The Noble Cause Framing Theory

[guest7363]

That is what I find so hard to understand |Lookout  Have always believed Jeremy would have to be a psychopath to carry out these murders and we haven't the slightest hint that he is.  In fact quite the opposite is true, all  the evidence points to him  being extremely normal with no sign of personality disorders or psychopathy. Surely someone like Suzette Ford would have known if Jeremy had sown signs of this as well as Julie Mugford but for all her accusations we never heard a word about him being jealous, over controlling or violent with her.  There was the odd squabble but nothing strange about that. imo

IM sorry Maggie but I remember this Mass killer Jeremy Bamber launched a vicious attack on a fellow prisoner with a broken bottle.

 He rammed the jagged edges of a sauce bottle into his victim's face and tried to cut off his nose and ears. The inmate's scalp was also cut open. I think you have to be a little strange to be able to do this?

[Jan]

Can you provide me with the reference? I have read Jeremy told Police that Sheila had recently indulged in target practice. Didn't he also have a key to the door which was forced?

I think if you read his OS he actually played down her handling of guns. He did not make a big issue of it. If you are around people handling guns all your life it does not take a lot of working out to how how to use them

[lookout]

IM sorry Maggie but I remember this Mass killer Jeremy Bamber launched a vicious attack on a fellow prisoner with a broken bottle.

 He rammed the jagged edges of a sauce bottle into his victim's face and tried to cut off his nose and ears. The inmate's scalp was also cut open. I think you have to be a little strange to be able to do this?

Ralf,,on the occasion that Jeremy used violence with a broken bottle was when an inmate came up behind him with a knife,while Jeremy was on the phone. The other guy had cut Jeremy and as a consequence,,, he'd received a wound requiring several stitches. If Jeremy hadn't fought back,,the guy would have killed him.
Nothing much came of that incident,,nor have I seen anything pertaining to the other guys injuries.

[Caroline]

I think everyone has doubts Caroline I just read an article from david james smith who visited Jeremy in jail and did a lot of research. I worried about those tears. I wondered if they were real and what he really felt. I looked and looked at his face and tried to prod and provoke different reactions. I could not say I ever felt overtly manipulated, but of course I just may not have noticed it was happening.
I had said on the way in that I feared I would find him repulsive, but in the event, I found him all too human and understandable. Except for the part of him that I felt was hidden. The corner of his soul that carried the knowledge of what had really happened that night 25 years ago,
and who really had killed his family.
He knows the truth. And he is the only person in the world who does.
Was it Sheila? Was it Jeremy?
Reader, I have no idea

Hi Ralf, I've read the article and can understand his feelings. He's right, only Jeremy knows for sure and it's a fascinating case because you just can't stop wondering.

[Caroline]

Ralf,,on the occasion that Jeremy used violence with a broken bottle was when an inmate came up behind him with a knife,while Jeremy was on the phone. The other guy had cut Jeremy and as a consequence,,, he'd received a wound requiring several stitches. If Jeremy hadn't fought back,,the guy would have killed him.
Nothing much came of that incident,,nor have I seen anything pertaining to the other guys injuries.

Hi Lookout, I'm sorry but that's not correct. Jeremy attacked a prisoner in 1996 with the bottle because the guy tried to pick a fight in was in 2004 that he was slashed in the neck while on the phone. They were separate incidents.

[guest7363]

Hi Lookout, I'm sorry but that's not correct. Jeremy attacked a prisoner in 1996 with the bottle because the guy tried to pick a fight in was in 2004 that he was slashed in the neck while on the phone. They were separate incidents.

Thats totally correct Caroline read both articles  myself thanks  for clearing this up. Im affraid you have to talk to people who have worked with him inside to get a true picture.

[Alias]

Hi Lookout, I'm sorry but that's not correct. Jeremy attacked a prisoner in 1996 with the bottle because the guy tried to pick a fight in was in 2004 that he was slashed in the neck while on the phone. They were separate incidents.

