from further abandonment such as being sent to boarding school etc. it doesn't seem any more improbable than Jeremy Bamber dashing across ploughed fields in the pitch black, climbing through windows etc. imo. Actually, I found the letter quite plausible and I don't know why because in theory it is crazy and doesn't even make sense.
Maggie what parts of the letter did you find plausible.?
-
doesnt anyone think its a bit funny that none of the other ever recive anomous letters.
-
they got no reason to lie its not like there short of work.
Didn't say they lie, but they are only giving their opinions. No guarantee that they are correct. They often have to rely on photographs because they were not there at the time.
doesnt anyone think its a bit funny that none of the other ever recive anomous letters.
With some of the people I've met just through this forum and the red forum when it comes to the Bamber case, I would not be shocked if PH recieved 1, 2 or 10 anonymous letters. ;D
-
well its one thats suported by a lot of experts in there field were as the other one is the teory of one auther allefedly backed an anoumous letter/
What experts?
-
doesnt anyone think its a bit funny that none of the other ever recive anomous letters.
How do you know they didn't?
-
well i think if they had recived such anoumous letter they might of mentioned it but appwerantly who ever gets sent these letters.
-
What experts?
I guess he means Sutherst... although I think his 'findings' left a lot to be desired. Same with the recent Arizona tests.
-
I guess he means Sutherst... although I think his 'findings' left a lot to be desired. Same with the recent Arizona tests.
But Suthest admitted his findings weren't conclusive or scientific. I haven't see any experts that have suggested the entire enquiry all lies and only Jeremy was telling the truth but if Nugs knows of one?? :-\
-
well i think if they had recived such anoumous letter they might of mentioned it but appwerantly who ever gets sent these letters.
Why would they mention it?
-
what another prisoner telling them of a confession of course they would mention it.
im sure they would mention anoumous death threats if they really got them as well.
-
But Suthest admitted his findings weren't conclusive or scientific. I haven't see any experts that have suggested the entire enquiry all lies and only Jeremy was telling the truth but if Nugs knows of one?? :-\
There aren't any. I know that, you know that. ;D
Unless I've missed something. Nuggs, which expert/s did you mean?
-
Maggie what parts of the letter did you find plausible.?
The fact they may have both done it. As I said I don't know why but I do find that more plausible than some other theories.
-
what another prisoner telling them of a confession of course they would mention it.
im sure they would mention anoumous death threats if they really got them as well.
The explanation of the letter explains why the prisoner wrote to PH. It comes down to who you want to believe but I find it odd that you believe everyone (and his dog) lied to frame and innocent JB but you can't believe that prisoners talk to each other. Odd!
-
There aren't any. I know that, you know that. ;D
Unless I've missed something. Nuggs, which expert/s did you mean?
Really? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;) 8)
-
Prisoners do talk to each other about past crimes or whatever they have been up to before going to jail. It's about survival in prison people live on their wits, how many times have you heard about cell mates confessing to other cell mates and then police getting involved, at one time they used to put prisoners in cells with other prisoners hoping to get confessions? I would not be surprised if this is not still carried on? Reasons prisoners confess They might figure that since they're both criminals, the guy won't snitch on him, or that even if he does, his testimony will be regarded as unreliable. Sometimes people feel like they want to tell their stories to someone, and in that situation there's no one else to confide in besides other prisoners. Also, sometimes people get to know their celly pretty well, and they may think that the guy is trustworthy. Also, if the celly does snitch, he'll be in violation of the anti-snitching convict code.
Confessors might not realize that there are plenty of people in jails and prisons who are yearning for any opportunity to get some information they can trade to the government for a lighter sentence, and the government is often happy to make that kind of deal, and to protect the snitches from retaliation. They also might not realize that some cellies will have an attitude of, "I'm going to go to prison for my crime, so you should too." If their celly treats them cordially, they might overestimate the strength of the bond of friendship between them.
-
The fact they may have both done it. As I said I don't know why but I do find that more plausible than some other theories.
I agree that there might have been some passive involvement from Sheila - but I think Jeremy did the shooting.
-
The fact they may have both done it. As I said I don't know why but I do find that more plausible than some other theories.
I agree that there might have been some passive involvement from Sheila - but I think Jeremy did the shooting.
I find the idea of both of them being involved, the worst theory I have heard. ;D And I've heard a few. It just seems madness to me.
-
I find the idea of both of them being involved, the worst theory I have heard. ;D And I've heard a few. It just seems madness to me.
They were both in the house so it's possible but if the letter is genuine, what is more important to me, is that Jeremy was willing to discuss his involvement and innocent people wouldn't do that.
-
The fact they may have both done it. As I said I don't know why but I do find that more plausible than some other theories.
Same here Maggie, always had the feeling that this might be the case. Always felt Jeremy on his own no, Sheila on her own no, together yes? Just don't feel they were both cut out on their own to do it, Jeremy being the instigator.
-
They were both in the house so it's possible but if the letter is genuine, what is more important to me, is that Jeremy was willing to discuss his involvement and innocent people wouldn't do that.
Couldn't agree more.
-
Prisoners do talk to each other about past crimes or whatever they have been up to before going to jail. It's about survival in prison people live on their wits, how many times have you heard about cell mates confessing to other cell mates and then police getting involved, at one time they used to put prisoners in cells with other prisoners hoping to get confessions? I would not be surprised if this is not still carried on? Reasons prisoners confess They might figure that since they're both criminals, the guy won't snitch on him, or that even if he does, his testimony will be regarded as unreliable. Sometimes people feel like they want to tell their stories to someone, and in that situation there's no one else to confide in besides other prisoners. Also, sometimes people get to know their celly pretty well, and they may think that the guy is trustworthy. Also, if the celly does snitch, he'll be in violation of the anti-snitching convict code.
Confessors might not realize that there are plenty of people in jails and prisons who are yearning for any opportunity to get some information they can trade to the government for a lighter sentence, and the government is often happy to make that kind of deal, and to protect the snitches from retaliation. They also might not realize that some cellies will have an attitude of, "I'm going to go to prison for my crime, so you should too." If their celly treats them cordially, they might overestimate the strength of the bond of friendship between them.
Excellent post Justice.
-
Same here Maggie, always had the feeling that this might be the case. Always felt Jeremy on his own no, Sheila on her own no, together yes? Just don't feel they were both cut out on their own to do it, Jeremy being the instigator.
what would be the motive for both of them doing it.
-
They were both in the house so it's possible but if the letter is genuine, what is more important to me, is that Jeremy was willing to discuss his involvement and innocent people wouldn't do that.
Caroline
well said that is so true an innocent man would not discuss his involvement.
-
what would be the motive for both of them doing it.
Freedom!
-
what would be the motive for both of them doing it.
Jeremy's motive is obvious, he wants the lot? Sometimes one doesn't need a motive one can easily be manipulated into committing crime esp when one's mind is unbalanced, Sheila might not have realised it was going to go as far as it did or just got carried away in what was happening who knows Nugs we will never know I am afraid?
-
They were both in the house so it's possible but if the letter is genuine, what is more important to me, is that Jeremy was willing to discuss his involvement and innocent people wouldn't do that.
Very well said Caroline.
-
Jeremy's motive is obvious, he wants the lot? Sometimes one doesn't need a motive one can easily be manipulated into committing crime esp when one's mind is unbalanced, Sheila might not have realised it was going to go as far as it did or just got carried away in what was happening who knows Nugs we will never know I am afraid?
how likely is it that he would want sheila as an acomplice she couldent be relyid upon.
-
Caroline
well said that is so true an innocent man would not discuss his involvement.
It was interesting, if it's true that he said in the letter that JB said he left through the window and locked it behind him.
-
how likely is it that he would want sheila as an acomplice she couldent be relyid upon.
Not only could that backfire by her telling people in advance but worse would he really trust her with a gun and expect her to only shoot everyone else and not him as well?
-
how likely is it that he would want sheila as an acomplice she couldent be relyid upon.
What makes you think she was not reliable? You think she did it alone doesn't that make her reliable? What if he pulled her in on the final day when they chatted in the field, he could have been training her mind up to this point? Again I am no expert I have always had a feeling that their were two and it could have been Sheila? Now you can throw lots of questions to me and I or anyone on here cannot be 100 per cent certain and that is what makes this case so interesting. On the plus side Nugs I have talked to a pyschiatrist who worked at full Sutton and believe me they do talk? Their was another person who worked at full Sutton and I will not name the role they did and funnily enough they both said the same things as one another told me? But again this is only my hearsay
-
What makes you think she was not reliable? You think she did it alone doesn't that make her reliable? What if he pulled her in on the final day when they chatted in the field, he could have been training her mind up to this point? Again I am no expert I have always had a feeling that their were two and it could have been Sheila? Now you can throw lots of questions to me and I or anyone on here cannot be 100 per cent certain and that is what makes this case so interesting.
I agree but I think her role (if she had one) would have been passive, but having her onside means one less person to control.
-
What makes you think she was not reliable? You think she did it alone doesn't that make her reliable? What if he pulled her in on the final day when they chatted in the field, he could have been training her mind up to this point? Again I am no expert I have always had a feeling that their were two and it could have been Sheila? Now you can throw lots of questions to me and I or anyone on here cannot be 100 per cent certain and that is what makes this case so interesting. On the plus side Nugs I have talked to a pyschiatrist who worked at full Sutton and believe me they do talk? Their was another person who worked at full Sutton and I will not name the role they did and funnily enough they both said the same things as one another told me? But again this is only my hearsay
how could her to go along with it not change her mind and not tell anybody.
what are the chances of them both wanting to kill there parents unless theres somthing about there parents we dont know about its higly unlikely.
