To Disclose or to Destroy

Absolutely thrilled to have had so much positive early feedback on the blog – welcome to all of those who are popping in!

Had one comment from a very welcome visitor who asked – unless I misunderstood – why it is that all of the documents that we claim prove Jeremy’s innocence aren’t in the public domain. Well, if you’re wondering:

Much of it is! Head to any of the Official Campaign websites (links to your right) and you’ll be able to find a whole bucket-load of logs, correspondence, letters, statements and other things that help prove what we know to be true. Much of it has only seen the light of the day after 27 years after being kept back from us for so long.

More evidence has been discovered and is being worked on daily by Jeremy, his legal team and a huge raft of professionals from a range of sectors – more on that in the coming weeks and months.

The biggest fight for the Campaign, however, is against those who continually withhold even more information! There are still many, many crime scene photos, documents, statements, transcripts, Police notebooks and radio recordings, telephone calls among others being withheld – a lot of it under Public Interest Immunity. I’d ask all of you who believe Jeremy Bamber to be guilty to answer me one question:

If Jeremy Bamber is unequivocally guilty and an ‘evil’ man – why would such a huge, huge amount of evidence that would, seemingly, support that guilt still be hidden under PPI? Why, if nothing needs to be hidden, is stuff still not being disclosed?

Check out a couple of these notes. This one is from the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC). They actually question whether or not they can adequately review the case of Bamber when so much key evidence was destroyed – despite the fact that a Court Order had demanded it be preserved.

Doesn’t that seem odd?


How about this one? Here’s a document that shows that a number of years ago, before such evidence was illegally destroyed, an order existed that demanded the Home Office disclose material in the case of Jeremy Bamber.  That disclosure never did come.

Why didn’t it? Why was the evidence destroyed when strict orders were in place for its preservation?  Why is other evidence that would surely – in the eyes of those who see Bamber to be guilty – prove to be the final nail in his coffin, still being hidden?

We ask the question. Maybe you all could, too. As the visitor who got in touch put it...“If you've nothing to hide you've nothing to fear...”

Couldn’t have said it better myself!