UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Alleged Miscarriages of Justice => Jeremy Bamber and the callous murder of his father, mother, sister and twin nephews. Case effectively CLOSED by CCRC on basis of NO APPEAL REFERRAL. => Topic started by: Passer-by on July 31, 2015, 10:27:49 AM
-
I can't understand how the evidence of the moderator would be admissible in a modern court? It wasn't there when the police searched the cupboard (didn't they even photograph it?) but mysteriously appears when a gun dealer returned his own gun to the cupboard after illegally keeping it off-site, contrary to the terms of the license. One relative says it had 'jam' like stuff in it, then it's described as a 'flake', then it's shoved in a bag by some other things, handled by loads of people without gloves - most of whom benefit from JB going to jail - and was then stored with other items that could cross-contaminate it. If this is the kingpin of the prosecution it is breathtaking he hasn't had a retrial.
38
-
I can't understand how the evidence of the moderator would be admissible in a modern court? It wasn't there when the police searched the cupboard (didn't they even photograph it?) but mysteriously appears when a gun dealer returned his own gun to the cupboard after illegally keeping it off-site, contrary to the terms of the license. One relative says it had 'jam' like stuff in it, then it's described as a 'flake', then it's shoved in a bag by some other things, handled by loads of people without gloves - most of whom benefit from JB going to jail - and was then stored with other items that could cross-contaminate it. If this is the kingpin of the prosecution it is breathtaking he hasn't had a retrial.
He hasn't had a retrial for the simple reason there is no evidence to support one.
-
Isn't that an anomaly of the system, whereby a retrial can only happen if new evidence comes to light, rather than if old evidence is thrown in doubt?
-
Isn't that an anomaly of the system, whereby a retrial can only happen if new evidence comes to light, rather than if old evidence is thrown in doubt?
His CoA hearing in 2001 was based on new evidence throwing doubt on the old evidence if that makes sense!
It was up to his QC at trial to challenge the silencer. He was aware how, when, where it was found etc. CAL's book tells that JB discussed with Goeffrey Rivlin QC deliberate contamination pre trial and he was told it was too far fetched! The silencer could be challenged but not based on anything that was known at trial. If for example ballistics testing showed that draw-back would not draw-back blood from a contact shot as far as the 8th baffle I think that would be considered 'new evidence'. Or show that heat from the silencer would have damaged any blood deposited in the silencer so much so it would not have been possible to produce any results that also might be considered 'new evidence'.
-
Modern day forensics requires that evidence is properly protected from contamination so it is unlikely that the sound moderator evidence would feature in any retrial. On the bright side however there is plenty of other evidence which would ensure a guilty verdict once more.
-
Modern day forensics requires that evidence is properly protected from contamination so it is unlikely that the sound moderator evidence would feature in any retrial. On the bright side however there is plenty of other evidence which would ensure a guilty verdict once more.
Yes, the chain of custody is even more important these days if anyone is to get a fair trial. Somehow I don't think the sound moderator would rank too highly in a modern day trial.
-
Thanks for the explanation Holly 8((()*/
-
His CoA hearing in 2001 was based on new evidence throwing doubt on the old evidence if that makes sense!
It was up to his QC at trial to challenge the silencer. He was aware how, when, where it was found etc. CAL's book tells that JB discussed with Goeffrey Rivlin QC deliberate contamination pre trial and he was told it was too far fetched! The silencer could be challenged but not based on anything that was known at trial. If for example ballistics testing showed that draw-back would not draw-back blood from a contact shot as far as the 8th baffle I think that would be considered 'new evidence'. Or show that heat from the silencer would have damaged any blood deposited in the silencer so much so it would not have been possible to produce any results that also might be considered 'new evidence'.
A silencer does not generate heat and most certainly insufficient to damage blood on or within it to the extent it cannot be tested.
-
A silencer does not generate heat and most certainly insufficient to damage blood on or within it to the extent it cannot be tested.
Not necessarily so. A silencer generates a huge amount of heat. It reduces sound by allowing the hot gasses to expand and cool in the silencer's expansion chamber and trapping them in between the baffles. See the following vid where the guy is testing a suppressor sleeve (silencer, moderator, suppressor are all inter-changeable words and mean the same thing). After 30 rounds the temp is recorded at 390F. Water boils at 212F. I don't think the silencer used at WHF would get to that sort of temperature ie 390F as the bullets are much lower in velocity but they would still generate significant heat to the extent the blood 'found' in the silencer could be destroyed in terms of its ability to yield blood results.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tJ7heDIqXU
The blood tests used in JB's case were based on blood serology which requires a good quality sample and should never be exposed to heat:
Conventional serological analysis
"Analysis of the proteins, enzymes, and antigens present in the blood. These substances are more susceptible to degradation than DNA and this type of testing usually requires a "large" sample (quarter size) in good condition for optimal results. This type of testing is rarely statistically individualizing.
"Blood evidence must never be exposed to excessive heat or humidity. If possible, the bloodstained evidence should be refrigerated until it can be transported to the crime lab. The evidence should also be taken to the lab as soon as possible. The following are guidelines, listed in order of the author's preferences, for collecting and preserving blood evidence"
http://www.crime-scene-investigator.net/blood.html
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
PS If you click on the attached pic it will show an animated handgun with and without a silencer. It shows how in the unsilenced gun the hot gasses dissipate in the atmosphere after ejecting from the gun's muzzle. With a silencer it shows how the hot gasses largely dissipate in the silencer hence the heat and the need for suppressor sleeves.
-
PS If you click on the attached pic it will show an animated handgun with and without a silencer. It shows how in the unsilenced gun the hot gasses dissipate in the atmosphere after ejecting from the gun's muzzle. With a silencer it shows how the hot gasses largely dissipate in the silencer hence the heat and the need for suppressor sleeves.
I think what Angelo means is that the heat comes from the bullet and the gases and is not generated by the sound moderator.
-
I think what Angelo means is that the heat comes from the bullet and the gases and is not generated by the sound moderator.
Perhaps I didn't word it very well. But silencers get very hot as per above.
-
Blood for serological analysis should always be refrigerated hence DS Davidson stored the samples taken from the victims at post mortem in the SoC fridge at Chelmsford police station. See page 12 and 13 of COLP report:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=178.0;attach=455
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=178.0;attach=457
After they were handed to him by Dr Vanezis:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=204.0;attach=704
-
I wouldn't be surprised to discover that the blood in the silencer at ambient temperature over a week was enough to damage the sample for testing. It was around a week in total before DS Jones submitted it. He collected it from the Eatons on the eve of the 12th and submitted to the police station on the 13th.
Did Malcolm Fletcher and John Hayward have the conversation about heat generated from bullets fired causing the barrel of a rifle and silencer to get hot and the detrimental effect on blood &%+((£ They would not think in their wildest dreams EP might have deliberately contaminated the silencer to secure a conviction.
-
I wouldn't be surprised to discover that the blood in the silencer at ambient temperature over a week was enough to damage the sample for testing. It was around a week in total before DS Jones submitted it. He collected it from the Eatons on the eve of the 12th and submitted to the police station on the 13th.
Did Malcolm Fletcher and John Hayward have the conversation about heat generated from bullets fired causing the barrel of a rifle and silencer to get hot and the detrimental effect on blood &%+((£ They would not think in their wildest dreams EP might have deliberately contaminated the silencer to secure a conviction.