-
I agree but I think her role (if she had one) would have been passive, but having her onside means one less person to control.
Could not agree more Caroline, also it would give him a feeling of less guilt? He could blame Sheila and this would help him later on in life to deal with it in his mind?
-
how could her to go along with it not change her mind and not tell anybody.
what are the chances of them both wanting to kill there parents unless theres somthing about there parents we dont know about its higly unlikely.
There is lots about all of them that we don't know about.
-
I agree but I think her role (if she had one) would have been passive, but having her onside means one less person to control.
It does answer the question of what she was doing while Jeremy was killing everyone.
-
Could not agree more Caroline, also it would give him a feeling of less guilt? He could blame Sheila and this would help him later on in life to deal with it in his mind?
That too - although I don't think Jeremy has any guilt. If he did tell an imate this story, he seem to be playing games.
-
It does answer the question of what she was doing while Jeremy was killing everyone.
And far more likely that having to be carried to the main bedroom while sleeping.
-
And far more likely that having to be carried to the main bedroom while sleeping.
Exactly, it could answer the Sheila conundrum in part at least.
-
so does know this plot involves her being bumped off or not.
-
how could her to go along with it not change her mind and not tell anybody.
what are the chances of them both wanting to kill there parents unless theres somthing about there parents we dont know about its higly unlikely.
I possibly cannot answer that Nugs? But how many times have you seen or been involved in as a child where you are dragged into something you don't want to be in? Someone will always drag somebody else into their problems and then blame them? How many times have you said I wish I never got involved in that it was nothing to do with me? I know this is a different scale but it happens.
-
so does know this plot involves her being bumped off or not.
I am surprised you asked that given we all know the plot. It's like asking is the ship sinks in the movie version of Titanic ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
but this plan involves her ethere agreaing to kill herself or agreaing to be killed.
-
That too - although I don't think Jeremy has any guilt. If he did tell an imate this story, he seem to be playing games.
I think if it was made up or revenge Caroline the prisoner would have mentioned the twins? Am I right in saying the twins were not mentioned?
-
but this plan involves her ethere agreaing to kill herself or agreaing to be killed.
Or being double crossed.
-
I think if it was made up or revenge Caroline the prisoner would have mentioned the twins? Am I right in saying the twins were not mentioned?
No, he said Jeremy was VERY reluctant to talk about the twins and didn't mention who shot them.
-
No, he said Jeremy was VERY reluctant to talk about the twins and didn't mention who shot them.
So in theory for revenge on Jeremy or to claim more publicity for himself he could have said Jeremy also confessed that he killed the twins?
-
so does know this plot involves her being bumped off or not.
According to the letter, Jeremy loaded the rifle and Sheila shot June and Nevill, attacking Nevill in the kitchen when he was badly wounded, no mention of who killed the twins just that Sheila wanted to be with them and begged Jeremy to shoot her, which he did. So he only admitted to shooting Sheila and blamed her for shooting June and Neville.
-
so this anomous letter writer is it that asked harrsion not to reveal his identity or did he not tell harrision who he was.
-
So in theory for revenge on Jeremy or to claim more publicity for himself he could have said Jeremy also confessed that he killed the twins?
Exactly!
-
so this anomous letter writer is it that asked harrsion not to reveal his identity or did he not tell harrision who he was.
I didn't tell PH who he is or if he did - PH isn't saying.
-
so ph might not have a clue who this person or weather they are what they cliam to be.
-
so ph might not have a clue who this person or weather they are what they cliam to be.
Someone who sent the letter would have to know he was writing a book, they would have to know it as about Bamber, they would have to have access to his address and they would have to know about the case. People here write to Jeremy - they could always ask him about the scenario?
-
well he anounced to everyone he was writing a book about Jeremy bamber the first one shouldent of been hard to work out.
and its not like its hard to find information on the case.
-
well he anounced to everyone he was writing a book about Jeremy bamber the first one shouldent of been hard to work out.
and its not like its hard to find information on the case.
So just another one to add to the ever growing long list of liars? ???
-
But the idea that Jeremy is innocent and he was framed by EP, the relatives, Julie Mugford, the Sun Newspaper, the lab, the prosecution team, Julie's friends, his friends, the establishment, Babs Wilson ..... (please feel free to add to the list) makes perfect sense ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ::) ::)
Don't forget the writer of the anonymous letter!!! To summerize, what I learned yesterday was that not only does Nugs believe all the above to be true but also that there are certain "experts" who concur -however we're not told who are these experts.
It was with some interest that I learned from Nugs that prisoners don't talk to each other but what interested me more was Lookout's emphatic assertion that prisoners don't have friends in other prisoners!!!!!!!!!!! Might this be to put a pure. spotless and monk-like and unblemished Jeremy aside from prison riff raff? I CANNOT imagine what life would be like OUT of any confined space, without friends -nor do I care to- but I imagine that 30yrs behind bars and friendless would be intolerable, MORE so if one had needed to be surrounded by people on the outside, OR have an audience, which it seems Jeremy did.
-
well he anounced to everyone he was writing a book about Jeremy bamber the first one shouldent of been hard to work out.
and its not like its hard to find information on the case.
Nugs, I'm beginning to wonder if you keep adding to the list of those you consider to be involved in, what is fast becoming the greatest conspiracy of all time, bar none as a way of keeping it alive. Feel free to keep on adding. The more that get added to the list, the more improbable it becomes because the same question can be applied to the cast of thousands as could be applied to a few. The question is WHY
-
I agree but I think her role (if she had one) would have been passive, but having her onside means one less person to control.
If ifs & ands were pots and pans they'd be no need for tinkers' hands.
-
Prisoners do talk to each other about past crimes or whatever they have been up to before going to jail. It's about survival in prison people live on their wits, how many times have you heard about cell mates confessing to other cell mates and then police getting involved, at one time they used to put prisoners in cells with other prisoners hoping to get confessions? I would not be surprised if this is not still carried on? Reasons prisoners confess They might figure that since they're both criminals, the guy won't snitch on him, or that even if he does, his testimony will be regarded as unreliable. Sometimes people feel like they want to tell their stories to someone, and in that situation there's no one else to confide in besides other prisoners. Also, sometimes people get to know their celly pretty well, and they may think that the guy is trustworthy. Also, if the celly does snitch, he'll be in violation of the anti-snitching convict code.
Confessors might not realize that there are plenty of people in jails and prisons who are yearning for any opportunity to get some information they can trade to the government for a lighter sentence, and the government is often happy to make that kind of deal, and to protect the snitches from retaliation. They also might not realize that some cellies will have an attitude of, "I'm going to go to prison for my crime, so you should too." If their celly treats them cordially, they might overestimate the strength of the bond of friendship between them.
Brilliant post, Justice.
-
I agree that there might have been some passive involvement from Sheila - but I think Jeremy did the shooting.
Caroline
I agree with you I think Jeremy did the shooting he would originally have roped Sheila in so as she could let him in and keep her quiet her thinking they had a suicide pact or the like I have always thought Sheila was brainwashed by him but did not shoot anyone this explains why she was so clean and he had a need to say he had taken her soiled clothes home to destroy it sounds like the story he told his cell mate was told to fit the crime scene and it is strange no mention of the twins. I suppose with such a complex person has JB it is difficult to figure his action out.
-
If ifs & ands were pots and pans they'd be no need for tinkers' hands.
If ifs and buts were fruits and nuts them we'd all have a Merry Christmas -The forum is made up of them - usually a discussion is!
-
If ifs and buts were fruits and nuts them we'd all have a Merry Christmas -The forum is made up of them - usually a discussion is!
Speak for yourself.
-
If ifs and buts were fruits and nuts them we'd all have a Merry Christmas -The forum is made up of them - usually a discussion is!
Never heard that before ;D ;D I like it ;D
-
Speak for yourself.
I do speak for myself :P :P :P :P ::)
-
Never heard that before ;D ;D I like it ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D
-
If ifs and buts were fruits and nuts them we'd all have a Merry Christmas -The forum is made up of them - usually a discussion is!
Forum is made up of ifs and buts? Or fruits and nuts? ;D
-
Forum is made up of ifs and buts? Or fruits and nuts? ;D
Possibly more the latter? ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
According to the letter, Jeremy loaded the rifle and Sheila shot June and Nevill, attacking Nevill in the kitchen when he was badly wounded, no mention of who killed the twins just that Sheila wanted to be with them and begged Jeremy to shoot her, which he did. So he only admitted to shooting Sheila and blamed her for shooting June and Neville.
So Sheila was capable of using the rifle and beating her father (without breaking her nails ::))- and what was the story for the lack of prints on the rifle .and how did the silencer get in the cupboard and why use it?
-
So Sheila was capable of using the rifle and beating her father (without breaking her nails ::))- and what was the story for the lack of prints on the rifle .and how did the silencer get in the cupboard and why use it?
This is a story that Jeremy told someone else - he obviously has the answers if someone wants to ask him?
-
So Sheila was capable of using the rifle and beating her father (without breaking her nails ::))- and what was the story for the lack of prints on the rifle .and how did the silencer get in the cupboard and why use it?
Aside from using the moderator to keep the boys from waking up, the moderator was always on the weapon so would have been found that way. It would only be removed before the murders if the killer saw a reason to do so but there was no reason to do so. After there was a reason to remove it- to be able to plant the gun on Sheila to make it look like she killed herself. Of course in that case Jeremy also would have left her clothing behind to further demonstrate she killed everyone else.
