Re: Finally, finally, after 18 years & 10 months, Essex Police admit that the 'drowning' of Stuart Lubbock was a HOAX

by **Jill Havern** 07.02.20 8:53

Body in the Pool is trending on twitter https://twitter.com/search?q=%23BodyInThePool&src=trend_click&f=live

by **PeterMac** 07.02.20 9:19

1 Hr and 45.
Including endless breaks for endless adverts
First half hour, and lots more time about his TV career. Irrelevant except to show how he had a "big Audience"
Then a bit about the party, and some, but not all, of the people who were there.
Long descriptions with the original recording of the 999 call,
and then it started getting more interesting.

All 4 Pathologists interviewed = spoke direct to camera
All 4 said he had not drowned ("it was not a classical drowning", was the nearest Heath (I think) would go)
ALL 4 agreed that the anal injuries could NOT had been caused at the hospital, or by falling on the edge of the pool

And then the cutting of the film got a bit more incisive.

They showed MB claiming that the injuries must have happened at the hospital, and shortly later showed several of the pathologists saying that was absolutely impossible, and the injuries must have happened ante-mortem.

There were several other instances like that . MB and his solicitor, and Michael Mansfield QC being shown as they said something, and then that specific point trashed by pathologists and other evidence.

And towards the end the new SIO, DCI Stephen Jennings was seen a few times, each time making it clear that he is investigating a rape and a murder, and that wince only a finite number of people whose identifies are known were there at the time, one or more have to be 'involved'.

The issue of whether the body was ever in the pool was covered by clear implication on several occasions, and stated on others
Far too much "human sadness" shots, crying, gazing into the distance in silence, visiting the cemetery, and all that sort of thing, which although it may be real, adds precisely nothing
and is designed to invoke an emotion rather than a forensic response.

Overall ?

Extremely damaging to any remaining credibility BM and any of the others have
Accepting that the laws of Defamation still apply in the UK, and that BM can pay for QCs like Mansfield
it was OK, so far as it went.

by Doug D 07.02.20 12:39

The joys of recording, you can skip through the adverts!

To add to Peter’s post:

Not relevant, but the usual suspects managed to get airtime, Antonella Lazzeri, Eamonn Holmes, Fiona Phillips.

News of World reporter – truth doesn’t matter to the papers.

Why would the discredited Michael Heath even agree to appear? Probably a silly question.

Peter is wrong about all 4 pathologists agreeing, it was only 3.
Heath says ‘no third party involved…..immersion……drowning,’ yet he later talks about the ‘horrific anal injuries’

The ‘didn’t add up to a classical drowning’ was Dr Ian Calder, the third Forensic Pathologist involved and the ‘drowning expert’ .
Prof. Chris Milroy was the second Forensic Pathologist and Prof. Jack Crane the fourth.

Heath said ‘no restraint injuries’ yet Milroy said petechiae present, an indication of strangulation or being held in a head-lock.

One of the girls present that night said she saw MB rubbing cocaine into Lubbock's gums, which of course was denied.

Mike Mansfield QC, one of the very top guys, represented MB at the Coroner’s Inquest at which MB refused to answer a number of very relevant questions.

Crane says that in addition to the injuries, cocaine and MDMA (ecstasy) were found in Lubbock’s bloodstream and suggests cardiac arrest could have been the actual cause of death.

MB later tried to suggest that the anal injuries were inflicted after the event at the hospital, but this is nonsensed by the pathologists in that bruising and bleeding were evident which would not have occurred with a dead body.

In June 2019, MB was interviewed by Piers Morgan during which MB said ‘I think he drowned’

MB’s solicitors in response to this documentary came up with: ‘more credible….injuries caused by……slipping and striking the pool edge’. They clearly hadn’t been paying much attention.

by Guest 07.02.20 12:53

Thank you PeterMac for the resumé and Amy Dean for posting up the link 2thumbs

Much appreciated.

As Tony said he was heavily involved with the research for this documentary, I look forward to reading his observations. I bet he's working on it as I speak..
mail

.

by Guest 07.02.20 12:58

Documentary Barrymore: The Body In The Pool has made astonishing claims that the star’s PA removed potentially major pieces of evidence from the scene of Stuart Lubbock’s death. Lubbock was 31 years old when he was found dead in the swimming pool of Barrymore’s Essex home on 31 March, 2001, following a night out at Millennium nightclub nearby.

by Doug D 07.02.20 13:15

From the Daily Mail:

MB: 'As I've made clear to everyone, I'm not able to comment because Channel 4 are refusing to show it to me or even let me know what it contains.