I understand the original pre DNA testing in 1985 could only rule out suspects whereas the DNA testing in 1999/2000 could have gone much further had the baffle blood samples not been exhausted.
-
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6386.msg260188#msg260188
In reply to Puglove's post above:
POSSIBLE scenarios IF the silencer was deliberately contaminated:
The relatives claim they found the silencer complete with blood, paint and hair on 10th Aug so assuming it was not planted beforehand by EP then they would have to be in on it. Plus as far as I can see it would only take one corrupt officer. Now lets see who suspected JB from day 1? Who collected the silencer from the Eatons? Who is on video as praying for some evidence to turn up?
The procedures all seem very sloppy:
- Relatives phone saying they have an exhibit they think EP should look at more closely
- DS Jones turns up 2 days after phone call without an exhibit bag, tag, gloves. Instead he places the silencer in the inner of a kitchen roll.
- No WS statements taken from the Eatons at the time of collection
- Could have called on DB (the finder of the silencer) to take a WS that evening but instead sat drinking whisky with PE
- Hands silencer into police custody the following day:
CAL's book P232:
"Jones made no note of the silencer in Witham's miscellaneous property register, assuming that it would 'go into the Scenes of Crime system and [be] recorded in that fashion'. DI Cook regarded the omission as useful 'because it totally minimised the handling of the silencer by others, which would have occurred in the registering of it in property books'."
This begs the question as to whether the staff at FSS were aware of its history.
CAL sourced the above quotes from the COLP investigation.
When DS Davidson was asked about the victims' blood samples stored in the SoC fridge at Chelmsford police station it seems akin to asking a child about raiding a biscuit tin! There's no robust audit trail. The interviewers didn't seem particularly keen in carrying out a through investigation just going through the motions.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=178.0;attach=453
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=178.0;attach=455
- Who had access to the SoC fridge?
- DI Cook is on record as ferrying some of the exhibits to FSS (Doubt DI Cook was involved in anything dodgy). According to DS Davidson a civilian driver transported the samples to FSS. Who was the civilian driver? Is there a WS from him/her? If it was a civilian driver did he/she travel alone or did a police officer accompany for whatever reason(s)? If so who?
- 3 blood samples were taken from SC and NB but only 2 for June and one for each of the twins. There doesn't seem to be any proper system to check what was handed over by the pathologist was then forwarded to FSS and appropriate checks made to ensure nothing had been tampered with.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=204.0;attach=704
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=204.0;attach=706
The whole process was very weak and just ripe for fabricating evidence if someone was of mind to.
-
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6386.msg260188#msg260188
In reply to Puglove's post above:
POSSIBLE scenarios IF the silencer was deliberately contaminated:
The relatives claim they found the silencer complete with blood, paint and hair on 10th Aug so assuming it was not planted beforehand by EP then they would have to be in on it. Plus as far as I can see it would only take one corrupt officer. Now lets see who suspected JB from day 1? Who collected the silencer from the Eatons? Who is on video as praying for some evidence to turn up?
The procedures all seem very sloppy:
- Relatives phone saying they have an exhibit they think EP should look at more closely
- DS Jones turns up 2 days after phone call without an exhibit bag, tag, gloves. Instead he places the silencer in the inner of a kitchen roll.
- No WS statements taken from the Eatons at the time of collection
- Could have called on DB (the finder of the silencer) to take a WS that evening but instead sat drinking whisky with PE
- Hands silencer into police custody the following day:
CAL's book P232:
"Jones made no note of the silencer in Witham's miscellaneous property register, assuming that it would 'go into the Scenes of Crime system and [be] recorded in that fashion'. DI Cook regarded the omission as useful 'because it totally minimised the handling of the silencer by others, which would have occurred in the registering of it in property books'."
This begs the question as to whether the staff at FSS were aware of its history.
CAL sourced the above quotes from the COLP investigation.
When DS Davidson was asked about the victims' blood samples stored in the SoC fridge at Chelmsford police station it seems akin to asking a child about raiding a biscuit tin! There's no robust audit trail. The interviewers didn't seem particularly keen in carrying out a through investigation just going through the motions.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=178.0;attach=453
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=178.0;attach=455
- Who had access to the SoC fridge?
- DI Cook is on record as ferrying some of the exhibits to FSS (Doubt DI Cook was involved in anything dodgy). According to DS Davidson a civilian driver transported the samples to FSS. Who was the civilian driver? Is there a WS from him/her? If it was a civilian driver did he/she travel alone or did a police officer accompany for whatever reason(s)? If so who?
- 3 blood samples were taken from SC and NB but only 2 for June and one for each of the twins. There doesn't seem to be any proper system to check what was handed over by the pathologist was then forwarded to FSS and appropriate checks made to ensure nothing had been tampered with.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=204.0;attach=704
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=204.0;attach=706
The whole process was very weak and just ripe for fabricating evidence if someone was of mind to.
Well done, Holly. 8@??)(
All very valid points of what was added to the evidence of guilt (or, what they said was) at a fair rate of noughts, by some.
-
I do wonder why a silencer was used. The dog would have been going mad(unless he only barks at people at the door) This is the dog that Jeremy said that he hated.....so why didn't he shoot it?
-
I do wonder why a silencer was used. The dog would have been going mad(unless he only barks at people at the door) This is the dog that Jeremy said that he hated.....so why didn't he shoot it?
Apparently a silencer makes very little difference with the type of rifle and bullet used as they are both low powered.
-
I understand the original pre DNA testing in 1985 could only rule out suspects whereas the DNA testing in 1999/2000 could have gone much further had the baffle blood samples not been exhausted.
In JB's case the blood in the silencer was analysed based on serological analysis. It is rarely statistically individualising. As you can see from the table below the blood in the silencer matched SC's sample on 4 tests. I believe about 8% of the population would share the same 4 results. RB shared all four results with SC but it seems unlikely he would contaminate the silencer with his own blood as how would he know this? JB's defence asked the relatives to provide blood samples as they found the silencer and they obliged.
I think a lot of JB's supporters fail to recognise the importance of the silencer and blood evidence. All this talk about animal blood and homing in on AK1 etc is all wrong.
Table showing the victims' blood, enzyme and protein results:
ABO PGM EAP AK Hp
Nevill Bamber O PGM1+ EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1
June Bamber A PGM1+ EAP BA AK2-1 Hp2-1
Daniel Caffell O PGM2+1+ EAP B AK1 Hp2
Nicholas Caffell O PGM2+1+ EAP B AK1 Hp2
Sheila Caffell A PGM1+ EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blood In Silencer A Nil EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Boutflour A PGM1+ EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ABO = Blood Group System
PGM = Phosphoglucomutase (Enzyme) Breaks down quickly outside the body hence blood in silencer was unable to produce a reading
EAP = Erythrocyte Acid Phosphatase (Enzyme)
AK = Adenylate Kinase (Enzyme)
HP = Haptoglobin (Protein)
-
I'm with Anna: he'd have shot the dog. I also think the dog was barking at the perpetrator and stopped when she killed herself.
Personally I think they all thought it was suicide until they heard SC shot herself twice, then not having exact info on the forensics of that they all immediately assumed it must be murder so looked for/found 'evidence'. Whereas now it's been stated she could have fired both shots. I don't think she walked around after the first one, that's stretching it, I think both shots were close together: she may have lain with her head up against the bedside table to take the strain off her neck muscles holding it up.