-
https://youtu.be/ZCkUEC3wHMY
This is Trudie Benjamin. Does she post at all on Red or Blue ?
She should as both forums are mainly guilters. Not that she has got much to say. She was just saying new photographs and variations in police logs have appeared since the 2012 CCRC application. Which is said after each rejection.
How did new logs and photos come to light ? I thought documents were being withheld. I wish supporters would make their minds up.
-
This is a story that Jeremy told someone else - he obviously has the answers if someone wants to ask him?
no its a story tha somone else who wont say who are cliams he told him.
-
no its a story tha somone else who wont say who are cliams he told him.
ask him!
-
why i already know the answer hes going to give.
hes not going to say the letters true is he.
-
why i already know the answer hes going to give.
No you don't - scared to ask?
-
why dont you ask you cliam your writing to him.
-
https://youtu.be/ZCkUEC3wHMY
This is Trudie Benjamin. Does she post at all on Red or Blue ?
She should as both forums are mainly guilters. Not that she has got much to say. She was just saying new photographs and variations in police logs have appeared since the 2012 CCRC application. Which is said after each rejection.
How did new logs and photos come to light ? I thought documents were being withheld. I wish supporters would make their minds up.
I've heard worse campaigners. http://www.jeremybambertestimony.co.uk/tru
-
why dont you ask you cliam your writing to him.
I think you're mistaking Caroline for Lookout :o :o :o It's she who is writing to Jeremy.
-
why dont you ask you cliam your writing to him.
You're the one making accusations about people making stuff up, but if you're not interested in finding out the truth - that's up to you. I haven't written to Jeremy for quite some time.
-
You're the one making accusations about people making stuff up, but if you're not interested in finding out the truth - that's up to you. I haven't written to Jeremy for quite some time.
im very interested in finding out the truth but im not going to get it be asking him.
im sorry i just not convinced that an anmous letter amounts to proof of anything.
-
im very interested in finding out the truth but im not going to get it be asking him.
im sorry i just not convinced that an anmous letter amounts to proof of anything.
Why not? You can go around in cricles or yu can get the low down straight from the horses mouth? Why wouldn't you want to ask him?
-
im very interested in finding out the truth but im not going to get it be asking him.
im sorry i just not convinced that an anmous letter amounts to proof of anything.
Well, who DO you think you'll get it from? WhatEVER anyone else says is only going to be their own opinion.
-
Well, who DO you think you'll get it from? WhatEVER anyone else says is only going to be their own opinion.
When it comes down to it, it seems people don't really want to know the truth. Some people apparently write to him and don't ask about the case :o :o :o :o. Why else would you want to write to him??????
-
Why not? You can go around in cricles or yu can get the low down straight from the horses mouth? Why wouldn't you want to ask him?
becouse if hes a guilty hes hardly like to tell the truth is he so whats the point.
if hes innocent hell will be just as clueless about it as everybody else.
if he denied it how would i know he was telling the truth but then agian how would he wasnt.
-
https://youtu.be/ZCkUEC3wHMY
This is Trudie Benjamin. Does she post at all on Red or Blue ?
She should as both forums are mainly guilters. Not that she has got much to say. She was just saying new photographs and variations in police logs have appeared since the 2012 CCRC application. Which is said after each rejection.
How did new logs and photos come to light ? I thought documents were being withheld. I wish supporters would make their minds up.
Adam do you really think that what has happened over the past few months is going to be spattered all over a forum? Some people if they have been given information are quite capable of keeping it confidential if asked . And there may be good reasons for doing so.
-
becouse if hes a guilty hes hardly like to tell the truth is he so whats the point.
if hes innocent hell will be just as clueless about it as everybody else.
if he denied it how would i know he was telling the truth but then agian how would he wasnt.
So you don't trust his answer yet you think he's innocent?
-
When it comes down to it, it seems people don't really want to know the truth. Some people apparently write to him and don't ask about the case :o :o :o :o. Why else would you want to write to him??????
Well, I s'pose one could tell him to keep his pecker up? Hmm????
-
becouse if hes a guilty hes hardly like to tell the truth is he so whats the point.
if hes innocent hell will be just as clueless about it as everybody else.
if he denied it how would i know he was telling the truth but then agian how would he wasnt.
Sounds like you have a few trust issues there, Nugs :D
-
do you think its likely after mainting his innocene for 30 years to everybody he would sudenly admit guilt to me.
-
do you think its likely after mainting his innocene for 30 years to everybody he would sudenly admit guilt to me.
Ha ha! So you think he's guilty then? ;)
-
i allways said i wasnt sure.
-
i allways said i wasnt sure.
But you always argue in favour of him?
-
cell mate confessions are dubious at the best of times anomalous one are beyond even that,
Read up about Richard Causley, he was convicted of his wife's murder when 3 prisoners grassed him up because he had bragged to them about killing his wife? He told each cell mate how he had done it but gave each of them a different version? He was the first person to be convicted without a body being found I think. He has put his daughter and grandson through hell by appealing and not revealing where the body is, and the latest I read he has confessed to doing it to get parole then retracted? It has been on sky as well Suburban murders if anyone wants to watch it?
-
we dont even know this person whoever they are was a cell mate of bambers.
-
we dont even know this person whoever was a cell mate of bambers.
I don't know them three but they grassed him up and the police and jury believed them even without a body or forensic evidence?
-
have you heard of the case of micheal stone in prison becouse of an alleged cellmate confession dispite eye witness forensic and cercanstal evedence pointing to somone else.
-
But you always argue in favour of him?
I am amazed how many of those that argue in favour of Bamber week, month and year in.....are actually on the fence. ::) ;D
-
I am amazed how many of those that argue in favour of Bamber week, month and year in.....are actually on the fence. ::) ;D
The point is: is he being rehabilitated wherever they have moved him to,is he worthy of being rehabilitated and should he be given preferential treatment to any other prisoner? There are also Colin's wishes to bear in mind that he should never be released.
-
But you always argue in favour of him?
would you rather it was just an echo chamber if people saying he was guilty.
-
The point is: is he being rehabilitated wherever they have moved him to,is he worthy of being rehabilitated and should he be given preferential treatment to any other prisoner? There are also Colin's wishes to bear in mind that he should never be released.
How does one rehabilitate a person who doesn't believe they're in need of it? In theory everyone is worthy. I see no reason for him to be given preferential treatment but I suspect there is that about him which sets him apart from most others.
-
yove lost me here a bit steve.
-
would you rather it was just an echo chamber if people saying he was guilty.
Don't care one way or the other to be honest.
-
yove lost me here a bit steve.
We were talking about people sitting on the fence,maybe not wishing to condemn Jeremy Bamber outright but certainly not convinced of his innocence. This is presumably a general problem with lifers as 50 years ago they would have been hanged and thereby forgotten.
Some judicial systems such as Saudi Arabia give the surviving relatives a say in the sentence of the accused and I am mindful that Colin has stated categorically that Jeremy should never be released.
-
if hes guilty he should never be released i agrea with that.
i think most people would.
-
if hes guilty he should never be released i agrea with that.
i think most people would.
Maybe it was insensitive of me saying Jeremy should be sent to Norway,a place the twins went on holiday.
-
The point is: is he being rehabilitated wherever they have moved him to,is he worthy of being rehabilitated and should he be given preferential treatment to any other prisoner? There are also Colin's wishes to bear in mind that he should never be released.
Serving a life without parole prison sentence starting at age 25. Jeremy could serve the longest ever prison sentence in UK history.
-
Serving a life without parole prison sentence starting at age 25. Jeremy could serve the longest ever prison sentence in UK history.
Warranted too. Zero remorse & constant disregard for any of his victims legacies or the members of the family left behind.
-
Warranted too. Zero remorse & constant disregard for any of his victims legacies or the members of the family left behind.
Assuming guilt
It depends on ideology of the Justice system. Counties like Norway, Denmark and Sweden they consider all criminals victims of circumstance and a product of their upbringing. In the USA they consider you 100% responcable and its the other way round they treat convicts like animals. The USA has the highest prison rate in the developed world so I wont follow their approach.
-
We were talking about people sitting on the fence,maybe not wishing to condemn Jeremy Bamber outright but certainly not convinced of his innocence. This is presumably a general problem with lifers as 50 years ago they would have been hanged and thereby forgotten.
Some judicial systems such as Saudi Arabia give the surviving relatives a say in the sentence of the accused and I am mindful that Colin has stated categorically that Jeremy should never be released.
Whens the last time colin ever mentioned anything to the public? does he still get letters from Jeremy?
-
Whens the last time colin ever mentioned anything to the public? does he still get letters from Jeremy?
As part of her research, in July 2013 Carol Ann Lee contacted Colin Caffell, Sheila’s former husband and the father of her twins. It came shortly after the European Court of Human Rights ruled against the ‘whole life’ sentence imposed on Bamber and two others. Here is his moving reply...
‘I have remained silent through many years of Jeremy Bamber’s perennial intrusions into our lives because I have been endeavouring to create a normal life for my new family who have nothing to do with my tragic past.
‘Despite my best endeavours to shield them, however, they have had to live under its shadow. The new ruling by the European Court of Human Rights, against the setting of “whole life tariffs” as “inhumane”, not only potentially places the lives of myself, my family and the families of all those who fought for Jeremy’s conviction in very real danger (and the public in general in the case of other dangerous “whole lifers” who are also seeking parole) but undermines our democracy and strikes at the very heart of what is globally recognised as one of the finest and fairest justice systems in the world.
