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: adam on May 07, 2018, 11:16:30 PM
-
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.jeremybambertestimony.co.uk/tru&ved=2ahUKEwjFxby_zvTaAhUDC8AKHcoxDPcQFjACegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw3LMIM5LeAFKu_vnq6fizQX
All of her reasons have been discussed before & have strong counter arguments. So strong that a conviction has stood for 33 years.
As usual it is a combination of the relatives, police & Julie. But no mention of the experts.
She said there was no gun shot residue on Bamber. I was not aware he was tested on the night.
-
He wasn't tested and would have had ample opportunity to wash even if he had been. The elephant in the room is no residue or oil on Sheila's hands.
-
He wasn't tested and would have had ample opportunity to wash even if he had been. The elephant in the room is no residue or oil on Sheila's hands.
Or on her nightdress. Also, no blood spatter from any of the victims.
-
He wasn't tested and would have had ample opportunity to wash even if he had been. The elephant in the room is no residue or oil on Sheila's hands.
Well pointed out Alice, often a fact overlooked, the lack of evidence on Sheila.
-
Short answers to Trudies reasons -
• No forensics link Jeremy to the murders.
Wrong. No evidence on Sheila incriminates Bamber.
----------
• There was more than one sound moderator, exhibit labels were manipulated and four moderators were passed off to the jury as one and recent forensics have revealed that the silencer wasn’t even used in the murders.
This is similar to Mike's theories.
Have there been 'recent forensic tests' ?
--------
• We are asked to believe that Jeremy was able to get Shelia to calmly lay down whilst he shot her after first killing her children and her parents. I conclude that this would have been impossible.
Not impossible. Pretty easy as she was under sedation & a light woman.
What is Trudies Sheila scenario ?
--------
• We are asked to believe that Jeremy got from the murder scene home in time to make a phone call and leave no forensic trace. No Mud, blood or gun shot residue. I conclude that this would have been impossible.
He was not tested for gun shot residue.
----------
• We now know that Nevill called the police also, a fact that the jury never heard.
That is alright then.
---------
• Non-disclosure of evidence by Essex Police in this case stinks of a cover-up. In fact the 1986 Dickinson report into their conduct was a whitewash based on the biased testimony of Jeremy’s relatives. The very fact that the original murder/suicide file remains under PII is very suspicious.
Supporters have conflicting views on whether Bamber has everything. But no harm in always saying he hasn't.
--------
• We know that the police made a mess of the investigation but failing to mention for twenty odd years that they used the bodies in a training exercise and, furthermore, re-staged and photographed Shelia with the gun and then tried to make out it was Jeremy who had done the staging, is appalling.
When was this training exercise ?
How does this show Bamber is innocent ?
----------
• The relatives were terrified that they were going to lose their land and livelihood should Jeremy inherit and had everything to gain from Jeremy’s conviction. Certain members of the family were also incredulous that the “adopted” son would inherit everything.
This is accusing the relatives of fabricating the silencer. Which was the only piece of evidence they had access to.
How did the relatives fabricating one silencer, turn into 4 silencers for the jury ?
--------
• Julie Mugford was a bitter jealous jilted woman, who would have been charged with drug offences, cheque book fraud and burglary. Instead she got the ultimate revenge on Jeremy and gained £25K from the NOTW and immunity from prosecution. Not hard to see why she lied.
Julie would not have been arrested for anything if she had not approached the police.
Julie must have been jealous. And totally mad.
--------
• Whose fingerprints were on the Bible and why was this never disclosed?
Sheila may have touched June's bible pre massacre. Or Bamber put her hand on it when trying different staging positions.
As she says, no one knows. So does not show Bamber is innocent.
---------
• Why were exhibits destroyed despite a Court Order for them to be retained?
No idea. It had been a long time since the conviction.
What items ?
----------
• Why was it claimed that Shelia’s feet were clean when actually photographs show otherwise?
One photo shows redness.
Certainly no foot injuries
---------
• Jeremy passed a lie detector test. This in itself as been criticised as a meaningless exercise but most importantly for me is why on earth would he push so hard to take it if he was guilty and risked failing. Now that would have been game over!
