An innocent Jeremy = an amazingly brave (and stupid) Julie:

[Adam]

Thanks Jan.......  food for thought!!

Would you find it surprising that Julie would go to the police a month after the massacre, if Jeremy was innocent ? Because he apparently jilted her !

She would be doing herself more harm than an innocent Jeremy.

Seems amazingly vindictive, stupid, brave and reckless. She was not stupid and was studying for her second degree. Women are usually a lot more cunning when seeking out revenge on men.

She didn't approach the police in a rage of anger after Jeremy apparently jilted her, as she had already told five people what she knew. So her approach and WS was hardly made up as she went along. If it was the police would have sussed her out straight away.

[susan]

Thanks Jan.......  food for thought!!

Maggie

I am trying to get my tiny brain around what this could imply have you any idea?

[maggie]

Would you find it surprising that Julie would go to the police a month after the massacre, if Jeremy was innocent ?

She would be doing herself more harm than an innocent Jeremy.

Seems amazingly vindictive, stupid, brave and reckless. She was not stupid and was studying for her second degree. Women are usually a lot more cunning when seeking out revenge on men.

She didn't approach the police in a rage of anger after Jeremy apparently jilted her, as she had already told five people what she knew. So her approach and WS was hardly made up as she went along.

Sorry Adam but I wouldn't find it particularly surprising, am afraid I personally find it far more surprising that she stayed with a young man, however much she 'loved' him who spoke about murdering his parents and continued to stay with him after they whole family had been murdered and he had admitted at the very least that he hired a hit man to do it.   

I find this almost impossible to understand and remember I have been a young woman of her age with a certain degree of intelligence.  I can tell you I would have never stayed within a hundred miles of such an appalling person and my main reason at that age would have been that I would have been absolutely terrified of him.

I might add she claims to have been terrified and yet she told 5 people who may very well have repeated it back to Jeremy.  I do make allowances for youth, in fact I have 2 daughters myself who are far from strait laced and sheltered but neither of them would have stayed within a hundred miles of the persona she paints of JB and his actions.  They would both have told me he was weird, what he was saying etc.and I would have told them to keep well away from him.

It's a part of this case which doesn't make any sense to me at all.

[Caroline]

Maggie

I am trying to get my tiny brain around what this could imply have you any idea?

That prints were found, that they know who's but they ain't tellin.

[lookout]

That prints were found, that they know who's but they ain't tellin.

One thing for sure,they couldn't have been Jeremy's because we'd have all known about it long before now.

[maggie]

One thing for sure,they couldn't have been Jeremy's because we'd have all known about it long before now.

I have never been able to think of a reasonable explanation why EP would have framed Jeremy Bamber.  However, have just had a thought come into my head .....

We know EP went with four murders and a suicide but some members of the force were never convinced and believed it was JB, over a short time those believing him guilty managed to convince doubters he was in fact guilty.  At the same time the relatives were pressurising with the same opinion. 

Taff was removed from the investigation and the case became five murders with Jeremy Bamber as the perpetrator. This caused an uproar in the media as EP were seen as incompetent idiots and Taff Jones a highly successful DCI was personally diminished etc.

What if, at some point after changing direction and the evidence of the moderator had been exposed there was a discovery which showed proof JB couldn't have carried out the murders or that Sheila did?  Would EP have had the courage to say they had been wrong all along, Taff was right and Sheila did kill the family and commit suicide. 

Most of EP force wouldn't need to know about such evidence it could have been disappeared by a few people and no one was ever the wiser?  That would be a reason for EP to frame or not just tell 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth'

Just a thought and there may be a reason I haven't thought of why this isn't possible any ideas?

[Adam]

Sorry Adam but I wouldn't find it particularly surprising, am afraid I personally find it far more surprising that she stayed with a young man, however much she 'loved' him who spoke about murdering his parents and continued to stay with him after they whole family had been murdered and he had admitted at the very least that he hired a hit man to do it.   

I find this almost impossible to understand and remember I have been a young woman of her age with a certain degree of intelligence.  I can tell you I would have never stayed within a hundred miles of such an appalling person and my main reason at that age would have been that I would have been absolutely terrified of him.

