You forgot to mention that Nevill struggled with his assailant Holly. Do you really believe a petite Sheila clad only in a nightdress could have taken on an angry man over 6' tall and bleeding profusely and not ended up with a single mark or a spot of his blood on her? Not to mention shoot and reload the rifle three times yet never cracked a nail? Also none of Sheila's fingerprints on any bullets.
What about the soles of her feet? The kitchen floor was strewn with small glass shards as a consequence of a glass lampshade being smashed in the struggle yet Sheila's feet were both free from glass or cuts. Sheila's naked footprints were not found in the kitchen.
It's interesting you mention the silencer, if Mike Tesko is to believed there were three. Lets consider the one you refer to in your post. DNA analysis wasn't available in 1985 so the trial had to rely on blood grouping and enzyme analysis. It was determined that the blood on the silencer and the blood found within the silencer was human (not animal) and could have been Sheila's. This formed the basis of the Crown case.
A few years later a sample taken from the baffles deep inside the silencer was tested using DNA analysis and returned a 13 marker match to Sheila. Although this falls below the 20 marker threshold required for a conviction in the UK it proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the blood did belong to Sheila. The chance of that DNA belonging to anyone else is something like 1 in 10,000,000 To remind the reader, the significance of this is that the only way Sheila's DNA could have got so far into the silencer is if she was shot using it. Sheila was shot twice in the neck, the end of the silencer almost touching her skin. The suction following the shots drew minute particles of blood into the silencer where it was deposited on baffles and later recovered by forensic scientists using the latest techniques.
The point in all of this is simple, whoever shot Sheila unscrewed the silencer from the rifle when they realised that with it fitted the weapon was too long for Sheila to have used it to shoot herself in the neck. The silencer was found a few days after the murder in a shelf inside a gun cabinet.
Maybe you can address these points Holly?
"You forgot to mention that Nevill struggled with his assailant Holly. Do you really believe a petite Sheila clad only in a nightdress could have taken on an angry man over 6' tall and bleeding profusely and not ended up with a single mark or a spot of his blood on her? Not to mention shoot and reload the rifle three times yet never cracked a nail? Also none of Sheila's fingerprints on any bullets.
What about the soles of her feet? The kitchen floor was strewn with small glass shards as a consequence of a glass lampshade being smashed in the struggle yet Sheila's feet were both free from glass or cuts. Sheila's naked footprints were not found in the kitchen."
The very idea a woman attacked a man much larger and stronger than herself while under sedentary medication (If she was having a hyper experience this is what she would have been taking) is laughable.
I would like to know where Sheila stored the bullets on her person while running around out of her mind up and down stairs beating people up and loading /reloading a rifle. (as John mentions not even breaking a manicured nail!)
My other observation was motive: the father was violently slaughtered and the children had one bullet to the head. If she was acting like a crazed manic totally out of her mind, all recipients would have been equally violently slaughtered. And the alternative 'real motive was'? robbery?
I still smile when I read that he still bangs on about seeing someone moving in the house while the police were there...
