How did Jeremy subdue Sheila?

[Holly Goodhead]

And he later clarified that the tiny fragments he saw might not have been inside Nevill's body. He said they might have been too tiny too locate or might not have been in the body at all since the xrays were taken while the body was clothed. 

DRH/5 weighed 37 grains out of the original 40 so was missing 13 percent of the bullet. You can't seem to get it through your head that no bullets were whole, it is practically impossible for a non jacketed bullet to remain entirely whole after being fired except in a testing chamber and even then a very small amount will be missing since the barrel rifling scores the bullet. By definition what is recovered are fragments of bullets.  The largest fragment is frequently called the bullet though this is imprecise and technically should be called a fragment.  There is no harm done so long as people recognize this.

The largest fragment of each bullet was recovered except no fragments from one of the bullets that hit Nicholas.  They were so small that they would have been useless. Vanezis only removed one small fragment from any of the victims.  That tiny fragment was a second fragment from one of the bullets that hit Nevill's jaw or lip. It was was useless investigation wise because it was too small to mean anything, you can't get the rifling characteristics from a tiny fragment. That is PV/5 it was useless from a ballistics expert perspective in establishing anything so is not mentioned much. 

The bullet that grazed Nevill first struck the back of his arm, then hit his side and continued across the front of his chest. The entire bullet didn't come to rest in his side. The side didn't have an entrance wound that would allow a whole bullet to enter it had small damage. 

Look where DRH/5 was found it clearly ricocheted before ending up there which is why when questioned on the witness stand Fletcher refused to opine where the shot was fired from:



Some have suggested the bullet remained in Nevill's gown and fell out in that location when he was running by. It's not impossible but I think it is more likely it ricocheted there.

The v channel in her breast could not be made by a bullet that grazed her horizontally.  If made by a bullet it could only be made by a bullet moving vertically across her chest. That means she had to be lying down. A bullet that grazed her chest while she was lying down would end up in her bed/pillow. Think about her right arm being across her body hand near her left shoulder. Where would the bullet that exited her arm go? It would graze her breast and then go above her shoulder ending up in her pillow.  2 bullets were found in her pillows and one clearly was the one that exited her arm. This doesn't prove it his her chest because it could have cleared her chest and still ended up in the pillow. We don't know if the scratch to her breast was related to the murders or not.   

The largest fragment of one of the bullets that exited Daniel was recovered in the room hence not missing.

Daniel
PV/29
PV/34
PV/35
PV/36
DRH/36

Nicholas
PV/30 
PV/31

Vanezis explained that while Nicholas had 3 entrance wounds one of the bullets broke apart into small pieces so there was no sizable fragment to recover.  As I mentioned earlier small fragments are not of much use.

Once again you ignore reality of the GSW.

I posted for you the plume that comes out of the vents/ejection port.  You can clearly see that it only gets on the shooter. Thus if Jeremy were the shooter then the GSW would not get on Sheila. It could only get on Sheila if she were shooting herself. The plume goes back to the stock across the face and hands of the shooter not to the forward of the weapon.  The vents/ejection port are near the shooter not the victim.   You keep ignoring this and making the false claim that the GSW would get on a victim.  This is untrue it gets on the shooter hence why if she were the shooter she would have such GSW on her gown and hands but would not if merely a victim.

23 shots to other victims would certainly result in GSR on her body and clothing.  2 shots to herself hugging the weapon would surely get GSW on her clothing and body.  2 shots fired by Jeremy into her would not get GSW on her body because she was too far away from the vents/ejection port.

Scipio it is good to see you posting on the board again but may I remind you please that we attempt to keep things civil here.  Telling me I can't seem to get things through to my head and that I'm ignoring reality doesn't bode well with the aims and objectives of the board.  Thank you in anticipation.

