What Jeremy Bamber Faces

Started by Erik Narramore, January 30, 2022, 02:39:14 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1
User actions

Erik Narramore

January 30, 2022, 02:39:14 AM
There is scientific and forensic evidence against Jeremy, it's just that it's not direct evidence.  Instead, it supports a circumstantial case.

Julie Mugford's evidence is, arguably, direct evidence in that she is reporting to the court a confession on the part of Jeremy Bamber.
"If the accusation is not proved beyond reasonable doubt against the man accused in the dock, then by law he is entitled to be acquitted, because that is the way our rules work.  It is no concession to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is entitled by law to a verdict of Not Guilty." - R v Adams

Erik Narramore

#1
January 31, 2022, 02:36:30 AM
.
"If the accusation is not proved beyond reasonable doubt against the man accused in the dock, then by law he is entitled to be acquitted, because that is the way our rules work.  It is no concession to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is entitled by law to a verdict of Not Guilty." - R v Adams

Erik Narramore

#2
January 31, 2022, 02:51:53 AM
.
"If the accusation is not proved beyond reasonable doubt against the man accused in the dock, then by law he is entitled to be acquitted, because that is the way our rules work.  It is no concession to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is entitled by law to a verdict of Not Guilty." - R v Adams
Print
Go Up Pages1
User actions