‘It is perhaps a blessing for my family that, despite a fair trial in 1986 and a later appeal before three judges who determined that new evidence made Bamber’s original conviction “even safer”, he has refused to admit his guilt and therefore does not meet the Strasbourg court’s criteria of “progressing towards rehabilitation”.
‘Bamber has proved himself an extremely dangerous and devious man who will clearly remain that way, having shown no sign of remorse or contrition for murdering five members of his family for financial gain. That is “inhumane”. Any “depression and despair” he has said that he feels may be the beginning of him coming to terms with the fact that he has lost his spurious battle with justice; something most “lifers” begin to accept much earlier on in their sentences. It is not inhumane to have to face that – they need to – but it is inhumane to make victims and their families live a life sentence of uncertainty. The victims’ families have to truly face overwhelming loss, depression and despair.
‘It is also inhumane that our daughter and her friends, at the age of 11, Googled her name only to be confronted with Bamber’s website that included photographs of bullet wounds to my former wife’s neck. My daughter would understandably like to change her name.’
-
would you rather it was just an echo chamber if people saying he was guilty.
I agree - when most posters don't seem to want to look at both sides of any scenario then why should the doubters - I gave up a long time ago because people seem to have forgotten what discussion is.
Some people especially ask questions but have absolutely no intention of actually considering the answers.
-
I agree - when most posters don't seem to want to look at both sides of any scenario then why should the doubters - I gave up a long time ago because people seem to have forgotten what discussion is.
Some people especially ask questions but have absolutely no intention of actually considering the answers.
I have looked at both sides - in GREAT detail - have you?
-
I agree - when most posters don't seem to want to look at both sides of any scenario then why should the doubters - I gave up a long time ago because people seem to have forgotten what discussion is.
Some people especially ask questions but have absolutely no intention of actually considering the answers.
We have looked at both sides and the claims of Jeremy supporters fail miserably. It is Jeremy supporters who look at things very one sided including constantly ignoring the actual facts of the case. The Bamber Campaign site is full of untruths and when such are stripped away there is nothing left.
After looking at both sides what is apparent is that Jeremy supporters have no evidence to establish he is innocent but refuse to face he is guilty and take a leap of faith. Such supporters make many allegations that they can't prove that if true would render him innocent. Unsupported allegations though have no ability to undermine his conviction in any way.
-
I agree - when most posters don't seem to want to look at both sides of any scenario then why should the doubters - I gave up a long time ago because people seem to have forgotten what discussion is.
Some people especially ask questions but have absolutely no intention of actually considering the answers.
Jan I don't agree with you, a lot of posters past and present all who thought Bamber innocent have changed their mind, to say it has not been looked at from both sides is unfair. I personally think looking at things from both sides helps to form any judgement. I have been on this forum for nearly 5 years I think now and seen numerous posters change stance from innocent to guilty but I don't know of many if any who have changed from guilty to innocent? The forum was always full of innocent posters and the posters of guilty were in a minority for long periods, but what I have noticed it has changed and this says a lot to me. I think people changing their mind is very good, it's a it like being on the jury first you would listen to the prosecution and be swayed by them, then it would be the defence to put their case forward and then it's for you to way up both sides of the evidence and make a balanced view looking at the evidence provided and also both sides of the argument.
-
I agree - when most posters don't seem to want to look at both sides of any scenario then why should the doubters - I gave up a long time ago because people seem to have forgotten what discussion is.
Some people especially ask questions but have absolutely no intention of actually considering the answers.
Some MIGHT, but in general, I feel that's a sweeping and unfair assessment. MANY of us who changed side certainly didn't do so lightly. Personally, even after much soul searching and weighing up of information I found the experience, because what I was feeling shocked me, somewhat traumatic.
-
We have looked at both sides and the claims of Jeremy supporters fail miserably. It is Jeremy supporters who look at things very one sided including constantly ignoring the actual facts of the case. The Bamber Campaign site is full of untruths and when such are stripped away there is nothing left.
After looking at both sides what is apparent is that Jeremy supporters have no evidence to establish he is innocent but refuse to face he is guilty and take a leap of faith. Such supporters make many allegations that they can't prove that if true would render him innocent. Unsupported allegations though have no ability to undermine his conviction in any way.
It is surprising that with the amount of publicity Bamber has generated for himself over the last 30 years, he has so few supporters.
This forum has been up for years. It is available to most of the 7 billion population. But there are only about five regular supporters who post. Most on here are guilters after the forum was set up at first as a platform to support Bamber.
Apparently he has other supporters. But none post on here. Jackie Preece did post for a bit, before disappearing. Probably because she knew her arguments were being shot down.
All very creepy.
-
maybe becouse they have better things to do than post on forums all day.
-
Jan I don't agree with you, a lot of posters past and present all who thought Bamber innocent have changed their mind, to say it has not been looked at from both sides is unfair. I personally think looking at things from both sides helps to form any judgement. I have been on this forum for nearly 5 years I think now and seen numerous posters change stance from innocent to guilty but I don't know of many if any who have changed from guilty to innocent? The forum was always full of innocent posters and the posters of guilty were in a minority for long periods, but what I have noticed it has changed and this says a lot to me. I think people changing their mind is very good, it's a it like being on the jury first you would listen to the prosecution and be swayed by them, then it would be the defence to put their case forward and then it's for you to way up both sides of the evidence and make a balanced view looking at the evidence provided and also both sides of the argument.
To be fair Justice I think YOU do look at both sides in your posts - for a while I was not quite sure which side you were on :)
But I think there is a niggling doubt in some guilters otherwise why post ? He is in jail so where he should be. Like I said before if I was clear in my mind that he was guilty I would be off the forum immediately.
-
I have looked at both sides - in GREAT detail - have you?
:o No Caroline of course I bow to your greater knowledge.
-
To be fair Justice I think YOU do look at both sides in your posts - for a while I was not quite sure which side you were on :)
But I think there is a niggling doubt in some guilters otherwise why post ? He is in jail so where he should be. Like I said before if I was clear in my mind that he was guilty I would be off the forum immediately.
Susan, April and Caroline still post after changing stance. Why ? Because they find the case interesting to discuss.
Supporters have often asked why do guilters post. Claiming they must have some doubt. The answer is quite simply. It's a discussion forum.
-
Susan, April and Caroline still post after changing stance. Why ? Because they find the case interesting to discuss.
Supporters have often asked why do guilters post. Claiming they must have some doubt. The answer is quite simply. It's a discussion forum.
But why are you interested in a case which has been concluded in your mind? the only interest to you could be why a man who is guilty would continue to protest his innocence ? what other possible interest could there be ?
Oh and don't say thread created . Its boring
-
But why are you interested in a case which has been concluded in your mind? the only interest to you could be why a man who is guilty would continue to protest his innocence ? what other possible interest could there be ?
Oh and don't say thread created . Its boring
The same reasons there are books, videos, newspaper articles and phone in's. It's an interesting case, whether a guilter or supporter.
You posting you're support on here is not assisting Bamber. So is even more pointless.
-
The same reasons there are books, videos, newspaper articles and phone in's. It's an interesting case, whether a guilter or supporter.
You posting you're support on here is not assisting Bamber. So is even more pointless.
How do you know what I have done behind the scenes to help the case?
You are not the oracle you know ;)
-
How do you know what I have done behind the scenes to help the case?
You are not the oracle you know ;)
Are you Trudi Benjamin ?
-
Are you Trudi Benjamin ?
Nope.
-
Nope.
What have you done then ? Lookout, Caroline and Jackie have said what they have done.
If you say you are going to kept that private, then I assume you have done nothing. Apart from be in denial on here.
-
What have you done then ? Lookout, Caroline and Jackie have said what they have done.
If you say you are going to kept that private, then I assume you have done nothing. Apart from be in denial on here.
Adam it is evident what Jan has done she has posted some great posts that make sense and makes me think deeply about what she has said.
-
Adam it is evident what Jan has done she has posted some great posts that make sense and makes me think deeply about what she has said.
She has hinted she is working behind the scenes for Jeremy.
-
She has hinted she is working behind the scenes for Jeremy.
:) if that's how you want to take my post feel free. :)
-
She has hinted she is working behind the scenes for Jeremy.
Adam I apologise I did not know Jan was working behind the scenes for Jeremy.
-
Adam I apologise I did not know Jan was working behind the scenes for Jeremy.
That's alright. Neither did I.
-
But why are you interested in a case which has been concluded in your mind? the only interest to you could be why a man who is guilty would continue to protest his innocence ? what other possible interest could there be ?
Oh and don't say thread created . Its boring
I can answer this, I got roped into thinking he was innocent because of all the conspiracy theories, which on the surface may seem quite plausible - most of these have been blown apart but from time to time, people try and resurrect them or make up new ones. I think it's only fair that when this happens, there are people willing and able to challenge them.
-
But why are you interested in a case which has been concluded in your mind? the only interest to you could be why a man who is guilty would continue to protest his innocence ? what other possible interest could there be ?
Oh and don't say thread created . Its boring
Oi!!! Don't you start this too. ;D Starting to sound like xxxxx and that isn't good!!
It's an interesting case to me because.
He still claims innocence because he has nowhere else to go. The courts and CCRC heavily reject his poor applications - yet people still support him. I really struggle to understand why.
I think it's easy to throw the "why do you care" statement at 'guilters' but I find it just as confusing why supporters care & what the heck it can be that means they will throw what amounts to not much more than blind faith behind Bamber because there is absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing. All that there is are a few discrepancies in police statements but the truth is that if you were to look at most cases the same would be true.
