What doubts on Jeremy's innocence do supporters have ?

[adam]

Supporters often say Sheila wouldn't just lie down to be shot. Basically she would. Bamber would have believed this after he saw her alive just 5 hours earlier.

Sheila would be half asleep, under sedation, physically weak & uncordinated,  not know what was happening & not know other people were in danger/dead.

If any of that was not the case, Bamber could use his vastly superior strenght and the gun he was holding. He only had to get her a few yards & then on the floor.

He had certainly just shot June and Nevill 15 times, had a ferocious kitchen fight & perhaps already killed two 6 year old boys. Sheila was not going to make him give up over half way through. 

[adam]

Bamber had the option of injuring Sheila prior to getting her into his chosen position.  It would not incriminate him as he could just suggest Nevill injured Sheila.

Nevill would have certainly injured Sheila or damaged her nightie pre bullet firing or during the kitchen fight. But didn't.

Sheila & her nightie being undamaged shows how easy it was for Bamber to position and shoot her.

[Samson]

Bamber had the option of injuring Sheila prior to getting her into his chosen position.  It would not incriminate him as he could just suggest Nevill injured Sheila.

Nevill would have certainly injured Sheila or damaged her nightie pre bullet firing or during the kitchen fight. But didn't.

Sheila & her nightie being undamaged shows how easy it was for Bamber to position and shoot her.

In these two last posts you are arguing backwards, particularly by declaring it was easy to make her comply because her nightie was undamaged.
Another argument is to say it was undamaged because she shot June, then Neville in the mouth and elbow and shoulder, thus disabling them both. None of these shots damage the nightie, nor does the bludgeoning of Neville before she reloaded and finished him with the head shots.

[adam]

In these two last posts you are arguing backwards, particularly by declaring it was easy to make her comply because her nightie was undamaged.
Another argument is to say it was undamaged because she shot June, then Neville in the mouth and elbow and shoulder, thus disabling them both. None of these shots damage the nightie, nor does the bludgeoning of Neville before she reloaded and finished him with the head shots.

It seems you do not believe that Sheila showered and changed after killing everyone. Which is a popular theory from supporters.

Nevill had the chance to injure Sheila when fully fit. With or without the help of another adult, June. To get control of the rifle. But rang Bamber instead !

Nevill was shot 4 times upstairs. The two head shots would not have restricted the use of his arms and legs. The two body shots did not disable him as he got downstairs, where the crime scene evidence shows there was a huge fight.

Sheila & her nightie being mark free simultandously shows she was not involved in the kitchen fight & how easy it was for Bamber to control her.

[Samson]

It seems you do not believe that Sheila showered and changed after killing everyone. Which is a popular theory from supporters.

Nevill had the chance to injure Sheila when fully fit. With or without the help of another adult, June. To get control of the rifle. But rang Bamber instead !

Nevill was shot 4 times upstairs. The two head shots would not have restricted the use of his arms and legs. The two body shots did not disable him as he got downstairs, where the crime scene evidence shows there was a huge fight.

Sheila & her nightie being mark free simultandously shows she was not involved in the kitchen fight & how easy it was for Bamber to control her.

Sheila never needed to touch another human being. She shot them and bludgeoned Neville.

Parse that sentence and show where there is an irrevocable data point that shows she must have been in contact with a victim if she killed them all.

[Caroline]

In these two last posts you are arguing backwards, particularly by declaring it was easy to make her comply because her nightie was undamaged.
Another argument is to say it was undamaged because she shot June, then Neville in the mouth and elbow and shoulder, thus disabling them both. None of these shots damage the nightie, nor does the bludgeoning of Neville before she reloaded and finished him with the head shots.

It would be remarkable indeed if she managed to do all that and not have signs on her nightdress.

[APRIL]

In these two last posts you are arguing backwards, particularly by declaring it was easy to make her comply because her nightie was undamaged.
Another argument is to say it was undamaged because she shot June, then Neville in the mouth and elbow and shoulder, thus disabling them both. None of these shots damage the nightie, nor does the bludgeoning of Neville before she reloaded and finished him with the head shots.

D'ya know, it's impossible to get my head round Sheila being able to hit him hard enough to -sorry for this- expose part of his brain without getting some of it on her.

[adam]

Sheila never needed to touch another human being. She shot them and bludgeoned Neville.

Parse that sentence and show where there is an irrevocable data point that shows she must have been in contact with a victim if she killed them all.

Well she would have wrestled with Nevill for the rifle. Resulting in the ceiling light smashing,  aga scratching & upturned/smashed items. So their bodies were very close or touching each other for several seconds.

