Author Topic: Blood n heat...  (Read 1565 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4374
  • How cute am I?!
Re: Blood n heat...
« Reply #30 on: March 10, 2017, 07:46:34 PM »
Pay careful attention to what he said:

He said you can get results in the timeframe in which they did the testing.  There are 2 parts to that:

1) That the heat from the gases would not cause the blood to be unable to be tested successfully. If in fact the heat from the gases would have rendered it unable to be tested successfully then he would not have said the results were reasonable.

2) Blood breaks down over time. He addressed the general length of time it could sit in ambient temperature and yet still be successfully tested after a such period.  Of course if kept in cold storage rules change and some evidence has been stored in places without climate control which can cause evidence to spoil faster.

You want to make the leap that the gases from the shot that caused the drawback damages it and prevents a successful reading.  He didn't suggest any such thing but rather suggested the opposite by saying not only can a reading be obtained but it can be obtained a significant time later successfully.

Since it is well established that readings can be obtained from drawback the issue that experts care about is the length of time when the testing was done and storage conditions.  When done a sizable time later and the material was kept under miserable conditions then the odds of getting successful results will be much lower and sometimes near impossible.  That is when the expert is most useful to the defense.

ABO typing of blood found in barrels was done in plenty of US cases from murders to suicides.  Most of such cases involved blood in barrels of weapons.  Silencers are rarely used here and when used for murder it is rare to have a contact shot let alone one resulting in drawback. 

I will give you the simplest analogy I can consider a tomato.  Will a very short burst of heat immediately demolish a freshly picked tomato?  No but over time the tomato will rot. By storing it in a cool place you delay the process for a longer period of time than if you leave it at room temperature.  If you leave it near a heating vent that will speed up the process.  Quite obviously a tomato can't sit at room temperature for more than a couple of weeks without spoiling. If left consistently in hotter temps it is not going to ripen in an hour and be rotten but it is not going to last 2 weeks. That is what he is speaking to about the blood.

The reply was in direct response to my questions covering the size of sample and duration of the environments the flake was exposed to pre identification and testing.  The scientist has given timescales for analysing antigens, enzymes and proteins from dried bloodstains that haven't been environmentally insulted by temperature and humidity.   

I don't need or want to make any leaps.  I was first alerted to the possibility the blood evidence was fabricated when I considered the bloodstaining on the rifle, in the form of "splashes" and "smears", wasn't capable of being typed beyond confirming the splashes and smears were in fact blood and human in origin.  In fact none of the bloodstained exhibits were capable of yielding the sort of results the flake of blood in the silencer did.

A tomato isn't a good analogy.  A 1/4 inch flake of tomato juice would be a better analogy. 

Are you able to refer us to some documented cases?
Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1448
Re: Blood n heat...
« Reply #31 on: March 10, 2017, 11:58:50 PM »
The reply was in direct response to my questions covering the size of sample and duration of the environments the flake was exposed to pre identification and testing.  The scientist has given timescales for analysing antigens, enzymes and proteins from dried bloodstains that haven't been environmentally insulted by temperature and humidity.   

I don't need or want to make any leaps.  I was first alerted to the possibility the blood evidence was fabricated when I considered the bloodstaining on the rifle, in the form of "splashes" and "smears", wasn't capable of being typed beyond confirming the splashes and smears were in fact blood and human in origin.  In fact none of the bloodstained exhibits were capable of yielding the sort of results the flake of blood in the silencer did.

A tomato isn't a good analogy.  A 1/4 inch flake of tomato juice would be a better analogy. 

Are you able to refer us to some documented cases?

The outside splashes of blood on metal were smaller amounts of blood than the flake unless it is all combined together.  That it was not enough to get typing done on each stain compared to the flake is hardly surprising.  The blood on the stocks soaked into the wood so would not be that easy to get a good sample as big as the flake was. That outer blood was not only disturbed by the shooter while using the weapon after the blood was deposited, the killer blocked additional blood from getting on it by having hands where some additional blood would have gone so prevented the stains from being better.   

