tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post7477826231909278593..comments2024-03-18T04:20:15.987-04:00Comments on Statement Analysis ®: Michael Barrymore Interview on Death of Stuart Lubbock Statement Analysis Bloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13607372649929274491noreply@blogger.comBlogger56125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-60972389886616050012021-03-22T12:29:03.664-04:002021-03-22T12:29:03.664-04:00Kenney was the partner of Barrymore at the time, h...Kenney was the partner of Barrymore at the time, he was a drag queen. I'm no expert on gay sex but I guess Kenney was the passive partner and I cant see why he was involved in the rape of Stuart. My guess is that 4 of them were in the Jacuzzi and Barrymore and Justin Merritt were hoping to have a foursome with Stuart Lubbock and Jonathon Kenney. The police have recently arrested Kenney again, maybe because if he is innocent he will want to name the killers to save his own conscience? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-7734988690859913182019-08-04T01:57:07.413-04:002019-08-04T01:57:07.413-04:00Just, just, [he was] just another member?
Member ...Just, just, [he was] just another member?<br /><br />Member is another word for penis that I feel is common in the gay world.<br /><br />.Nadine Lumleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05591663475427502169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-40835349166804313312019-08-04T01:44:15.469-04:002019-08-04T01:44:15.469-04:00it’s gonna be surrounded by press?
Body alive and ...it’s gonna be surrounded by press?<br />Body alive and or dead was surrounded by pressing flesh? Or surrounded by flesh pressing?<br /><br /><br />Bear with me?<br />Bear is a gay term for older hairy fat gay man. Was there a fat older hairy gay man around?<br /><br />Or bear is bear naked flesh.<br /><br />.Nadine Lumleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05591663475427502169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-30790779600201589952019-08-04T01:37:49.710-04:002019-08-04T01:37:49.710-04:00I just went oh Christ and you know he quite obviou...I just went oh Christ and you know he quite obviously wasn’t moving much.<br /><br />The above sounds like victim blaming. Like OH CHRIST the kids knocked a lamp over, ffs!<br /><br />Lifeguard err experience?<br />Sounds like someone homo gay screwed a lifeguard, no?<br /><br />.Nadine Lumleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05591663475427502169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-51207403816982251142019-08-04T01:31:47.364-04:002019-08-04T01:31:47.364-04:00A coomon phrase is that animal parents sometimes e...A coomon phrase is that animal parents sometimes eat their young, out of cruelty or hunger or the children are just weak.<br /><br />I'm hearing a lot of floating and round and round. Was body swirling around in the jacuzzi like a toilet flush?<br /><br />.Nadine Lumleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05591663475427502169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-35864253015571150702019-08-04T01:26:40.308-04:002019-08-04T01:26:40.308-04:00....found in bed with three small boys frankly
--.......found in bed with three small boys frankly<br /><br />-->> .... with three small boy's FRANKS...<br /><br />...aka penises.<br /><br />😨Nadine Lumleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05591663475427502169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-69277383768564252692019-07-30T07:23:15.031-04:002019-07-30T07:23:15.031-04:00"You would assume they was capable of looking..."You would assume they was capable of looking after themselves."<br /><br />It is interesting that he speaks hypothetically here; I would expect "I assumed...". And does "they was" conceal the gender of a single person as someone else has noticed?<br /><br />While saying it he shakes his head, indicating that he is not in agreement with what he says<br /><br />Was Barrymore well aware that Stuart was incapable of looking after himself? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-69988114908807024892019-07-29T18:36:33.858-04:002019-07-29T18:36:33.858-04:00"and whether he’s floating when you see that,..."and whether he’s floating when you see that, it’s you know, it’s a very surreal thing to see."