Correct, it means nothing. If he had failed, it would have been kept quiet.
--------
-
In isolation, only Nevill calling the police would show Bamber was innocent.
---------
Julie retracting her statement would result in a release. However there was still the forensic & circumstantial evidence against him. So no certainty of innocence. Just a jealous girlfriend.
The relatives admitting they fabricated one piece of evidence would result in a release. However there is still a lot more forensic & circumstantial evidence against him. So no certainty of innocence. Just crazy relatives.
These two things together would be much more convincing.
----------
The rest of Trudie's points would not result in a release, if correct. Either in isolation or together. Unless the police admit to the 'cover up/whitewash' she suggested.
-
Is there any hard evidence that Nevill called the police? The log seems crystal clear in that it records Jeremy's call only. It would be impossible for an injured man to make that call and not leave a blood stain on the phone I'd have thought?
-
Everyone associated with the 'Campaign for Freedom' say Nevill called the police. There has to be unity here.
Away from the CFF, on the Blue & Red forums, most supporters say Nevill did not call the police. Espescially after they attempt a 'Sheila Scenario'. Sherlock intially had Nevill calling the police in his scenario, but retracted this after around 20 minutes.
I believe Mike & Roch support Nevill phoning the police. However their Sheila scenarios are very vague. Mike saying 'By shooting them' & Roch saying 'Sheila shot them but I can't explain the phone calls'.
Nugs & Maggie have never given a Sheila scenario & won't make any committment on Nevill phoning the police.
-
Nigel gave a scenario this month where Sheila had an accomplice (not Bamber). He posted -
'Phone call by NEVILLE to police, not sure how that happened, but stranger things have occured. and I need more time to think about this important point.'
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9428.0.html
-
Sadly in my opinion the facts show that Nevill called no one as he was too busy desperately fighting to disarm Jeremy.
-
Sadly in my opinion the facts show that Nevill called no one as he was too busy desperately fighting to disarm Jeremy.
Correct Alice, also you have to ask yourself why Jeremy never called 999 having supposedly receiving a frantic call from his father for help?
-
Bit disappointed with Trudie's list. All things that have been gone over a lot on both forums.
Mike, Nugs & Roch come up with much more interesting theories.
-
Yes that place is a mine of lunacy. Sheila barking like a dog and numerology where everyone adds up to nine! Thoroughly offensive to the memory of a seemingly gentle soul murdered in cold blood.
-
Yes that place is a mine of lunacy. Sheila barking like a dog and numerology where everyone adds up to nine! Thoroughly offensive to the memory of a seemingly gentle soul murdered in cold blood.
And Roch's psychological projections: "Thinking of registering on red forum as either 'ActualRoch' or 'RealRoch'. Seems like those prefixes are a tried and tested method to post shit-stirring tripe @)(++(*
-
He wasn't tested and would have had ample opportunity to wash even if he had been. The elephant in the room is no residue or oil on Sheila's hands.
SC's hands (swabs) were not tested for gsr. Oil on hands from firearm discharge doesn't feature as a recognised forensic test. Where would oil come from?
-
I have read that the bullets used have an oil coating and it is impossible to load them without getting this on your hands.
-
SC's hands (swabs) were not tested for gsr. Oil on hands from firearm discharge doesn't feature as a recognised forensic test. Where would oil come from?
Because trigger machanisms etc. are lubricated after cleaning. Jeremy stated that his father most likely removed the sights in order to clean the gun, so if he is telling the truth (there's a BIF 'if'), you might expect to find oil lubriction on the rifle.
-
Or on her nightdress. Also, no blood spatter from any of the victims.
Afaik SC's nightdress wasn't tested for GSR? Given the rifle was found resting on her nightdress and fired twice over her nightdress, whether by her own hand or JB's, the presence of GSR wouldn't tell us anything?
Unlikely a .22 long rifle with subsonic ammo would generate back spatter capable of reaching the perp. Then there are the physiological changes to victims having sustained 1 gsw ie lowering of blood pressure making successive gsw's less likely to produce back spatter.