What surprises me is that you don't take note that if the killer used bare hands that the killers hands would have had blood on them and been apt to leave prints on the weapon or elsewhere in blood by touching the weapon that had blood all around it. Also that the killer would have bee hit with the spatter as well in areas like face and clothing. It would not all get on the rifle just.  That blood no doubt was Nevill's since he is the one who was beaten with he rifle.

I know you bring up the defense argument of her maybe cleaning herself before killing herself based on religious ritualistic killings but that is rare and doesn't square with this case.  I really wonder why you don't look at that more seriously. 





“...there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.”  Niccolò Machiavelli

Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4374
  • How cute am I?!
Re: Blood n heat...
« Reply #32 on: March 11, 2017, 11:30:19 AM »
The outside splashes of blood on metal were smaller amounts of blood than the flake unless it is all combined together.  That it was not enough to get typing done on each stain compared to the flake is hardly surprising.  The blood on the stocks soaked into the wood so would not be that easy to get a good sample as big as the flake was. That outer blood was not only disturbed by the shooter while using the weapon after the blood was deposited, the killer blocked additional blood from getting on it by having hands where some additional blood would have gone so prevented the stains from being better.   

What surprises me is that you don't take note that if the killer used bare hands that the killers hands would have had blood on them and been apt to leave prints on the weapon or elsewhere in blood by touching the weapon that had blood all around it. Also that the killer would have bee hit with the spatter as well in areas like face and clothing. It would not all get on the rifle just.  That blood no doubt was Nevill's since he is the one who was beaten with he rifle.

I know you bring up the defense argument of her maybe cleaning herself before killing herself based on religious ritualistic killings but that is rare and doesn't square with this case.  I really wonder why you don't look at that more seriously.

Some of the stains on the rifle were significantly larger than the 1/4" flake supposedly found in the silencer - see attached.  The blood on the rifle obviously wasn't subjected to the hot discharge gases from from firing or the cyanoacrylate fuming chamber.  It was tested on 13th Aug.  Conversely the blood flake had to survive the hot discharge gases from firing, cyanoacrylate fuming chamber and ambient temperature until 12th Sep.  It was potentially also exposed to other hazardous environments such as claims JB replaced the silencer in a plastic bag.  An absolute no, no in forensic science is placing wet blood in plastic as it provides the right environment for bacteria and mould which have the potential to destroy any forensic value.  It was also placed in AE's car boot which had been parked outside WHF for several hours during the height of the British summer whilst she 'tidied'.  I haven't banged on about the the latter two as they will prove difficult, if not impossible, to quantify.  Surely anyone looking at the case objectively will ask themselves how the flake of blood supposedly found in the silencer was able to yield the sort of results claimed when the rifle wasn't?

I think SC's found state is entirely consistent with her carrying out the murders and taking her own life.  I don't believe she engaged in any ritual cleaning or changed her clothes.  We cannot be sure she was forensically clean.  The police destroyed her nightdress which may have yielded vital clues using 21st century forensic science.  The autopsy report notes an unexplained graze to her abdomen covered by a dressing and two small holes were found in her nightdress with a  ? about burning.  Of course there may be entirely innocent explanations eg SC was a smoker so she may simply have caught herself with a cigarette.  Point is a bunch of amateur sleuths shouldn't be speculating about all of this 3 decades on.
Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4374
  • How cute am I?!
Re: Blood n heat...
« Reply #33 on: March 11, 2017, 01:24:47 PM »
Scipio, David1819, or anyone else, are you able to refer us to any documented cases where the prosecution case has in part or full relied upon blood evidence found within the barrel of a firearm or silencer?  Preferably blood evidence by way of conventional serological analysis of blood but also interested in any cases involving blood evidence by way of DNA analysis.  Thanks.
Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline Samson

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
Re: Blood n heat...
« Reply #34 on: March 12, 2017, 03:13:46 PM »
I think we can more or less agree that if the silencer was not used in killing the family, any expert opinion establishing the mixed blood of June and Neville became fused in a 6 mil blood flake, or that Sheila's blood itself could constitute that flake, means we have expert witnesses in the Bamber case that should be prosecuted or hauled before a range of disciplinary committees.