<br /><br />experiential memory going in present despite qualifying reality with "whether"Mike Dammannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13012939206439863720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-31236912723268512382019-07-29T15:46:17.066-04:002019-07-29T15:46:17.066-04:00Just a couple of things I do not yet see covered b...Just a couple of things I do not yet see covered by other comments (many good ones here):<br /><br />"I just went oh Christ and you know he quite obviously wasn’t moving much. "<br /><br />"much" is out of place indicating experiential memory from before "finding". Was he moving a little bit when found dead? Of course not. HE likely speaks of when death took place and lack of moving indicated death or dying. Cynical tone indicates lack of fear of prosecution. Being "above the law". It must be considered throughout his statements to know angle of approach.<br /><br />"The first thing I did when I seen it was run back into the house and get help from Jonathan who I knew had lifeguard errr experience. "<br /><br />"the first thing" is unnecessary showing attempt to cover what action was actually first.Mike Dammannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13012939206439863720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-1502802376490847162019-07-29T14:51:04.004-04:002019-07-29T14:51:04.004-04:00Thanks, Peter. Yes, I too think the rape happened ...Thanks, Peter. Yes, I too think the rape happened in a space separate from the other guests. Or at least separate from <i>most of</i> the other guests. According to a police intelligence report Michael paid off two witnesses not to give evidence and there was deep bruising on both Stuart’s shoulders suggesting he was held down (by (an)other person(s)?) while it happened. Maybe Stuart was raped in another room or in the Jacuzzi (Michael brings up the Jacuzzi in the first sentence along with turning on the lights). Maybe the fact that the Jacuzzi is visible from almost every room in the house makes it a less likely crime scene, though? Tests reportedly showed that Stuart died from immersion in the pool. Maybe Michael (or one of the other men?) held Stuart’s head down in the water during the rape. Or maybe Stuart was raped in the house and fell/was thrown in the pool afterwards. In this respect I think the following statement from the Nolan interview is interesting: <br /><br />(15:30) <i>”So, I was in the, eh, yeah, I was in the house and the others went out, eh, they said can they go <b>in the pool</b>, can they swim <b>in the pool</b>. I said [yeah,eh] but, I, it’s halfway through being built. <b>Put the, threw the, eh, top back</b>, [[…] switch over there], <b>I threw the top back, the switch is over there on the left and that goes back to show the light up from underneath.</b> Some of them went out to there, the four girls as well, which the press very conveniently leave out…….Ehm, and, I went and had a joint with, ehm…. James and, I can’t remember his name now, it doesn’t matter and then we went back [I] said do you want to go to the Jacuzzi? [They] said yeah, okay. Went out and the other lot had been out earlier. When we went outside, <b>looked down</b> and I didn’t even know Stuart’s name at the time. <b>Just, just, [he was] just another</b> member of the party, right? <b>Looked down</b> and he’s there floatin’ in the pool. <b>Whether he’s down or at the top or whatever.</b> “</i><br /><br />If I understand correctly, there was a top (cover) over the pool which was removed relatively shortly before Stuart was found. That makes it perhaps less likely that he stumbled into the pool by himself (depending on the sort of cover)? Michael repeatedly says “in the pool” (2x) and “threw (…) back”(2x). Why is it so important to him that he threw “the, eh, top” back? Did he perhaps throw Stuart back in the pool? And/or did he “look(...) down” (2x) while Stuart was floating to the bottom? I think Michael saw Stuart both floating at the top and lying at the bottom (“Whether he’s down or at the top or whatever”). And what does (the repeated reference to) the light switch have to do with it all. Could this – like opening and closing of door - perhaps allude to childhood sexual abuse especially in combination with throw back of top/cover? Michael says Stuart was “just, just, (…) just another member of the party” -> this means he was anything but ("it was a day like any other”-kind of phrase). <br /><br />AutumnAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-33037419954179440282019-07-29T08:57:34.332-04:002019-07-29T08:57:34.332-04:00Autumn, good find!
