Repository For Points/Questions Adam Has Failed To Address

[Adam]

But why a year after and just before the Bamber trial? Intriguing.

They went to the bank in October 85.

The trial was October 86.

So they paid the money back & admitted the crime a year before the trial.

[lookout]

How very convenient !

[grahameb]

They went to the bank in October 85.

The trial was October 86.

So they paid the money back & admitted the crime a year before the trial.

As I said. Why do this a year later just before the trial as the police were building a case against Bamber. She still left it a year before she confessed. Too convenient if you ask me. And you REALLY cannot see the connection?

[lookout]

Grahame,,there's a vast difference in " can't " and " won't ".

[Adam]

Anyway.

The main issue is Julie went the police after a month of soul searching.

She made  her WS. Everyone can read it. Her diary is online. Everyone can read it.

The 'only' reason she would have to lie was because she was 'apparently' jilted. The police had 'nothing' I repeat 'nothing' on her to force her to lie.

[grahameb]

No. She went to the police a year after her crime.

[Adam]

No. She went to the police a year after her crime.

They went to the bank a year before the trial. Not just before as you claimed.

What has Julie's fraud using Susan's cheque book got to do with the case ? Nothing.

[lookout]

Go and study law,Adam. You'll find it had a LOT to do with the case.

[grahameb]

They went to the bank a year before the trial. Not just before as you claimed.

What has Susans cheque book fraud got to do with the case ? Nothing.

I dispute that Adam. If it had nothing to do with the Bamber case then why were the police so interested in it so as to sent the same officer along with her to the bank? Haven't read that the wheels of justice turn slowly? And Hamlet's complaint as he was contemplating suicide, "The law's delay"? The police were collecting evidence against Bamber almost from the time of the killings.

[susan]

Adam are you frightened to mention Julie's cheque book fraud instead of Susans cheque book fraud time and time again always thought you were a programmed parrot.

[Adam]

I dispute that Adam. If it had nothing to do with the Bamber case then why were the police so interested in it so as to sent the same officer along with her to the bank? Haven't read that the wheels of justice turn slowly? And Hamlet's complaint as he was contemplating suicide, "The law's delay"? The police were collecting evidence against Bamber almost from the time of the killings.

My understanding is Susan went to the police a month after Julie did.

Susan was also an important witness in the case. She felt it was right to own up about her cheque book fraud beforehand. Julie was aware Susan was being interviewed by the police and also confessed around the same time.

The police advised them both to go to the bank & pay them back. Stan Jones escorted them.

Nothing sinister. And nothing to do with Julies already completed WS.

[Alias]

We can talk and talk and talk, page up, page down, bottom line remains: had the jury known about Julie´s past crimes they would have regarded her as an untrustworthy person and would not have been likely to believe her testimony. Even more so if they had known about the NOTW deal she had in place - and she did have it in place prior to the trial, the newspaper footed her and her mother´s hotel bill during trial.... We all know this.

[Adam]

We can talk and talk and talk, page up, page down, bottom line remains: had the jury known about Julie´s past crimes they would have regarded her as an untrustworthy person and would not have been likely to believe her testimony. Even more so if they had known about the NOTW deal she had in place - and she did have it in place prior to the trial, the newspaper fotted her and her mother´s hotel bill during trial.... We all know this.

They did know about Susans cheque book fraud & Jeremys caravan break in. I have said this several times.

Jeremy also had a NOTW deal. It has not been proved that Julies NOTW deal was illegal.

[maggie]

They did know about Susans cheque book fraud & Jeremys caravan break in. I have said this several times.

Jeremy also had a NOTW deal. It has not been proved that Julies NOTW deal was illegal.

Can  I recommend you read  this book as a balance against Roger Wilkes'  book Adam.  You will find it very easy to read, it is clear and to the point and explores much of the later discovered documents etc.

http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/s-c-lomax      I am sure it will add to your knowledge.   

[Adam]

Why hasn't Jeremy recommended Wilkes's book.

He was interviewed for it & it is an unbiased factual book. Written by an investigative reporter.