'Forgive me for looking down at the iPad but I don't want to get any of this wrong.

'However, I will say to anyone who would like to get to the truth of the matter that they should watch the ITV interview I did last year with Piers Morgan. He went into everything and left no stone unturned.

'The truth is I have always done everything anyone has ever asked of me and I've cooperated with everyone.

'Essex Police's own QC has said that: ''We know that Mr Barrymore has has nothing to do with this and that there is no evidence linking him with the injuries to Mr Lubbock or the pool''.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7976149/Taxi-driver-took-drunk-Michael-Barrymore-Stuart-Lubbock-entertainers-Essex-home.html

So giving MB’s solicitors the benefit of the doubt, maybe they didn’t see in advance the pathologists categorically denying the injuries could have been caused by slipping on the side of the pool.

As for MB, does ‘no comment’ or 'refusing to answer' really count as full cooperation and I wonder who Essex Police’s own QC is, who supposedly ‘knows’?

by Guest 07.02.20 13:22

'However, I will say to anyone who would like to get to the truth of the matter that they should watch the ITV interview I did last year with Piers Morgan. He went into everything and left no stone unturned.

Michael Barrymore Addresses the Tragic Death of Stuart Lubbock at His Home

In this emotional interview, the former king of Saturday night television opens up to Piers Morgan about his astronomical fall from grace and discusses the tragic events which resulted in the death of Stuart Lubbock at his house in 2001.

June 2019

by Doug D 07.02.20 21:20

Papers seem to be confused/not know who phoned for the ambulance, but the voice is identified @ 1.39.34 as that of Justin Merritt. Right at the start of the programme you can also hear a second unknown voice feeding him the actual address.

by **Tony Bennett** 08.02.20 0:55

I haven't watched the C4 documentary yet.

I've not had a TV for 25 years and anyway I was busy throughout the programme, and two hours after, frantically tweeting the truth in response to tens of thousands trending on the hashtags #BodyInThePool, #MrBarrymore, #Barrymore and #StuartLubbock.

Hard to do with 280 characters, including spaces.

While doing so, Twitter suddenly sent me this message:

Finally, finally, after 18 years & 10 months, Essex Police admit that the 'drowning' of Stuart Lubbock was a HOAX - Page 2 Lubboc14

by Guest 08.02.20 1:24

You don't need a TV Tony. You can watch online, the link posted by Amy Dean up-page..

https://www.channel4.com/programmes/barrymore-the-body-in-the-pool/on-demand/69718-001

It's not the BBC so you don't need a licence big grin

.

Your opinion of the documentary is far more important to the avid observer on CMOMM than the insatiable gossip column, affectionately known as twitter.

thumbup

by Guest 10.02.20 1:40

Michael Barrymore BBC Interview - ITV / Drugs / Cheryl / Stuart Lubbock Swimming Pool / Big Brother

Michael has had a very difficult life of late. After 10 years of mega-stardom as one of ITV's biggest Stars, his life fell apart after coming out, battles with drugs, the death of a man in his swimming pool & the death of his wife Cheryl.

In 2006 Belfield spoke to him about these battles as well as his life, career and TV come back on Celebrity Big Brother.

In the 80's & 90's Michael was one of the UK's most loved, popular, talented & highest paid Stars. With hits including 'Barrymore', 'Strike it lucky' and 'Strike it rich'. His Blackpool video from 1992 was a masterclass in Stand-up comedy.

Enjoy a rare insight into the Star who admitted is 'dead' because of the News of the World.

by Doug D 10.02.20 16:48

Interesting to re-visit Peter Hyatt's take on the Piers Morgan interview:

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t16567-michael-barrymore-denial-analysis

by **Tony Bennett** 11.02.20 1:14

Amy Dean wrote:Here is the programme. I haven't seen it yet.
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/barrymore-the-body-in-the-pool/on-demand/69718-001

Thank you @Amy Dean for providing this link, through which I have tonight been able to view the whole programme and have made some preliminary notes on it.

And thank you to all of you who have made contributions on the thread.

I will say more later, but for now I am so disappointed that so much was left out. I will explain later.

