Author Topic: Was the twins' future up for discussion?  (Read 26709 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Was the twins' future up for discussion?
« Reply #75 on: May 04, 2020, 11:04:00 AM »
You can see the pig skin tests in the "new evidence" documentary with Mark w..ble Thomas but here is a screenshot that they claim "prove" the burns were caused by the muzzle of the gun and not the silencer ( or something else ) 

The muzzle was heated with a blow lamp for the tests.

I've never thought the marks were burns or that they related to the night of the murders.

At trial Dr V said he was unsure.  Prof Knight did not think they were burns.
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?

Offline The General

Re: Was the twins' future up for discussion?
« Reply #76 on: May 04, 2020, 11:12:56 AM »
The “bunny buster” you refer to effectively ended the lives of 5 people, remember?
Urgh.....read the conversation back.....Jesus......cba.....whatevs
The point being, it's a wholly inappropriate weapon for an execution, which is what is was. But its choice was necessitated by the need to fit Sheila up, even as incongruent as that was.
Yes, it did the job, but only after repeated attempts on the adults.

Besides, we were discussing the burn marks and didn't need an interjection regarding the blatantly obvious.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2020, 11:16:35 AM by The General »
The 2nd Youngest Member of the Forum

Offline Common sense

Re: Was the twins' future up for discussion?
« Reply #77 on: May 04, 2020, 12:29:08 PM »
I've never thought the marks were burns or that they related to the night of the murders.

At trial Dr V said he was unsure.  Prof Knight did not think they were burns.

I agree. They don't advance the case at all. Although...

Maybe they were caused by a mysterious device used by AA's men in black?!

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Was the twins' future up for discussion?
« Reply #78 on: May 04, 2020, 12:40:53 PM »
Urgh.....read the conversation back.....Jesus......cba.....whatevs
The point being, it's a wholly inappropriate weapon for an execution, which is what is was. But its choice was necessitated by the need to fit Sheila up, even as incongruent as that was.
Yes, it did the job, but only after repeated attempts on the adults.

Besides, we were discussing the burn marks and didn't need an interjection regarding the blatantly obvious.

If you work out the maths and physics behind the muzzle velocity you arrive at the leathality:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11191.msg570652#msg570652

And if you want a practical example look no further than the case of David Bain where 5 family members died from gunshot wounds inflicted from a. 22 rifle where 8 cartridges were used. 
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Was the twins' future up for discussion?
« Reply #79 on: May 04, 2020, 12:52:32 PM »
I agree. They don't advance the case at all. Although...

Maybe they were caused by a mysterious device used by AA's men in black?!

NB sustained a serious back injury when the plane he was flying in ww2 crashed.  He was hopitalised for months.  I've always wondered if the marks were as a result of this.  I cant see any evidence anyone checked out his medi records. 
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?

Offline The General

Re: Was the twins' future up for discussion?
« Reply #80 on: May 04, 2020, 12:54:22 PM »
If you work out the maths and physics behind the muzzle velocity you arrive at the leathality:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11191.msg570652#msg570652

And if you want a practical example look no further than the case of David Bain where 5 family members died from gunshot wounds inflicted from a. 22 rifle where 8 cartridges were used.
The maths in context are way more useful.
In this case it took several rounds to finally dispatch his mother and father.
But if a more suitable weapon was at his disposal, would it be used? Of course it would, but that wasn't possible in this instance due to the necessity to make the pieces of the puzzle fit.
Let's look at it from another angle - how else could Bamber do it any retain any hope of getting away with it?
Hitman? Finding one is difficult, finding one that will kill kids even more so, plus where's the motive?
Robbery gone wrong? Nope. Why kill everyone? Why not just leg it?
Fire? Non starter as I've recently learned - he considered it, but then dismissed it as anything of value would be destroyed and the insurance (that he subsequently reviewed) didn't cover it in his opinion.
As bizarre as it sounds, the only viable mode was the one he cobbled together - the Sheila Went Bonkers angle.
The 2nd Youngest Member of the Forum

Offline Caroline

Re: Was the twins' future up for discussion?
« Reply #81 on: May 04, 2020, 01:02:51 PM »
Urgh.....read the conversation back.....Jesus......cba.....whatevs
The point being, it's a wholly inappropriate weapon for an execution, which is what is was. But its choice was necessitated by the need to fit Sheila up, even as incongruent as that was.
Yes, it did the job, but only after repeated attempts on the adults.

