Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on May 31, 2011, 09:27:PM
-
New Application will be submitted based on fresh blood evidence
The details of this new evidence have not yet been brought to the attention Of Jeremy or his legal team, but should his application to the CCRC fail, then this new evidence will be the basis of a fresh application...
-
is it too late to submit this evidence to the ccrc now?
-
New Application will be submitted based on fresh blood evidence
The details of this new evidence have not yet been brought to the attention Of Jeremy or his legal team, but should his application to the CCRC fail, then this new evidence will be the basis of a fresh application...
So you expect it to fail?
-
New Application will be submitted based on fresh blood evidence
The details of this new evidence have not yet been brought to the attention Of Jeremy or his legal team, but should his application to the CCRC fail, then this new evidence will be the basis of a fresh application...
So you expect it to fail?
---------------------------
Like Jeremy and his legal team, I am still optimistic that his case will be referred back to court of appeal...
-
New Application will be submitted based on fresh blood evidence
The details of this new evidence have not yet been brought to the attention Of Jeremy or his legal team, but should his application to the CCRC fail, then this new evidence will be the basis of a fresh application...
If Jeremy and his legal team don't know about it, where has this new evidence come from?
-
New Application will be submitted based on fresh blood evidence
The details of this new evidence have not yet been brought to the attention Of Jeremy or his legal team, but should his application to the CCRC fail, then this new evidence will be the basis of a fresh application...
If Jeremy and his legal team don't know about it, where has this new evidence come from?
---------------------------
From the original Bamber file (SC/786/85), when the blood of the victims and relatives was tested and individual results were obtained, which were unique to each of them. The results obtained on that occasion, for Sheila's blood, were not used to confirm that the blood found in the silencer belonged exclusively to her, instead, this was qualified by a reliance upon the blood group activity, A, EAP BA, AK1 and HP 2-1, which was not all by itself, unique to her, alone...
None of the blood found in the silencer, produced the identical blood results that matched Sheila's when tested...
Court has been deceived...
I have the documents and the results obtained to prove that the cliam that blood found in the silencer was unique to Sheila, was not true, that it was deceitful and misleading...
-
Mike, can I ask if JB still thinks that the silencer evidence is as important this time?
-
Mike, can I ask if JB still thinks that the silencer evidence is as important this time?
-------------
Yes, the current CCRC application / review takes into account the silencer evidence, paint, blood and scratch marks and the like...
-
New Application will be submitted based on fresh blood evidence
The details of this new evidence have not yet been brought to the attention Of Jeremy or his legal team, but should his application to the CCRC fail, then this new evidence will be the basis of a fresh application...
If Jeremy and his legal team don't know about it, where has this new evidence come from?
---------------------------
From the original Bamber file (SC/786/85), when the blood of the victims and relatives was tested and individual results were obtained, which were unique to each of them. The results obtained on that occasion, for Sheila's blood, were not used to confirm that the blood found in the silencer belonged exclusively to her, instead, this was qualified by a reliance upon the blood group activity, A, EAP BA, AK1 and HP 2-1, which was not all by itself, unique to her, alone...
None of the blood found in the silencer, produced the identical blood results that matched Sheila's when tested...
Court has been deceived...
I have the documents and the results obtained to prove that the cliam that blood found in the silencer was unique to Sheila, was not true, that it was deceitful and misleading...
That is true - they couldn´t have proven that without a DNA test, which of course they didn´t have back then. It is all just based on the very few blood groups there are.
-
But IS the silencer important? It seems obvious to me that it was planted by spiteful relatives to change the course of the investigation.
-
is iot too late for submissions to made to the ccrc mike?
-
New Application will be submitted based on fresh blood evidence
The details of this new evidence have not yet been brought to the attention Of Jeremy or his legal team, but should his application to the CCRC fail, then this new evidence will be the basis of a fresh application...
If Jeremy and his legal team don't know about it, where has this new evidence come from?
---------------------------
From the original Bamber file (SC/786/85), when the blood of the victims and relatives was tested and individual results were obtained, which were unique to each of them. The results obtained on that occasion, for Sheila's blood, were not used to confirm that the blood found in the silencer belonged exclusively to her, instead, this was qualified by a reliance upon the blood group activity, A, EAP BA, AK1 and HP 2-1, which was not all by itself, unique to her, alone...
None of the blood found in the silencer, produced the identical blood results that matched Sheila's when tested...
Court has been deceived...
I have the documents and the results obtained to prove that the cliam that blood found in the silencer was unique to Sheila, was not true, that it was deceitful and misleading...
That is true - they couldn´t have proven that without a DNA test, which of course they didn´t have back then. It is all just based on the very few blood groups there are.
-------------------------
The tests revealed much more information than simple blood group activity, A, EAP BA, AK1 and HP 2-1, for all the victims and relatives (including Jeremy)...
Depending on what happens with CCRC decision, I will be posting copies of the new evidence on here...
-
But IS the silencer important? It seems obvious to me that it was planted by spiteful relatives to change the course of the investigation.
Well, it was one of the main things that got him convicted. I think you have answered your own question.
-
is iot too late for submissions to made to the ccrc mike?
-----------------------------
Yes, unless CCRC make provisions to allow a new additional submission, before they make their final decision...
New evidence might have to wait either, (a) until CCRC refer case back to court of appeal, in which case Jeremy can bring any additional matter to the attention of the court dealing with the appeal, or (b) if CCRC refuse to send case back to appeal court, in which case, Jeremy can make another application, based upon this new evidence...
