Times, they are a changing....

[-Harters-]

Good gracious,you'd think it was only me who spoke about the family.Look around you,look at the dozens of links.Do they not mention ALL the family.? After all,they're as much a part of this as anyone else.

Most people can form an alternative view yet still remain civil and courteous to all, you don't seem to be able to control yourself and it simply reflects badly on you. That's not a dig, just an observation.

[lookout]

Not by choice Lookout.

It still doesn't alter the fact that their names are splashed everywhere,yet I get singled out for daring to mention them.

[maggie]

and it's my choice to form an opinion of someone on this forum that constantly attacks the family. imo

Well Im not sure about that as that means we can attack anyone we disagree with. Personally I dont believe that gets anyone anywhere. That also means if you can attack lookout then she can attack you.

[lookout]

Most people can form an alternative view yet still remain civil and courteous to all, you don't seem to be able to control yourself and it simply reflects badly on you. That's not a dig, just an observation.

Birds of a feather,eh.?

[mertol22]

is obsolete important?

vhs recorders have some suprising features despite their now cave man status, tv magazines of the month might shed some light

[vidvic]

Well Im not sure about that as that means we can attack anyone we disagree with. Personally I dont believe that gets anyone anywhere. That also means if you can attack lookout then she can attack you.

If you knew me or the way that I post I would never attack anyone that hasn't attacked me first. Lookout has said some ghastly things to me and about the family, which everyone is entitled to do, but not in the way lookout has done in the past. I fully accept that people believe the family framed Bamber and I only ask the chance to fight their corner.

[-Harters-]

Birds of a feather,eh.?

Even the moderators of this forum provide you with guidance:

 "Please ensure that references to the victims in any case discussed on the forum are made in a respectful manner. Please remember that victims may include those living as well as those deceased."

It's up to you whether you adhere to it or not, as I said, the animosity you display simply reflects badly upon yourself, it makes no difference to anything else.

[lookout]

If you knew me or the way that I post I would never attack anyone that hasn't attacked me first. Lookout has said some ghastly things to me and about the family, which everyone is entitled to do, but not in the way lookout has done in the past. I fully accept that people believe the family framed Bamber and I only ask the chance to fight their corner.

Just a minute you. You haven't exactly been the friendliest of people since I came onto this forum. I immediately had my guard up and realised what sort of a person you were going to be,and I was right.
You've dished out some nasty one-liners at every opportunity.How do you expect me to be.? I'll not creep or kow-tow to people like you,mate,so forget it.

[vidvic]

Lookout. In October you said you had a trusted friend who told you that the Boutflours had a secret bit of information on Jeremy. This week you said it was the Eatons. You told us that you had a trusted friend who knew the family very well and they were nasty people. This is not my experience whatsoever. Which family actually is it that your friend knew?

You asked Mike if he knew what this secret was and then said that you'd try and find out from your trusted friend I presume? Would you not have asked anyway?

[mertol22]

Just a minute you. You haven't exactly been the friendliest of people since I came onto this forum. I immediately had my guard up and realised what sort of a person you were going to be,and I was right.
You've dished out some nasty one-liners at every opportunity.How do you expect me to be.? I'll not creep or kow-tow to people like you,mate,so forget it.

i remember well both vidvic and then hartley both one night ganged up on mike , they were both guilty of bullying mike, vidvic should not have to fight their corner by doing so tells me they might have something to defend, Lookout has done nothing wrong here.

[Lugg]

Jeremy claimed in his 7th/8th August statement that on the night of the five murders, he watched a programme called RECOVERY then went to bed at 11pm.

Then a month later, his story changes and he went to bed at 11:30-11:40.

The TV programme 'Recovery' didn't finish until midnight.

I'm not sure what the police made of this at the time, whether they pressed him on it. 

A bit errelevant really though isn't it? I bet that there are many people who can't remember what time they went to bed on a certain day after a few weeks went by? And perhaps he didn't sit through the whole of the program? Tell you what though. If he did the murders he was pretty crap in setting up an alibi.

[vidvic]

i remember well both vidvic and then hartley both one night ganged up on mike , they were both guilty of bullying mike, vidvic should not have to fight their corner by doing so tells me they might have something to defend, Lookout has done nothing wrong here.

so Mertol, you would not defend your friends if they are lied about?

[-Harters-]

A bit errelevant really though isn't it? I bet that there are many people who can't remember what time they went to bed on a certain day after a few weeks went by? And perhaps he didn't sit through the whole of the program? Tell you what though. If he did the murders he was pretty crap in setting up an alibi.

Given the title of this thread, it seems extremely and specifically relevant.

[-Harters-]

Given the title of this thread, it seems extremely and specifically relevant.

Unless this thread is actually a Bob Dylan sing-along and I've got the wrong end of the proverbial stick. 

[petey]

Unless this thread is actually a Bob Dylan sing-along and I've got the wrong end of the proverbial stick. 

No singing and dancing tonight. Engage me in some debate and I'll give it my best shot to counter your arguments.