This is about the only thing that is new, namely the comment by DCI Stephen Jennings which was reported in the Daily Mail and is indeed taken from his comments on film in the programme:

“Mr Jennings admitted that police failed to secure the scene for forensic tests at the time of the death on March 31, 2001, as they wrongly assumed he had drowned after taking a cocktail of drink and drugs. He also said that a handle from an outhouse and a pool thermometer had gone missing. When asked what he thought happened to them, he replied: ‘They’ve been removed to hide evidence. Stuart was assaulted, quite possibly in the Jacuzzi, and then either died in the Jacuzzi or went unconscious, and then, to make it look like a drowning, was thrown in the swimming pool’.

DCI Jennings has basically admitted that police were "wrong to assume he was drowned" and that Stuart was raped to death and only then was 'his body thrown into the pool'.

But think about this.

Why on earth, having killed Stuart Lubbock, and presumably having cleaned him up, would they bother to throw his body into the pool, only for someone to dive in and put it back on the poolside?

Remember that all the witnesses gave wildly conflicting stories of who found the body first and who got him out - and most changed their stories over time.

Remember also that the first independent witnesses at the scene - two ambulance men - saw his body at the poolside, not in the pool.

Isn't the solution I offered back in 2007 a thousand times more likely than DCI Jennings' theory that they threw Stuart's body into the pool, only to fish it out again?

Namely, that they cleaned him up, laid his body by the poolside, threw some water over him, maybe forced some water down his throat as well, then called the ambulance.

by **sharonl** 11.02.20 8:20

Having watched this documentary, I would say that the investigation should be for the abduction, rape and murder of Stuart.

Barrymore clearly lured Stuart back to his home - why? He may also have drugged him.

Either Barrymore or one or more of the guests, raped and murdered him.

There was a cover up - but why? What was going on at that house?

I ask myself, is Barrymore another Epstein character, luring young men for use by his guests?

by **Tony Bennett** 11.02.20 9:44

sharonl wrote:Having watched this documentary, I would say that the investigation should be for the abduction, rape and murder of Stuart.

Barrymore clearly lured Stuart back to his home - why? He may also have drugged him.

Either Barrymore or one or more of the guests, raped and murdered him.

There was a cover up - but why? What was going on at that house?

I ask myself, is Barrymore another Epstein character, luring young men for use by his guests?

Very good points.

One chapter of my book deals with Barrymore's almost insatiable lust for 'gay sex' with young men. One of his drivers spoke publicly about how Barrymore would suddenly ring him up and demand that he be driven to the area best known for picking up 'rent boys' - which apparently is (or was) in and around Charing Cross station or Kings Cross. These boys would be any age from about 14 upwards. These boys and young men would be only too happy to be paid for a night of gay sex with a celebrity. Sorry, this is awfully sordid.

Most of this information I got from a book by Phil Taylor, former Associate Editor of the 'News of the World', titled "Barrymore: A Man Possessed", a very appropriate title I feel.

It was Phil Taylor who serialised my book in the News of the Wold. The newspaper sometimes could be little more than a scandal rag but, on this occasion, they printed the truth, and boy, how Phil Taylor put me through the mill to make sure that every sentence he published was strictly, 100% accurate. He was more worried than I was about a possible libel action.

I am not sure I have ever published on here the first serialisation of my book in the paper. Well, here it is - what a great pity that the Channel 4 documentary covered NONE of this - a wasted opportunity:

---------------------

EXCLUSIVE BY PHIL TAYLOR, ASSOCIATE EDITOR.

TODAY the News of the World uncovers the explosive dossier that forced police to re-open their investigation into Stuart Lubbock’s death at Michael Barrymore’s home.

Following our expose that key witness Kylie Merritt had lied to the inquest, detectives are now investigating EIGHTEEN lines of inquiry.

They are also focusing on TEN startling contradictions between the statements of Barrymore and five guests at his fatal drug-fuelled party.

And campaigning father Terry Lubbock insists his legal team’s devastating analysis - which landed on the Essex Chief Constable’s desk - shatters Barrymore’s claim that Stuart accidentally drowned in his pool after a party in 2001.

Now we can we reveal how FIFTEEN detectives are working full-time to solve the case after a police review accused cops of bungling the original inquiry.