The test done for the jury showed the moderator barely made any difference in noise level to the human ear, only to rabbits. JB would have known this.
-
I'm with Anna: he'd have shot the dog. I also think the dog was barking at the perpetrator and stopped when she killed herself.
Personally I think they all thought it was suicide until they heard SC shot herself twice, then not having exact info on the forensics of that they all immediately assumed it must be murder so looked for/found 'evidence'. Whereas now it's been stated she could have fired both shots. I don't think she walked around after the first one, that's stretching it, I think both shots were close together: she may have lain with her head up against the bedside table to take the strain off her neck muscles holding it up.
The test done for the jury showed the moderator barely made any difference in noise level to the human ear, only to rabbits. JB would have known this.
The pathologist said he was unable to confirm murder or suicide and that he had experienced a few cases of suicide with more than one gunshot.
I think EP and other experts eg pathologist were satisfied with the murder/suicide theory but the relatives most certainly were not. The relatives were then allowed to effectively take over and carry out their own investigation. Much of the prosecution case was effectively drawn up by the relatives:
- AE stated SC was uncoordinated and unable to use a gun
- AE found June's bike at JB's after snooping around his cottage when he was out and then this suddenly became the mode of transport used to carry out the murders
- RB claimed JB said he could kill his parents
- DB 'found' the silencer complete with blood, paint and a hair attached
- AE found splash marks on the windows and the whole window theory was down to the family. Then of course weeks later a rusty hacksaw blade is 'found' just below a window
-
8((()*/
(There: just to prove insomniac scan be brief Holly!)
-
Because of the moderator and scuffle with Neville, I had assumed that it was impossible for Sheila to have done it. However If we forget the moderator, as it appeared to have only made the rifle cumbersome to use and that would be a handicap to anybody committing 4 murders or possibly 5.
It was possible, but then again she was so clean. Then she did love animals and wouldn't have hurt the dog.
Did Jeremy say he hated the dog to sound like a tough guy. He had a dog and was devastated when it got run over and died, so not such a hard guy, in fact a bit wimpish.
After a further two hour break, questioning recommenced at 7.30pm. Jones asked Jeremy to look at a photograph of the telephone on the kitchen worktop with the ammunition beside it.
‘Before I see the photograph is it in any way disturbing?’
‘No, it is not.’
Jones pushed the image across the table. Jeremy pointed to a photograph on the worktop. ‘Picture of my mum,’ he said quietly.
If it was Jeremy I don't think it would have been such a difficult job to overcome his father. So could he have paid someone to kill them? If so who................Who was he giving money too? We know that he liked to spend his money on himself.
-
In JB's case the blood in the silencer was analysed based on serological analysis. It is rarely statistically individualising. As you can see from the table below the blood in the silencer matched SC's sample on 4 tests. I believe about 8% of the population would share the same 4 results. RB shared all four results with SC but it seems unlikely he would contaminate the silencer with his own blood as how would he know this? JB's defence asked the relatives to provide blood samples as they found the silencer and they obliged.
I think a lot of JB's supporters fail to recognise the importance of the silencer and blood evidence. All this talk about animal blood and homing in on AK1 etc is all wrong.
Table showing the victims' blood, enzyme and protein results:
ABO PGM EAP AK Hp
Nevill Bamber O PGM1+ EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1
June Bamber A PGM1+ EAP BA AK2-1 Hp2-1
Daniel Caffell O PGM2+1+ EAP B AK1 Hp2
Nicholas Caffell O PGM2+1+ EAP B AK1 Hp2
Sheila Caffell A PGM1+ EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blood In Silencer A Nil EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Boutflour A PGM1+ EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ABO = Blood Group System
PGM = Phosphoglucomutase (Enzyme) Breaks down quickly outside the body hence blood in silencer was unable to produce a reading
EAP = Erythrocyte Acid Phosphatase (Enzyme)
AK = Adenylate Kinase (Enzyme)
HP = Haptoglobin (Protein)
Robert Boutflour followed his son-in-law into the witness box. He grew agitated when Rivlin asked whether he might have cut himself at any stage after the discovery of the silencer, implying that the blood within the baffles was his rather than Sheila’s, since by pure coincidence they had the exact same blood grouping. He became irate when Rivlin questioned his memory of Jeremy declaring: ‘I could kill anybody, I could even kill my parents.’ In response to Rivlin’s suggestion that Jeremy ‘didn’t say anything at all about killing his parents’, Robert thundered: ‘You can suggest it, but I was there and I heard it!’ He was hustled, red-faced and protesting, out of court while the judge discussed a point of law with both counsels. Colin Caffell was in the witness waiting room at the time, and sensed that the relatives risked turning the jury against them, such was their obvious revulsion towards Jeremy.
-
I have no problem with a 5'8" woman in her mid 20s fit enough to bear twins managing to overcome an already injured man who may well have been rested or collapsed in a chair - even without the added factor she may have believed she was fighting the devil incarnate. For pitysakes we have women smaller than that in the Army.
I'd like to know what we're the clothes were soaking in the bucket: she may have taken them off on autopilot thinking it was menses, rubbed the clothes up and down a bit then washed her hands and put a clean nightie on. I don't think there would have been much blood on the perpetrator anyhow form a .22 or from hitting Nevil with the gun: the blood will have emanated from the victims wounds whilst on the floor, but without violent splash back.
The damage could all equally have happened with or without the sound moderator.
-
I have no problem with a 5'8" woman in her mid 20s fit enough to bear twins managing to overcome an already injured man who may well have been rested or collapsed in a chair - even without the added factor she may have believed she was fighting the devil incarnate. For pitysakes we have women smaller than that in the Army.
I'd like to know what we're the clothes were soaking in the bucket: she may have taken them off on autopilot thinking it was menses, rubbed the clothes up and down a bit then washed her hands and put a clean nightie on. I don't think there would have been much blood on the perpetrator anyhow form a .22 or from hitting Nevil with the gun: the blood will have emanated from the victims wounds whilst on the floor, but without violent splash back.
The damage could all equally have happened with or without the sound moderator.
It might have been rather difficult to hold a gun with extra length of the silencer and pull the trigger, don't you think? And why would she want the silencer after everyone else was killed. I can understand that she may have got cleaned up(although how I don't know) but why hide the silencer......I find it difficult to believe a silencer was used by anyone. The gunsmith said that it wasn't all that easy to detach. The gun was without a silencer when she was found.
I have now started reading a book by Scott Lomax so I hope to compare what is said.
-
I do wonder why a silencer was used. The dog would have been going mad(unless he only barks at people at the door) This is the dog that Jeremy said that he hated.....so why didn't he shoot it?
Because the theme was ' Sheila done it'
Jeremy made several miscalculations. He was shocked when he found out that the rifle wasn't as powerful as he thought and needed several bullets to kill a person. He must have panicked when his first attempt to shoot Sheila only stunned her.
-
I don't think the silencer was used: I think it's completely fabricated evidence. The only person who says the gun was fitted with sights and a silencer before the killings was a gun dealer who illegally kept his own identical gun off the premises, and returned his own identical silencer at the same time he brought his gun back, and stood to gain from Bamber's imprisonment.
If you look at the photo of the gun balanced against the wall next to the 'gun cupboard (a posh title for what in reality is just the space under a small tight staircase) without the moderator and compare it to the photo of the policeman holding it with the moderator, I don't think it would even have fitted under the stairs with the moderator on.