The bloodstains on the rifle were said to resemble "splashes" and "smears" probably from when NB sustained injuries from a "blunt instrument". However these stains were in such small quantity it wasn't even possible to group them unlike the silencer *%87 If the victims generated copious amounts of blood spatter then why wasn't it on the rifle?
-
I have read that the bullets used have an oil coating and it is impossible to load them without getting this on your hands.
There is some debate as to what constitued the coating.
-
I have read that the bullets used have an oil coating and it is impossible to load them without getting this on your hands.
That wasn't my personal experience. The cartridges are coated in paraffin wax and designed to be "non-greasy".
-
Because trigger machanisms etc. are lubricated after cleaning. Jeremy stated that his father most likely removed the sights in order to clean the gun, so if he is telling the truth (there's a BIF 'if'), you might expect to find oil lubriction on the rifle.
But when did the cleaning take place and had it actually been discharged since? The rifle was found resting across SC's nightdress which was tested for the presence of gun oil and none found.
-
Afaik SC's nightdress wasn't tested for GSR? Given the rifle was found resting on her nightdress and fired twice over her nightdress, whether by her own hand or JB's, the presence of GSR wouldn't tell us anything?
Unlikely a .22 long rifle with subsonic ammo would generate back spatter capable of reaching the perp. Then there are the physiological changes to victims having sustained 1 gsw ie lowering of blood pressure making successive gsw's less likely to produce back spatter.
The bloodstains on the rifle were said to resemble "splashes" and "smears" probably from when NB sustained injuries from a "blunt instrument". However these stains were in such small quantity it wasn't even possible to group them unlike the silencer *%87 If the victims generated copious amounts of blood spatter then why wasn't it on the rifle?
There doesn't have to be 'copious' amounts (although there was copious amounts around Nevil). Blood was present on the rifle but none was found f Sheila's nightdress - you would expect to find at least traces if she had shot and battered her father to death. This also makes Roch's claim that victims were close enough to gouge eachother - when no cross transference of blood was reported (I guess he would say it was all hidden under the orders of Ainsley).
-
There doesn't have to be 'copious' amounts (although there was copious amounts around Nevil). Blood was present on the rifle but none was found f Sheila's nightdress - you would expect to find at least traces if she had shot and battered her father to death. This also makes Roch's claim that victims were close enough to gouge eachother - when no cross transference of blood was reported (I guess he would say it was all hidden under the orders of Ainsley).
@)(++(*
-
But when did the cleaning take place and had it actually been discharged since? The rifle was found resting across SC's nightdress which was tested for the presence of gun oil and none found.
Well, if it was cleaning, it had to be between the time AP stayed at WHF and the night of the murders. Don't get me wrong, I don't think the sights were removed for cleaning - I think Jeremy removed them.
-
There doesn't have to be 'copious' amounts (although there was copious amounts around Nevil). Blood was present on the rifle but none was found f Sheila's nightdress - you would expect to find at least traces if she had shot and battered her father to death. This also makes Roch's claim that victims were close enough to gouge eachother - when no cross transference of blood was reported (I guess he would say it was all hidden under the orders of Ainsley).
Yes there was copious amounts of blood around Nevil from his leaking gsw's. The same for SC and June. But as you have pointed out unless victims/perp entered into hand to hand combat this was unlikely to transfer. I don't believe there was any physical contact between victims and perp. Blood spatter from gsw's is different in that it's aerial and presents as tiny droplets but its presence is dependent on many factors eg calibre and type of firearm, anatomical location of wound and whether victim had already sustained gsw's. It's unlikely any blood spatter was produced at WHF but even if it did blood serology testing used at JB's trial wasn't capable of typing such small quantities and since the nightdress has since been destroyed against police procedures we'll never know what it may have revealed using DNA testing.
Bloodstains on the rifle were of such small quantity it wasn't possible to type them. The rifle was found resting on SC's person/nightdress. If any blood transferred it wouldn't reveal a) the perp and b) the quantity would be too small for testing based on blood serology.