I think the counter question to yours would be - why is it that SOME supporters seem to support many other MOJ's too? It's not just Bamber they support but others - and why do some supporters seem to have previous trust issues with establishments and the police. I am not including you in this, Jan as I don't think you follow other 'MOJs' but some people that have trust issues and past issues with the police are more inclined to support MOJ's online it seems.
-
Oi!!! Don't you start this too. ;D Starting to sound like xxxxx and that isn't good!!
It's an interesting case to me because.
He still claims innocence because he has nowhere else to go. The courts and CCRC heavily reject his poor applications - yet people still support him. I really struggle to understand why.
I think it's easy to throw the "why do you care" statement at 'guilters' but I find it just as confusing why supporters care & what the heck it can be that means they will throw what amounts to not much more than blind faith behind Bamber because there is absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing. All that there is are a few discrepancies in police statements but the truth is that if you were to look at most cases the same would be true.
I think the counter question to yours would be - why is it that SOME supporters seem to support many other MOJ's too? It's not just Bamber they support but others - and why do some supporters seem to have previous trust issues with establishments and the police. I am not including you in this, Jan as I don't think you follow other 'MOJs' but some people that have trust issues and past issues with the police are more inclined to support MOJ's online it seems.
I agree with you on that one Mat - and that is why recently I did ask Mike the question why he still supported Jeremy whilst they had fallen out - was it because he thought JB innocent or because he wanted to "get back" at the police in general and prove that they had lied.
On the whole I think we do have a good justice system and a good police force - however I think to believe everything they say as proof that a case is not a MOJ is fool hardy.
I guess this case did just come to my attention because of the publicity tbh.
And I did not mean to put all guilty posters into the same category - I apologise - I am afraid Adam just wound me up. I will try to remain calm.
-
Adam I apologise I did not know Jan was working behind the scenes for Jeremy.
;)
-
;)
Jan surely Adam was not pulling my leg ;D he is such a naughty boy at times ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Oi!!! Don't you start this too. ;D Starting to sound like Alias and that isn't good!!
It's an interesting case to me because.
He still claims innocence because he has nowhere else to go. The courts and CCRC heavily reject his poor applications - yet people still support him. I really struggle to understand why.
I think it's easy to throw the "why do you care" statement at 'guilters' but I find it just as confusing why supporters care & what the heck it can be that means they will throw what amounts to not much more than blind faith behind Bamber because there is absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing. All that there is are a few discrepancies in police statements but the truth is that if you were to look at most cases the same would be true.
I think the counter question to yours would be - why is it that SOME supporters seem to support many other MOJ's too? It's not just Bamber they support but others - and why do some supporters seem to have previous trust issues with establishments and the police. I am not including you in this, Jan as I don't think you follow other 'MOJs' but some people that have trust issues and past issues with the police are more inclined to support MOJ's online it seems.
That is a good point. Other cases may have discrepancies in statements. The Bamber case probably has no more than any others. The slight difference is the police changed direction after a few weeks.
What other convicted criminals have or had a lot of supporters ? I can only think of Hanratty, who was later found to be guilty through DNA.
-
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11075284/When-innocent-men-go-to-jail-miscarriages-of-justice-in-Britain.html&ved=0CDgQFjAEahUKEwivscy5svnGAhWInnIKHZKfCtI&usg=AFQjCNGy12HcShvvT1vkp8hTxXKPVvxh3Q&sig2=sYUJuTXcGSwdWMejqpl2aA
-
Barry George was convicted of the murder of television presenter Jill Dando and was released after two trials and two appeals. His sentence was finally overturned after scientific evidence was ruled inadmissible by the trial judge. He was denied compensation and is taking his claim to the European Court of Human Rights.
-
Supporters have brought up Barry George before.
However the above post shows there is no proof he is innocent. Just that he has got released on a technicality.
Nick Ross believes George is guilty.
-
Supporters have brought up Barry George before.
However the above post shows there is no proof he is innocent. Just that he has got released on a technicality.
Nick Ross believes George is guilty.
It was an unsafe conviction end of. So therefore he could be innocent.
-
Supporters have brought up Barry George before.
However the above post shows there is no proof he is innocent. Just that he has got released on a technicality.
Nick Ross believes George is guilty.
theres plenty of proof his innocent for anybody whos followed the case.
and not many people are that bothered by what nick id watch cild porn ross thinks
-
Even though GSR was found on his clothing !
-
It was an unsafe conviction end of. So therefore he could be innocent.
Jeremy hasn't even been able to show it was an unsafe conviction.
But full marks for trying.
-
I doubt that Barry George made a big attempt to get released.
He had mental health problems so probably didn't have a clue what was going on. It would have lawyers working on his behalf, keen to get brownie points on a high profile case.
Jeremy has been given lots of legal support but is also very hands on a clued up in his campaign. But it has not been enough.
-
Jeremy hasn't even been able to show it was an unsafe conviction.
But full marks for trying.
don't try and put words in my mouth - where did I say that?
-
I doubt that Barry George made a big attempt to get released.
He had mental health problems so probably didn't have a clue what was going on. It would have lawyers working on his behalf, keen to get brownie points on a high profile case.
Jeremy has been given lots of legal support but is also very hands on a clued up in his campaign. But it has not been enough.
???? so are you saying that those with mental health problems only get help to score brownie points?
-
Even though GSR was found on his clothing !
a single particle was found in a pocket. It is easy for a single particle to be transferred this was unable to establish anything from a firearms perspective.
-
don't try and put words in my mouth - where did I say that?
Not putting words into anyone's mouth. Just stating a fact.
-
???? so are you saying that those with mental health problems only get help to score brownie points?
Don't put words into my mouth.
Just stating a probability. Unlike Bamber for 30 years, Barry George probably didn't do one thing to try to get released. He was much too ill. Even when the conviction was overturned all he could say was 'I can't believe it'. Rather than making a big speech on the court steps.
-
I doubt that Barry George made a big attempt to get released.
He had mental health problems so probably didn't have a clue what was going on. It would have lawyers working on his behalf, keen to get brownie points on a high profile case.
Jeremy has been given lots of legal support but is also very hands on a clued up in his campaign. But it has not been enough.
What about Sion Jenkings?
-
What about Sion Jenkings?
What about him ?
He was an intelligent man and worked with his lawyers to get released. Although was also refused compensation.
-
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/retrials/&ved=0CBwQFjAAahUKEwji5MiozfrGAhUBcRQKHYPLBy0&usg=AFQjCNFRUsAkLvYDDCyG4Pc_rCdcU1Ygcg&sig2=AILTvQyVKxFjo7YLr9dMqA
Interesting article on retrials.
Jeremy would have to get his case to the COA who would suggest a retrial. I assume after they have overturned the conviction.
However it seems he can also jump straight to a retrial if 'new and compelling' evidence is supplied.
-
a retrial depends on the proscution if the proscution say they still have evedence to make a case agianst the defendant it will go to retrial if they say the havent it would just go to formal auqietel.
-
What about him ?
He was an intelligent man and worked with his lawyers to get released. Although was also refused compensation.
so do you think that if compensation is not given it still means the person is guilty ?
That is not the reason.
-
On Thursday 12th May 2011 a Supreme Court ruling that widens the definition of a miscarriage of justice has been hailed as a step in the right direction by campaigners.
The Supreme Court ruled, by the narrowest of margins, that some acquitted in court are entitled to compensation even if they cannot prove their innocence beyond reasonable doubt.
But judges warned the ruling would lead to some guilty people landing taxpayer-funded payouts. Currently, anyone who overturns their conviction must have been ‘shown conclusively to be innocent’ before compensation is considered.
-
On Thursday 12th May 2011 a Supreme Court ruling that widens the definition of a miscarriage of justice has been hailed as a step in the right direction by campaigners.
The Supreme Court ruled, by the narrowest of margins, that some acquitted in court are entitled to compensation even if they cannot prove their innocence beyond reasonable doubt.
But judges warned the ruling would lead to some guilty people landing taxpayer-funded payouts. Currently, anyone who overturns their conviction must have been ‘shown conclusively to be innocent’ before compensation is considered.
there are more recent cases on here that have been discussed in respect of this ruling that explain things more clearly
-
Sion Jenkins certainly did not deserve compensation.
He was found guilty. The juries at two further re trials were
not able come to a verdict. So he was released.
Barry George eventually got released. After failed appeals. But his compensation claim was rejected.
-
Does anyone know of cases where convictions have been quashed and the person got a big compensation pay out ?
To be honest 99.9%:of convicted criminals are guilty. The case has gone through the police, DPP and the courts for gods sake. But some find a loop hole and technicality after years of trying.
If huge compensation was paid to every released prisoner, virtually every prisoner would apply. There is already a huge amount applying, resulting in the CCRC being slow to process cases.
-
Gerry Conlon got half a million in 1997.
Someone asked me what I thought of the Renault 5. I said 'I think their innocent'.
-
Does anyone know of cases where convictions have been quashed and the person got a big compensation pay out ?
To be honest 99.9%:of convicted criminals are guilty. The case has gone through the police, DPP and the courts for gods sake. But some find a loop hole and technicality after years of trying.
If huge compensation was paid to every released prisoner, virtually every prisoner would apply. There is already a huge amount applying, resulting in the CCRC being slow to process cases.
Paddy Hill (one of the Birmingham Six) received over a million pound and Stephan Kisko would have received £500,000.00 but I think he died before being paid. Poor Stephan, a truly sad case!