JB had used the gun a lot and he had been on shoots with shotguns and objected to anything other than vermin being killed: he would have known how long and unwieldy the gun was with the moderator - it would have been extremely impractical for moving from room to room and I'm surprised there wasn't paint damage to door jams etc. He would also have known it is not a silencer and scarcely deadens the sound of the shots. He would also have known that animals like foxes are still able to run off after being shot once with a .22 - it would be plain as a pike staff you'd need more than that to take down Nevill.
It is precisely this miscalculation which points to it being Sheila. I think the trigger for the event will have been sudden, but from personal experience I'd say she had thought about doing this for months as a way of coping with stress: 'if it gets any worse I can at least do this'. She possibly scoped out the gun and handled it in private as part of that feeling of regaining control/power over her life.
The evidence from AE that SC was too uncoordinated to load the gun, couldn't even pour a cup of tea etc was ridiculous and completely at odds with the fact she had managed to paint her nails perfectly OK a few days earlier. (And incidentally her toenail varnish was clearly chipped in the autopsy photo, if she had redone her fingernails she would also have done her toenails, so it's likely her fingernails were no longer perfect as well).
All we know about the blood on the moderator was that there was a tiny bit of it and frankly it could have come from a rabbit. We don't even know if it's the original moderator. The people who found the moderator also cleaned the house of blood: they are still living there with bloodstained underlay in their bedroom - how hard would it be to get a bit of blood on the moderator? And would it really have looked, as AE said, like "jam" all that time later? Sounds like a bit of inventiveness inspired by Inspector Morse.
The moderator is a complete Red Herring.
-
But on another note: can anyone explain how SC's x-Ray clearly shows a bullet broken into fragments, Dr Vanezis states the neck bullet broke into fragments - but police exhibits 60 and 61 are two whole bullets, one allegedly from her head and the other allegedly from her neck?
-
And another thing! 8)--))
The idea that Nevill was a stickler for gun security: the conditions of owning a shotgun are that it is kept secured in a locked cupboard, with the key safely stored. My experience of my in-laws farm is this isn't something everyone takes as seriously as they might (it's unsurprising that Farming is also the occupation with the highest number of industrial accidents!).
The photographs of the gun cupboard show that (a) it doesn't appear to have a lock on it and (b) it was obstructed by a desk, making it hard to use so less likely they did so. It is therefore highly probable the gun was out. I doubt the with him being a gun dealer, would have wanted to highlight that too much.
-
I don't think the silencer was used: I think it's completely fabricated evidence. The only person who says the gun was fitted with sights and a silencer before the killings was a gun dealer who illegally kept his own identical gun off the premises, and returned his own identical silencer at the same time he brought his gun back, and stood to gain from Bamber's imprisonment.
If you look at the photo of the gun balanced against the wall next to the 'gun cupboard (a posh title for what in reality is just the space under a small tight staircase) without the moderator and compare it to the photo of the policeman holding it with the moderator, I don't think it would even have fitted under the stairs with the moderator on.
JB had used the gun a lot and he had been on shoots with shotguns and objected to anything other than vermin being killed: he would have known how long and unwieldy the gun was with the moderator - it would have been extremely impractical for moving from room to room and I'm surprised there wasn't paint damage to door jams etc. He would also have known it is not a silencer and scarcely deadens the sound of the shots. He would also have known that animals like foxes are still able to run off after being shot once with a .22 - it would be plain as a pike staff you'd need more than that to take down Nevill.
That's a double-barreled shotgun balanced against the Office/Den wall, not the actual murder weapon - an Anschutz 525...
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=633.msg71558#msg71558 (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=633.msg71558#msg71558)
Anthony Pargeter discovered the Bambers' newish Anschutz complete with moderator and telescopic sights alongside his own weapon in the gun cupboard, and I've no cause to disbelieve him. His was lying on the floor cased, and theirs propped with the butt on the floor, uncased next to it.
As it was referred to as a "gun cupboard" then it obviously was used to store weapons at some stage or other, and imo could easily contain a fully fitted-out Anschutz because the winders and additional normal treads of the stair continue to right as in the photo below and as drawn in the GF plan (S3)...
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=633.msg25947#msg25947 (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=633.msg25947#msg25947)
An Anschutz 525 is not unwieldy even with a moderator. I've used a quality air rifle of similar length and weight to an Anschutz and that was easy to control, even more so when held with the butt under the armpit (as seen in Wild-West movies) to shorten it. The noise in a confined bedroom space indoors with sound bouncing off hard surfaces such as walls, ceiling, doors, and cupboards would be louder than if the rifle was fired outdoors too... hence his reason to use a moderator to reduce it.
-
I don't think the silencer was used: I think it's completely fabricated evidence. The only person who says the gun was fitted with sights and a silencer before the killings was a gun dealer who illegally kept his own identical gun off the premises, and returned his own identical silencer at the same time he brought his gun back, and stood to gain from Bamber's imprisonment.
If you look at the photo of the gun balanced against the wall next to the 'gun cupboard (a posh title for what in reality is just the space under a small tight staircase) without the moderator and compare it to the photo of the policeman holding it with the moderator, I don't think it would even have fitted under the stairs with the moderator on.
JB had used the gun a lot and he had been on shoots with shotguns and objected to anything other than vermin being killed: he would have known how long and unwieldy the gun was with the moderator - it would have been extremely impractical for moving from room to room and I'm surprised there wasn't paint damage to door jams etc. He would also have known it is not a silencer and scarcely deadens the sound of the shots. He would also have known that animals like foxes are still able to run off after being shot once with a .22 - it would be plain as a pike staff you'd need more than that to take down Nevill.
It is precisely this miscalculation which points to it being Sheila. I think the trigger for the event will have been sudden, but from personal experience I'd say she had thought about doing this for months as a way of coping with stress: 'if it gets any worse I can at least do this'. She possibly scoped out the gun and handled it in private as part of that feeling of regaining control/power over her life.
The evidence from AE that SC was too uncoordinated to load the gun, couldn't even pour a cup of tea etc was ridiculous and completely at odds with the fact she had managed to paint her nails perfectly OK a few days earlier. (And incidentally her toenail varnish was clearly chipped in the autopsy photo, if she had redone her fingernails she would also have done her toenails, so it's likely her fingernails were no longer perfect as well).
All we know about the blood on the moderator was that there was a tiny bit of it and frankly it could have come from a rabbit. We don't even know if it's the original moderator. The people who found the moderator also cleaned the house of blood: they are still living there with bloodstained underlay in their bedroom - how hard would it be to get a bit of blood on the moderator? And would it really have looked, as AE said, like "jam" all that time later? Sounds like a bit of inventiveness inspired by Inspector Morse.
The moderator is a complete Red Herring.
Anyone who thinks Sheila could have attacked and killed her parents and murdered her sons without missing a single shot is, to put it mildly, sorely deluded.
Regardless of how efficient the silencer was, it reduced the noise and with neighbours distant on both sides of the farmhouse this was an important factor.
What you in particular fail to understand Passer-by is that the only weapon available to Jeremy was the Anschutz rifle if his 'Sheila done it' plan was to convince anyone.
