[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by InOne

See, that is why these papers are bollocks, just have these silly stories and no actual facts!!!

Let's be honest: very few of the 'papers' will report the facts - mostly because at this stage, they don't really know the facts - or rather, any facts they have at this point are scant to say the least - and most likely - neither do the police have anything incredibly significant or conclusive (or otherwise, they'd have released or charged the man by now).

I guess this is precisely the type of thing the Attorney General meant in respect of telling the media to effectively, "Get a grip"....

Whatever way.... the man has probably had the worst New Year ever.

Talking of which ... Happy New Year to you !!

[InOne]

Happy New Year Pyramid Do you use your real name on here?

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by InOne;40[COLOR=red

28764]Happy New Year Pyramid Do you use your real name on here?

Thanks! to you too.

My real name is Pyramid* !! Seeing as I'm older than the sands of time..... and certainly from what I see... a lot older than the majority on tibbs! Call me granny and the police will be looking for another homicidal maniac !!

[Angus]

Originally Posted by arista

So CJ loves Death
scared the kids.

This sort of smear campaign is outrageous and really should not be allowed - it's like a trial by newspaper. Whether he's guilty or not he's entitled to a fair and unbiased trial - what does it matter whether he's an eccentric, has blue hair, or is considered weird by some rather sheltered souls? When exactly was any of that a crime?

Personally, I still suspect he might be involved because of the circumstances, not because of how he looks or behaves, but until the police find some hard evidence he deserves the benefit of the doubt.

[InOne]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

Thanks! to you too.

My real name is Pyramid* !! Seeing as I'm older than the sands of time..... and certainly from what I see... a lot older than the majority on tibbs! Call me granny and the police will be looking for another homicidal maniac !!

Stop being so dramatic

[Novo]

His hair in that Photo is more Grey then Blue

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by angus58

This sort of smear campaign is outrageous and really should not be allowed - it's like a trial by newspaper. Whether he's guilty or not he's entitled to a fair and unbiased trial - what does it matter whether he's an eccentric, has blue hair, or is considered weird by some rather sheltered souls? When exactly was any of that a crime?

Personally, I still suspect he might be involved because of the circumstances, not because of how he looks or behaves, but until the police find some hard evidence he deserves the benefit of the doubt.

Agree.....

Originally Posted by InOne

Stop being so dramatic

Consider yourself Cursed !!!!

[JobsForTheBoys]

If he is released without charge will the newspapers still keep up with their character assasination of him or will they apologise to him?

[mrscolumbo]

Well I expect with little or no leads the police had to be seen to be doing something - Mr Jefferies a little too convenient as a suspect I fear - like saying the butler did it!

[InOne]

Originally Posted by mrscolumbo

Well I expect with little or no leads the police had to be seen to be doing something - Mr Jefferies a little too convenient as a suspect I fear - like saying the butler did it!

Yeah seems a little Scooby Do like.

And welcome to the forum

[arista]

Originally Posted by angus58

This sort of smear campaign is outrageous and really should not be allowed - it's like a trial by newspaper. Whether he's guilty or not he's entitled to a fair and unbiased trial - what does it matter whether he's an eccentric, has blue hair, or is considered weird by some rather sheltered souls? When exactly was any of that a crime?

Personally, I still suspect he might be involved because of the circumstances, not because of how he looks or behaves, but until the police find some hard evidence he deserves the benefit of the doubt.

Yes it is
he will have to move out of the area.


He has been made in to the
ultimate peeping tom peado

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by JobsForTheBoys

If he is released without charge will the newspapers still keep up with their character assasination of him or will they apologise to him?

Now this raises a question in my mind.

Never mind apologies...... if he is released without charge - I wonder if he is able to sue the newspapers for printing defammatory and libellious stories?

What I also find strange is: he worked at that school from 1967 to 2001 - if pupils found him so odd and he had anything 'suspect' (not killer wise, I mean in the way he is now being portrayed as some sick weirdo) - I doubt any private school would have retained his services. He worked there for 34 years - eccentric or not, he clearly wasn't that 'odd'.

It is all trial by media at this stage and it really is bang out of order. All this kind of nonsense should be embargoed until a final decision is made - ie: if and when he has been charged, placed in court for trial and found guilty (based on facts and forensics and not just circumstancial evidence - something I find a complete enigma).

[mrscolumbo]

Today's Telegraph has a piece quoting another ex tenent who says she would have been happy to leave the care of her child with Mr Jefferies and that he never entered the apartment without their permission - also agree 35 years at the same school and left without a blemish on his charactor why bother now to put any store by what ex pupils have got to say - who hasn't attending a school with the odd dubious teacher.

[Pyramid*]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...ays-woman.html

Have just read this.

What a load of baloney.

Let's start with the facts that put a whole different light on this woman's story.

She had been living in a refuge having left an abusive relationship - ie: she would have been in a very sensitive place emotionally and psychologically herself and would naturally be on the 'alert' - on the defensive due her own personal circumstances in having left an abusive relationship.

A man she clearly didn't like, began to pay her some attention. Hardly a crime. he and she happened to go to the same library, the same coffee shop, walk past the same bus stops: hardly unusual for 2 people in the same town to share the same haunts.

The paper reports that she 'confronted' him to say that she felt his behaviour wasn't normal and he replied with anger, "what do you think I am, some sort of pervert?". I'd say that any ordinary person, with very ordinary and normal intentions WOULD react like in that manner - if they were 'confronted' - especially if their intentions were innocent.

This man that she barely knew, she manages to pigeon hole as domineering, as a control freak and dominant towards women. How would she know this if she herself had not spent some time with him to determine this? Oh wait... she didn't ! On giving her 'story' her, it's claimed that she was weeping - what a load of utter piffle.