-
Paddy Hill (one of the Birmingham Six) received over a million pound and Stephan Kisko would have received £500,000.00 but I think he died before being paid. Poor Stephan, a truly sad case!
And he's so traumatised he struggles every day to manage the outside world even 20 years later.
He was so institutionalised he's never recovered and I bet he'd rather have been a poor free man than suffered that injustice to become a millionaire.
-
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13918358&ved=0CCUQFjAAahUKEwjY7qbr-fvGAhWGFtsKHda8DZU&usg=AFQjCNGOWvw4W-sBnLkM1_7SiFvczBiDIQ&sig2=BAqjbVNAXtHHMODD5n7Tww
Lots of money paid out to prisoners. But virtually zilch for a convicted criminal showing he was innocent.
-
2011 -
Four prisoners got between £125,000 and £62,000 in personal injury cases. Three got £25,000 for "false imprisonment".
-
And he's so traumatised he struggles every day to manage the outside world even 20 years later.
He was so institutionalised he's never recovered and I bet he'd rather have been a poor free man than suffered that injustice to become a millionaire.
I can imagine - ruined life! Poor old Stephan only wanted to go home to his mother but she died before he was released. He wouldn't have managed well without her which is probably why he died only a year after release.
-
I can imagine - ruined life! Poor old Stephan only wanted to go home to his mother but she died before he was released. He wouldn't have managed well without her which is probably why he died only a year after release.
Shameful.
-
Caroline/Maggie, what was done to that poor man was inhuman beyond words. His world must have fallen apart when his mum died. I just pray that there were those inside with enough decency to protect from the worst aspects of prison life and those who profit from it.
-
http://thetruthnews.info/Who-Was_Stephan_Kiszko.html
-
It is correct that compensation should only be paid to released prisoners who were almost certainly innocent.
Huge compensation pay outs to everyone who gets released on a technicality will just create more crime. Criminals believing if they get convicted they may still released released and a pay off. Perhaps even more than they robbed in the first place ! Virtually all will still be guilty anyway.
-
I can imagine - ruined life! Poor old Stephan only wanted to go home to his mother but she died before he was released. He wouldn't have managed well without her which is probably why he died only a year after release.
Caroline
that is so sad he never got home to his Mother :(
-
Some criminals are already rich and will be able to hire top lawyers to try to find a loop hole.
The tax payers are already paying for him to stay in prison. Don't see why they should also pay for him getting released on a technicality.
-
Does anyone know of cases where convictions have been quashed and the person got a big compensation pay out ?
To be honest 99.9%:of convicted criminals are guilty. The case has gone through the police, DPP and the courts for gods sake. But some find a loop hole and technicality after years of trying.
If huge compensation was paid to every released prisoner, virtually every prisoner would apply. There is already a huge amount applying, resulting in the CCRC being slow to process cases.
Its estimated that 4% of people sentenced to death in the US were innocent.
-
Sion Jenkins certainly did not deserve compensation.
He was found guilty. The juries at two further re trials were
not able come to a verdict. So he was released.
Barry George eventually got released. After failed appeals. But his compensation claim was rejected.
They will only get compensation if the cases become closed and they find the real killer with the execption if the killer is them ofcourse.
-
http://thetruthnews.info/Who-Was_Stephan_Kiszko.html
So wicked to do that to an innocent man.
-
Its estimated that 4% of people sentenced to death in the US were innocent.
Bet most of that 4% are black as well.......
-
So wicked to do that to an innocent man.
Watch this if you get a chance
http://vidto.me/grzuzf06uup8.html (http://vidto.me/grzuzf06uup8.html)
Avoid the big picture saying download and just click proceed to video at the bottom
-
http://thetruthnews.info/Who-Was_Stephan_Kiszko.html
Sickening beyond words, Caroline. It reinforces that there are SOME in society who gravitate towards those positions which give them power over those who haven't the ability to fight for themselves.
-
They will only get compensation if the cases become closed and they find the real killer with the execption if the killer is them ofcourse.
I am not sure they find the real killer in the Sion Jenkins case. Everything points to him.
He claimed it could have been a passing psychopath that attacked the deceased girl. In broad daylight. In his back garden. Although he had amble time to kill her while they were alone in the house. His actions straight afterwards were very erratic as well.
But it all came down to forensics.
-
Does anyone know of cases where convictions have been quashed and the person got a big compensation pay out ?
To be honest 99.9%:of convicted criminals are guilty. The case has gone through the police, DPP and the courts for gods sake. But some find a loop hole and technicality after years of trying.
If huge compensation was paid to every released prisoner, virtually every prisoner would apply. There is already a huge amount applying, resulting in the CCRC being slow to process cases.
Stephen downing got £750,000 for Serving 27 years in prison. He had his conviction overturned for the murder of Wendy Sewell. He had 2 appeals READ THIS BIT at the end? During the second appeal held on 15 January 2002 the Court of Appeal accepted many of the reasons that were put forward by Hale and others for believing the conviction was unsafe. Julian Bevan, counsel for the Crown, accepted two arguments put forward by the defence. The first was that Downing's confession should not have been allowed to go before a jury. The confession was unsafe because Downing had been questioned for eight hours, during which the police shook him and pulled his hair to keep him awake; because he wasn't formally cautioned that what he said may be used in evidence against him; and because he wasn't given a solicitor. The Crown also agreed with the defence argument that more recent knowledge of blood-splattering patterns meant the prosecution's claim that the blood could only have been found on the clothes of the attacker was questionable. HOW INTERESTING.
-
Forgot to say recently Wendy Sewell's death has been linked to the Yorkshire Ripper? She was not shot she was beaten about the head with a Pickaxe handle? Caught in an innocent prisoner's dilemma, Downing was unable to be paroled, as he did not admit to the crime. He was classified as "In Denial of Murder" and therefore ineligible for parole under English law. In January 2014 a former detective investigating 16 unsolved murders and possible links to the Yorkshire Ripper obtained a pathology report and claimed this was buried' by the police in 1973 within a few days of the attack on Wendy Sewell that would have completely contradicted the so-called confession, exonerated Downing and prevented a miscarriage of justice. This new evidence sparked a new submission to the Home Secretary claiming that Derbyshire Police's investigations in 1973 had been potentially biased and unsatisfactory. The report called on Derbyshire Police to apologise and explain their actions which had been highlighted at appeal in 2002 as 'substantially and significantly breaching the judges' rules.' They were asked to explain this recent finding and confirm why crucial evidence had been deliberately kept from the defence.
-
Bet most of that 4% are black as well.......
no
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/race-death-row-inmates-executed-1976 (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/race-death-row-inmates-executed-1976)
-
Sickening beyond words, Caroline. It reinforces that there are SOME in society who gravitate towards those positions which give them power over those who haven't the ability to fight for themselves.
If you think that's bad look into this case. Police got word from a psychic medium that it was him. that led to Johnny Garrett being sentenced to death
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Garrett (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Garrett)
-
https://youtu.be/DY6esFUgl5k
Here is a new radio interview.
-
What happened to the man interviewed early on ? I suspect the campaign team have edited him out of the Youtube posting.
As I said, someone like Trudie Benjamin will go to the media and say it is a MOJ and unfair trial. But won't go into details or debate on a forum.
But it gives her a purpose in life and she gets to feel important by talking on the radio. Ohhhh.
-
What happened to the man interviewed early on ? I suspect the campaign team have edited him out of the Youtube posting.
As I said, someone like Trudie Benjamin will go to the media and say it is a MOJ and unfair trial. But won't go into details or debate on a forum.
But it gives her a purpose in life and she gets to feel important by talking on the radio.
Out of interest what is your purpose in life, Adam? ;D
-
https://youtu.be/0zIpxABbqVI
To be fair there are other bits of the interview on Youtube. Where the man speaks more.
-
Trudie is going on about the old chestnut of missing documents. Saying she wants the originals.
She is even claiming Neville called the police.
Isn't the man speaking the same man that wrote the Spectator article - Leo Mckinstrey ?
-
They will only get compensation if the cases become closed and they find the real killer with the execption if the killer is them ofcourse.
The measure of whether they deserve compensation is that there is absolute evidence of their innocence, evidence of government wrongdoing that lead to an unjust conviction pr there was no rational basis to try them because there was no prima facie case. If the Knox trial happened in the UK then that would be an example of a case where compensation would be due because there was no prima facie case for an indictment and should not have even been a trial. But the UK's system is too strong to even allow such a stupid prosecution to occur in the first place which is why there are no comparable examples actually happening. No MOJs correspond to the situation that existed in the Knox case. The Knox case is one of those WTF just happened cases. They are exceedingly rare in commonlaw jurisdictions. Moreover, people don't rot in prison for a year till charges are filed like in Italy. The charges have to be filed and there is a right to a speedy trial. When people got out of prison after years it most often is because a change in key witness testimony. DNA evidence has resulted in quite a number being freed but still a change in testimony is likely king in the total scoreboard. Since DNA testing is routine modern conviction are unlikely to be overturned based on DNA evidence it is still possible but not very likely. A change in witness testimony will thus remain the biggest culpret of overturned convictions. If the government got a witness to lie then the government is responsible and compensation is due. If the person lied on their own they are not a victim of the government and it is harder to justify getting compensation.
-
How do Bamber's lawyers know the police are withholding documents ?
Have they gone to Scotland Yard, seen the boxes labelled 'Jeremy Bamber' and asked to borrow them. But the police said 'no' ?
They say they want original documents or WS's. What's the difference if an original document has been photocopied ?