It has been proven by forensics expert Mark Webster that the blood was not animal blood.
www.forensic-science.co.uk/bamber.html
-
But on another note: can anyone explain how SC's x-Ray clearly shows a bullet broken into fragments, Dr Vanezis states the neck bullet broke into fragments - but police exhibits 60 and 61 are two whole bullets, one allegedly from her head and the other allegedly from her neck?
It was a large fragment.
-
It was a large fragment.
Apparently it broke into 15 pieces - and it wasn't that big to start with: why would the Police describe a large fragment as "whole"?
-
And another thing! 8)--))
The idea that Nevill was a stickler for gun security: the conditions of owning a shotgun are that it is kept secured in a locked cupboard, with the key safely stored. My experience of my in-laws farm is this isn't something everyone takes as seriously as they might (it's unsurprising that Farming is also the occupation with the highest number of industrial accidents!).
The photographs of the gun cupboard show that (a) it doesn't appear to have a lock on it and (b) it was obstructed by a desk, making it hard to use so less likely they did so. It is therefore highly probable the gun was out. I doubt the with him being a gun dealer, would have wanted to highlight that too much.
We only have killer Bambers say so that the Anschutz was left out and we know what that's worth. 8(0(*
-
Apparently it broke into 15 pieces - and it wasn't that big to start with: why would the Police describe a large fragment as "whole"?
Obviously an error.
-
Because of the moderator and scuffle with Neville, I had assumed that it was impossible for Sheila to have done it. However If we forget the moderator, as it appeared to have only made the rifle cumbersome to use and that would be a handicap to anybody committing 4 murders or possibly 5.
It was possible, but then again she was so clean. Then she did love animals and wouldn't have hurt the dog.
Did Jeremy say he hated the dog to sound like a tough guy. He had a dog and was devastated when it got run over and died, so not such a hard guy, in fact a bit wimpish.
After a further two hour break, questioning recommenced at 7.30pm. Jones asked Jeremy to look at a photograph of the telephone on the kitchen worktop with the ammunition beside it.
‘Before I see the photograph is it in any way disturbing?’
‘No, it is not.’
Jones pushed the image across the table. Jeremy pointed to a photograph on the worktop. ‘Picture of my mum,’ he said quietly.
If it was Jeremy I don't think it would have been such a difficult job to overcome his father. So could he have paid someone to kill them? If so who................Who was he giving money too? We know that he liked to spend his money on himself.
There are some knowns about the case. One being that NB was shot four times upstairs. He received two shots to his face from close range. These two injuries alone were life threatening. They caused heavy blood loss internally and externally and extreme pain. He received one shot to his left arm which left it totally impaired. The other shot only grazed his shoulder. The four shots he received downstairs, in the kitchen, were said to have been fired in quick succession and immediately fatal. He was not physically able to engage in a "violent struggle" in the kitchen as he had been too badly injured in his bedroom. The pathologist describes his actions as a "spirited defence".
-
There are some knowns about the case. One being that NB was shot four times upstairs. He received two shots to his face from close range. These two injuries alone were life threatening. They caused heavy blood loss internally and externally and extreme pain. He received one shot to his left arm which left it totally impaired. The other shot only grazed his shoulder. The four shots he received downstairs, in the kitchen, were said to have been fired in quick succession and immediately fatal. He was not physically able to engage in a "violent struggle" in the kitchen as he had been too badly injured in his bedroom. The pathologist describes his actions as a "spirited defence".
A minor point Holly. The eighth bullet casing DRH14 was found on the first landing of the main staircase so in theory he might not have been shot 4 times in the kitchen. Then again a policeman or even the shooter could have kicked the empty casing from further up the stairs.
-
A minor point Holly. The eighth bullet casing DRH14 was found on the first landing of the main staircase so in theory he might not have been shot 4 times in the kitchen. Then again a policeman or even the shooter could have kicked the empty casing from further up the stairs.
According to CAL, I assume in recent conversations with former members of the investigation, the mysterious missing fourth casing might have jammed in the ejection port after the last shot in the kitchen and JB managed to free it at the top of the stairs on his way back up, where it was discovered.
... or it was carried up in the tread of a boot and magically released!
-
According to CAL, I assume in recent conversations with former members of the investigation, the mysterious missing fourth casing might have jammed in the ejection port after the last shot in the kitchen and JB managed to free it at the top of the stairs on his way back up, where it was discovered.
... or it was carried up in the tread of a boot and magically released!
Yes, I can go with that too. The origin of the casing on the stairs will always be a mystery.
-
I'd have thought it was possible for any of the casings downstairs to have been kicked about or wedged in the dole of a boot because the floor wasn't carpeted and they'd have been like marbles when the police entered, obviously more interested in making the scene safe than preserving it.
-
@ anglolawyer
Just had a look at the moderator drawing that Holly uploaded over at IA. The first one attached below, I think.
There's a later drawing of the "same" moderator SBJ/1 (Stanley Brian Jones) and dated 25th Sept '85. Second and third attachment
-
This is a photo of a differently-shaped moderator, which was taken from the OS and also pictured in the Mark Williams Thomas/Simon McKay television investigation about the burn marks on NB's back. There's an added boss and the right-hand barrel end isn't chamfered as in the above drawings.
-
Thanks Myster. This is worth immersing oneself in, although I suspect it will be a demanding, time-consuming task.
-
Anyone who thinks Sheila could have attacked and killed her parents and murdered her sons without missing a single shot is, to put it mildly, sorely deluded.
How so? How can you miss mainly still targets at point blank range? and more to the point one bullet did miss Neville grazing him.
Many have mentioned including myself that had Jeremy done it you would expect Neville to go first with a bullet straight through the forehead. All I can say is that a Guilty Jeremy is also a very poor marksmen
-
It now seems from knowledge gained on another forum that the silencer found by the relatives on 10th August was forensically analysed by FSS on 13th August. It was then returned to EP. When the investigation changed from murder/suicide to murder the same silencer was resubmitted for further examination &%+((£
-
It now seems from knowledge gained on another forum that the silencer found by the relatives on 10th August was forensically analysed by FSS on 13th August. It was then returned to EP. When the investigation changed from murder/suicide to murder the same silencer was resubmitted for further examination &%+((£
So!? It just means EP didn't have enough evidence to charge him when the mod was first submitted, so it was returned until they did.
Isn't it time you changed that message to "PARKER-HALES DON'T GET HOT AND DESTROY BLOOD EVIDENCE".
-
So!? It just means EP didn't have enough evidence to charge him when the mod was first submitted, so it was returned until they did.
Isn't it time you changed that message to "PARKER-HALES DON'T GET HOT AND DESTROY BLOOD EVIDENCE".
Not just returned for further analysis but dismantled. Why would this not be done first time around? Surely they would be on the hunt for the grey hair which could have dropped inside and been hugging a baffle or two? &%+((£
More importantly blood analysed by conventional serological analysis degrades quickly so I would have expected the scientists at FSS to take the silencer apart and extract everything possible at the earliest opportunity.
Silencers get hot when a bullet is fired through them. And blood exposed to any heat source degrades and the potential for conventional serological analysis can be lost. So no my avatar message is an important point which needs to be tested properly hence the ?
Tests carried out to date to assess heat have been concerned with the outside of the silencer/tip in connection with NB's burn marks. The heat generated inside the silencer causing all internal parts to heat up is likely to be much hotter than the outside/tip. The hot gasses exit slowly through the inner walls and baffles.
-
The scientists felt the moderator by hand in pre-trial tests and it was only slightly warm...
