Much of what she wrote is simply supposition. For instance, there is no way to know whether he used a bike or his car. We know he planned to use a bike but don't have a way to know whether he kept to his plan or decided to use his car instead.
Some things we can know because there is sufficient evidence. We know in general the order of the shots because the evidence helps detail such. She completely misread that evidence though.
We know that the magazine was re-loaded 2 times so 3 magazine loads fired (one of these reloads was either partial or the gun reloaded again before the magazine was empty)
There are 2 possible alternatives
Scenario A)
1) 11 bullets initially loaded and fired
2) at least 4 bullets re-loaded and fired
3) 10 bullets loaded and fired
Scenario B)
1) 10 bullets initially loaded and fired
2) at least 4 bullets re-loaded and fired
3) 11 bullets loaded and fired
For sure
1) consisted of 6 shots fired at June and 4 at Nevill in the master bedroom. At least 4 of the 6 shots were fired while June was in the bed. The other 2 could have come while she was in the bed or as she was getting out of the bed. If the gun had 11 shots then the 11th shot was the shot between her eyes. But it it seems odd for that to be the case because she first walked around the bed making it more likely that this happened later.
2) the gun was empty as the struggle in the kitchen happened, after Nevill was knocked unconscious the killer was able to reload the gun and loaded least 4 bullets in the gun (could have loaded up to 10) then fired 4 shots into Nevill's head killing him.
3) The killer then fully reloaded the magazine and went back upstairs with 10 or 11 bullets in the weapon. If more than 4 bullets had been reloaded before shooting Nevill that means the chamber would have had 1 in it already thus with the full magazine load that adds to 11. If June had only been shot 6 times initially then the gun had 11 bullets of which 1 was fired between June's eyes as she was on the floor to make sure she was dead, 8 were used on the boys and the last 2 on Sheila.
If he went upstairs from the kitchen with 10 bullets there is no way to know for sure whether he would have fired the bullets into Sheila first or the boys first. If 11 then he could have shot June first. The order depends on what the situation was.
She assumes that Sheila woke up and was in the master bedroom by the time Jeremy returned upstairs but that doesn't have to be the case. Jeremy may have to have gotten her out of bed. If she was up she could have been tending to her mother on the floor and simply ran to the other side of the bed to get away from Jeremy. The claim that going around the bed to go through the boxroom was the most direct route to the boy's room is silly. The most direct route from the hall is to go a down a few stairs and continue through the hall. The 2 hallways were separated by only a couple of stairs.
Instead of making the assumption she does because evidence and logic dictate it, she makes up what she would like to think happened. She ignores that the shots above June's ear and to her neck were delivered in bed which we know because the neck bullet exited her body into her pillow and the blood from her head transferred to her pillowcase. By ignoring such this gives her 2 extra shots and she says these 2 shots were used on the boys to kill them. She claims the other shots into the boys were fired later though the evidence points to the 8 shots to the boys being fired in succession.
She also assumes a spent casing was jammed in the gun and Jeremy finally managed to eject it when he was on the stairs. More likely is that he would have unjammed it in the kitchen. He knows the gun is jammed but instead of unjamming it he fully reloads the magazine and walks around with the magazine in the gun as he tries to unjam it? Just as possible if not more likely is simply that the casing stuck to the shoe of someone and was transported there by accident.
So most of her story is speculation and those details that we can tell for sure she got wrong.
May I suggest you read the book Scipio before you attempt a critique!
As I explained to Angelo yesterday the above is contained in an appendix (1). It is a "possible scenario" put together by those who worked on the original investigation including Dr Vanezis and Malcolm Fletcher; not all those consulted agreed on every point! What does this tell you 8(0(*
The book contains nothing original from the author. She has simply brought existing info together from various sources including interviews.
CAN I ASK PLEASE THAT IF POSTERS WISH TO COMMENT ON CAROL ANN LEE'S BOOK THEY READ IT BEFORE COMMENTING - THANK YOU.
May I suggest you read the book Scipio before you attempt a critique!
As I explained to Angelo yesterday the above is contained in an appendix (1). It is a "possible scenario" put together by those who worked on the original investigation including Dr Vanezis and Malcolm Fletcher; not all those consulted agreed on every point! What does this tell you 8(0(*
The book contains nothing original from the author. She has simply brought existing info together from various sources including interviews.
CAN I ASK PLEASE THAT IF POSTERS WISH TO COMMENT ON CAROL ANN LEE'S BOOK THEY READ IT BEFORE COMMENTING - THANK YOU.
If that is the case then the article is misleading.
In the meantime the scenario that matters is the one presented in court by the prosecution not one obviously wrong that was one of many explored by the police. This scenario is especially worthless for the reasons I mentioned.
A book that would be of value is one that fully details the evidence presented at trial including summarizing all the relevant testimony, that takes into account the COLP Report evidence and findings and fully details allegations made by Jeremy over the years including those to COLP and how COLP ended up revealing them to be false.
That's the only thing that would present a worthwhile book.