Much of the expert testimony is ambigious which is unhelpful to say the least!  Under cross examination and by a process of elimination Malcolm Fletcher agreed with the following:

- DRH/5 could not have pertained to the graze wound NB sustained to his elbow/chest as it entered NB's chest at a shallow angle - attached trial testimony
- DRH/5 pertained to a graze wound June sustained to her chest - attached trial testimony
- A total of 26 bullets were fired - attached trial testimony

You are arguing against the ballistics evidence/expert at trial?

I disagree re GSR.  The rifle was found on SC's person/nightdress with the casing ejection port face down resting on her nightdress.  In all probability 26 shots had been fired from the rifle.  MF said GSR emits from the casing ejection port and this can be evidenced in the slow motion part of the vid.  Therefore imo it stands to reason that at least a small amount from this area of the rifle would transfer to SC's nightdress. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bgz0lqGVouo





[attachment deleted by admin]

[scipio_usmc]

Scipio it is good to see you posting on the board again but may I remind you please that we attempt to keep things civil here.  Telling me I can't seem to get things through to my head and that I'm ignoring reality doesn't bode well with the aims and objectives of the board.  Thank you in anticipation.

Much of the expert testimony is ambigious which is unhelpful to say the least!  Under cross examination and by a process of elimination Malcolm Fletcher agreed with the following:

- DRH/5 could not have pertained to the graze wound NB sustained to his elbow/chest as it entered NB's chest at a shallow angle - attached trial testimony
- DRH/5 pertained to a graze wound June sustained to her chest - attached trial testimony
- A total of 26 bullets were fired - attached trial testimony

You are arguing against the ballistics evidence/expert at trial?

Fletcher didn't say there were 26 shots he said MAYBE there were 26 shots and 1 casing was never recovered. He didn't say June definitely suffered from a graze wound just that it is possible.  He ignored that the bullet that grazed Nevill was not in his body and thus had to be at the scene.   He ignored that DRH/5 was not in a location where it could get from grazing June's breast as she was lying in bed. He simply made the simplistic claim that since it was on June's side of the room it somehow pertained to June.  That kind of simplistic thinking is worthless he would be torn apart if he tried that on a witness stand today.  Maybe he erroneously thought the bullet was near her dresser as opposed to the dressing table in the opposite corner. Maybe he just wasn't thinking much. It makes no difference the possibility he suggested is not realistic.


If the v shaped scratch on June's breast was in fact from a bullet then it was a bullet that grazed her while she was lying down and wound have ended up in the bed.  So either it was not a bullet graze or was from one of the bullets that ended up in her pillow. A bullet that grazed her chest while she was lying in bed could not bounce off her pillow and end up on the opposite side of the room. A bullet could not graze her breast laterally and cause the v shaped scratch.  A graze wound would have damaged her gown as well and I see no evidence of damage in the breast area of her gown.

There is no way that the entire bullet entered Nevill's side in the small scratch marks. It grazed his side and then grazed the front of his chest. At most tiny slivers entered him. That leaves the bulk of bullet that grazed him unaccounted for and DRH/5 clearly pertains to it because it can't correspond to any other wounds of anyone.

I disagree re GSR.  The rifle was found on SC's person/nightdress with the casing ejection port face down resting on her nightdress.  In all probability 26 shots had been fired from the rifle.  MF said GSR emits from the casing ejection port and this can be evidenced in the slow motion part of the vid.  Therefore imo it stands to reason that at least a small amount from this area of the rifle would transfer to SC's nightdress. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bgz0lqGVouo

Your position is not supported by any evidence or science. I don't know why you keep showing the video it doesn't help you at all. The video shows that the ejection port and vents are near the shooter and would not be near Sheila if shot by Jeremy- particularly with the added length of the moderator.  The only way it would be near the victim is if the victim shoots himself/herself.   

Your alternative argument is that eventually putting the gun on her would deposit GSR on her gown but that is not necessarily true.  No GSR needs to deposit on her gown simply by placing it on her. It need not deposit any and most certainly would not deposit anywhere near the amount that would have to be there if she shot the others and then herself. She would have had a considerable amount on her gown and body.  There is no way she shot anyone.