I might add she claims to have been terrified and yet she told 5 people who may very well have repeated it back to Jeremy.  I do make allowances for youth, in fact I have 2 daughters myself who are far from strait laced and sheltered but neither of them would have stayed within a hundred miles of the persona she paints of JB and his actions.  They would both have told me he was weird, what he was saying etc.and I would have told them to keep well away from him.

It's a part of this case which doesn't make any sense to me at all.

I'm sorry but nothing is more surprising than a lone woman approaching the police and trying to frame an innocent man.
With no evidence to back up her claims.
 

All the other issues have had threads created.

She stayed with Jeremy because she loved him and did not believe he would do anything. Family massacres in TD were zero. Her WS also says there was a period in their 18 months together where Jeremy didn't mention it.

She stayed with him for one month afterwards. A young woman in turmoil while he whisked her around England and Europe. Being told there was nothing she could do and she would not believed. Going to the police after speaking to 5 people.

There is a recent thread on Julie approaching 5 people beforehand. She hasn't claimed it. It's in Wilkes's book. I have no doubt it is true. Telling five people beforehand badly refutes the claim she went to the police in a rage because she was jilted.

Time to apologise to Julie ?

[maggie]

I'm sorry but nothing is more surprising than a lone woman approaching the police and trying to frame an innocent man.
With no evidence to back up her claims.
 

All the other issues have had threads created.

She stayed with Jeremy because she loved him and did not believe he would do anything. Family massacres in TD were zero. Her WS also says there was a period in their 18 months together where Jeremy didn't mention it.

She stayed with him for one month afterwards. A young woman in turmoil while he whisked her around England and Europe. Being told there was nothing she could do and she would not believed. Going to the police after speaking to 5 people.

There is a recent thread on Julie approaching 5 people beforehand. She hasn't claimed it. It's in Wilkes's book. I have no doubt it is true. Telling five people beforehand badly refutes the claim she went to the police in a rage because she was jilted.

Time to apologise to Julie ?

She was very close to her mother, she wasn''t alone.  Why not tell her mother?

[Adam]

She was very close to her mother, she wasn''t alone.  Why not tell her mother?

Who knows.

Maybe she did not want to worry her.

There is not much written about Julie being with her mother after the massacre. She was with Jeremy, his family and friends most of the time. Eventually having time to speak to her own trusted friends.

[Jan]

I have never been able to think of a reasonable explanation why EP would have framed Jeremy Bamber.  However, have just had a thought come into my head .....

We know EP went with four murders and a suicide but some members of the force were never convinced and believed it was JB, over a short time those believing him guilty managed to convince doubters he was in fact guilty.  At the same time the relatives were pressurising with the same opinion. 

Taff was removed from the investigation and the case became five murders with Jeremy Bamber as the perpetrator. This caused an uproar in the media as EP were seen as incompetent idiots and Taff Jones a highly successful DCI was personally diminished etc.

What if, at some point after changing direction and the evidence of the moderator had been exposed there was a discovery which showed proof JB couldn't have carried out the murders or that Sheila did?  Would EP have had the courage to say they had been wrong all along, Taff was right and Sheila did kill the family and commit suicide. 

Most of EP force wouldn't need to know about such evidence it could have been disappeared by a few people and no one was ever the wiser?  That would be a reason for EP to frame or not just tell 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth'

Just a thought and there may be a reason I haven't thought of why this isn't possible any ideas?

There was a lot of pressure that is quite clear from the Dickinson report and I agree that EP were given a hard time in the press as well so it is a possibility. Also I have to say that I can see why Jeremy clings to any little clue of what the truth is because we have to remember if he is innocent he actually knows very little . He does not know what happened when the raid team went in or about any subsequent investigations or interviews . He is grasping at straws all the time .Julie must know the truth though because if he is innocent she is telling lies - although as she said in the newspaper interview he never told her that he did it.

[maggie]

Who knows.

Maybe she did not want to worry her.

There is not much written about Julie being with her mother after the massacre. She was with Jeremy, his family and friends most of the time. Eventually having time to speak to her own trusted friends.