... so how about - "SUZI QUATRO FOR PRIME MINISTRESS!"? 8(8-))
-
The scientists felt the moderator by hand in pre-trial tests and it was only slightly warm...
... so how about - "SUZI QUATRO FOR PRIME MINISTRESS!"? 8(8-))
Malcolm Fletcher makes ref in CAL's book to test firing the rifle/silencer to determine the temperature but this was in connection with the burn marks to NB's back. MF noted it was warm to the touch. The CoA doc makes ref to 24.5c but the conditions are unclear. Philip Boyce in the 'new evidence' ITV docu also carried out experiments based on heat but again connected to NB's burn marks and he didn't state the temp just it wasn't hot enough to cause the burn marks.
What we need is a biologist to carry out serological analysis on blood after firing the rifle/silencer and leaving for 5 weeks in ambient temperature to ascertain if the blood is still capable of producing results for the antigens, enzymes and protein ie ABO, EAP, HK and HP.
No stress. I'm quite chilled at the moment as I've recently learned the Bay City Rollers are making a comeback 8(>((
http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/bay-city-rollers-bits-side-6711175
Just need to dig out my tartan glad rags and I'll be there 8(>(( on my space hopper 8(*(
-
When a poster posted on another forum that the silencer (found by relatives) was returned to EP and was then resubmitted I nearly choked on my glass of rose as it was the first time I had heard this and the poster overall sounds credible (he thinks JB guilty btw &%+((£). I honestly thought it was probably top secret but I can now see it is common knowledge:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=168.0;attach=283
It appears someone has attempted to scrub out the following words which I've deciphered as:
"initial" and "I received possession of both these items"
I've not seen a resubmission mentioned previously just more than one silencer was involved with exhibit labels changed.
-
Malcolm Fletcher makes ref in CAL's book to test firing the rifle/silencer to determine the temperature but this was in connection with the burn marks to NB's back. MF noted it was warm to the touch. The CoA doc makes ref to 24.5c but the conditions are unclear. Philip Boyce in the 'new evidence' ITV docu also carried out experiments based on heat but again connected to NB's burn marks and he didn't state the temp just it wasn't hot enough to cause the burn marks.
What we need is a biologist to carry out serological analysis on blood after firing the rifle/silencer and leaving for 5 weeks in ambient temperature to ascertain if the blood is still capable of producing results for the antigens, enzymes and protein ie ABO, EAP, AK and HP.
No stress. I'm quite chilled at the moment as I've recently learned the Bay City Rollers are making a comeback 8(>((
http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/bay-city-rollers-bits-side-6711175
Just need to dig out my tartan glad rags and I'll be there 8(>(( on my space hopper 8(*(
-
Calm down, Dear... you're jiggling about between too many forums!
-
Calm down, Dear... you're jiggling about between too many forums!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9C53IEcg_0 8**8:/:
and Charlie
-
Scipio's claims on Blue:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7075.msg333646.html#msg333646
"The inside of the opening has a lip. That lip is threaded and acts as a shelf. On this "shelf" was the blood she saw. The "blob" she saw sitting on this shelf was removed by the lab on Aug 13 and used to test whether it was human blood or something else. It was determined to be human blood. On this same "shelf" Lincoln removed enough blood traces to successfully type test it and he determined it to be group A. If there was no blood there then the lab would not have gotten a positive test for blood and Lincoln would not have found traces of group A blood there. He said the amount of blood remaining there exceeded the amount on the baffles. That is not at all surprising since physics results in the largest particles of blood traveling not far while the smaller particles of blood would be able to travel several inches deep. This results in the quantity of blood found deep being less.
Since a moderator is open on both sides light can get inside the back while you are looking at the front so long as you hold it in a manner other than looking at the ground. Obviously holding it up to the light or a window with light coming in is the best. Doing this enabled the family to see the blood inside. They also saw the blood on the face of the moderator when looking at the opening because the face is the aspect containing the opening. Normally you just see the outside wall".
This being the case I wonder why the silencer was returned to EP by the lab on 13th August and resubmitted circa mid Sept for dismantling and a peep inside when the 'flake' was first identified and tested &%+((£
-
DI Cook confirms he submitted the silencer (found by the relatives on 10th Aug and collected by DS Jones on 12th Aug) to the lab on 13th Aug. The same day ie 13th Aug DI Cook took possession once again of the silencer along with the rifle and returned to EP:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=168.0;attach=283
Scientist Glynnis Howard confirms she undertook preliminary testing on the silencer on 13th Aug:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=169.0;attach=305
If the blood inside the silencer was observed on 13th Aug why not test it then and there? If it wasn't observed why not? Why re-examine again mid Sept?
-
I'm not even sure that the relatives did look through the end and saw any blood inside. David Boutflour only mentions noticing the spot of blood on the outside, and that the body itself was sticky. Sticky from what, I wonder?
https://youtu.be/bcTvqLk0MWU?t=29m42s (https://youtu.be/bcTvqLk0MWU?t=29m42s)
-
I'm not even sure that the relatives did look through the end and saw any blood inside. David Boutflour only mentions noticing the spot of blood on the outside, and that the body itself was sticky. Sticky from what, I wonder?
https://youtu.be/bcTvqLk0MWU?t=29m42s (https://youtu.be/bcTvqLk0MWU?t=29m42s)
Hmmm the CoA doc claims they "examined it":
74. The silencer was taken to Ann Eaton's address for safekeeping and that evening members of the family examined it. They noticed that the "gun blue" of the surface had been damaged and there appeared to be red paint and blood upon it. The moderator was packaged up and the police were informed of the discovery. When collected by DS Jones on 12 August he noticed a grey hair, about an inch long attached to it. By the time the moderator had been delivered to the Forensic Science Service at Huntingdon the hair had been lost.
It makes no sense to me. When was the grey hair first observed? DI Cook was aware of it and claims it was lost in his possession while in transit from EP to FSS. Surely he would ask the lab to dismantle the silencer and look for the hair?
DI Cook's trial testimony where he confirms the above:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=168.0;attach=303
It's funny how the mind plays tricks/misses info and pre-conceived ideas take over. I've read the above and other WS's several times. But it was only after a poster on IA highlighted the fact the silencer was returned to DI Cook/EP on 13th Aug that the penny dropped. It was then held by EP until it was resubmitted mid Sept when it was dismantled and the flake found. I had wrongly assumed the silencer was dismantled and the flake found when the silencer was first submitted and it was then retained by FSS until post trial. I suppose I could be forgiven for thinking this. I'm convinced more than ever the whole silencer 'evidence': blood, paint and hair was fabricated.
-
I can't understand how the evidence of the moderator would be admissible in a modern court? It wasn't there when the police searched the cupboard (didn't they even photograph it?) but mysteriously appears when a gun dealer returned his own gun to the cupboard after illegally keeping it off-site, contrary to the terms of the license. One relative says it had 'jam' like stuff in it, then it's described as a 'flake', then it's shoved in a bag by some other things, handled by loads of people without gloves - most of whom benefit from JB going to jail - and was then stored with other items that could cross-contaminate it. If this is the kingpin of the prosecution it is breathtaking he hasn't had a retrial.
38
It was there when police searched the cupboard. Police didn't care about it thus didn't take notice of it being there. They didn't take out everything in the closet and carefully inspect it all and record all the items in the closet.
If they took out everything and recorded it and failed to list it then you could use that to suggest it wasn't there.