Your ultimate argument is that she had to have GSR on her clothing and since they say she didn't the tests must have been worthless and wrong.  This argument fails miserably.

You are not starting from a neutral position and looking at the evidence objectively.  You operate from the starting point that Jeremy is innocent and Sheila committed the murders and then stretch to try to support this position.  None of the stretching works though.

[Holly Goodhead]

Scipio, MF recorded the bullet recovered from the dressing table (DRH/5) as "whole" which is exhibit number 49 on the attached list.  Dr Vanezis said he observed fragments in NB's chest cavity from the graze wound?  Can you explain please how DRH/5 pertains to the graze wound sustained by NB?

[scipio_usmc]

Scipio, MF recorded the bullet recovered from the dressing table (DRH/5) as "whole" which is exhibit number 49 on the attached list.  Dr Vanezis said he observed fragments in NB's chest cavity from the graze wound?  Can you explain please how DRH/5 pertains to the graze wound sustained by NB?

Vanezis said he observed some tiny fragments that were were either in the clothing or simply too tiny to find in person.

I already told you the weight of the bullet.  None of the bullets he recovered were whole. He didn't write whole to mean the entire bullet was recovered.

The unfired bullet weighed 40 grains.  The fragment weighed 37 grains, 3 were missing. 3 grains are 13 percent of the weight.  Some tiny fragments from DRH/5 broke off and either entered his side or remained in his clothing while the remainder of the bullet grazed his chest and ended up in the corner of the room. The only way for the bullet to get there naturally would be if the killer were by Nevill's bedside table and Nevill near the chair with his left side of his body facing the shooter.  The casing would end up near the window. Since it makes zero sense for the actors to be in such location and no casing was near the window it is obvious the bullet ricocheted there.



I showed how the victim would have to be walking in order for the shot to not be a ricochet and to land there after grazing him. What I drew is supposed to be the shoulders. I drew L and r to show the left side and the angle Nevill would be positioned.

S by Nevill's side table is the shooter and the trajectory of the bullet is represented by the red line.  The orange line represents the casing.

Nevill was shot 2 times in the face and one in the arm while sitting up in bed. Why would the shooter walk all the way to the side table and let him by to go to the other side of the room towards the door?  Worse still why would he not have his back to the killer and instead be positioned in the odd angle shown? Nor was there a casing in the position where it would be.  So it is clear the bullet bounced there

 
If I were forced to venture a guess it would be Nevill sitting on the bed facing the wall to get out, rising out of bed or even standing facing the wall still before he could turn to start to walk towards the foot of the bed thus his left side to the shooter. The bullet grazes him, hits the wall and bounces off the wall to that location. I'm skeptical of the theory it was stuck in his nightshirt and fell out at he was running out of the room- some have posited such. 22LR rounds are notorious for ricocheting after hitting something hard so the ricochet would not be surprising.

I know you will say Sheila came in through the closet, woke Nevill up and he was running away when shot but that still would not account for the lack of the casing, the odd angle Nevill would have been moving as opposed to having his back to the shooter but most importantly would fail to deal with the evidence proving the shooter first was at the foot of the bed hitting him 3 times as he sat up.   


Not only do the casings support such the trajectory of the bullets do. The shooter (especially if short Sheila) most certainly could not have shot Nevill while he was standing in the face or the shoulder at the downward trajectories the gun would have to be pointed up to hit those locations. If he were lying down the trajectories would be up unless the killer was behind the headboard and since it was against the wall...


Nevill would not go back into bed after being shot at so it is clear he was shot before he got out of bed.  The shooter had to be by the foot of the bed like when shooting June while she was in bed. Nevill either had to be getting out of bed when grazed and the bullet ricocheting or he and he shooter walked past one another and he was shot while the killer was near his side table and someone moved the casing or it also ricocheted towards the door. I find it hard to believe the killer would let him by and go to his side table.


As you should have noticed this doesn't inform in and of itself who did the shooting. Sheila could have walked in and shot Nevill 4 times and June 6 in such manner.  It's damning because it undermines Jeremy's claim that Nevill made a distress call to him since Nevill would not make a distress call then go back to bed. 