-
why wasnt the new evidence made available to his defence before now?
-
I think that Jeremy will keep going back to the ccrc with new evidence if he is innocent and the ccrc will keep looking stupid if they just keep drip feeding evidence held under PII
Lets get it over with for everyones sake release everything
I was reading a case yesterday I think someone has just been released miscarriage of justice after many years but he didnt use the ccrc he went another route that was successful I must ask ngb1066 he might know this other route
I am going to look for it now
-
HMEssex, I wish that I could answer all my questions! The silencer evidence is so unlikely, imo, that it should be disregarded.
-
HMEssex, I wish that I could answer all my questions! The silencer evidence is so unlikely, imo, that it should be disregarded.
I agree. Then there is only Julie Mugford´s testimony basically - and what did she know at all (if she wasn´t plain lying on most points)?
-
Perhaps JM just knew what she'd been told. I can't help but think that if she truly wanted to stuff JB, she would have blamed him, not involve someone else. The investigation was already veering towards JB.
-
At the risk of sounding dim, I can't believe that there couldn't be a retrial, purely on the basis that parts of Sheila's body, if not her entire body, had been moved at least twice. There is photographic evidence of that here, on this forum. Is that too simplistic? Would that not be enough?
-
Perhaps JM just knew what she'd been told. I can't help but think that if she truly wanted to stuff JB, she would have blamed him, not involve someone else. The investigation was already veering towards JB.
Precisely what I think!
-
Really? Can I do my dance now? ;)
-
Yep, go on 8)
-
Brilliant!! I told you so, I told you so, doo doo doo doo, I told you so!!
Ouch. I think I just put my hip out.
-
Shona do you think that JM might have said the hitman thing to implicate jb a bit even if he wasnt involved thinking he might get ten years like a small punishment and didnt realise what she had done and that he would end up with his whole life in prison perhaps she is still in love with him now imagine that
-
Maybe she never stopped loving him. He seemed like a handsome, charismatic guy. Hence his following now. JM looks like she lives over a Canadian pie-shop. IMO.
-
Maybe she never stopped loving him. He seemed like a handsome, charismatic guy. Hence his following now. JM looks like she lives over a Canadian pie-shop. IMO.
I thought she looked like a cabbage patch doll.
-
Ha!! There is some botox action going on. IMO.
-
When I suggested a month or two ago that JB always had further "new" evidence held back in case his appeal failed, so that he could start a new one, I was laughed out of town...
-
I didn't Bob and I think Jeremy even said that in the interview speaking to Eric Allison
Bob I think I am right in say you think JB is guilty do you support everything being released under pii so this could make everything much clearer and bring an end to this case
-
I didn't Bob and I think Jeremy even said that in the interview speaking to Eric Allison
Bob I think I am right in say you think JB is guilty do you support everything being released under pii so this could make everything much clearer and bring an end to this case
I'm about 75% on the guilty side Jackie - but I certainly agree all evidence should be released to both sides. I don't see how you can have a fair justice system otherwise.
-
Thanks Bob that's why this a farce most people would agree with everything being released even the people who think JB is guilty
If the ccrc appear to be playing games not releasing certain things under PII I can understand why JB would hold stuff back to appeal against his conviction again
It's ridiculous and all the time it's costing £40,000 to keep JB in prison every year
I will have to ask Ngb if he could give any idea how much an appeal would cost
£200,000 or more?
-
Thanks Bob that's why this a farce most people would agree with everything being released even the people who think JB is guilty
If the ccrc appear to be playing games not releasing certain things under PII I can understand why JB would hold stuff back to appeal against his conviction again
It's ridiculous and all the time it's costing £40,000 to keep JB in prison every year
I will have to ask Ngb if he could give any idea how much an appeal would cost
£200,000 or more?
It is difficult to say exactly how much an appeal would cost as it depends partly upon the cost of the preparation including obtaining experts' reports (such as the Peter Suthurst evidence) and partly the time taken in the Court of Appeal. You are probably not far out in suggesting £200,000 as a reasonable guess of the total cost, but it could be a lot more than that.
-
Thankyou NGB1066 x
-
I think that Jeremy will keep going back to the ccrc with new evidence if he is innocent and the ccrc will keep looking stupid if they just keep drip feeding evidence held under PII
Lets get it over with for everyones sake release everything
I was reading a case yesterday I think someone has just been released miscarriage of justice after many years but he didnt use the ccrc he went another route that was successful I must ask ngb1066 he might know this other route
I am going to look for it now
It is interesting that the alternative route is one which was referred to by Bob Woffinden in his Guardian article attacking the record of the CCRC. A link to the article was I think posted here yesterday. It is in fact a very good article by Woffinden which makes his Daily Mail article and his Talk Radio comments all the more disappointing. The alternative route for someone who has really powerful material which destroys an essential part of the prosecution case is to go straight to the DPP or CPS and disclose the material, rather than presenting the evidence to the CCRC. If it is clear cut the DPP/CPS can then agree - and have done so on occasions - that they will not oppose an appeal against conviction and in that situation the case can be fast tracked to the Court of Appeal, with a bail application made immediately pending the hearing of the appeal. I obviously do not know exactly what Jeremy's team now have in terms of firm grounds of appeal. It appears that there is more work to be done in relation to the photographic negatives recently released by the CCRC. All the indications are that Jeremy's team will continue in their attempts to persuade the CCRC to change their provisional decision and agree to refer the case to the Court of Appeal. If that fails they will have to consider the best way to proceed.