“Well, absolutely not. No way....Autumn, good find!<br /><br />“Well, absolutely not. No way. No way did I do it. And if I did, you know, I would have put my hands up ten years ago … or eleven years, whatever it’s now. I, I, I, I couldn’t, eh ,I mean, you know… I haven’t spoken about this properly like this properly [probably?] really at all to be quite honest. And I, I, I, I, I. I do find it difficult to talk about. Not because I’m guilty… of anything. But because I didn’t do anything. I did a stupid thing. I walked away from the scene. But I’d already gone in and got help to bring him out. Nothing happened to the guy there.”<br /><br /><br />I wonder if he raped him in another room. <br /><br />Peter Statement Analysis Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13607372649929274491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-26330912746401499152019-07-29T08:56:07.869-04:002019-07-29T08:56:07.869-04:00Pablo, interacting observation. Peter Pablo, interacting observation. Peter Statement Analysis Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13607372649929274491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-50814348521464028472019-07-29T08:35:02.614-04:002019-07-29T08:35:02.614-04:00I also wonder if his reference to holding his hea...I also wonder if his reference to holding his head up high may be some indirect reference to the night itself - did he or someone hold Stuart’s head up high if he had drowned or in an attempt to resuscitate him. It obviously has its literal meaning but given the alleged account this turn of phrase could be significantAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-83282460200272393172019-07-28T22:33:06.080-04:002019-07-28T22:33:06.080-04:00For anyone who still wants to analyse this case: b...For anyone who still wants to analyse this case: below is a link to another interview with Michael Barrymore in which he gives additional information and issues a denial (as from 13:45): <br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fA1DbGrXoo<br /><br />The interviewer asks Michael Barrymore if he "did do it". His answer is (at 19:41):<br /><br /><i>“Well, absolutely not. No way. No way did I do it. And if I did, you know, I would have put my hands up ten years ago … or eleven years, whatever it’s now. I, I, I, I couldn’t, eh ,I mean, you know… I haven’t spoken about this properly like this properly [probably?] really at all to be quite honest. And I, I, I, I, I. I do find it difficult to talk about. Not because I’m guilty… of anything. But because I didn’t do anything. I did a stupid thing. I walked away from the scene. But I’d already gone in and got help to bring him out. Nothing happened to the guy there.”</i><br /><br />Hmmm.... trying hard to persuade ("absolutely", "no way", "no way") and allowing for the possibility that he did it ("if I did do it") and maybe even embedded confessions ("did I do it" / "Not <i>because I'm guilty</i>"). In addition, he tries to distance himself from Stuart ("the guy" -> elsewhere he says he didn't even know Stuart’s name). If, as Michael says, nothing happened to Stuart "there" then where exactly did something happen to Stuart? A lot of stutter on "I". He says he hasn’t spoken properly about it “to be quite honest”. Does this mean he isn’t quite honest in previous parts of his denial? Also: what exactly prevents him from speaking properly about "this" (this is pulling it close)? He says it’s because he walked away from the scene. If, as he says, he’s innocent and merely discovered and got help for Stuart, why would the fact that he subsequently walked away traumatize him to the point that he cannot talk about what happened that night? Or is it something more ugly that prevents him from talking "properly"? Also: "or whatever it's now" -> sounds a bit disrespectful i.m.o. <br /><br />There are several other interesting statements in this interview (e.g. he repeatedly suggests people think he “got away with it”).<br /><br />AutumnAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-19231395111917669862019-07-28T22:19:10.947-04:002019-07-28T22:19:10.947-04:00It’s not necessary to know the answers to all our ...It’s not necessary to know the answers to all our questions in order to know what happened - a few of MB’s words might tell it. I’m looking forward to the analysis.Hey Judehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05118508358051764200noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-78567697968058213162019-07-28T22:12:17.694-04:002019-07-28T22:12:17.694-04:00- Or to analyse MB. This evening I listened to tw...