There was a tiny bit of human blood:
outside:
1) on the face,
2) in the knurled portion
3) in an indented ring towards the rear of the moderator
inside:
4) inside the opening
5) a flake trapped between the first 2 baffles
6) on the first 8 baffles
The blood inside the opening is what the family could see. They could not see the baffles and flake which were too deep inside to see and too small to really notice anyway. The baffles were swabbed that is how the blood was found on them.
Defense expert Lincoln swabbed the area inside the opening where the blood the family saw had been and managed to find microscopic traces still present despite the lab removing the blood that was visible. He tested it and found it to be group A blood consistent with Sheila's. He also found weak traces on the first 8 baffles. The remaining 9 baffles tested negative for blood.
The Defense chose not to use Lincoln at trial because his evidence supported the prosecution.
-
Scipio's claims on Blue:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7075.msg333646.html#msg333646
"The inside of the opening has a lip. That lip is threaded and acts as a shelf. On this "shelf" was the blood she saw. The "blob" she saw sitting on this shelf was removed by the lab on Aug 13 and used to test whether it was human blood or something else. It was determined to be human blood. On this same "shelf" Lincoln removed enough blood traces to successfully type test it and he determined it to be group A. If there was no blood there then the lab would not have gotten a positive test for blood and Lincoln would not have found traces of group A blood there. He said the amount of blood remaining there exceeded the amount on the baffles. That is not at all surprising since physics results in the largest particles of blood traveling not far while the smaller particles of blood would be able to travel several inches deep. This results in the quantity of blood found deep being less.
Since a moderator is open on both sides light can get inside the back while you are looking at the front so long as you hold it in a manner other than looking at the ground. Obviously holding it up to the light or a window with light coming in is the best. Doing this enabled the family to see the blood inside. They also saw the blood on the face of the moderator when looking at the opening because the face is the aspect containing the opening. Normally you just see the outside wall".
This being the case I wonder why the silencer was returned to EP by the lab on 13th August and resubmitted circa mid Sept for dismantling and a peep inside when the 'flake' was first identified and tested &%+((£
I've lost a contact lens and thought I might have left it in the above post but I cant seem to find it &%+((£
-
I've lost a contact lens and thought I might have left it in the above post but I cant seem to find it &%+((£
Did you also lose your brain like the scarecrow in the Wizard of Oz?
Everyone who knows anything about this case knows that the lab did a limited examination on August 13 so that they would not damage any potential fingerprints and the gun was fingerprinted by Cook before it was finally returned to the lab in September for full analysis. The COA opinion not only discusses this bu criticizes Cook for taking so long to get it fully examined by the lab.
-
Did you also lose your brain like the scarecrow in the Wizard of Oz?
Everyone who knows anything about this case knows that the lab did a limited examination on August 13 so that they would not damage any potential fingerprints and the gun was fingerprinted by Cook before it was finally returned to the lab in September for full analysis. The COA opinion not only discusses this bu criticizes Cook for taking so long to get it fully examined by the lab.
Yes the silencer was submitted to the lab on 13th Aug for preliminary tests. The blood on the outside incl the paint was analysed. But you claimed the relatives held the silencer up to the light and observed the blood internally before it was handed to DS Jones on 12th Aug.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6514.msg285041#msg285041
On 13th Aug the silencer was handed back to DI Cook. It was resubmitted to FSS mid Sept where it was dismantled for the first time and hey presto a blood flake was discovered which just so happened to be capable of blood typing and matched SC's blood serology.
Simple request Scipio. You claim the CoA doc criticises the above and specifically singles out DI Cook. Here's the CoA doc please highlight for members and guests the text complete with the point number:
http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html
-
Yes the silencer was submitted to the lab on 13th Aug for preliminary tests. The blood on the outside incl the paint was analysed. But you claimed the relatives held the silencer up to the light and observed the blood internally before it was handed to DS Jones on 12th Aug.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6514.msg285041#msg285041
On 13th Aug the silencer was handed back to DI Cook. It was resubmitted to FSS mid Sept where it was dismantled for the first time and hey presto a blood flake was discovered which just so happened to be capable of blood typing and matched SC's blood serology.
Simple request Scipio. You claim the CoA doc criticises the above and specifically singles out DI Cook. Here's the CoA doc please highlight for members and guests the text complete with the point number:
http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html
Sorry I meant the Dickinson report which faulted him for not telling the lab that the murder suicide theory changed when he brought the moderator there and was criticized for not speeding up t he process of bringing it and the rifle there. Note that they didn't even confirm the Anschutz fired all the shots until September because he was busy repeatedly fingerprinting the weapon and moderator and after finally finishing he took his time in sending these items to the lab.
-
Sorry I meant the Dickinson report which faulted him for not telling the lab that the murder suicide theory changed when he brought the moderator there and was criticized for not speeding up t he process of bringing it and the rifle there. Note that they didn't even confirm the Anschutz fired all the shots until September because he was busy repeatedly fingerprinting the weapon and moderator and after finally finishing he took his time in sending these items to the lab.
Fair enough but this doesnt explain your assertion that the relatives held the silencer up to the light and observed the blood inside the silencer. This was surely relayed to DS Jones who in turn relayed it to DI Cook and ultimately the lab? The Holab forms supposedly detail what tests the police require the lab to carry out. Do we have the Holab form? Which should state analyse blood inside and outside or words to this effect?
DI Cook claims the single grey hair found attached to the silencer had disappered by the time he submitted it to the lab. He surely must have documented this on the HOLAB form? And the lab would take a peep inside to look for the lost hair and at the same time observe the blood. Scientists are usually curious by nature?
-
Fair enough but this doesnt explain your assertion that the relatives held the silencer up to the light and observed the blood inside the silencer. This was surely relayed to DS Jones who in turn relayed it to DI Cook and ultimately the lab? The Holab forms supposedly detail what tests the police require the lab to carry out. Do we have the Holab form? Which should state analyse blood inside and outside or words to this effect?
DI Cook claims the single grey hair found attached to the silencer had disappered by the time he submitted it to the lab. He surely must have documented this on the HOLAB form? And the lab would take a peep inside to look for the lost hair and at the same time observe the blood. Scientists are usually curious by nature?
The family members who saw blood inside noted such in their statements. That is how we know they saw blood inside.
Why would Cook note blood and evidence on the form? The job of the lab is to assess what evidence is on it. He admitted the hair was lost by the time he got it to the lab. He didn't even think about the hair. After the family mentioned the hair an inquiry took place and he admitted it was lost by him before he turned it in to the lab. Since the hair would not have told anything important no one ended up caring about the error but in a future case it could hurt losing evidence like this so was a lesson learned.
The closet was Nevill's the house was Nevill's there potentially was Nevill's hair in the closet and other places so it could be picked up anytime the moderator was being taken to the closet or even put in the closet. So if it was Nevill's hair, as is surely the case, does that help prove the killer? No. Hair in closet in box, moderator put away touches hair and it sticks- big deal...
-
The family members who saw blood inside noted such in their statements. That is how we know they saw blood inside.
Why would Cook note blood and evidence on the form? The job of the lab is to assess what evidence is on it. He admitted the hair was lost by the time he got it to the lab. He didn't even think about the hair. After the family mentioned the hair an inquiry took place and he admitted it was lost by him before he turned it in to the lab. Since the hair would not have told anything important no one ended up caring about the error but in a future case it could hurt losing evidence like this so was a lesson learned.
