Do tell you're theory.
It is a discussion forum & will be discussed.
It has all been discussed previously. I've alluded to it above ie "supposedly" meaning I am skeptical about the labs claim of finding blood inside the silencer. If the lab did find blood inside then I am skeptical about how it deposited there.
Firstly the means by which it is claimed the blood deposited inside ie 'drawback' does not usually feature with a small caliber firearm, low velocity ammo, neck wounds and without the presence of skin tissue. A silencer makes it less likely still given the whole phenomenon is based on the proposition that firearm discharge gases blast into a wound forcing blood back against the line of fire. A silencer allows the hot discharge gases to slow and cool within the silencer therefore slowing the rate at which discharge gases will enter the wound. When blood does present through drawback it usually presents as fine blood droplets resembling high impact blood spatter not a flake said to measure a 1/4". The lab claim to have found blood as deep as the 5th baffle and maybe deeper up to 8th baffle. The distance of the 5th baffle from aperture exceeds firearms testing in forensic lit showing shorter distances.
Secondly the blood flake was analysed by way of blood serology which was the standard method used in a pre dna era. This type of testing requires samples of a certain quantity and quality. Samples are easily degraded by way of heat, humidity and light. Even if the combi of firearm, ammo, wound site and silencer was capable of generating the drawback phenomenon it is unlikely a flake of blood said to measure 1/4" would withstand not only the hot gases from firearm discharge but also the humidity in the cyanoacrylate fuming chamber and time spent at ambient temp between and after these events.
The blood flake produced results for ABO, AK, and EAP with an inconclusive result for HP. It was unable to produce a result for PGM. And yet arguably the world's expert on blood serology has advised that in dried stains that haven't been environmentally insulted eg heat and humidity, ABO stains are good for approx 2 years, HP and PGM 1 year and AK and EAP 6 months which is the opposite of the blood flake test results ie the flake was unable to yield a result of PGM and a partial/inconclusive result for HP and yet turned up results for AK and EAP which are less stable.
The normal method at that time for analyzing blood was to dissolve the flake whole and use the resultant material for the 5 tests. In this case the flake was divided into 5 and then each portion dissolved to run the 5 tests. No explanation has ever been provided why this unorthodox method was chosen along with any advantages/disadvantages. One reason may have been to circumvent internal systems in generating a required set of results that generate photographic evidence by way of bands.
Post trial and pre 1989 appeal JB's defence challenged whether the blood would be altered after firearm discharge. This was in connection with Rivlin's crazy theory that the blood flake represented an "intimate" mix of NB and June's blood. As a result the FSS claim to have placed blood in a number of silencers and then discharged the rifle 25 times with the blood results remaining unaltered. The rifle/ammo combi has a muzzle velocity of 1080 ft/s meaning the internal explosion has to be capable of firing a bullet out of the barrel at 1080 feet per sec with hot discharge gases blasting down the barrel and through the silencer/baffles and yet the little blood flake was hardy to enough to withstand beeing environmentally insulted over and over and still able to return a full set of results
Not forgetting all the other blood stained exhibits eg rifle, carpets, nightdress, socks etc were in the main unable to yield any sort of result other than confirmation the blood was human in origin and these had not been environmentally insulted.
Mark Webster biologist for the defence at 2002 appeal said when he examined the silencer he found soot within which gives some idea of the heat generated. This is one of the reasons barrels and silencers are cleaned regularly.
This is one of the many reasons I say the lawyers at trial and appeal were grossly incompetent and negligent. It's not rocket science to be able to read Dr Lincoln's letter to the defense pre trial and spot a significant inconsistency in that the blood flake supposedly found inside the silencer was able to yield significantly more results than any other exhibit and ask why?!
Mid 80's and before forensic science wasn't what it is today. The staff as FSS were woefully unqualified and the defence were somewhat hampered in that FSS had a monopoly. Today in the UK we have several forensic service providers eg Cellmark, Key and LGC where FSS findings could be checked and challenged. The defence at trial relied upon Dr Lincoln for the blood/biology and Major Mead for the rifle/silencer ballistics and it is doubtful the two ever met which again comes back to a poor defence in not managing the case properly.
Parliament has already acknowledged high profile quality failings at FSS mid 80's:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmsctech/writev/forensic/m61.htmThe above is currently being reviewed by forensic scientists. If new info comes to light which could assist JB's case it will be forwarded to a lawyer to be dealt with appropriately.