Original WS's are useless. Everyone has the right to make several WS's before agreeing for it to be submitted pre trial.
-
Trudie is going on about the old chestnut of missing documents. Saying she wants the originals.
She is even claiming Neville called the police.
Isn't the man speaking the same man that wrote the Spectator article - Leo Mckinstrey ?
If she wants to ruin her reputation, she seems to be succeeding. I do somewhat agree with your opinion that attention plays a part.
-
How do Bamber's lawyers know the police are withholding documents ?
Have they gone to Scotland Yard, seen the boxes labelled 'Jeremy Bamber' and asked to borrow them. But the police said 'no' ?
They say they want original documents or WS's. What's the difference if an original document has been photocopied ?
Original WS's are useless. Everyone has the right to make several WS's before agreeing for it to be submitted pre trial.
I can quite see that if the original WS varies greatly from the last there will be screams about coercion..................................however, what exactly is counted as the original? Is it first one ever OR is is the original of the final statement?
-
I can quite see that if the original WS varies greatly from the last there will be screams about coercion..................................however, what exactly is counted as the original? Is it first one ever OR is is the original of the final statement?
Well the final WS's of nearly all the witnesses are on line for everyone.
Having the originals of these will not say anything different.
Having Julie's first WS draft will not help him. It can't be used in an appeal and is unlikely to say she is lying because he jilted her.
-
Trudie Benjamin says the jury only heard half the evidence. How would she know ? Bamber had the best defence available who had a year to get their case together.
She then says he's lost two appeals. Forgetting the CCRC judgement. And says appeals give a very narrow opportunity. I thought the defendant dictates what an appeal will include.
-
I can't stand McKinstrey and I can't stand Tatchell,so I'm off to a good start aren't I ?
-
Tatchell is supporting Bamber. Saying the police have evidence they are holding.
Is Tatchell just getting this information from supporters ?
Caroline, CAL, Lookout and Jan said Bamber has all documents.
Whatever happens, supporters can and will always claim the police are withholding evidence.
-
I couldn't care less who's supporting who,I still don't like Tatchell. Never have. McKinstrey,McKenzie and Ferrari are all out of the same stable so far as twisted journalism ( who think they know everything ) goes.
-
If you think that's bad look into this case. Police got word from a psychic medium that it was him. that led to Johnny Garrett being sentenced to death
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Garrett (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Garrett)
That case like the Bamber case suffers from supporters posting lies. Those lies include:
1) that the hair at the scene was matched to Reuda
2) That fingerprints at the scene was matched to Rueda
3) that police looked at him because of a clairvoyant. In fact they looked at him because he was seen spying in elderly windows and his prints ended up matching
There is no proof Rueda confessed to killing the nun. A supporter alleges he got him to confess, whether he really did confess who knows but we also don't know what he was offered in exchange.
Hair consistent with Garrett's public hair was found on the victim. Garrett's excuse for the his prints being on the nun's headboard and knife found under the bed failed to hold water. He claimed he leaned on the bed to steal a cross but there was no cross there to steal. Similarly no items were missing for him to have stolen like he claimed. Worse the door was locked and people around at the time he claims to have simply walked in and rummaged room to room. Supporters made up that his prints were found all over the convent later saying if police checked for prints they would have been found. He claimed he stole the knives from the convent but the steak knife was from his own kitchen. He dropped the steak knife while running away.
Garrett threatened to kill people including a teacher. Defense experts who examined him said he was crazy with multiple personalities and confessed to raping the nun.
-
"The evidence..I wish I could talk about it.." (8min 30)
Michael I wish you would.
-
What's that about Steve ?
-
Oh Michael O' Brien on the Bamber case,the start of this thread. He received £650,000 after 11 years wrongful incarceration. Of course no money is worth the deprivation of your liberty for such a period of time.
-
Tatchell is supporting Bamber. Saying the police have evidence they are holding.
Is Tatchell just getting this information from supporters ?
Caroline, CAL, Lookout and Jan said Bamber has all documents.
Whatever happens, supporters can and will always claim the police are withholding evidence.
very funny Adam
-
How do Bamber's lawyers know the police are withholding documents ?
I think the Lawyers can find out what has been filed under PII
Have they gone to Scotland Yard, seen the boxes labelled 'Jeremy Bamber' and asked to borrow them. But the police said 'no' ?
Actually something like this has happened. His Legal team wanted more photographs and they refused to hand them over twice the CCRC had to try and force the police to hand them over. If I remember correctly a deal was eventually made where they could see them but not keep them or take them away
-
I think the Lawyers can find out what has been filed under PII
Actually something like this has happened. His Legal team wanted more photographs and they refused to hand them over twice the CCRC had to try and force the police to hand them over. If I remember correctly a deal was eventually made where they could see them but not keep them or take them away
Have you got a source ?
Perhaps there is a photo of Sheila putting the silencer away.
I wonder how Mike got the picture of Sheila on the bed ?
-
Oh Michael O' Brien on the Bamber case,the start of this thread. He received £650,000 after 11 years wrongful incarceration. Of course no money is worth the deprivation of your liberty for such a period of time.
No,it isn't worth it because it will be forever there on the man's mind,as well the money being a further reminder.
-
Have you got a source ?
Perhaps there is a photo of Sheila putting the silencer away.
I wonder how Mike got the picture of Sheila on the bed ?
I will try find out wear I read this. I don't believe mike has such photo, I will believe it when I see it
-
No,it isn't worth it because it will be forever there on the man's mind,as well the money being a further reminder.
One wonders if Jeremy has been institutionalized for life now after so long an incarceration.
-
Have you got a source ?
Perhaps there is a photo of Sheila putting the silencer away.
I wonder how Mike got the picture of Sheila on the bed ?
sarcasm is not an answer
But if someone for instance in an OS said they saw Sheila use a gun - and then in a later statement it disappeared then something LIKE that would of course be relevant.
If in her diaries she had written that she intended to take her own life -that would be relevant.
How do they know certain documents exist? I would think they have lists of items and have now realised that certain items are not in the boxes . Its not that difficult is it?
Incidentally I know of a case where a young man has died in NHS care and it has taken 2 years to get to the inquest - and three times the family legal team have been told that they have been given all the documents regarding his care - and guess what three times they have found out this is not true. How do they even know now a week before the inquest that they have al the documents - answer they don't.
-
What photos will prove his innocence.
There are enough photos of the deceased and crime scene. As well as descriptions of both. And that's just online.
-
What photos will prove his innocence.
There are enough photos of the deceased and crime scene. As well as descriptions of both. And that's just online.
Well that's the point - if there are photos missing there may be a perfectly innocent explanation - but then again it may show something - its impossible to know if the pictures are removed.
-
One wonders if Jeremy has been institutionalized for life now after so long an incarceration.
I've often thought that myself and a lot will depend on his strength of character as to whether he'll adjust to a life outside the confines of a prison. It's going to be a long haul I would think as we all know how much has changed but life would literally have stood still for him.
-
I've often thought that myself and a lot will depend on his strength of character as to whether he'll adjust to a life outside the confines of a prison. It's going to be a long haul I would think as we all know how much has changed but life would literally have stood still for him.
I would think he's totally institutionalised, it's hard to imagine how he would ever cope on the outside. He said himself he doesn't remember what 'outside was like' and he has spent more time in prison than on the outside. I feel he or anyone else would really suffer in such a situation. :-\
-
One wonders if Jeremy has been institutionalized for life now after so long an incarceration.
If Jeremy was released he would be fine, many people will want to interview him and he will find ways of getting on the media. This is probably one of the reason they wont release him because he would not keep his mouth shut and will draw allot of attention to himself. That's the kind of person he is
-
I would think he's totally institutionalised, it's hard to imagine how he would ever cope on the outside. He said himself he doesn't remember what 'outside was like' and he has spent more time in prison than on the outside. I feel he or anyone else would really suffer in such a situation. :-\
It reminds me of the poor souls who'd been hemmed in at the mental hospital when they were discharged. There was no help,though it's in short supply even now but at least there is help which was more can be said for those in the 1950's who were literally out on a limb unless they had family.
-
If Jeremy was released he would be fine, many people will want to interview him and he will find ways of getting on the media. This is probably one of the reason they wont release him because he would not keep his mouth shut and will draw allot of attention to himself. That's the kind of person he is
The CCRC and appeal courts will just follow the evidence.
But yes a released Bamber would make a good living. Which is a reason he has always campaigned.
At 25 upon conviction, he could afford to wait years for success.
-
If Jeremy was released he would be fine, many people will want to interview him and he will find ways of getting on the media. This is probably one of the reason they wont release him because he would not keep his mouth shut and will draw allot of attention to himself. That's the kind of person he is
One thing's for sure,he's not afraid of facing anyone and he'd hold his head high too. It's what people do who are telling the truth.
-
At 25 upon conviction Bamber must have felt that he would be out in ten years. Surely if fought relentlessly he would find a way.
But it didn't happen.
-
I think the Lawyers can find out what has been filed under PII
PII is a court order sealing records. The court reviews the evidence and decided whether to seals it or not. There is a privilege log which just gives generalized descriptions of the documents which the other lawyers can see. If the order is granted the other side never gets to see the actual documents.
The only difference between PII and other orders sealing records is the grounds upon which the request is based.
-
Isn't it grounds enough that the man has been locked up for 30 years and is surely entitled to know what's been hidden ?
-
Isn't it grounds enough that the man has been locked up for 30 years and is surely entitled to know what's been hidden ?