The prosecution thought the location of the casings in the bedroom was sufficient to convince the jury Nevill was shot there before things proceeded to the kitchen. They didn't seek out an expert in reconstruction because they didn't feel they needed one.     


Another issue is you are talking about people making the prosecution decisions who don't own guns and thus don't know about them.  They didn't think to ask Fletcher or others about the height issue and trajectories. I shoot so I do.

Here is a photo of June and Nevill and the height June could fire a gun straight into him while he is standing upright.  If she were to shoot an area above the line then the trajectory would be up and below would be down. 

June was only 2 inches shorter than Sheila so there would not be significant variation but this is just to illustrate the point.



If we were talking about shots at a distance then things change because a bullet arcs at a distance so still can have a downward trajectory when hitting a target fro a distance even with the gun aimed up.  With short distances though such doesn't come into play I just mention it because there are always variables that come into play. you can't just take a rule and apply it across the board you must take into account the variables.

Even Jeremy would not be able to shoot him in the face downwards if both were standing on ground of the same height and it is highly unlikely he would be able to shoot Nevill's shoulder downward either. He most certainly could not shoot it downward at the fairly steep angle of the shot.

   


 

[Holly Goodhead]

Vanezis said he observed some tiny fragments that were were either in the clothing or simply too tiny to find in person.

I already told you the weight of the bullet.  None of the bullets he recovered were whole. He didn't write whole to mean the entire bullet was recovered.

The unfired bullet weighed 40 grains.  The fragment weighed 37 grains, 3 were missing. 3 grains are 13 percent of the weight.  Some tiny fragments from DRH/5 broke off and either entered his side or remained in his clothing while the remainder of the bullet grazed his chest and ended up in the corner of the room. The only way for the bullet to get there naturally would be if the killer were by Nevill's bedside table and Nevill near the chair with his left side of his body facing the shooter.  The casing would end up near the window. Since it makes zero sense for the actors to be in such location and no casing was near the window it is obvious the bullet ricocheted there.



I showed how the victim would have to be walking in order for the shot to not be a ricochet and to land there after grazing him. What I drew is supposed to be the shoulders. I drew L and r to show the left side and the angle Nevill would be positioned.

S by Nevill's side table is the shooter and the trajectory of the bullet is represented by the red line.  The orange line represents the casing.

Nevill was shot 2 times in the face and one in the arm while sitting up in bed. Why would the shooter walk all the way to the side table and let him by to go to the other side of the room towards the door?  Worse still why would he not have his back to the killer and instead be positioned in the odd angle shown? Nor was there a casing in the position where it would be.  So it is clear the bullet bounced there

 
If I were forced to venture a guess it would be Nevill sitting on the bed facing the wall to get out, rising out of bed or even standing facing the wall still before he could turn to start to walk towards the foot of the bed thus his left side to the shooter. The bullet grazes him, hits the wall and bounces off the wall to that location. I'm skeptical of the theory it was stuck in his nightshirt and fell out at he was running out of the room- some have posited such. 22LR rounds are notorious for ricocheting after hitting something hard so the ricochet would not be surprising.

I know you will say Sheila came in through the closet, woke Nevill up and he was running away when shot but that still would not account for the lack of the casing, the odd angle Nevill would have been moving as opposed to having his back to the shooter but most importantly would fail to deal with the evidence proving the shooter first was at the foot of the bed hitting him 3 times as he sat up.   


Not only do the casings support such the trajectory of the bullets do. The shooter (especially if short Sheila) most certainly could not have shot Nevill while he was standing in the face or the shoulder at the downward trajectories the gun would have to be pointed up to hit those locations. If he were lying down the trajectories would be up unless the killer was behind the headboard and since it was against the wall...


