UK - Stuart Lubbock, raped & killed, Michael Barrymore mansion, Essex, 31 Jan 2001 *arrest in 2021*

New Posts

altojack said:
I have reported my own post to get the two threads merged. Seems daft having two threads open and confusing to some. It will make it easier to keep up with what has been posted.
Click to expand...

Brilliant, thanks. I wasn't sure how to go about doing that.

I've been discussing this on another forum for a couple of days and it has been draining. I'm grateful for members on here who are always so respectful, despite difference of opinion and always make sure they are well informed of the basic facts before commenting. It's a relief to be reading a victim friendly forum. Thank you all :)
 
AllyBeeUK said:
Brilliant, thanks. I wasn't sure how to go about doing that.

I've been discussing this on another forum for a couple of days and it has been draining. I'm grateful for members on here who are always so respectful, despite difference of opinion and always make sure they are well informed of the basic facts before commenting. It's a relief to be reading a victim friendly forum. Thank you all :)
Click to expand...

AllyBee, it's easy to do, just click on report button and a window pops up asking why you want to report. I just said we have 2 threads and could we merge the new one to the original. Should make it easier to look back at previous stuff posted in the early days.
 
After reading the old press reports of what MB said I'm looking at the 3 who were in the jacuzzi while Stuart allegedly mucked around outside and in the pool.

I found it very strange reading one report from a party gore telling that the pool cover was on.

All JMO as no links right now but reports are still online.
 
Kasmeer said:
Totally new to this case other than having obviously seen headlines over the years, this was an interesting watch. I'd previously got the impression it was a simple drowning, but it's definitely clear that more than just that happened. The attempts by MB's lawyers to say "nothing happened here" regarding the anal injuries are so unbelievable it only raises my suspicion overall; the current "it could've been accidental"claim is just laughable. If he truly had nothing to do with it he'd be a whole lot better off saying something like "look, I was too drunk to really know what was going on, I'm horrified such a thing could happen in my house, etc etc", while giving police the full story, not arguing (against the evidence) that it didn't even happen...

As a side note, I never really saw Barrymore's tv work before the incident, and found the clips shown at the start rather uncomfortable viewing - all that physical contact with female audience members would be really inappropriate these days, I'd think; I guess times have changed but it seems strange to imagine that was ever fine for primetime tv. o_O

I suspect those clips might have been selected with that in mind though so I try not to let it bias my opinions - his own words and actions have done enough that way frankly. Definitely a coverup, whether it's of an accidental death or something more sinister, and who was most involved, who knows, I suspect only somebody breaking the silence and telling the truth will solve this, and after this time, there'd be little way to corroborate it anyway, everyone involved has either lied or "no commented" their way through the last 19 years so could we believe anything any of them chose to say now?
Click to expand...

So I have watched the documentary now, last night and am totally horrified by Barrymore's reaction. Like Kasmeer said, I also believed it was a simple drowning and the gutter press just went to town on him. I spent most of the time watching the programme with my mouth open. The bit that horrified me the most was when he tried to claim that the injuries took place in the hospital, and he went on GMTV to push forward this theory. What a horrible horrible thing to suggest.

The fact that so many experiences pathologists all said that there was no way his injuries were caused by an accident should say something to him.

And I don't understand why he didn't just say he was drunk and passed out and had no knowledge. He's either protecting himself or someone else.

There were only 9 people at the party - surely it would have been screamingly obvious when Stuart disappeared with one, or two people, who was to blame. And the fact they have narrowed it down to MB being one of 3 people who could have done something to him speaks volumes. My heart went out to Stuart's family and the distress they have had to suffer over the years.
 
Who is protecting who, here?

Options: MB genuinely doesn't know what happened, in which case one would expect him to be as helpful and candid as possible.

MB knows and is protecting the perpetrator: his boyfriend, or some random person he met that night.

With a career to protect, it might be more expected to deflect the blame as far away from oneself as possible. The allegations against the hospital are the only thing coming close to this.

The conspiracy of silence doesn't seem to make sense. At the inquest, some of the individuals did implicate MB in the drug administration, for example. Surely enough statements about what actually happened would constitute enough evidence for a crown case. Why has this not been possible to secure? I can't see why this hasn't been resolved.
 
jslk said:
Who is protecting who, here?

Options: MB genuinely doesn't know what happened, in which case one would expect him to be as helpful and candid as possible.

MB knows and is protecting the perpetrator: his boyfriend, or some random person he met that night.

With a career to protect, it might be more expected to deflect the blame as far away from oneself as possible. The allegations against the hospital are the only thing coming close to this.

The conspiracy of silence doesn't seem to make sense. At the inquest, some of the individuals did implicate MB in the drug administration, for example. Surely enough statements about what actually happened would constitute enough evidence for a crown case. Why has this not been possible to secure? I can't see why this hasn't been resolved.
Click to expand...
The problem is they might face a perverting the course of justice charge. I'm not quite sure how that works tho
 
jslk said:
Who is protecting who, here?

Options: MB genuinely doesn't know what happened, in which case one would expect him to be as helpful and candid as possible.

MB knows and is protecting the perpetrator: his boyfriend, or some random person he met that night.

With a career to protect, it might be more expected to deflect the blame as far away from oneself as possible. The allegations against the hospital are the only thing coming close to this.

The conspiracy of silence doesn't seem to make sense. At the inquest, some of the individuals did implicate MB in the drug administration, for example. Surely enough statements about what actually happened would constitute enough evidence for a crown case. Why has this not been possible to secure? I can't see why this hasn't been resolved.
Click to expand...

HongKongPhooey said:
The problem is they might face a perverting the course of justice charge. I'm not quite sure how that works tho
Click to expand...

BBM 1: Neither can I. It is baffling.

BBM 2: Given the circumstances, it may be a good idea to offer immunity from prosecution to anyone who knows what happened but was not directly involved.
 
It's been a while since I've been on this forum. Has this case gone cold again?
 
I didn’t watch the documentary because I figured it would be more of the same old same old; MB’s “poor me” routine and endless clips of him behaving inappropriately with women on his TV shows.

Even as a child he made my flesh crawl, and there is no doubt in my mind that he was heavily involved with what went on that night. I’m glad his career went down the toilet, he deserved it. Whatever he did or didn’t do, he lied through his teeth and was complicit in blackening the victim’s name and character.

There must be one hell of a house of cards built around this that someone doesn’t want to fall, because otherwise the obvious perpetrators would have been charged and locked up years ago.

MOO.
 
Previously, I had found the (almost comical) police statements from everyone involved, but now I can't find it anymore.
Anyone have a link please?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 221 more.
Total: 4,531 (members: 222, guests: 4,309)

Online statistics

Members online
222
Guests online
4,309
Total visitors
4,531
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,458
Messages
17,969,164
Members
228,773
Latest member
OccasionalMallard
Back
Top