And Lubbock’s legal team say they have provided police with “compelling evidence” that Stuart was the victim of a violent sexual assault at the star’s home, was never in the pool and that the “drowning” was a cover-up.

Lubbock’s lawyer Tony Bennett held a confidential meeting with Detective Superintendent Gareth Wilson, who is the leading the new inquiry, at the major investigations unit in Old Harlow on Thursday.

Last night Bennett revealed: “I was informed there are now 15 dedicated officers working full-time on the Lubbock case and they are following 18 new lines of inquiry.

“Police are briefing the Coroner about developments and have spoken to her a number of times.”

Revealing how his team unearthed their damning dossier now being probed by police, he said: “After the News of the World revealed Kylie Merritt had lied to the inquest, we started a painstaking nine-month analysis of all the witness statements.

“It became crystal clear that the massive contradictions and impossibilities within their statements gave the game away.

“After sending our dossier to Essex Police they decided to reopen the investigation.

“There is compelling evidence that Stuart was violently killed at Barrymore’s house, he was never in the pool and that there was a cunning cover-up by those responsible.

“Significantly, Essex Police last month formally changed their description that ‘Stuart was found in the swimming pool at a house in Roydon’ to merely ‘found at a house in Roydon’.

“It was as clear an admission as the Police could possibly make that they now accepted the Lubbock Trust’s case that Stuart was never in Barrymore’s swimming pool.

“We hope that once the police investigation is concluded, the Coroner will have more than enough information to re-open the inquest and find Stuart had been unlawfully killed.”

Dad-of-two Stuart died after a booze and drugs party at Barrymore’s home in Roydon, Essex after meeting the gay star at Harlow’s Millennium nightclub.

A post mortem revealed he had taken cocaine and had suffered severe anal injuries, which pathologists said were caused by a fist or an implement.

Apart from tragic dad-of two-Stuart and Barrymore, there were seven others at the party.
They were Barrymore’s then lover Jonathan Kenney, a drag queen who is HIV positive.

Unemployed dustman Justin Merritt and his sister Kylie. Chef James Futers and his Roydon village friend Simon Shaw. And Harlow girls Kelly Campbell and Claire Jones.

Lubbock’s legal team have higlighighted what they call ‘the missing hour-and-a-half’.

It’s the crucial time between 4.00am to 4.15am, when Stuart and the two men subsequently arrested on suspicion of murder - Kenney and Merritt - are seen together in the Jacuzzi with Lubbock, and the ambulance being called at 5.46am.

None of the eight witnesses can give a proper explanation for what occurred during that period.

Kenney and Merritt claimed they went for a Jacuzzi with Lubbock. Merritt said he last saw him alive ‘bombing’ in the pool and in high spirits.

Barrymore says he found the body at the bottom of the pool, rushed in to tell Kenney, shouting “help, someone is drowning.” Merritt says he then immediately called the ambulance.

When the ambulance crew arrived, they found Kenney giving chest compressions and Kylie mouth to mouth resuscitation to Stuart lying at the side of the pool.

Justin Merritt and Kenney were arrested on suspicion of murder, but never charged. An open verdict was recorded at the inquest with the Coroner slamming party guests for their “wall of silence.”

Now Lubbock’s legal team say they have pinpointed these 10 glaring contradictions in the witness accounts:

CONTRADICTION 1: Justin Merritt and Kenney both say they left the Jacuzzi together. But while Merritt claims to have seen Stuart swimming in the pool, Kenney says he did not see Stuart in the pool.

CONTRADICTION 2: Merritt describes Stuart as hyperactive, “divebombing” and swimming up and down the pool “like an electric eel”. By contrast, Kenney claims that he and Merritt left Stuart “slumped” and “in a stupor” in the jacuzzi.

CONTRADICTION 3: Barrymore said he was the only one to find Stuart in the pool. But James Futers and Simon Shaw claimed they found Stuart on their own, and that Barrymore wasn’t with them.

CONTRADICTION 4: Barrymore initially said that he found Stuart ‘floating’in the pool. Later, after Futers and Shaw had given statements to the Police claiming that they had found Stuart lying at the bottom of the pool, Barrymore changed his story to say he found Stuart ‘floating at the bottom’ - a phrase which has baffled Terry Lubbock ever since.