Online APRIL

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 286
Re: Blood n heat...
« Reply #35 on: March 12, 2017, 04:28:33 PM »
I think we can more or less agree that if the silencer was not used in killing the family, any expert opinion establishing the mixed blood of June and Neville became fused in a 6 mil blood flake, or that Sheila's blood itself could constitute that flake, means we have expert witnesses in the Bamber case that should be prosecuted or hauled before a range of disciplinary committees.

I can just see it now. NO expert witnesses willing to testify for fear that SOMEONE will prosecute them for something and their reputations will be ruined simply because they gave their opinion. ALL experts have differing opinions. They sure as hell wouldn't be picked to testify if their theory went against what was trying to be proved.

Offline Samson

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
Re: Blood n heat...
« Reply #36 on: March 12, 2017, 07:26:36 PM »
I can just see it now. NO expert witnesses willing to testify for fear that SOMEONE will prosecute them for something and their reputations will be ruined simply because they gave their opinion. ALL experts have differing opinions. They sure as hell wouldn't be picked to testify if their theory went against what was trying to be proved.
No, there is always the option to refuse the attempt to make a declaration on obscure material. In the Lundy case every expert in the world on ImmunoHistoChemistry refused, but one man in Texas agreed to establish that necrotic rotten material was a woman's brain. He is in the process, 16 years on of being called to task. He put Lundy in jail and he stays there despite having a cast iron alibi. He was 100 miles from the crime scene when it occurred. There is no need to make things up. This is the case in this Bamber nonsense, the silencer was in a cupboard during the commission of this crime, and the man in jail was 4 miles away, yet blood that could not be recognised as human becomes victims' blood. Where was the obligation to voice an opinion that results in a finding precluded by the case facts?
« Last Edit: March 12, 2017, 07:30:05 PM by Samson »

Offline Caroline

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 533
Re: Blood n heat...
« Reply #37 on: March 13, 2017, 08:27:44 AM »
No, there is always the option to refuse the attempt to make a declaration on obscure material. In the Lundy case every expert in the world on ImmunoHistoChemistry refused, but one man in Texas agreed to establish that necrotic rotten material was a woman's brain. He is in the process, 16 years on of being called to task. He put Lundy in jail and he stays there despite having a cast iron alibi. He was 100 miles from the crime scene when it occurred. There is no need to make things up. This is the case in this Bamber nonsense, the silencer was in a cupboard during the commission of this crime, and the man in jail was 4 miles away, yet blood that could not be recognised as human becomes victims' blood. Where was the obligation to voice an opinion that results in a finding precluded by the case facts?

This isn't the Lundy case.

Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4374
  • How cute am I?!
Re: Blood n heat...
« Reply #38 on: March 15, 2017, 02:21:18 PM »
I think we can more or less agree that if the silencer was not used in killing the family, any expert opinion establishing the mixed blood of June and Neville became fused in a 6 mil blood flake, or that Sheila's blood itself could constitute that flake, means we have expert witnesses in the Bamber case that should be prosecuted or hauled before a range of disciplinary committees.

The rifle was found on SC's body sans silencer.  JB claims the first he knew there was problem at the farm was when he received NB's phone call.  As we know the silencer was found in the gun cupboard days later by relatives.  However instead of looking at ways to repudiate the silencer and blood flake, JB's QC, Geoffrey Rivlin, chose to include it by suggesting SC used the silencer to murder her parents and sons and then removed it before taking her own life.  He also suggested the blood flake represented an intimate mix of NB and June's blood  caused by close range shots and/or the beating NB sustained.  Now bearing in mind the relatives said they found the silencer in a bag (plastic?) behind a dart board at the back of the cupboard it makes the case for SC using the silencer highly implausible.  More likely if SC used it and found it easier to pull the trigger sans silencer she would simply detach it and leave it hanging about.  Why would she go to the trouble of replacing it in the cupboard?  Prof Knight at trial said those who murder and commit suicide often tidy up and carry out mundane chores but imo it's a lot to ask a jury to buy into.  Furthermore although much of the expert evidence at trial surrounding ballistics was rudimentary there was virtually nothing to support the case that blood from any gsw's or non gsw's sustained by NB and June had the potential to enter into the silencer.  With the advent of the internet and easy access to forensic textbooks etc we can see Geoffrey Rivlin's claims of the mixed blood flake are unsustainable. 

