Bamber's 1989 COA

[Adam]

Not much is said about this. Just found this -

'March 1989 - Bamber appeals against his conviction on the grounds that the judge unfairly summed up the case. He loses.'

----------

This did not have to through the CCRC. So the appeal was only 3 years after conviction.

Very unlikely the conviction would be overturned for this reason. But no harm in getting the 'Campaign for Freedom' off the ground.

If anyone has any other information on this appeal, would be good to see it. 

[Adam]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://murderpedia.org/male.B/b/bamber-jeremy.htm&ved=2ahUKEwivmoGPrO7wAhUQERQKHRG4AoIQFjAWegQIChAC&usg=AOvVaw2yU15ANbmri6bRV209rcUi

This is a good link on the case & mentions 1989.

[Adam]

'He first sought leave to appeal in June 1987, arguing that the judge's summing up had omitted material important to the defence and that the judge had himself expressed strong views. It was heard and dismissed by a single judge, and then heard again by a full court, and leave to appeal was refused on 20 March 1989 by Lord Chief Justice, Lord Lane.'

----------

Wonder what material he believed the judge omitted?

What does 'heard by a full court' mean.

[Adam]

Wilkes's book has a couple of pages on it.

[lookout]

Shouldn't you be out and about spending your thousands ? Or perhaps treating yourself to a Boss suit ?

[Adam]

Shouldn't you be out and about spending your thousands ? Or perhaps treating yourself to a Boss suit ?

I did buy a Hugo Boss suit a few years ago. For work. Very weak.

Suspect it was the kind of suit for special occasions every few months. Rather than day to day life. Or maybe just unlucky.

[Adam]

Shouldn't you be out and about spending your thousands ? Or perhaps treating yourself to a Boss suit ?

Have you got any extra information on Jeremy's 1989 COA submission?

[guest29835]

I did buy a Hugo Boss suit a few years ago. For work. Very weak.

Suspect it was the kind of suit for special occasions every few months. Rather than day to day life. Or maybe just unlucky.

Thanks Adam.  You're thinking along the right lines here for Jeremy's appeal.  He needs to buy himself an expensive suit and some industrial frames, to wear in court when his case comes up.  He can't go into the appeal looking like a scruff.

[lookout]

Have you got any extra information on Jeremy's 1989 COA submission?

Should I have ?

[Adam]

Should I have ?

It is a forum. People exchange information & sources within thread discussion.

What do you think of the judges summing up?

[lookout]

It is a forum. People exchange information & sources within thread discussion.

What do you think of the judges summing up?

They knew nothing !

[lookout]

It's by far the easiest thing in the world to continue condemning a man who you've already declared as guilty and spent nearly 3/4's of his life in prison.
It's not so easy when that person is innocent with no evidence found at the crime scene to prove he was there.

If I'd known for sure that he had been/ was guilty, I wouldn't be on the forum because there'd be nothing further to discuss and no point in being here.
Only those who have an axe to grind will kick a man when he's down.

[Adam]

It's by far the easiest thing in the world to continue condemning a man who you've already declared as guilty and spent nearly 3/4's of his life in prison.
It's not so easy when that person is innocent with no evidence found at the crime scene to prove he was there.

If I'd known for sure that he had been/ was guilty, I wouldn't be on the forum because there'd be nothing further to discuss and no point in being here.
Only those who have an axe to grind will kick a man when he's down.

You have given me a thread idea 

[Adam]

Will go into Wilkes's book on this soon. Unless someone else has the book & wants to. Other books must also have information on it.

[lookout]

You have given me a thread idea

Oh goody  I can't wait.