CONTRADICTION 5: Barrymore says he saw Stuart floating ‘FACE UP’ and stared into his eyes (though six feet under water). But Kenney told Police that he found Stuart in the pool floating ‘FACE DOWN.’

CONTRADICTION 6: Barrymore sounded the alarm claiming that he saw Stuart at the bottom of the pool. Yet as the party guests rushed out onto the patio, they found Stuart already laid out on the pool-side. There was simply no way, say Lubbock’s legal team, that Stuart could have been pulled out of the swimming pool in the few seconds available.

CONTRADICTION 7: Futers and Shaw even contradict each other about how Stuart was found. Futers says they walked down DIFFERENT sides of the pool before Stuart was found. Shaw says they walked together down the SAME side of the pool.

CONTRADICTION 8: Shaw says he dived into the pool to pull Stuart out of the water. But, incredibly, he says he can’t remember who helped him pull out the 12-stone body onto the poolside.

CONTRADICTION 9: Futers says he helped to get Stuart’s body out of the pool. Kenney says it was him, not Futers.

CONTRADICTION 10: Barrymore said in his evidence to the Coroner that he “saw Futers and Shaw jump straight into the pool while I ran in and got more help”. But under cross-examination by the Lubbock family barrister, he then admitted he DIDN’T see them.

Barrymore later told the barrister: ‘Well I didn’t stand around to wait to see them dive in.”
Here is what Barrymore and Kenney told Essex Police from their initial statements.

BARRYMORE ‘Body was floating face UP.’

“I went out into the pool area ... I looked into the pool and saw a young man floating in the pool face UPWARDS. I ran inside the house and called for Jonathan who I know to be a trained lifesaver ...”

KENNEY ‘Body was floating face DOWN.’

“Stuart Lubbock, Justin Merritt and I sat in the jacuzzi for at least 20 minutes. Then Justin and I went back inside the house and into the master bedroom. I had time to dry myself, warm up and dress. Shortly afterwards I heard a female voice shout that there was a male floating in the swimming pool. I ran outside and found a male floating face DOWN in the pool ...”

Barrymore maintains that when he rushed into the house, Stuart’s body was six feet down in the pool, face upwards.

In his second statement given to Police on May 30, 2001 Barrymore said: “I immediately ran back into the house in order to get help ... I rushed into the bedroom and screamed at Jonathan ... Jonathan and Merritt immediately responded and they rushed past me towards the pool ..”

Yet, as Kenney and Merritt rushed out just seconds later, Merritt says he didn’t see a body in the pool. It was, he says, already on the poolside.

JUSTIN MERRITT told police: “Someone came into the room and said ‘someone’s drowning’. At this point, I jumped off the bed and ran out. I saw Stuart laying by the side of the pool ...”

Simon Shaw gave a gripping account to police of how he heroically dived in and pulled Stuart’s body from the pool.

But Lubbock’s lawyers say it is not credible that he can’t remember who helped him get Stuart’s 12-stone body out of the pool in what must have been the most unforgettable moment of his life.

Shaw told police: “I took in some air and dived to the bottom of the pool keeping my eyes open.

“I grabbed hold of the person by one of the arms and then in an arm hold, I gripped the neck. I tried to lift him up, but I found the person heavy and then he slipped through my hold.

“I was now running out of air and swam back to the top. I took in more air and dived down to the person again. Then, somehow, I managed to lift him up.

“I then swam to the top, holding the male person. Someone - I do not know who - grabbed hold of me and pulled me to the side of the pool.

“I continued to keep a hold on Stuart and with the help of someone - I do not know who - I managed to lift the person out of the pool. I pushed, while the other pulled.”

Now Lubbock’s legal team have contacted three pathologists involved in the case, asking them to look again at their findings in the light of their claims that Stuart was probably never in the pool.

Barrymore, 54 - who bounced back on Celebrity Big Brother - continues to maintain Stuart’s death was a “tragic accident” in his new autobiography and denies any knowledge of how he suffered his internal injuries.

He insists they happened away from his house and may have been inflicted at the hospital. But a year-long police investigation ruled that out.

The four pathologists in the case were all told an Essex Police briefing on December 11, 2001 that Stuart “had been see swimming in the pool earlier in the night” and had “been found in the pool.”

Bennett said: “It was hardly surprising, therefore, that the pathologists had to consider drowning as a possible cause of death.