-
Yes there was copious amounts of blood around Nevil from his leaking gsw's. The same for SC and June. But as you have pointed out unless victims/perp entered into hand to hand combat this was unlikely to transfer. I don't believe there was any physical contact between victims and perp. Blood spatter from gsw's is different in that it's aerial and presents as tiny droplets but its presence is dependent on many factors eg calibre and type of firearm, anatomical location of wound and whether victim had already sustained gsw's. It's unlikely any blood spatter was produced at WHF but even if it did blood serology testing used at JB's trial wasn't capable of typing such small quantities and since the nightdress has since been destroyed against police procedures we'll never know what it may have revealed using DNA testing.
Bloodstains on the rifle were of such small quantity it wasn't possible to type them. The rifle was found resting on SC's person/nightdress. If any blood transferred it wouldn't reveal a) the perp and b) the quantity would be too small for testing based on blood serology.
No blood smears were visible on the nightdress. If the rifles had smears just way you carry and fire the gun would result in transference unless you walked arounf with it at arms length at all times. Blood didn't transfer after the rifle was placed on the body because it was probably dry when placed there.
-
No blood smears were visible on the nightdress. If the rifles had smears just way you carry and fire the gun would result in transference unless you walked arounf with it at arms length at all times. Blood didn't transfer after the rifle was placed on the body because it was probably dry when placed there.
Boom!!
-
No blood smears were visible on the nightdress. If the rifles had smears just way you carry and fire the gun would result in transference unless you walked arounf with it at arms length at all times. Blood didn't transfer after the rifle was placed on the body because it was probably dry when placed there.
Blood smears were visible on the nightdress ie the so-called palm print. At trial John Hayward said he tested one of the marks and it was consistent with SC's blood group. I have a good quality hard copy soc image and can see what appears to be a small bloodstain away from all other stains. The stains on the rifle were of such small quantity I doubt there was sufficient to transfer. Research shows it takes blood around 60 mins to completely dry on a hard surface at an ambient temp of 20 degrees.
-
Blood smears were visible on the nightdress ie the so-called palm print. At trial John Hayward said he tested one of the marks and it was consistent with SC's blood group. I have a good quality hard copy soc image and can see what appears to be a small bloodstain away from all other stains. The stains on the rifle were of such small quantity I doubt there was sufficient to transfer. Research shows it takes blood around 60 mins to completely dry on a hard surface at an ambient temp of 20 degrees.
There would be traces if the rifle was smeared and the blood was wet - of curse there would. Smears from the rifle would be on the side of the nightdress. Those stains on the front are too well defined in shape to have come from the rifle.
-
There would be traces if the rifle was smeared and the blood was wet - of curse there would. Smears from the rifle would be on the side of the nightdress. Those stains on the front are too well defined in shape to have come from the rifle.
But the smears on the rifle were tiny and incapable of blood typing they were so small so how would we know whether tiny transfer stains were a) on SC's nightdress and b) if they were present it wouldn't be possible to blood type the stains anyway.
-
But the smears on the rifle were tiny and incapable of blood typing they were so small so how would we know whether tiny transfer stains were a) on SC's nightdress and b) if they were present it wouldn't be possible to blood type the stains anyway.
There were smears and splashes all over the rifle - tiny or not, they were visible. How did such splashes and smears get on the rifle while missing Sheila altogether? Someone clobbered Nevil with a force big enough to break a piece off the rifle stock. Venezis described wounds to Nevil's head and face (lacerations and brusing) to be consistent with having reeceived blunt force trauma. Someone beat the crap out of him Holly - if it were Sheila there is no way she could escape having some on Nevil on her person.
-
There were smears and splashes all over the rifle - tiny or not, they were visible. How did such splashes and smears get on the rifle while missing Sheila altogether? Someone clobbered Nevil with a force big enough to break a piece off the rifle stock. Venezis described wounds to Nevil's head and face (lacerations and brusing) to be consistent with having reeceived blunt force trauma. Someone beat the crap out of him Holly - if it were Sheila there is no way she could escape having some on Nevil on her person.
As Nigel & Mike have said, it was Sheila's accomplice.
