When MF was cross-examined he agreed through a process of elimination June sustained an 8th gsw, unrelated to the other 7, which caused a bruise to her chest.
You are distorting again.
1) June had a v shaped scratch on her breast
2) Vanezis and Fletcher both said the scratch may have been caused by a bullet grazing her but could have been caused by something else
3) Fletcher stated that IF it was a bullet graze wound then based on the location of the graze on the bottom of June's breast then June was lying down as the bullet passed across her breast and ended up in her pillow.
Far from him saying if a bullet caused the wound that it had to be from an 8th bullet he opined that it was from one of the bullets that exited her leg or arm ESPECIALLY the one that exited her arm because it lined up with the breast wound:
Why do you keep posting the same falsehood over and over again after I already proved it false a half a dozen times?
cross:
Redirect:
If this is so then by definition it must mean bullet DRH/5 pertains to this wound.
DRH/5 pertains to Nevill's bullet graze wound. The experts were uncertain whether June suffered a bullet graze wound but were POSITIVE that Nevill suffered such a wound. The testimony was that it was a graze wound through which the entire bullet could not have entered thus why it was called a graze wound not an entrance wound. You keep making up that the entire bullet entered his body though there is no evidence of any kind to support such. You desperately want to ignore reality to pretend DRH/5 pertains to a wound to June or Sheila neither of which can be established as bullet graze wounds while ignoring Nevill's certain graze wound.
Q: In other words that is a bullet graze, if you like, where the bullet has not gone into the body?
Vanezis: That is right.
Vanezis saw a few tiny fragments on the xray that were WAY TOO SMALL to represent an entire bullet they could not even represent 1/5 of a bullet. He was unsure whether they were in Nevill's clothing or inside his body. He opined that if they were inside his body they were tiny slivers that broke off the bullet and were too small to locate. These tiny slivers that could not represent even 1/5 of a bullet you misrepresent as being an entire bullet so that you can pretend that DRH/5 is unrelated to Nevill's graze and can pretend it relates to someone else.
That fantasy would require 26 bullets to have been fired. Only 25 casings were found by police and the family never found a 26th casing.
Bullet DRH/5 was described by MF as "whole"
False, he said it had the appearance of a complete bullet. He didn't claim any of the bullets were whole. By definition every fragment recovered was a bullet fragment not an entire bullet.
He weighed the largest bullet fragments and described the appearance of each fragment as whole, near whole, half or small fragments. By describing them as such he was not asserting they were complete bullets.
Here once again is the full list of his descriptions and their weights and in parenthesis the percentage of a complete bullet that such weight represents:
Whole
DRH/35A 2.44 grams (94.2%)
DRH/35B 2.43 grams (93.8%)
PV/2 2.4267 grams (93.69%)
PV/24 2.4208 grams (93.47%)
DRH/5 2.42 grams (93.44%)
DRH/36 2.42 grams (93.44%)
PV/23 2.29 grams (88.4%)
PV/19 2.16 grams (83.39%)
PV/29 2.13 grams (82.24%)
PV/31 2.1223 grams (81.94%)
PV/4 2.099 grams (81%)
PV/20 1.5453 grams (59.66%)
Nearly Whole
PV/30 2.03 grams (78.38%)
PV/36 2.03 grams (78.38%)
PV/3 1.9368 grams (74.78%)
PV/11 1.93 grams (74.52%)
PV/34 1.7972 grams (69.39%)
PV/25 1.79 grams (69.11%)
PV/26 1.7783 grams (68.66%)
DRH/9 1.67 grams (64.48%)
PV/8 1.63 grams (62.9%)
Half of bullet
PV/10 1.14 grams (44%)
Fragment
PV/35 no weight listed
Small Fragment
PV/5 no weight listed
PV/9 no weight listed
------------------
What is quite obvious is that there is a big variation between the weights of bullet fragments he called whole. In fact, 1 bullet fragment he called whole (PV/20) weighs less than every single fragment that he called nearly whole.
You keep engaging in the same exact behavior as the Campaign team. The Campaign Team keeps misrepresenting that the fragments he referred to as appearing whole were all complete bullets. You are doing the same exact thing. You intentionally ignore the weights and fact they were not whole bullets at all but rather were fragments in order to advance your agenda. That doesn't constitute following the evidence where it leads, it constitutes ignoring the evidence and pretending what you wish.
and found under the dressing table. I haven't seen any soc photos of the dressing table but from other documents it appears to have been set against the wall opposite the bed and between the door and window. This is the area the perp was standing in when June sustained her gsw's whilst in bed and getting out of evidenced by the casings. I have suggested bullet DRH/5 ricocheted back towards the perp. There's some evidence for this:
- The autopsy report notes SC had a small graze in the left lumbar region covered by a dressing:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=199.0;attach=670
- And Glynis Howard (?looks like her handwriting?) notes SC's nightdress had a small hole left front 1/8" diameter with a ? mark about a burn:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=197.0;attach=653
1) Sheila had a band-aid on her scratch. That alone supports she was injured prior to the killings. She woudl nto bother to put a band-aid on a wound when planning to kill herself.
2) The evidence proves Sheila can't have killed herself, someone else murdered her.
3) You have zero evidence to support Sheila firing a weapon period let alone a bullet ricocheting back at her.
Bullets don't ricochet directly back at a shooter anyway. They ricochet off an object at an angle. Bullets don't ricochet off bodies or pillows they ricochet when they strike hard objects. The only way to get it to go directly back at a shooter would be to shoot the ground and even then it is not that likely to go directly back. On the shooting range during military rifle training the guy to my right fired shot a bullet that went maybe 5 feet before hitting the ground and ricocheted back- it passed in the middle of his position and mine. If you stand close to a cement wall and shoot it then there is a chance of a ricochet directly back at you but even then it will depend on the angle the bullet hits the wall.
4) The dressing table was in the corner of the room. Someone shooting from that location at June would be targeting June's left side. June was shot from the right, the shooter was at the foot of the bed either in the middle or more in front of Neville when shooting at her.
Your theory is not in the least bit possible except in your mind.