“But the now-discredited Dr Michael Heath, who carried out the initial autopsy, was the only one to give “immersion” as the possible cause of death.

“The others said the cause of death was ‘unascertainable’ and were highly sceptical about whether Stuart had drowned.”

Dr Heath has since resigned from Home Office work after a discplinaryu triubnal ruled that he bungled two other murder cases.

Two other pathologists found clear signs of asphyxiation - tiny blood spots on Stuart’s face which pointed to suffocation, not drowning.

All four pathologists concluded Stuart’s severe internal injuries were caused by a fist or other hard object being forcibly inserted into the anus.

Professor Jack Crane and Dr Ian Calder both noted that the main features normally associated with drowning were absent.

Dr Calder, an expert in drownings, tellingly said: “In my opinion, the lungs are not typical of drowning. They have not got the characteristic description; the bulging, they have not got the crossing over the midlines, they have not got the dilatation. The other thing is, they are very heavy ... each weighs over a kilogram - which is not a feature of drowning. Those lungs are very, very heavy - much too heavy for drowning. Also it was witnessed that a lot of water came out of the mouth ... we did not have the typical froth within the airways.”

Professor Crane said: “The difficulty I had in this case was, on looking at the autopsy findings, that the typical findings of drowning were not present; the lungs were not ballooned, there was no ‘tenacious foam’, they did not have a firm crepiant texture as you examine them ... I am unable to say that this person drowned.”

On the blood spots found on Stuart’s face, Professor Crane stressed: “Petechiae are not a feature of drowning. I cannot think of one drowning where I have seen Petechial haemorrhages. If they are present they may be an indicator of some form of asphyxial process, either compression of the neck, or obstruction of air passages, such as the mouth and nose.”

Detectives are now investigating claims that Stuart was dead up to an hour before the ambulance was called, giving time for a clean-up operation to take place.

Bennett said: “The massive contradictions in the witness statements point unerringly to a cover-up.

“It is clear that Stuart had received shocking injuries to his anus from a violent, sexually motivated attack.

“We are convinced the drowning was a cover-up and we are determined to bring Stuart’s killers to justice.”

ends.

by **sharonl** 11.02.20 11:30

Barrymore was seen as a great entertainer, but why? You only have look back at some of the clips in that documentary to see what a grubby, creepy man he was.

I could never understand how anyone could watch him, let alone laugh at him. In one clip he wraps himself around a woman on the floor, and that’s how he got his laughs. If anyone done that today they’d be done for assault not praised for great entertainment

by **PeterMac** 11.02.20 18:17

sharonl wrote:Barrymore was seen as a great entertainer, but why? You only have look back at some of the clips in that documentary to see what a grubby, creepy man he was.
I could never understand how anyone could watch him, let alone laugh at him.

I am glad you say that. I thought it was only me.
I find many of these "entertainers" creepy. Especially the Children's entertainers – of whom we have spoken some time ago.
There is an interesting suggestion that they do so well in acting because from their earliest days they have been doing exactly that.
Pretending to be something they are not
So they become good at it.

I worked alongside a number of homosexual men in the police service, and all were valued colleagues and friends.
But none had the affectations of speech and gesture, the lisping and 'radial palsy' hand flapping, and the mincing and squealing that so many of the Professional Gays do.

I don't understand the differences sufficiently to comment further, but I seem to have a highly sensitive detection mechanism, and am rarely taken by surprise
when yet another makes some announcement of a fact which and knew anyway and of which we frankly do not care.

by Amy Dean 12.02.20 11:41

I agree, Sharon. It was always beyond me how anyone could find his act entertaining, but many people did and some of them would be happy to see him back on TV regularly.

Have you seen this clip with Susan Boyle? Possibly some of the others he mauled were paid stooges but she wasn't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5sFowfXKO0

by **PeterMac** 12.02.20 11:47

I don't know where this came from. It popped up on YouTube on my ipad recently

by **Tony Bennett** 12.02.20 13:10

PeterMac wrote:I don't know where this came from. It popped up on YouTube on my ipad recently

Wow! @PeterMac! - I had no idea about this documentary.

It was only released a few months ago I see.

When I say that, of course if you watch the documentary, most of it is my commentary on the evidence.

If you compare my interview with the one put out by Channel 4 last Thursday, I would suggest that you'll get much closer to the truth watching this one.

I think the maker is Martin (?) Domoney.