-
There were smears and splashes all over the rifle - tiny or not, they were visible. How did such splashes and smears get on the rifle while missing Sheila altogether? Someone clobbered Nevil with a force big enough to break a piece off the rifle stock. Venezis described wounds to Nevil's head and face (lacerations and brusing) to be consistent with having reeceived blunt force trauma. Someone beat the crap out of him Holly - if it were Sheila there is no way she could escape having some on Nevil on her person.
According to GH's TT blood staining = thickness and blood smearing = a light surface. GH refers to five areas. The illustration attached refers to 6 areas (is there a 7th? I can't make it out?). Anyway the 6 I can read are tiny:
3/8 x 3/8
1/8 x 1/16
5/8 x 3/8
1 1/4 x <1/4
1/4 x 1/16
1/4 x 1/16
The above stains/smears were too small to group:
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.
The rifle sans silencer is 48" long. If the perp held the rifle by the barrel and wielded blows on NB, which seems likely hence the broken stock, that's some distance between NB and perp.
If any bloodstains transferred to perp (SC imo) during the beating or whilst she was holding the rifle thereafter or when it was resting across her body, these would be smaller than those found on rifle. And if those on rifle were too small to be typed how do we know what clues the nightdress might have yielded using DNA testing had it not been destroyed against police protocol? Only 2 areas of blood staining to the the nightdress were tested: under the arm and one of the marks which gives the appearance of finger. The tests were consistent with SC's blood group but what about all the other smaller stains on her nightdress?
There's no evidence where the blood on the rifle came from. It seems a racing cert NB was beaten with the rifle but he sustained 7 gsw's and lacerations from the beating. Did the blood on the rifle transfer from his gsw's during the beating?
-
According to GH's TT blood staining = thickness and blood smearing = a light surface. GH refers to five areas. The illustration attached refers to 6 areas (is there a 7th? I can't make it out?). Anyway the 6 I can read are tiny:
3/8 x 3/8
1/8 x 1/16
5/8 x 3/8
1 1/4 x <1/4
1/4 x 1/16
1/4 x 1/16
The above stains/smears were too small to group:
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.
The rifle sans silencer is 48" long. If the perp held the rifle by the barrel and wielded blows on NB, which seems likely hence the broken stock, that's some distance between NB and perp.
If any bloodstains transferred to perp (SC imo) during the beating or whilst she was holding the rifle thereafter or when it was resting across her body, these would be smaller than those found on rifle. And if those on rifle were too small to be typed how do we know what clues the nightdress might have yielded using DNA testing had it not been destroyed against police protocol? Only 2 areas of blood staining to the the nightdress were tested: under the arm and one of the marks which gives the appearance of finger. The tests were consistent with SC's blood group but what about all the other smaller stains on her nightdress?
There's no evidence where the blood on the rifle came from. It seems a racing cert NB was beaten with the rifle but he sustained 7 gsw's and lacerations from the beating. Did the blood on the rifle transfer from his gsw's during the beating?
I know they were too small to group, but they weren't too small to see and the smears had to be caused by the rifle touching against something - that's what 'smears' are. Sheila's hand were supposedly clean, so what caused the smears and how did Sheila manage to escape staining her nightdress when both the floor and kitchen units did not? Wielding such a blow would cause blood to spray - even if Nevil were dead at the time, surface blood would spray due to just being hit by the rifle, like jumping in a puddle.
-
I know they were too small to group, but they weren't too small to see and the smears had to be caused by the rifle touching against something - that's what 'smears' are. Sheila's hand were supposedly clean, so what caused the smears and how did Sheila manage to escape staining her nightdress when both the floor and kitchen units did not? Wielding such a blow would cause blood to spray - even if Nevil were dead at the time, surface blood would spray due to just being hit by the rifle, like jumping in a puddle.
There are numerous visible stains on SC's nightdress isolated from one another. Only 2 large stains were tested: under her arm and one of the marks resembling a finger.
The smears on the rifle could well have been caused during the blows NB sustained. If the rifle was used in this way the chances are the movements involved an element of swiping.