- Or to analyse MB. This evening I listened to two Tony Bennet videos on the case on YouTube, so that, with the picture and what the other witness said, is just too much extraneous information, so I have to give up on the interview now. I’m so put off by MB’s attitude and flippancy, as though he’d be happy to use Stuart’s death for a laugh if he could get away with it, it’s quite difficult to like him. I don’t think he killed Stuart, or necessarily that anyone intended his death or killed him - I can’t back that up with analysis. It would be interesting to see their original statements.Hey Judehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05118508358051764200noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-86316706702962798482019-07-28T21:46:56.454-04:002019-07-28T21:46:56.454-04:00Yes, Cassie, I shouldn’t have said that, more some...Yes, Cassie, I shouldn’t have said that, more something like maybe he was a little starstruck, along with not being able to say much of what the audience and viewers wanted to hear. We are looking at MB, not the Delphi case, but yes, I don’t have the brains to analyse Chief Sup.Hey Judehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05118508358051764200noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-72944911891376969162019-07-28T19:51:43.961-04:002019-07-28T19:51:43.961-04:00https://images.app.goo.gl/rZ8HFv1dbZfMEipu5 (pictu...https://images.app.goo.gl/rZ8HFv1dbZfMEipu5 (picture of the house)<br /><br />I didn't know there were a pool and jaccuzi, the picture shows<br />Where did guest stay while drinking? Where in the pool was the victim?<br />Which route had he taken? And his guest? <br /><br />Nothing is said about what time Stuart was last seen by all present. Wasn't he excused for some reason? How much time had pass? <br />He was found in the pool and nobody seems to be speaking about when they last saw him.<br />Wouldn't you be wondering what happened after you last saw the victim? <br /><br /><br />Habundiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01826623123769885956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-10476087179173297392019-07-28T17:55:57.240-04:002019-07-28T17:55:57.240-04:00Autumn, well, there is no upstairs to that house, ...Autumn, well, there is no upstairs to that house, so it’s safe to say MB couldn’t have looked down from an upstairs window. <br /><br />He wasn’t in the jacuzzi If, as he said, he looked down as he walked out - he was walking or standing when he looked down. It’s interesting the jacuzzi is right next to the pool, because if Michael wasn’t looking down from a balcony or an upstairs window, which evidently he was not, he was looking down into the bottom of the pool? <br /><br />As he said he saw Stuart floating, is it possible he did first see him floating, but for whatever reason, didn’t raise the alarm then, but rather went and smoked a joint, then walked out and looked down and saw that Stuart had sunk to the bottom of the pool? <br /><br />Alcohol and drugs might have effected all their recall and reactions. It sounds like Stuart had quite a bit to drink, too. Hey Judehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05118508358051764200noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-26660203147048574772019-07-28T16:11:16.841-04:002019-07-28T16:11:16.841-04:00One of the "two witnesses" mentioned by ...One of the "two witnesses" mentioned by Michael Barrymore - Simon Shaw - has stated that they discovered Stuart lying at the bottom of the pool. See this article:<br /><br />https://www.theguardian.com/media/2002/sep/13/broadcasting.uknews1<br /><br />In that case Stuart was not "floating" and that might explain the "looked down". Shaw says he took Stuart out of the pool and another partygoer tried to resuscitate him. Interestingly, Shaw then says he saw Stuart "appearing to be breathing" and "being sick" which made him believe he would "be all right". <br /><br />AutumnAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-14399746200732109232019-07-28T12:31:44.852-04:002019-07-28T12:31:44.852-04:00Habundia and Hey Jude,
If you google "Michae...Habundia and Hey Jude,<br /><br />If you google "Michael Barrymore house" and click on "images" you'll see aerial photos of the house. The jacuzzi is on one of the corners of the swimming pool. I find the "looked down" part strange as well. The edge of the jacuzzi seems to be somewhat higher than the pool (see close up photo in this article: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4537836/Michael-Barrymore-s-guest-raped-murdered.html ). So perhaps if Michael was in the jacuzzi he would have to stand up and look over the edge to see Stuart. However, he implies he was in the house and not in the jacuzzi (he says he ran "back into the house") .<br /><br />AutumnAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-62009540822240506822019-07-28T09:36:13.067-04:002019-07-28T09:36:13.067-04:00Cassie, you are trolling...