Agree Nevill did not use his 9 inch height & 8 stone weight advantage to punch or jump on Sheila, which would have left evidence on her nightie.  Although that would have been his easiest way to negate her, either pre or post rifle shots.

[Holly Goodhead]

It would be remarkable indeed if she managed to do all that and not have signs on her nightdress.

The ballistic and pathological evidence would suggest otherwise.  And if small traces of victims' blood existed on SC's person/nightdress no one would be any the wiser since testing wasn't carried out and even if it had been blood serology type testing was unable to type small stains. 

Only 2 blood stained areas of SC's nightdress were tested: under the armpit and one of the marks which appears to resemble a finger.  These stains were consistent with her own blood groups.

Summary non-gunshot injuries sustained by NB most likely location being the kitchen:

- Fractures to skull
- Bruising to both eyes not solely associated with fractures to skull but blows from blunt object
- Laceration to right side of nose, 1 blow in association with injury to right eye above
- Bruising and grazing to bridge of nose.  Same blow as laceration to right side of nose
- Bruising forehead 1 each side
- Bruising right cheek and temple
- Bruising and abrasions left cheek and temple
- *Laceration right parietal region "severe superficial skin injury"
- Laceration left parietal region 1/4"
- Bruising ulna right forearm

* Pathologist said he was unable to gauge the force used other than for this wound which he described as being inflicted with "considerable force" albeit it caused a laceration wound. 

The above non-gunshot wounds were probably not capable of generating medium velocity blood spatter.  The pathologist described the instrument used to cause these wounds as "blunt" which in all probability was the rifle.  The rifle contained so little blood it was not even possible to group unlike the 1/4" blood flake found in the silencer!   

Aside the fractures to the skull the other wounds amounted to bruises and lacerations.



 

[Holly Goodhead]

It seems you do not believe that Sheila showered and changed after killing everyone. Which is a popular theory from supporters.

Nevill had the chance to injure Sheila when fully fit. With or without the help of another adult, June. To get control of the rifle. But rang Bamber instead !

Nevill was shot 4 times upstairs. The two head shots would not have restricted the use of his arms and legs. The two body shots did not disable him as he got downstairs, where the crime scene evidence shows there was a huge fight.

Sheila & her nightie being mark free simultandously shows she was not involved in the kitchen fight & how easy it was for Bamber to control her.

Imo 'supporters' make the fatal mistake of relying on JB's grossly incompetent and negligent lawyers at trial and appeal.  Eg prosecution claim SC was clean.  So instead of the defence arguing SC's found state was entirely consistent with SC as perp they argue all sorts of bizarre things:

- a ritual cleanse
- changing of clothes
- pathologist and police committing perjury by covering up SC's hands and feet were blood stained
- non-disclosed images of SC's feet which supporters claim represent SC's blood stained feet

This is all wrong imo.  There was no ritual cleanse or changing of clothes and the pathologist/police didn't commit perjury nor do images exist of SC's blood stained feet.  SC's found state as per pathologist and police was entirely consistent with SC as perp.

[Holly Goodhead]

Supporters often say Sheila wouldn't just lie down to be shot. Basically she would. Bamber would have believed this after he saw her alive just 5 hours earlier.

Sheila would be half asleep, under sedation, physically weak & uncordinated,  not know what was happening & not know other people were in danger/dead.

If any of that was not the case, Bamber could use his vastly superior strenght and the gun he was holding. He only had to get her a few yards & then on the floor.

He had certainly just shot June and Nevill 15 times, had a ferocious kitchen fight & perhaps already killed two 6 year old boys. Sheila was not going to make him give up over half way through.

There's no evidence SC was half asleep, sedated, physically weak and uncoordinated.  Toxicology reports show levels of Haloperidol in SC's system just within the moderate range. 

If JB was responsible he had to pin SC  to the floor in such a way she would not fight back eg limbs flailing and at the same time position the rifle with silencer, some 50" in length, under her chin to enable him to pull the trigger. 

No evidence of a "ferocious kitchen fight".

[Holly Goodhead]

Charlie Wilkes didn't create the Bamber thread on IA and doesn't post much on it. Suspect Samson is bigging him up as he's a poster there I've never engaged with.

I've already engaged with Luminous Wanderer & TomG. Both crying off to IA as they didn't like me pulling apart their theories. While I engaged with David only yesterday, requesting a source from him on Blue, which I am still waiting for.