I reject the blood/silencer evidence as I don't believe a flake of blood measuring a 1/4" would survive the hot discharge gases, the cyanoacrylate fuming chamber and time spent at ambient temperature until it was identified on 12th Sep and tested by way of conventional serological analysis of blood.  The success of this type of analysis is dependent on the quality and quantity of the sample.  The quantity of blood on the outside of the rifle was significantly greater than the 1/4" blood flake and was analysed about a month earlier; wasn't subjected to the hot discharge gases and cyanoacrylate fuming chamber but was unable to produce any blood test results other than confirming it was blood and human in origin.

Samson take a peep at the blood results table in the following.  GR argued that a combination of NB and June's blood results could have resulted in SC's thus providing a false reading if you will:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6585.msg268313#msg268313

For those who believe JB is innocent I blame JB's defence: law firm Kinglsey Napley and solicitor Paul Terzeon, the late Ed Lawson QC and Geoffrey Rivlin QC. 

Arrogant - Thought the jury wouldn't understand and would buy into the above by being unable to find guilty 'beyond reasonable doubt'. 

Greedy - JB's case was the first case Kingsley Napley handled funded by legal aid.  Expertise was sourced on the cheap.  In reality they needed to go to the US or some other country eg SA where gun crime is high.   

Incompetent and Negligent - Eg didn't chase down the bible to examine bloodstains and test in an attempt to determine the origin. 
Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1448
Re: Blood n heat...
« Reply #39 on: March 17, 2017, 11:37:37 PM »
The rifle was found on SC's body sans silencer.  JB claims the first he knew there was problem at the farm was when he received NB's phone call.  As we know the silencer was found in the gun cupboard days later by relatives.  However instead of looking at ways to repudiate the silencer and blood flake, JB's QC, Geoffrey Rivlin, chose to include it by suggesting SC used the silencer to murder her parents and sons and then removed it before taking her own life.  He also suggested the blood flake represented an intimate mix of NB and June's blood  caused by close range shots and/or the beating NB sustained.

By suggesting the flake was a mixture of June and Nevill's blood was an attempt to repudiate it. While quite weak the alternative was to just give up.

I reject the blood/silencer evidence as I don't believe a flake of blood measuring a 1/4" would survive the hot discharge gases, the cyanoacrylate fuming chamber and time spent at ambient temperature until it was identified on 12th Sep and tested by way of conventional serological analysis of blood.

Your belief is not founded in science though. You can't point to any experts who say the heat would prevent the blood tests from being successful you simply decided it on your own. The defense could only make the argument you present if experts were willing to testify to such but none were. It is an established fact that superglue fuming and the heat in moderators doesn't damage blood to the point it can't be successfully typed.  That is why you can't find any experts who say it never can be type tested after super glue fuming or if found in a moderator.

The defense was operating under the rules of court while you are not and can argue anything you like.

You keep quantifying all of the blood on the outside of the rifle together as if it were all collected in 1 giant sample but is was not. They took small amounts from various stains to test if it was human and that expended such samples. That made each stain smaller. That left less of each stain to remove to try to use for type testing. The flake was a much larger volume of blood than any of the scrapings they got from the outside of the rifle.

You take the fiction that some of the scrapings were larger than the flake inside and that not being able to successfully type such means it would be impossible to have tested the flake successfully.  This simply doesn't work.

You also take the general rule that the length of time to test items will be shortened if stored in high heat/humidity conditions and make the leap this means the heat of the moderator or superglue fuming would always prevent successful. You are free to believe anything you like by making leaps like such but it can't be used in court and is not even persuasive to others here.

You are not really being fair to the defense.