——
Habundia, a jacuzz...Cassie, you are trolling...<br /><br />——<br />Habundia, a jacuzzi is different to a pool - plus they were having drinks (in the process of) - you can’t take drinks into a pool. He said they asked to go into the jacuzzi, and that he smoked a joint, then “walked out” (away from the jacuzzi? - or maybe out of the house?), looked down and “there there was Stuart err floating in the pool” - the jacuzzi and pool are different things, rather than a change in language. It doesn’t sound as if jacuzzi and pool are in the same place because he “looked down” and there was Stuart. If Stuart was floating, and if the jacuzzi was on the same level as the pool, why would he have needed to look down to see Stuart, rather than just look, or look across? We walked out” - he was walking or standing, when he “looked down”. He wouldn’t need to look down from a standing position if Stuart was floating, he would just need to look. Either Michael was above ground level, or Stuart was beneath the water?<br /><br />He doesn’t say where the switches were for the pool lights, but maybe they were inside the house. Where was everyone during the time he had a joint? Were they in the jacuzzi, or still in the house? He doesn’t say - he doesn’t say they actually went into the jacuzzi, only that they had asked, and he had said he had to put the lights on so they could see where the were going, not that he did put them on. <br /><br />It doesn’t make much sense - unless the jacuzzi was in an enclosed area (from which to walk out after he had his joint) above the pool, maybe on a deck above ground level, with balcony (over which to look down into the pool). Otherwise there is a lot of missing time between his saying he had to put the lights on, and his looking down and there was Stuart floating. How could he or anyone else not see Stuart, if he had put on the lights, unless the jacuzzi was away from the pool, or if near the pool, they hadn’t gone out to use it, after all? What were his guests doing after the time he said he had to turn on the lights? He had a joint, which takes time. Did he turn on the lights, and did they go into the jacuzzi? Or did he have a joint while they continued having drinks, and waited for the lights?<br /><br /><br /> Hey Judehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05118508358051764200noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-57481393308794583652019-07-28T06:41:27.196-04:002019-07-28T06:41:27.196-04:00Hey jude thanks for your response.
I do wonder bas...Hey jude thanks for your response.<br />I do wonder based on what do you conclude 'the pool' and 'the jacuzzi ' to be two different things in this story? I don't say they aren't. I dont seem to find anything that could corroborate this thinking?<br />But if they are both present (jacuzzi and pool) then it would be interesting to know how far those were apart from each other. <br />Also how convenient would it be someone having rectum injuries ending up 'accidentally' in a pool, drowned? Drowning doesn't cause rectum injuries.<br />I dont read anything that would make me think this was an accident. 'There wasn't sufficient evidence to charge', that doesn't say 'accidental', if it was accidental the coroner would have put that in the autopsy report and cops would have called it accidental, not 'insufficient evidence to charge'. If it wasn't mentioned that the victim had rectum injuries I could have believed this to be accidental, but because of his injuries (and the fact he was focused on the headline 'gay orgy') I can't. As the police didn't think either as they would have said that if they thought it to be accidental. <br />Micheal doesn't call it accidental either, he told his PA what happened.....did he tell him it was accidental? <br />Habundiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01826623123769885956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-84192092648042144902019-07-28T02:30:35.897-04:002019-07-28T02:30:35.897-04:00Oh wow Doug was involved with "solving" ...Oh wow Doug was involved with "solving" Amanda Blackburn case too?!<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhM5EhLq2HMCassienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7164794708270892518.post-22747987814523965382019-07-28T02:02:47.500-04:002019-07-28T02:02:47.500-04:00Doug’s voice REALLY sounds like the “Down the hill...Doug’s voice REALLY sounds like the “Down the hill voice”.<br /><br />Every fiber of my being is telling me a cop did the killings.<br />The hair on my neck stands up when I watch Doug speaking & use SA to see he is being deceptive & he is covering something up. Watch the videos. You’ll see.Cassienoreply@blogger.com