We are entitled to know things that are incriminatory and exculpatory not everything. This is based on our entire system which says you have the right to know all evidence to be used against you in advance so you can prepare to deal with it and the right to all evidence that clears you so that you can use it to your advantage. Legislatures get to decide what things other than this we are entitled to know. The Courts won't let legislatures eliminate the requirement to provide all incriminatory and exculpatory evidence but does respect their right to decide what beyond that must be made known.
-
After 30 years, a long trial, two appeals, one CCRC application and apparently millions of documents in Bamber's prison cell, you would think Trudie would have some specific things to discuss.
But no, it was the alleged missing documents. Again.
-
So what's wrong with the fact that Trudi mentioned missing documents ?
-
So what's wrong with the fact that Trudi mentioned missing documents ?
She's saying all the released evidence shows guilt. As she does not discuss it. Only alleged stuff no one has seen.
No one is sure if there are unreleased documents. One minute there is, the next there isn't.
If there are unreleased documents, the best supporters can hope for is a missed dotted 'i' or crossed 'T'. They can then go for a technicality.
There is no way any alleged unreleased documents will outweigh the already released evidence that shows guilt.
-
The CCRC and appeal courts will just follow the evidence.
But yes a released Bamber would make a good living. Which is a reason he has always campaigned.
At 25 upon conviction, he could afford to wait years for success.
That is nothing but pure assumption on your behalf. And would depend on how he was released and whether or not compensation was paid . And IF he had been jailed for 30 years and he was innocent and received no compensation then personally I would not blame him if he wrote a book about his experiences .
-
That is nothing but pure assumption on your behalf. And would depend on how he was released and whether or not compensation was paid . And IF he had been jailed for 30 years and he was innocent and received no compensation then personally I would not blame him if he wrote a book about his experiences .
You keep saying that when I post.
Firstly it is wrong -
Bamber was 25 upon conviction. FACT.
Time was on his side. FACT.
The CCRC and appeal courts make decisions upon evidence. FACT.
Some of the rest is assumption. But this is an internet forum. People are allowed to give opinions.
My opinion is Bamber knew if it took him 10 years to get out on a technicality, he would only be 35. He may get compensation and may be able to go after the inheritance money. If not he can do the media circuit. Or he could get both and still do the media circuit. Actually most of this is also FACT.
As it happened, he remained inside after ten years (FACT). but his campaigning had become a way of life. So he wasn't going to stop (ASSUMPTION).
-
That's always supposing that the CCRC and appeal courts obtain ALL evidence !?
-
You keep saying that when I post.
Firstly it is wrong -
Bamber was 25 upon conviction. FACT.
Time was on his side. FACT.
The CCRC and appeal courts make decisions upon evidence. FACT.
Some of the rest is assumption. But this is an internet forum. People are allowed to give opinions.
My opinion is Bamber knew if it took him 10 years to get out on a technicality, he would only be 35. He may get compensation and may be able to go after the inheritance money. If not he can do the media circuit. Or he could get both and still do the media circuit. Actually most of this is also FACT.
As it happened, he remained inside after ten years (FACT). but his campaigning had become a way of life. So he wasn't going to stop (ASSUMPTION).
You said the reason he was campaigning was to make money when he came out - Assumption.
-
'The CCRC and appeal courts will just follow the evidence.
But yes a released Bamber would make a good living. Which is a reason he has always campaigned.
At 25 upon conviction, he could afford to wait years for success.'
That was my quote. It says 'a reason'. He testified himself he likes the good things in life. So if he thought he would be rich upon acquittal, it would motivate him.
-
'The CCRC and appeal courts will just follow the evidence.
But yes a released Bamber would make a good living. Which is a reason he has always campaigned.
At 25 upon conviction, he could afford to wait years for success.'
That was my quote. It says 'a reason'. He testified himself he likes the good things in life. So if he thought he would be rich upon acquittal, it would motivate him.
well he would need to be because if it was ruled at the time of the trial it was a fair verdict even if new evidence appeared he probably would not get compensation . But I would think freedom is enough to motivate anyone.
-
well he would need to be because if it was ruled at the time of the trial it was a fair verdict even if new evidence appeared he probably would not get compensation . But I would think freedom is enough to motivate anyone.
If he were released now he would live off of his supporters until he inked a book deal then he would leave them high and dry.
-
If he were released now he would live off of his supporters until he inked a book deal then he would leave them high and dry.
He wouldn't need to " live off his supporters " at all,the media would be breaking their necks to get a story.
-
If he were released now he would live off of his supporters until he inked a book deal then he would leave them high and dry.
Whats happened to you scipio - giving opinions instead of facts - you are sounding quite bitter?
Do you know as a fact how many of his supporters have given money and how many just time?
Just wondered? I only know of one person who was complaining of being "fleeced" by him.
-
How do Bamber's lawyers know the police are withholding documents ?
Have they gone to Scotland Yard, seen the boxes labelled 'Jeremy Bamber' and asked to borrow them. But the police said 'no' ?
They say they want original documents or WS's. What's the difference if an original document has been photocopied ?
Original WS's are useless. Everyone has the right to make several WS's before agreeing for it to be submitted pre trial.
I think Adam the campaign team know the police are holding documents under pii as the information in the documents he has refer to documents he doesnt have.
Does that make sense! If you receive a letter and it refers to something that you havent got what do you do?
He does have a right now I think to see any missing documents.
-
I think Adam the campaign team know the police are holding documents under pii as the information in the documents he has refer to documents he doesnt have.
Does that make sense! If you receive a letter and it refers to something that you havent got what do you do?
He does have a right now I think to see any missing documents.
Notsure, Jeremy told me that he has all the Pii material so not sure why the OS are still going on about it.
-
Whats happened to you scipio - giving opinions instead of facts - you are sounding quite bitter?
Do you know as a fact how many of his supporters have given money and how many just time?
Just wondered? I only know of one person who was complaining of being "fleeced" by him.
I know of a few he's asked for a substantial amount from.
Notsure, Jeremy told me that he has all the Pii material so not sure why the OS are still going on about it.
Sounds good and gives the supporters something to bleat on about - neither them or Jeremy are honest when it comes to the PII it seems.
-
I know of a few he's asked for a substantial amount from.
Sounds good and gives the supporters something to bleat on about - neither them or Jeremy are honest when it comes to the PII it seems.
that's fair enough - I have only heard of one but if you know different then that's fine I believe you .
But the odd thing is that I heard that some of the PII info was released ( not all ) before EP wrote the email stating they would not release it . So it seems that there are misconceptions from all sides to be honest.
-
And by the way on the forum there is only one person bleating on about the boxes - and I wish he would shut up .
-
that's fair enough - I have only heard of one but if you know different then that's fine I believe you .
But the odd thing is that I heard that some of the PII info was released ( not all ) before EP wrote the email stating they would not release it . So it seems that there are misconceptions from all sides to be honest.
Was it Bamber who told you that he has it all? I don't remember you saying he had it all, just Adam saying you've said Bamber has it all. So just curious.
-
Was it Bamber who told you that he has it all? I don't remember you saying he had it all, just Adam saying you've said Bamber has it all. So just curious.
No I have never said he had it all . I was told that he had information held under PII that's all . At that point I was under the impression it had just been released. I had no other information than that. the campaign team said they had 24 boxes released in 2011 that contained information that had not previously been seen - but I guess this may not have been information held under PII - but if it was then EP were not telling the whole truth in their email.
I agree its all very confusing - but I trust the person who told me .
But as I said before - if he just received some boxes and was told that was everything - then how would you know that was the truth ? I still personally think there would be some things that would not be released such as pictures of the twins - for obvious reasons and that would of course be understandable.
I really am not that bothered by what the campaign team say anyway.There is either something in there to prove innocence or there is not .End of.
-
that's fair enough - I have only heard of one but if you know different then that's fine I believe you .
But the odd thing is that I heard that some of the PII info was released ( not all ) before EP wrote the email stating they would not release it . So it seems that there are misconceptions from all sides to be honest.
To be 100% accurate, Jeremy said he had 'almost' all of the PII stuff BUT, he said there was enough to GUARANTEE his freedom. Call me a sceptic but .....
-
No I have never said he had it all . I was told that he had information held under PII that's all . At that point I was under the impression it had just been released. I had no other information than that. the campaign team said they had 24 boxes released in 2011 that contained information that had not previously been seen - but I guess this may not have been information held under PII - but if it was then EP were not telling the whole truth in their email.
I agree its all very confusing - but I trust the person who told me .
But as I said before - if he just received some boxes and was told that was everything - then how would you know that was the truth ? I still personally think there would be some things that would not be released such as pictures of the twins - for obvious reasons and that would of course be understandable.
I really am not that bothered by what the campaign team say anyway.There is either something in there to prove innocence or there is not .End of.
Thanks Jan :)
To be 100% accurate, Jeremy said he had 'almost' all of the PII stuff BUT, he said there was enough to GUARANTEE his freedom. Call me a sceptic but .....
Sceptic!
-
Thanks Jan :)
Sceptic!
Moi? :o :o ;) ;D ;D
-
But I guess he knows this is his very last chance - so if he is going to go for it he has to tackle every possible angle.
-
But I guess he knows this is his very last chance - so if he is going to go for it he has to tackle every possible angle.
Yes, but I think if they had something worth shouting about, they would be shouting to drum up support.
-
Yes, but I think if they had something worth shouting about, they would be shouting to drum up support.
True - but If I was him I would wait until the submission had been made I don't think it would go well if it had come out in the press first. But that depends on who is advising him I guess.