Charlie Wilkes will not waste time going over the same ground as many of us do myself included.  He's the only 'supporter' I agree with.  Here's one of his posts from IA:

What I see with a lot of people is that they don't follow crime stories or look at many cases, so they don't realize what kind of crime they are looking at (which can be misleading, but not often), and they don't recognize the difference between good evidence and bad/inconclusive/contrived evidence.

The section in bold is imo where 'supporters' let JB down as much of what they advocate is bad/inconclusive/ contrived evidence.  To those who believe JB guilty this simply reinforces their views.  Also bad/inconclusive/contrived evidence isn't in a million years going to assist JB overturn his conviction. 

http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=194843#p194843

   

[John]

Sheila never needed to touch another human being. She shot them and bludgeoned Neville.

Parse that sentence and show where there is an irrevocable data point that shows she must have been in contact with a victim if she killed them all.

I notice you avoid the scuffle over the kitchen table?

Even if we consider for a moment that Sheila had the rifle I don't think Nevill would have had any difficulty disarming her.  The shots were all on target except one which would have been a remarkable achievement for anyone familiar with the weapon but for Sheila?  I don't think so.

[Caroline]

The ballistic and pathological evidence would suggest otherwise.  And if small traces of victims' blood existed on SC's person/nightdress no one would be any the wiser since testing wasn't carried out and even if it had been blood serology type testing was unable to type small stains. 

Only 2 blood stained areas of SC's nightdress were tested: under the armpit and one of the marks which appears to resemble a finger.  These stains were consistent with her own blood groups.

Summary non-gunshot injuries sustained by NB most likely location being the kitchen:

- Fractures to skull
- Bruising to both eyes not solely associated with fractures to skull but blows from blunt object
- Laceration to right side of nose, 1 blow in association with injury to right eye above
- Bruising and grazing to bridge of nose.  Same blow as laceration to right side of nose
- Bruising forehead 1 each side
- Bruising right cheek and temple
- Bruising and abrasions left cheek and temple
- *Laceration right parietal region "severe superficial skin injury"
- Laceration left parietal region 1/4"
- Bruising ulna right forearm

* Pathologist said he was unable to gauge the force used other than for this wound which he described as being inflicted with "considerable force" albeit it caused a laceration wound. 

The above non-gunshot wounds were probably not capable of generating medium velocity blood spatter.  The pathologist described the instrument used to cause these wounds as "blunt" which in all probability was the rifle.  The rifle contained so little blood it was not even possible to group unlike the 1/4" blood flake found in the silencer!   

Aside the fractures to the skull the other wounds amounted to bruises and lacerations.



 

'Probably' isn't scientific Holly however, blunt instruments are capable of generating medium and high velocity spatter. Smack a water melon with a baseball bat if you don't believe it! They didn't test the rest of the nightdress because there was nothing to see, had she battered Nevil, there would have been. No probably maybe about it. It's irrelevant how much blood was on the rifle, given that it would have been transferred to the individual carrying it - think about the way you hold a rifle? It's held close to the body and under the arm. Any blood would end up on the clothing of the person carrying it - leaving smears behind. No one would hold the rifle at arms length. We know that no one else's blood was found on Sheila but we don't know that the same could be said about Jeremy.

[Holly Goodhead]

'Probably' isn't scientific Holly however, blunt instruments are capable of generating medium and high velocity spatter. Smack a water melon with a baseball bat if you don't believe it! They didn't test the rest of the nightdress because there was nothing to see, had she battered Nevil, there would have been. No probably maybe about it. It's irrelevant how much blood was on the rifle, given that it would have been transferred to the individual carrying it - think about the way you hold a rifle? It's held close to the body and under the arm. Any blood would end up on the clothing of the person carrying it - leaving smears behind. No one would hold the rifle at arms length. We know that no one else's blood was found on Sheila but we don't know that the same could be said about Jeremy.

Yes I appreciate 'probably' isn't scientific but it was something JB's defence at trial could argue against.  Spatter is dependent on velocity ie speed in which one objects hits another object eg bullet/victim, "blunt instrument"/ victim or baseball bat/melon.  Baseball bats are much lighter than the rifle and a melon more pliable and less resistant than poor NB.  Therefore the velocity with a baseball bat and melon would potentially be greater with the potential for spatter greater. 

If NB's non-gunshot wounds generated blood spatter then more must have transferred to the rifle than the perp as the rifle was coming into direct contact with NB and the victim wasn't ie the length of the rifle in part separated NB and his perp.  If this was the case then why didn't bloodstains found on the rifle transfer to SC's nightdress given it was found resting across her body?