The Threat.

[Jan]

Without taking into consideration whether a letter was sent or not I think the article itself sounded vindictive and accusing of certain people totally without any proof whatsoever.

I totally agree especially when on of those people has no right of reply.

[Jan]

its got to be somone who knows him how else would they he doded a bullet.

Do we even know if he did?

[nugnug]

why would they say it if he hadent.

[tyler]

Well said Jan

I would think a writer would have great difficulty in changing the direction on where the book is leading one too.

From what PH told me it was not a book set out to prove innocence or guilt, but to highlight inaccuracies performed from the onset to the present. 

From what I have gathered PH has been to Canada and, New Zealand and interviewed the majority of those who were involved at the time, including the infermus  Sgt Jones.

It will interesting reading, that's if the book ever hits the shelves.  We have been waiting for this book for a long time.  It appears to have its setback in a legal capacity. What that is we don't know. 

Hi Patti. I agree with you that the Author has never stated as to whether he believes Jeremy to be innocent or guilty. But he did believe that the case was a MOJ. He appears to have changed his mind and that is obviously his perogative. However,he has stated previously that he believes the silencer evidence was faked,so,as I have asked before,if Jeremy was convicted on corrupt evidence,regardless of guilt/innocence,does that not make his case a MOJ?

[nugnug]

well in terms of law theres no such things as a moj just an unsafe conviction.

it makes the conviction unsafe.

[Patti]

its got to be somone who knows him how else would they he doded a bullet.

I don't he has dodged a bullet do you Nugs? I think that was put there to frighten. 

[nugnug]

if he hadent i dont see the poit of saying it.

[tyler]

It does seem a shame that he probably had a falling out with just one person and then for some unknown reason others have to be dragged into it all. And now everyone and their dog is wading in for the opportunity of an argument. The more I think about it the more I think- there are sadly a lot of possibilities of who could be involved.

Who was the 'one' person that you refer to? He had a falling out with two members of this forum and was banned due to threatening behaviour. I understand he was banned from the red forum for the same reason? And I am led to believe that he also had a falling out with the Campaign Team,though for a different reason. I do not know how relations are between himself and Jeremy. Does anybody else know?

[tyler]

well in terms of law theres no such things as a moj just an unsafe conviction.

it makes the conviction unsafe.

thanks for explaining that Nugs.

[Patti]

Hi Patti. I agree with you that the Author has never stated as to whether he believes Jeremy to be innocent or guilty. But he did believe that the case was a MOJ. He appears to have changed his mind and that is obviously his perogative. However,he has stated previously that he believes the silencer evidence was faked,so,as I have asked before,if Jeremy was convicted on corrupt evidence,regardless of guilt/innocence,does that not make his case a MOJ?

Hi Tyler

I would imagine that all there is to know about the case has already been scrutinized by all previous authors' including those who have been interested in the case, such as we are.  One thing is clear and I am sure everyone would agree and that is the mishandling/gross misconducts of the case.  Whether Jeremy is guilty or not he did deserve a fair handling of the case along with a fair trial.  So I agree with you 100%

The jury were unaware of a majority of things in my opinion which I think is unfair.

I often wonder if the case were put to trial now based on the evidence we have now, would the result be different?   

[ngb1066]

Who was the 'one' person that you refer to? He had a falling out with two members of this forum and was banned due to threatening behaviour. I understand he was banned from the red forum for the same reason? And I am led to believe that he also had a falling out with the Campaign Team,though for a different reason. I do not know how relations are between himself and Jeremy. Does anybody else know?

He has had no contact with Jeremy or the campaign team for many months.

 

[tyler]

Hi Tyler

I would imagine that all there is to know about the case has already been scrutinized by all previous authors' including those who have been interested in the case, such as we are.  One thing is clear and I am sure everyone would agree and that is the mishandling/gross misconducts of the case.  Whether Jeremy is guilty or not he did deserve a fair handling of the case along with a fair trial.  So I agree with you 100%

The jury were unaware of a majority of things in my opinion which I think is unfair.

I often wonder if the case were put to trial now based on the evidence we have now, would the result be different?   

Hi Patti. I think that the result could have been different back in 86 if Jeremy had had a better defense team. Personally I think they were woefully inadequate.

[tyler]

He has had no contact with Jeremy or the campaign team for many months.

Thank you ngb.But do you know if there is any amniosity between them? As in,do you know if Jeremy feels disappointed, or even angry that the book is to now take a different direction,one that is going to be less favourable to his cause and even maybe potentially damaging to him? I will understand if you'd prefer not to say.

[ngb1066]

Thank you ngb.But do you know if there is any amniosity between them? As in,do you know if Jeremy feels disappointed, or even angry that the book is to now take a different direction,one that is going to be less favourable to his cause and even maybe potentially damaging to him? I will understand if you'd prefer not to say.

I have not spoken to Jeremy about it Tyler.  I understand that at one time there was regular and close contact between Paul Harrison and members of the campaign team and that earlier this year that contact was ended.  I do not believe there was any personal row beteen Paul Harrison and Jeremy.  I would imagine that Jeremy is not at all happy with the way things have turned out.   I do have some further information on the circumstances in which the contact was ended and I have formed a view about the underlying reasons, but at this stage I do not feel able to post that here.  I will however say that I very much doubt if Paul Harrison has, as he claims, finally established guilt beyond any doubt.  Obviously we will have to await the book but I do not believe any significant new evidence has been discovered.

 

[tyler]

I have not spoken to Jeremy about it Tyler.  I understand that at one time there was regular and close contact between Paul Harrison and members of the campaign team and that earlier this year that contact was ended.  I do not believe there was any personal row beteen Paul Harrison and Jeremy.  I would imagine that Jeremy is not at all happy with the way things have turned out.   I do have some further information on the circumstances in which the contact was ended and I have formed a view about the underlying reasons, but at this stage I do not feel able to post that here.  I will however say that I very much doubt if Paul Harrison has, as he claims, finally established guilt beyond any doubt.  Obviously we will have to await the book but I do not believe any significant new evidence has been discovered.

Thank you ngb