The closet was Nevill's the house was Nevill's there potentially was Nevill's hair in the closet and other places so it could be picked up anytime the moderator was being taken to the closet or even put in the closet. So if it was Nevill's hair, as is surely the case, does that help prove the killer? No. Hair in closet in box, moderator put away touches hair and it sticks- big deal...
Please provide the relevant W/S's showing the relatives observed the blood in the silencer before handing it over to EP.
According to DS Davidson, COLP inquiry, the whole purpose of the HOLAB form is for the police to inform the lab what tests they require carrying out:
"It is a list of exhibits and a brief background of the incident, with a request in plain English what we want the lab to do for us".
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=178.0;attach=445;image
-
Please provide the relevant W/S's showing the relatives observed the blood in the silencer before handing it over to EP.
According to DS Davidson, COLP inquiry, the whole purpose of the HOLAB form is for the police to inform the lab what tests they require carrying out:
"It is a list of exhibits and a brief background of the incident, with a request in plain English what we want the lab to do for us".
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=178.0;attach=445;image
Read Ann Eaton's statements yourself. I know they are long but too bad I am not going to spare you the same pain the rest of us had to go through in reading them.
Here is the HOLAB form read it yourself (ps note how it says blood on butt of the rifle):
-
Read Ann Eaton's statements yourself. I know they are long but too bad I am not going to spare you the same pain the rest of us had to go through in reading them.
What exactly did you do while on blue besides stump for Jeremy did you ever read any of the evidence in this case?
Here is the HOLAB form read it yourself (ps note how it says blood on butt of the rifle):
I accept there may have been blood on the stock but what does this prove or disprove?
-
I accept there may have been blood on the stock but what does this prove or disprove?
1) There was spatter that "splashed" the left side of the stock- this proves Nevill was beaten with the stock because as he got hit with the stock the blood splashed onto it. There was very limited spatter on the mechanism and barrel but it was still there. The spatter gets on the person wielding the bludgeoning instrument not merely the weapon. It didn't reach the barrel and yet not hit the killer. This means if Sheila had been the killer she should have had spatter on her clothing and body particularly the back of the hand that was holding the stock.
2) It tells us the killer was wearing gloves or the killer's hands would have had blood spatter on the outside and on the inside of the weapon there would have been prints of some sort even if partials only left in the blood.
3) There was blood transfers to the area where the piece broke off as well as the stock area below the trigger. This means the hands of the killer had blood on it and transferred it to the gun. This confirms the observation the killer was wearing gloves since the transfers didn't involve any prints whatsoever. The killer's gloves had blood on them that transferred to the weapon. Was the blood from spatter? From punching the victim in the face as he was bleeding or something else such as touching the victim to re-position him? Who knows all that matters is that the killer had blood from the victim on the gloves.
Were there any bloody gloves that Sheila could have worn at the scene? No
Did Sheila have any medium velocity spatter on her clothing (clothing she wore at death or any of her clothing she could have changed out of) that could have been from Nevill? No
This is why it is significant. If Sheila had been the one who beat Nevill then there would have been gloves and clothing she wore with his spatter on them. It is further corroboration that the killer fled the scene because no such items were present.
It is part and parcel of the whole issue of what evidence would have been on Sheila's body and clothing if she had killed the others and herself.
Why did the jury reject the defense claims that maybe Sheila changed? Apart from the fact that it makes no sense for her to wash up and change her clothing she changed out of would still be there.
When you add to that the fact that she can't have cleaned off evidence that would be there if she shot herself and the evidence proving it impossible for her to have shot herself it is a slam dunk even before you add Julie's evidence.
-
1) There was spatter that "splashed" the left side of the stock- this proves Nevill was beaten with the stock because as he got hit with the stock the blood splashed onto it. There was very limited spatter on the mechanism and barrel but it was still there. The spatter gets on the person wielding the bludgeoning instrument not merely the weapon. It didn't reach the barrel and yet not hit the killer. This means if Sheila had been the killer she should have had spatter on her clothing and body particularly the back of the hand that was holding the stock.
2) It tells us the killer was wearing gloves or the killer's hands would have had blood spatter on the outside and on the inside of the weapon there would have been prints of some sort even if partials only left in the blood.
3) There was blood transfers to the area where the piece broke off as well as the stock area below the trigger. This means the hands of the killer had blood on it and transferred it to the gun. This confirms the observation the killer was wearing gloves since the transfers didn't involve any prints whatsoever. The killer's gloves had blood on them that transferred to the weapon. Was the blood from spatter? From punching the victim in the face as he was bleeding or something else such as touching the victim to re-position him? Who knows all that matters is that the killer had blood from the victim on the gloves.
Were there any bloody gloves that Sheila could have worn at the scene? No
Did Sheila have any medium velocity spatter on her clothing (clothing she wore at death or any of her clothing she could have changed out of) that could have been from Nevill? No
This is why it is significant. If Sheila had been the one who beat Nevill then there would have been gloves and clothing she wore with his spatter on them. It is further corroboration that the killer fled the scene because no such items were present.
It is part and parcel of the whole issue of what evidence would have been on Sheila's body and clothing if she had killed the others and herself.
Why did the jury reject the defense claims that maybe Sheila changed? Apart from the fact that it makes no sense for her to wash up and change her clothing she changed out of would still be there.
When you add to that the fact that she can't have cleaned off evidence that would be there if she shot herself and the evidence proving it impossible for her to have shot herself it is a slam dunk even before you add Julie's evidence.
The above are in the main your own theories. When the pathologist was asked about other external injuries NB sustained (other than gunshot) he does not commit to even say they were caused by the rifle let alone individual parts of the rifle. Yes there was some blood staining to the rifle but of such small quantity that it was not even possible to group. Therfore it doesn't follow that if SC was the perp she would be covered in medium impact spatter as you claim.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=205.0;attach=726
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=205.0;attach=728
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=205.0;attach=730
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. A "pull-through" on the barrel of the rifle was conducted for any traces of blood within the weapon. There were none.
-
The above are in the main your own theories. When the pathologist was asked about other external injuries NB sustained (other than gunshot) he does not commit to even say they were caused by the rifle let alone individual parts of the rifle. Yes there was some blood staining to the rifle but of such small quantity that it was not even possible to group. Therfore it doesn't follow that if SC was the perp she would be covered in medium impact spatter as you claim.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=205.0;attach=726
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=205.0;attach=728
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=205.0;attach=730
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. A "pull-through" on the barrel of the rifle was conducted for any traces of blood within the weapon. There were none.
You keep referring to Lincoln's Autopsy report written in August. He didn't know half as much at that time and was unwilling to speculate much. Big deal he noted the lateral damage which ca't be caused by the barrel and we know the barrel can't cause those roundish abrasions either. He didn't know about the blood spatter found on the rifle butt or try investigating the typical damage caused by a rifle butt, he chose to leave it to the lab to assess the issue further. You want to say that because he refused to do testing and assess this it means the lab can't and no one else can offer their superior expertise. That is laughable.
We know for a fact that the lateral abrasions were caused by the butt scraping along the skin while the roundish ones were caused by the "knob" of the butt digging in. We know for a fact as he was beaten blood was splashing on the butt and the killer. We know for a fact the butt broke when Nevill's head was bashed in with it- rendering him unconscious.