Is there anything that you have come across that makes you doubt Jeremy being guilty...in all the evidence you have read.....For example do you believe everything that Julie M said? Do you believe Dovey when he said a police officer did attend the bank with the two girls and two weeks later that same police officer cam back to take a statement from me. Do you believe in everything that Stan Jones did and said? Things like that. Sorry for not making it clear I am a bit neurotic today lol 
Your examples don't appear to relate to your questions, but I'll provide a brief answer as best I can, then we can pick out particular points if you wish.
Q1: Is there anything that you have come across that makes you doubt Jeremy being guilty.A: I knew almost nothing about the case until a few years ago, in fact I can't put my hand on my heart and say that I was actually even aware of the cases existence before that time.
For reasons that I won't go into, I became aware of the case together with the claims that it was a massive miscarriage of justice, so rather than listen to other peoples views, be it friends or family or articles in newspapers, documentaries or films, I decided to set about looking at it on my own terms to see where I stood, where my opinions and views lay. To this date, I have never read any of the books associated with the case, Wilkes, Lomax', Collins, none of them.
At first I read on the various forums and JB's official site(s), different claims which alledgedly supported his innocence, and to say I was shocked is an understatement, the various claims on the face of it certainly had substance and I really struggled to come up with plausable alternative scenarios. So at that stage I did contemplate the seemingly very real possibility that Jeremy was innocent of the crimes he had been convicted of.
I lost interest in the case until one day I accidentally stumbled upon this very forum, I seem to recall I was redirected here from a link given in a comment to some news article, it was the first time that I had seen the case actually debated and discussed, rather than there just being some sort of rhetoric ramblings from campaigners.
Mike provided many documents at that time and there were further documents on the SleuthingForJustice site. After reading every statement, report or other case related document I could get my hands on, I started asking questions on the forum, a member by the name of 'Kaldin' was a big influence at that stage.
I very quickly discovered that the various claims being made by JB's supporters, were not quite what they seemed, the two phone logs were simply a record of the same conversation, one recorded by the sender, the other by the receiver. The 'police were in conversation', turned out to be nothing of the kind. The female body seen through the kitchen window turned out to be mistaken identity. One by one the various claims were stripped away and I actually felt insulted that I had been lied to, supporters of Jeremy were actively trying to mislead people by cherry picking things and showing them out of context, and then just coming up with out and out lies about other things that they couldn't possibly know or couldn't possibly be true.
So from that point on, I had the opinion that Jeremy was indeed guilty, I intended to stay open minded enough for that opinion to change, but the more and more details I became aware of, the stronger my opinion became.
So I suppose the short answer would have been: No, or at least not since I educated myself on the details of the case.
Q2: For example do you believe everything that Julie M said? Do you believe Dovey when he said a police officer did attend the bank with the two girls and two weeks later that same police officer cam back to take a statement from me. Do you believe in everything that Stan Jones did and said? Things like that. Sorry for not making it clear I am a bit neurotic todayI tend to come at things from the other way, rather than think about whether something was true or not, I would simply have no opinion until it was shown to me that something else had actually taken place.
I cannot possibly know whether a person is being or has been honest, or not, without evidence to support it, so I am not in a position to to be able to believe or not believe everything a person has said, and consequently I often simply have no opinion.
To pick out your three examples:
A) Julie Mugford. Whilst I believe the essence of her evidence, I believe she knew a lot more, a lot earlier than she had let on, quite how much I do not know. Obviously this is just me speculating.
B) Dovey. The trouble with this is that your information only comes from the 2002 statement which I posted on this forum. From what I understand and I have only heard this second or even third hand, during the appeal Dovey had a complete memory breakdown and could not recall any of the details surrounding the incident, the 2002 statement is in contrast to the original evidence. So whilst there may be more to it, I suspect that there is not.
C) Stan Jones. There isn't anything in particular that jumps out at me with SBJ, is there a particular incident you had in mind?