Was it after the physical evidence was destroyed? This dude had nothing to do wiht that, but I can see why Jeremy would be a tad unbalanced after that!

[Caroline]

Was it after the physical evidence was destroyed? This dude had nothing to do wiht that, but I can see why Jeremy would be a tad unbalanced after that!

The blood evidence was destroyed in Feb 96, the attack happened in May however, I have no idea whether Jeremy knew that the blood evidence had been destroyed at this time. It was a pretty bad attack and it seems he was a little more than a tad unbalanced. Then again, prison is a dog eat dog environment..


http://www.thefreelibrary.com/KILLER+BAMBER%27S+BROKEN+BOTTLE+JAIL+ATTACK.-a061330122

[lookout]

  I hadn't known about the 1996 episode,,only that the guy who stabbed Jeremy apparently went around stabbing other inmates as well,,a prize lunatic.
However,,I took it that when the guy jumped Jeremy from behind,,that Jeremy had used self-defence.

Not one link is the same as another at all. Although both reports stated the same amount of stitches,,one was just a superficial wound,,while the other was centimeters away from the jugular.

I think it's best not to read too much into most of the links as they're all based on supposition,being that none of the authors were present when the tragedy happened.

[Alias]

The blood evidence was destroyed in Feb 96, the attack happened in May however, I have no idea whether Jeremy knew that the blood evidence had been destroyed at this time. It was a pretty bad attack and it seems he was a little more than a tad unbalanced. Then again, prison is a dog eat dog environment..


http://www.thefreelibrary.com/KILLER+BAMBER%27S+BROKEN+BOTTLE+JAIL+ATTACK.-a061330122

That was sarcasm!  I don´t consider cutting up someone "a tad unbalanced".

[Martin]

So Martin - I think  what you are saying is this argument that EP used whatever means they could to convict a guilty man would then mean that if for example the new evidence is that there was a wealth of information about Sheila which was not presented in court  , then the argument would be that it would not lead to the conviction being squashed, because the police kept it back in order to secure their ultimate aim - to put a guilty man behind bars.

And once you use this argument then this would neatly cover a huge amount of scenarios that may released by previously unseen evidence coming to light?

So in effect the only information that would ensure the release of JB would be Proof of his innocence that might come from a whistle blower? Or a document that proved the phone call from NB in an indisputable manner.

Am I understanding you correctly?

You certainly are.

You have summarized the mechanics of it very well. The individual is weaker than the state.

[Martin]

Hi Ralf, I've read the article and can understand his feelings. He's right, only Jeremy knows for sure and it's a fascinating case because you just can't stop wondering.

That basically thoughtless statement is not neutral, but actually implies Jeremy’s guilt.

It would be fair to say that if he is guilty, then he is the only one who knows it with certainty, but the opposite does not apply.

If Jeremy is innocent, then a number policemen know it with absolute certainty, because they were there when Sheila was alive in the house or when her body was found- assuming Sheila did it.

Logic is not your strong point.

Thinking can go wrong because people try to impose symmetry where asymmetry applies.

[Jan]

Martin, the main hope then is that the Stephen Lawrence case could be a flash point for change  as in the end the truth did come out. Perhaps the tide is turning. But it takes some brave people and a lot of determination. I do however now understand the full implications of your posts.

[lookout]

Di Stefano didn't believe that it was Sheila either.

[Caroline]

That basically thoughtless statement is not neutral, but actually implies Jeremy’s guilt.

It would be fair to say that if he is guilty, then he is the only one who knows it with certainty, but the opposite does not apply.

If Jeremy is innocent, then a number policemen know it with absolute certainty, because they were there when Sheila was alive in the house or when her body was found- assuming Sheila did it.

Logic is not your strong point.

Thinking can go wrong because people try to impose symmetry where asymmetry applies.

It certainly isn't yours!!