Another snippet in this story about former tenants who claimed he was a peeping tom type.

The couple lived below Jefferies for eight months from December 1998 and became convinced that he had secretly been into their flat.
But a home-made "security system" showed he had not.

Which proves one thing about this couple: they were wrong.

Absolutely shocking that this type of reporting is allowed to continue, it really is. If he's found guilty, let this stuff come out: but it's completely inappropriate at this crucial stage.

[Novo]

Obsessed with Death
Scared the Kids at the School
Peeping tom
eccentric meddler
Stalker
nutty professor


What is next to add to the list?

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Novo

Obsessed with Death
Scared the Kids at the School
Peeping tom
eccentric meddler
Stalker
nutty professor


What is next to add to the list?

Guilty......

Killer......

Murderer...........

[Novo]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...ays-woman.html

Have just read this.

What a load of baloney.

Let's start with the facts that put a whole different light on this woman's story.

She had been living in a refuge having left an abusive relationship - ie: she would have been in a very sensitive place emotionally and psychologically herself and would naturally be on the 'alert' - on the defensive due her own personal circumstances in having left an abusive relationship.

A man she clearly didn't like, began to pay her some attention. Hardly a crime. he and she happened to go to the same library, the same coffee shop, walk past the same bus stops: hardly unusual for 2 people in the same town to share the same haunts.

The paper reports that she 'confronted' him to say that she felt his behaviour wasn't normal and he replied with anger, "what do you think I am, some sort of pervert?". I'd say that any ordinary person, with very ordinary and normal intentions WOULD react like in that manner - if they were 'confronted' - especially if their intentions were innocent.

This man that she barely knew, she manages to pigeon hole as domineering, as a control freak and dominant towards women. How would she know this if she herself had not spent some time with him to determine this? Oh wait... she didn't ! On giving her 'story' her, it's claimed that she was weeping - what a load of utter piffle.

Another snippet in this story about former tenants who claimed he was a peeping tom type.



Which proves one thing about this couple: they were wrong.

Absolutely shocking that this type of reporting is allowed to continue, it really is. If he's found guilty, let this stuff come out: but it's completely inappropriate at this crucial stage.

"I'm a natural blonde and he'd comment on how nice my hair was - he did like blondes. "


Numerous other articles have said that he has never shown interest towards Women or Men

Sounds like someone trying to sneak in their 5 minutes of fame

[Novo]

Yesterday, as forensics officers continued to comb the Victorian building where Jefferies lives, a couple told how they nicknamed him "Hannibal Lecter" while living in one of his basement flats

^

Add Hannibal Lector to that list

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Novo

"I'm a natural blonde and he'd comment on how nice my hair was - he did like blondes. "


Numerous other articles have said that he has never shown interest towards Women or Men

Sounds like someone trying to sneak in their 5 minutes of fame

Yep, they all come crawling out of the woodwork it seems. Along with previous tenants who had their suspicious proved to be incorrect.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Novo

Yesterday, as forensics officers continued to comb the Victorian building where Jefferies lives, a couple told how they nicknamed him "Hannibal Lecter" while living in one of his basement flats

^

Add Hannibal Lector to that list

yeah, saw that. Over the years, I've 'known' many people who were a bit odd - recall nicknames my friends and I had for some (The Claw being one that sticks in my mind) - for a man who was nothing more than 'over friendly, overly tactile'. hardly makes them killers.

[mrscolumbo]

What scurrilous reporting by the Sun - why does she not want to be named probably of dubious character and couldn’t be relied on as a witness – having worked in a Library we often got people in very regularly some every day especially to use the computer and read the newspapers – being a literary man I expect Mr Jefferies frequented the Library more days than not, nothing suspicious in that also visiting the supermarket and bumping into your neighbour now and again is hardly the profile of a stalker with murder in mind!

[Zippy]

I reckon he's guilty as hell. Sorry, I just do.

The police reckon she was abducted from the house without any break in(so it was somebody she knew probably) then taken 3 miles away and dumped. I reckon he strangled her in an arguement and then knew it would be best to make it look like it happened away from the house. Makes him less of a suspect.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Zippy

I reckon he's guilty as hell. Sorry, I just do.

The police reckon she was abducted from the house without any break in(so it was somebody she knew probably) then taken 3 miles away and dumped. I reckon he strangled her in an arguement and then knew it would be best to make it look like it happened away from the house. Makes him less of a suspect.

Why are you sorry !!! You've got every right to think that if it's what you believe, I'm pretty sure you aren't alone either, there will be a lot who will think the same way.

Time will tell. In it's own very warped way, gruesome as it sounds, I do find a certain interest / slight fascination in these type of things - purely from the psychological interest / p.o.v. if he is charged and found to be guilty etc.

[Zippy]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

Why are you sorry !!! You've got every right to think that if it's what you believe, I'm pretty sure you aren't alone either, there will be a lot who will think the same way.

Time will tell. In it's own very warped way, gruesome as it sounds, I do find a certain interest / slight fascination in these type of things - purely from the psychological interest / p.o.v. if he is charged and found to be guilty etc.

well, innocent until proven guilty....

but thats just my hunch having read some details about where she was found and what she didnt have on her etc. She didnt have her mobile with her and thats the first thing people grab these days when going out. And if it was somebody she knew that narrows the suspects down massively. It's easy to tick them off as suspects....except those without alibi's. He obviously doesnt have one.

[mrscolumbo]

A totally personal observation - I think the police are clutching at straws and hoping and praying that dna links Mr Jefferies with the unsolved crime in 1974 of that poor student and then they can nail him in connection with Joanna Yeates crime.