Even with respect to the Bible it would have been quackery for then to look at what page had the blood stains and try to make up some way to suggest it helped prove suicide. Some lawyers are desperate enough to do that 
but I actually think more of them for not engaging in such BS.  The blood on the Bible was presumed to be Sheila's, it was not only by her but sitting in a pool of her blood.  If there were blood from another victim on the Bible they still could not think of a way it would help establish Jeremy's innocence nor can I. Unless you had Sheila's bloody fingerprints on it in Nevill's blood (which would support her having beat him and gotten his blood on her hands in the process) small amounts of blood of other victims would not matter. The police found no prints in blood to try testing.
“...there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.”  Niccolò Machiavelli

Offline Samson

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
Re: Blood n heat...
« Reply #40 on: March 18, 2017, 05:42:24 AM »
By suggesting the flake was a mixture of June and Nevill's blood was an attempt to repudiate it. While quite weak the alternative was to just give up.

Your belief is not founded in science though. You can't point to any experts who say the heat would prevent the blood tests from being successful you simply decided it on your own. The defense could only make the argument you present if experts were willing to testify to such but none were. It is an established fact that superglue fuming and the heat in moderators doesn't damage blood to the point it can't be successfully typed.  That is why you can't find any experts who say it never can be type tested after super glue fuming or if found in a moderator.

The defense was operating under the rules of court while you are not and can argue anything you like.

You keep quantifying all of the blood on the outside of the rifle together as if it were all collected in 1 giant sample but is was not. They took small amounts from various stains to test if it was human and that expended such samples. That made each stain smaller. That left less of each stain to remove to try to use for type testing. The flake was a much larger volume of blood than any of the scrapings they got from the outside of the rifle.

You take the fiction that some of the scrapings were larger than the flake inside and that not being able to successfully type such means it would be impossible to have tested the flake successfully.  This simply doesn't work.

You also take the general rule that the length of time to test items will be shortened if stored in high heat/humidity conditions and make the leap this means the heat of the moderator or superglue fuming would always prevent successful. You are free to believe anything you like by making leaps like such but it can't be used in court and is not even persuasive to others here.

You are not really being fair to the defense.

Even with respect to the Bible it would have been quackery for then to look at what page had the blood stains and try to make up some way to suggest it helped prove suicide. Some lawyers are desperate enough to do that 
but I actually think more of them for not engaging in such BS.  The blood on the Bible was presumed to be Sheila's, it was not only by her but sitting in a pool of her blood.  If there were blood from another victim on the Bible they still could not think of a way it would help establish Jeremy's innocence nor can I. Unless you had Sheila's bloody fingerprints on it in Nevill's blood (which would support her having beat him and gotten his blood on her hands in the process) small amounts of blood of other victims would not matter. The police found no prints in blood to try testing.
Of course blind Freddie knows all the test firing and contact shooting in the world won't get a quarter inch dried flake in the baffles. But that is classic gardening.
Less than reassuring Scipio that law excites you more than science in finding what really happened.

Professor Chris Halkides

Maybe we should coin the term "rat malfeasance unit" RMU and grade the various pieces of evidence accordingly. Or RGU, relative gardening unit...

They called Bruce Hutton the gardener, but the seed had no embryo. Arthur Thomas vs the henchmen. They won for a short while, only 9 years.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2017, 05:45:59 AM by Samson »

Offline Caroline

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 533
Re: Blood n heat...
« Reply #41 on: March 18, 2017, 12:45:32 PM »
Of course blind Freddie knows all the test firing and contact shooting in the world won't get a quarter inch dried flake in the baffles. But that is classic gardening.
Less than reassuring Scipio that law excites you more than science in finding what really happened.

Professor Chris Halkides

Maybe we should coin the term "rat malfeasance unit" RMU and grade the various pieces of evidence accordingly. Or RGU, relative gardening unit...

They called Bruce Hutton the gardener, but the seed had no embryo. Arthur Thomas vs the henchmen. They won for a short while, only 9 years.

Someone will have to translate this, no idea what he's on about!


Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4374
  • How cute am I?!
Re: Blood n heat...
« Reply #43 on: March 18, 2017, 03:52:59 PM »
SNIP

Your belief is not founded in science though. You can't point to any experts who say the heat would prevent the blood tests from being successful you simply decided it on your own. The defense could only make the argument you present if experts were willing to testify to such but none were. It is an established fact that superglue fuming and the heat in moderators doesn't damage blood to the point it can't be successfully typed.  That is why you can't find any experts who say it never can be type tested after super glue fuming or if found in a moderator.

The defense was operating under the rules of court while you are not and can argue anything you like.

SNIP

You would have us believe that the quantity and quality of blood found at soc and subsequently analysed by conventional serological analysis is irrelevant.  It isn't.

http://www.crime-scene-investigator.net/print/blood-print.html

http://www.forensicscienceresources.com/georgecv.htm

I've recently posted text from email communication with arguably the world's leading expert on blood serology:

Sorry I have not responded earlier, but things have been very busy here.  The amount of stain used seems about right to get a result. The stability of the genetic markers that were conducted on the1/4 inch flake of blood are all well within the expected results time frame.  ABO is good for about two years at ambient temperatures and is the longest for the series of five markers you listed.  Haptoglobin and PGM would be the next at about a year, and AK & EAP are about six months.  This is, of course, is for dried stains that have not been environmentally insulted by temperature or humidity.  XXXX would not have the capability of a fingerprint chamber or to test fire a weapon at our facility.

And from a leading UK forensic scientist:

Thank you for your email. I have always found this case very interesting. As I'm sure you have seen on my out of office reply, I am away from work on maternity leave at the moment. I am not back until mid-March so I would not be able to work on any specifics until then.

I have taken on projects of this type in the past but as I work part time now I would need to speak to some colleagues before agreeing to any work. We do have a cyanoacrylate fuming chamber and some kind of firearms licence but I'm not sure what It covers as it may only be for our flare gun.

Maybe we could speak in the new year to discuss your requirements further.

Best wishes"


Myster has been sent copies of the emails.   

The only way to know for sure is to carry out tests. 

You find me some cases/evidence which support the following:

- Blood found at soc and subsequently analysed by way of conventional serological analysis is unaffacted by temperature and humidity.

- Criminal cases that are underpinned by way of blood found in a silencer and subsequently analysed by way of conventional serological analysis.

The fact JB's defence didn't explore the above is irrelevant.  They are lawyers (and not very good ones imo) not forensic scientists. 

Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline Holly Goodhead

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4374
  • How cute am I?!
Re: Blood n heat...
« Reply #44 on: March 18, 2017, 04:21:34 PM »

SNIP

You keep quantifying all of the blood on the outside of the rifle together as if it were all collected in 1 giant sample but is was not. They took small amounts from various stains to test if it was human and that expended such samples. That made each stain smaller. That left less of each stain to remove to try to use for type testing. The flake was a much larger volume of blood than any of the scrapings they got from the outside of the rifle.

You take the fiction that some of the scrapings were larger than the flake inside and that not being able to successfully type such means it would be impossible to have tested the flake successfully.  This simply doesn't work.

You also take the general rule that the length of time to test items will be shortened if stored in high heat/humidity conditions and make the leap this means the heat of the moderator or superglue fuming would always prevent successful. You are free to believe anything you like by making leaps like such but it can't be used in court and is not even persuasive to others here.

You are not really being fair to the defense.


According to the CoA  doc the flake found inside the silencer measured 1/4" by way of surface and is by definition ultra thin.  By comparison the rifle contained numerous stains, smears and splashes.  According to Glynis Howard's trial testimony bloodstains are greater in volume compared with smears.  One bloodstain measured 1 1/4" x <1/4" which is significantly larger than the flake inside the silencer and yet this was incapable of being typed. 

71. The rifle bore blood smearing on the barrel in the region of the fore-sight and around the mechanism and there were splashes of blood to the left side of the weapon. The appearance of the blood staining was consistent with it having been used to strike somebody who was already bleeding. On analysis the blood was found to be human blood but tests to determine grouping were unsuccessful.   

This imo should have set the alarm bells ringing along with Dr Lincoln's letter to the defence which shows numerous exhibits were tested and none were able to produce the sort of results the blood flake supposedly found inside the silencer did. 
Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92