Besides, we were discussing the burn marks and didn't need an interjection regarding the blatantly obvious.

Why are you so hostile to VS?

Offline The General

Re: Was the twins' future up for discussion?
« Reply #82 on: May 04, 2020, 01:23:39 PM »
Why are you so hostile to VS?
I'm not. How dare you, I've never been so insulted since breakfast.
VS and I have a hate / hate / like relationship. She hates me, but she also likes me. I like her. But because my ego doesn't permit me being corrected, I react with conceit, sarcasm and often completely fabricated and unfounded posts.
I've got internet annoyance issues that I'm working through with my therapist. It's a long road.
The 2nd Youngest Member of the Forum

Offline Caroline

Re: Was the twins' future up for discussion?
« Reply #83 on: May 04, 2020, 01:36:05 PM »
I'm not. How dare you, I've never been so insulted since breakfast.
VS and I have a hate / hate / like relationship. She hates me, but she also likes me. I like her. But because my ego doesn't permit me being corrected, I react with conceit, sarcasm and often completely fabricated and unfounded posts.
I've got internet annoyance issues that I'm working through with my therapist. It's a long road.

Well, given you're on. the same side of the argument, take short cut!  8((()*/

Offline The General

Re: Was the twins' future up for discussion?
« Reply #84 on: May 04, 2020, 01:42:01 PM »
Well, given you're on. the same side of the argument, take short cut!  8((()*/
Well while we're on the subject of hostility, I reckon there's a few who could do with reeling in the vitriol a bit on G Unit, Holly and Aggie - and they've hitched their horse to the other wagon.
The 2nd Youngest Member of the Forum

Offline APRIL

Re: Was the twins' future up for discussion?
« Reply #85 on: May 04, 2020, 01:55:54 PM »
NB sustained a serious back injury when the plane he was flying in ww2 crashed.  He was hopitalised for months.  I've always wondered if the marks were as a result of this.  I cant see any evidence anyone checked out his medi records.


I imagine that scars which are several years old will look very different from those recently acquired.

Offline Nicholas

Re: Was the twins' future up for discussion?
« Reply #86 on: May 04, 2020, 01:58:45 PM »
NB sustained a serious back injury when the plane he was flying in ww2 crashed.  He was hopitalised for months.  I've always wondered if the marks were as a result of this.  I cant see any evidence anyone checked out his medi records.

Doesn’t mean it wasn’t checked out - just means Bamber and you are not privy to his private medical records
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline ISpyWithMyEye

Re: Was the twins' future up for discussion?
« Reply #87 on: May 04, 2020, 03:36:56 PM »
I've never thought the marks were burns or that they related to the night of the murders.

At trial Dr V said he was unsure.  Prof Knight did not think they were burns.


You’re not a scientist, pathologist or doctor, Holly — with all due respect your thoughts are of no significance

It’s patently obvious that Nevill wouldn’t have been walking around with three wounds embedded in his back, that were deep and must have caused tremendous pain

It’s irrelevant in a way; if professors can’t explain them Im sure you can’t — or anyone else — except Jeremy.

The fact is, Jeremy killed Nevill and his family; 35 years have passed by; and the marks make no difference to the fact Jeremy is guilty of mass murder and will spend the rest of his empty days in a cell, as he deserves to.
Seeking Justice for June & Nevill Bamber, Sheila Caffell & her two six-year-old twin boys who were shot dead in their heads by Psychopath, JEREMY BAMBER who must NEVER be released.