Afaik the blood stains on the kitchen worktop and floor were not tested or if they were the results are unknown. This begs the question why they were not tested or if they were why are the results unknown? DC Hammersley describes the blood stains to the kitchen floor as a "light distribution" and this seems to be an extension of the blood trail from the landing and stairs originating from NB's upstairs gsw's. Based on the pathological evidence ie NB's hands blood stained and SC's free of blood stains it would seem the stains on the kitchen worktop originate from NB. I don't see how any of this would transfer to SC/nightdress?
The blows NB sustained from a "blunt instrument", in all probability the rifle, resulted in lacerations. I don't believe type of wound has the potential to cause blood spatter. There was no evidence of skin tissue adhering to the rifle. The blood on the rifle probably originated from NB's gsw's ie the rifle used to wield blows and coming into contact with surfaces already blood stained.
-
There are numerous visible stains on SC's nightdress isolated from one another. Only 2 large stains were tested: under her arm and one of the marks resembling a finger.
The smears on the rifle could well have been caused during the blows NB sustained. If the rifle was used in this way the chances are the movements involved an element of swiping.
Afaik the blood stains on the kitchen worktop and floor were not tested or if they were the results are unknown. This begs the question why they were not tested or if they were why are the results unknown? DC Hammersley describes the blood stains to the kitchen floor as a "light distribution" and this seems to be an extension of the blood trail from the landing and stairs originating from NB's upstairs gsw's. Based on the pathological evidence ie NB's hands blood stained and SC's free of blood stains it would seem the stains on the kitchen worktop originate from NB. I don't see how any of this would transfer to SC/nightdress?
The blows NB sustained from a "blunt instrument", in all probability the rifle, resulted in lacerations. I don't believe type of wound has the potential to cause blood spatter. There was no evidence of skin tissue adhering to the rifle. The blood on the rifle probably originated from NB's gsw's ie the rifle used to wield blows and coming into contact with surfaces already blood stained.
He didn't say worktops Holly and whether there is alight distribution or not, you would expect to find blood on a perp who have bludgeoned someone in such a manner.
-
He didn't say worktops Holly and whether there is alight distribution or not, you would expect to find blood on a perp who have bludgeoned someone in such a manner.
But we don't know that there wasn't blood on SC's person/nightdress from victims. And if there wasn't and she was the perp there might be reasons for this that a pathologist and blood stain analyst could provide.
Had the perp taken a kitchen knife to NB then yes that would be different. The perp would be covered in blood. But there was some distance between NB and perp due to the length of the rifle and the pathologist describes the injuries being caused by a "blunt instrument" which wouldn't necessarily cause blood to spatter or transfer to perp. The injuries in terms of cuts to the skin resulting in the production of blood were superficial ie abrasions not deep penetrating cuts.
-
But we don't know that there wasn't blood on SC's person/nightdress from victims. And if there wasn't and she was the perp there might be reasons for this that a pathologist and blood stain analyst could provide.
Had the perp taken a kitchen knife to NB then yes that would be different. The perp would be covered in blood. But there was some distance between NB and perp due to the length of the rifle and the pathologist describes the injuries being caused by a "blunt instrument" which wouldn't necessarily cause blood to spatter or transfer to perp. The injuries in terms of cuts to the skin resulting in the production of blood were superficial ie abrasions not deep penetrating cuts.
Blood Spatter in Blunt Force Trauma
As in most crime scenes blood spatter pattern analysis can provide vital evidence in determining what actually happened during the commission of the crime. Blunt trauma to most of the body may not produce significant blood spatter since most of the blunt force damage will be to internal organs. Blunt trauma to the head and neck, on the other hand, almost always results in a series of characteristic blood spatter patterns. The blood spatter is characteristic of medium velocity blood spatter resulting from an external force of greater than five feet per second (fps) but less than twenty-five fps. Blunt force trauma also produces cast-off blood spatter as blood is thrown from the weapon as it is raised and then brought down on the victim each additional time. This spatter can occur on ceilings, walls and floor depending on the force and direction of the inflicted blows. In the process the victim’s blood is also transferred to the blunt object and can usually be recovery from the weapon once it is identified.