I seem to recollect I did the interview only about 3-4 years ago. I did an interview, provided information about the case to the interviewer, then forgot all about it. Obviously Mr Domoney has updated it because he features that ridiculous hagiographic 'puff' piece that Piers Morgan did with Michael Barrymore recently, making out he was innocent and deserved to be back on television.

Those who have followed this case on the forum in the last 9 years know broadly of my work on the case.

The C4 documentary eliminated all mention of my role in the case, it never mentioned my book 'NOT AWIGHT', and it never got near to discussing my main theory on the case i.e. that six witnesses lied about Stuart ever being in the swimming pool.

Indeed, the very title of the C4 documentary: "Barrymore: The Body in the Pool", reinforced the idea that he was 'found in the pool'. There were numerous voices from news items speaking of "Stuart's body was found in the pool" etc. etc.

As PeterMac so rightly observes: "THE FIRST STORY" - which has not changed over 19 years despite my best efforts - sticks around for ever.

I think there was a subliminal aspect to this C4 film. How many images were of the pool? And how long did they last? There were multiple shots throughout of the pool, lingering lovingly on it, as it were.

I think most viewers not overly familiar with the story would still think, after watching the C4 programme: "Stuart was found in the pool".

He was never in the pool - and the fight goes on...

by Guest 12.02.20 15:45

by Guest 15.02.20 11:09

The first time I saw the grotesque and unfunny Barrymore, he was dressed as a kangaroo, bouncing about singing something marsupial. That was enough for me. 'Children's entertainers' make me instantly suspicious. That makes me some sort of 'ist', no doubt.

by **Jill Havern** 15.02.20 12:09

Kenny the Kangaroo.

by Guest 15.02.20 15:09

CaKeLoveR wrote:The first time I saw the grotesque and unfunny Barrymore, he was dressed as a kangaroo, bouncing about singing something marsupial. That was enough for me. 'Children's entertainers' make me instantly suspicious. That makes me some sort of 'ist', no doubt.

Children's entertainers who use innuendo.

Big.... red.... flag....

by **PeterMac** 15.02.20 15:25

a Child Protection-ist, perhaps

Innuendo is rife, sometimes clearly intended, other times written by people so naive
that they cannot understand what they are saying.

Jake the peg - anyone ?

Children's Hour had lots of unintended stuff, since it was written - in the 50s - by a very straight-laced Victorian/Edwardian spinster who had absolutely no idea about alternative meanings to words. So there are some lovely examples about children "looking for their balls", and so on.

by **sharonl** 15.02.20 22:36

This one may just be me but I cannot watch Miranda or take her seriously as a comedienne.

Of the very few clips that I have seen, she has fallen off a fence or been walking in childrens reins. This humour, imo is the sort that would appeal to 5 - 11 year olds but then she goes on about things like penis pasta and relationships. I could never really make out whether she is insulting adult intelligence or aiming her so called comedy at kids.

I stand to be corrected on this one, what does anyone else think.

I haven't seen much of this nonsense so maybe I'm not really in a position to comment

by Guest 15.02.20 23:07

I have seen a couple of episodes of Miranda, and she seems to lose her skirt a lot. I don't know what to make of her, although her Call the Midwife character is ok.

by **Jill Havern** 04.03.20 14:06

Michael Barrymore says he is suffering 'pain and agony' through '20 years of hell' after Stuart Lubbock pool death but insists his 'door is always open' to victim's family as he demands new force takes over investigation

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8073453/Michael-Barrymore-says-suffering-pain-agony-Stuart-Lubbock-death.html

by **Tony Bennett** 04.03.20 16:23

Jill Havern wrote:[b]Michael Barrymore says he is suffering 'pain and agony' through '20 years of hell' after Stuart Lubbock pool death but insists his 'door is always open' to victim's family as he demands new force takes over investigation]/b]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8073453/Michael-Barrymore-says-suffering-pain-agony-Stuart-Lubbock-death.html

What about Operation Grange?

After doing a 9-year investigation into 'the abduction' to 'help the family', could they not now do a 9-year investigation into 'the accidental drowning' to help a disgruntled former celebrity?

by Guest 04.03.20 16:50

Many a true word spoken jest......

Finally, finally, after 18 years & 10 months, Essex Police admit that the 'drowning' of Stuart Lubbock was a HOAX