Sorry, we're talking about 5 murders Adam, it all may be true but it's difficult to believe. imo  You are correct she was with Jeremy and his family and friends, I would have thought if she was worried and fearful she would have found a way to speak to her mother sometime over the few weeks before she went to the police.  Her mother knew Jeremy well, it doesn't make any sense imo.  There's something that doesn't get.

[Jan]

Sorry, we're talking about 5 murders Adam, it all may be true but it's difficult to believe. imo

that will be the trusted friend who slept with her boyfriend then.

[scipio_usmc]

I have never been able to think of a reasonable explanation why EP would have framed Jeremy Bamber.  However, have just had a thought come into my head .....

We know EP went with four murders and a suicide but some members of the force were never convinced and believed it was JB, over a short time those believing him guilty managed to convince doubters he was in fact guilty.  At the same time the relatives were pressurising with the same opinion. 

Taff was removed from the investigation and the case became five murders with Jeremy Bamber as the perpetrator. This caused an uproar in the media as EP were seen as incompetent idiots and Taff Jones a highly successful DCI was personally diminished etc.

What if, at some point after changing direction and the evidence of the moderator had been exposed there was a discovery which showed proof JB couldn't have carried out the murders or that Sheila did?  Would EP have had the courage to say they had been wrong all along, Taff was right and Sheila did kill the family and commit suicide. 

Most of EP force wouldn't need to know about such evidence it could have been disappeared by a few people and no one was ever the wiser?  That would be a reason for EP to frame or not just tell 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth'

Just a thought and there may be a reason I haven't thought of why this isn't possible any ideas?

DCI Jones wasn't replaced and then instantly it treated as 5 murders.  They simply went over everything a new keeping an open mind.

There are countless cases where suspects are arrested and the let go and never tried because of insufficient evidence.  There is nothing to suggest that they would have had a problem with releasing him if they could not make the case.

The Dickinson Report was commissioned after they knew he was guilty and that there was nothing to refute it.  They wanted to make sure they didn't botch things in the future in such manner.  The investigators decided what happened prior to hearing from the people experts in the very areas in question relevant to figuring out what happened.  Many experts didn't look at everything till a month later.  They had to reply on photos at that point or examine physical evidence later than they should have.

They treated things in isolation being totally unaware of relevant factors and facts when writing reports such as the autopsy report. A very simple recommendation that should have been made was not because they were looking at more broad recommendations.  In firearm crimes they should always collect all firearms, ammunition and firearms related accessories.  They collected the firearms and accessories over the course of months.

 

[maggie]

DCI Jones wasn't replaced and then instantly it treated as 5 murders.  They simply went over everything a new keeping an open mind.

There are countless cases where suspects are arrested and the let go and never tried because of insufficient evidence.  There is nothing to suggest that they would have had a problem with releasing him if they could not make the case.

The Dickinson Report was commissioned after they knew he was guilty and that there was nothing to refute it.  They wanted to make sure they didn't botch things in the future in such manner.  The investigators decided what happened prior to hearing from the people experts in the very areas in question relevant to figuring out what happened.  Many experts didn't look at everything till a month later.  They had to reply on photos at that point or examine physical evidence later than they should have.

They treated things in isolation being totally unaware of relevant factors and facts when writing reports such as the autopsy report. A very simple recommendation that should have been made was not because they were looking at more broad recommendations.  In firearm crimes they should always collect all firearms, ammunition and firearms related accessories.  They collected the firearms and accessories over the course of months.

I know thanks scipio.

[Adam]

Sorry, we're talking about 5 murders Adam, it all may be true but it's difficult to believe. imo  You are correct she was with Jeremy and his family and friends, I would have thought if she was worried and fearful she would have found a way to speak to her mother sometime over the few weeks before she went to the police.  Her mother knew Jeremy well, it doesn't make any sense imo.  There's something that doesn't get.

Maybe they didn't have that sort of relationship. Anyway she spoke to five people so didn't speak to her mother. Or did she ?

Anyway it's up to her who she speaks to. As it happened it was five people, the police and the courts.