https://www.officer.com/investigations/article/10249149/death-by-blunt-force-trauma
-
Blood Spatter in Blunt Force Trauma
As in most crime scenes blood spatter pattern analysis can provide vital evidence in determining what actually happened during the commission of the crime. Blunt trauma to most of the body may not produce significant blood spatter since most of the blunt force damage will be to internal organs. Blunt trauma to the head and neck, on the other hand, almost always results in a series of characteristic blood spatter patterns. The blood spatter is characteristic of medium velocity blood spatter resulting from an external force of greater than five feet per second (fps) but less than twenty-five fps. Blunt force trauma also produces cast-off blood spatter as blood is thrown from the weapon as it is raised and then brought down on the victim each additional time. This spatter can occur on ceilings, walls and floor depending on the force and direction of the inflicted blows. In the process the victim’s blood is also transferred to the blunt object and can usually be recovery from the weapon once it is identified.
https://www.officer.com/investigations/article/10249149/death-by-blunt-force-trauma
The above article states that such spatter results from an external force of > 5 ft/ps but < 25 ft/ps. Dr Vanezis stated that the force was difficult to estimate for all the non gsw injuries other than the parietal laceration which he describes as a "severe superficial skin injury" which was delivered with a "considerable degree of force".
A superficial skin injury:
An abrasion is a wound caused by superficial damage to the skin, no deeper than the epidermis. It is less severe than a laceration, and bleeding, if present, is minimal.
So no I don't think it necessarily follows that the non gsw's NB sustained would result in blood spatter. The blood on the rifle was of such small quantity it was only possible to perform the KM test to confirm it was blood and human in origin. Only 2 large blood stains were tested on SC's nightdress and shown to originate from her. I have a good quality hard copy soc image of SC, courtesy of David, it appears authentic and I can see what appear to be 2 small blood stains near the wood part of the rifle to SC's right. However even if it is blood I don't see what it can prove in terms of how it came to be there. Maybe a BSA could say it was there direct from victim to perp but I don't see how transfer from rifle to SC can be ruled out and then it's a case of how the rifle came to be on SC's person!?
*The burn mark to SC's nightdress and black particles appear to have fallen under the radar along with any small blood stains. Lost forever since the nightdress was destroyed against police procedures.
* Looking at the image I mentioned this appears to be to SC's left and well away from the rifle. David has suggested in the past it was caused by heat from the ejection port/vents.
-
The above article states that such spatter results from an external force of > 5 ft/ps but < 25 ft/ps. Dr Vanezis stated that the force was difficult to estimate for all the non gsw injuries other than the parietal laceration which he describes as a "severe superficial skin injury" which was delivered with a "considerable degree of force".
A superficial skin injury:
An abrasion is a wound caused by superficial damage to the skin, no deeper than the epidermis. It is less severe than a laceration, and bleeding, if present, is minimal.
So no I don't think it necessarily follows that the non gsw's NB sustained would result in blood spatter. The blood on the rifle was of such small quantity it was only possible to perform the KM test to confirm it was blood and human in origin. Only 2 large blood stains were tested on SC's nightdress and shown to originate from her. I have a good quality hard copy soc image of SC, courtesy of David, it appears authentic and I can see what appear to be 2 small blood stains near the wood part of the rifle to SC's right. However even if it is blood I don't see what it can prove in terms of how it came to be there. Maybe a BSA could say it was there direct from victim to perp but I don't see how transfer from rifle to SC can be ruled out and then it's a case of how the rifle came to be on SC's person!?
*The burn mark to SC's nightdress and black particles appear to have fallen under the radar along with any small blood stains. Lost forever since the nightdress was destroyed against police procedures.
* Looking at the image I mentioned this appears to be to SC's left and well away from the rifle. David has suggested in the past it was caused by heat from the ejection port/vents.
What burn mark?
-
What burn mark?
We discussed this previously because I recall you saying the cause might have been cigarette ash (you being a smoker or ex smoker).
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=197.0;attach=653
I have another doc re above on my lappy but I'm out and about at mo on phone.