Nevill would not go back into bed after being shot at so it is clear he was shot before he got out of bed.  The shooter had to be by the foot of the bed like when shooting June while she was in bed. Nevill either had to be getting out of bed when grazed and the bullet ricocheting or he and he shooter walked past one another and he was shot while the killer was near his side table and someone moved the casing or it also ricocheted towards the door. I find it hard to believe the killer would let him by and go to his side table.


As you should have noticed this doesn't inform in and of itself who did the shooting. Sheila could have walked in and shot Nevill 4 times and June 6 in such manner.  It's damning because it undermines Jeremy's claim that Nevill made a distress call to him since Nevill would not make a distress call then go back to bed. 


The prosecution thought the location of the casings in the bedroom was sufficient to convince the jury Nevill was shot there before things proceeded to the kitchen. They didn't seek out an expert in reconstruction because they didn't feel they needed one.     


Another issue is you are talking about people making the prosecution decisions who don't own guns and thus don't know about them.  They didn't think to ask Fletcher or others about the height issue and trajectories. I shoot so I do.

Here is a photo of June and Nevill and the height June could fire a gun straight into him while he is standing upright.  If she were to shoot an area above the line then the trajectory would be up and below would be down. 

June was only 2 inches shorter than Sheila so there would not be significant variation but this is just to illustrate the point.



If we were talking about shots at a distance then things change because a bullet arcs at a distance so still can have a downward trajectory when hitting a target fro a distance even with the gun aimed up.  With short distances though such doesn't come into play I just mention it because there are always variables that come into play. you can't just take a rule and apply it across the board you must take into account the variables.

Even Jeremy would not be able to shoot him in the face downwards if both were standing on ground of the same height and it is highly unlikely he would be able to shoot Nevill's shoulder downward either. He most certainly could not shoot it downward at the fairly steep angle of the shot.

All the evidence shows bullet DRH/5 aka item 49 found in the main bedroom was "whole".  The graze wound NB sustained to his elbow/chest left fragments in his chest cavity observed radiographically. 

MF examined the bullets and fragments microscopically and described them as follows:

- Whole
- Nearly whole
- Half a bullet
- Fragment
- Small Fragment

If as you say the weight of DRH/5 was less than whole with some 13% missing then why was it listed as 'whole' and not 'nearly whole'? 

I've seen posts about weights but I haven't seen any documentary evidence?

It does not seem plausible to me that June and NB were in bed and JB crept in and opened fire.  June sustained most of her gsw's from a distance of 2 or 3 feet away all to her front ie none to her rear.  Yet with NB all his gsw's were sustained when the rifle was inches away from his skin and crucially 2 of the 4 gsw's he sustained upstairs were to his rear.  The 2 to his face went straight on and back with a trajectory of approx 20 degrees below the horizontal.  If the shooter was so close as to be able to inflict such wounds at close range whilst NB was seated in bed how did NB manage to get out of bed and turn to enable the shooter to inflict gsw's to his rear? 

No experts have ever attempted a soc reconstruction.  It's all along the lines of JB crept into his parents bedroom and shot them.  Yet when you break down all the indvidual parts it simply doesn't add up and I have no doubt that experts creating a reconstruction based on exacts measurements of WHF, soc photos, autopsy report and photos and other data such as casings and bloodstaining or lack of will come to the same conclusion. 

[scipio_usmc]

All the evidence shows bullet DRH/5 aka item 49 found in the main bedroom was "whole".  The graze wound NB sustained to his elbow/chest left fragments in his chest cavity observed radiographically. 

MF examined the bullets and fragments microscopically and described them as follows:

- Whole
- Nearly whole
- Half a bullet
- Fragment
- Small Fragment

If as you say the weight of DRH/5 was less than whole with some 13% missing then why was it listed as 'whole' and not 'nearly whole'? 

I've seen posts about weights but I haven't seen any documentary evidence?

The report you keep quoting from is not the examination records.  The first thing the lab did was examine the bullets and write up an examination record for each bullet and casing.  The examination record details the exact weight and rifling characteristics. The lab examination record details the weight as 37 grains and 8 lands and grooves.

His report described the general appearance of bullets he doesn't claim any of them are whole in the sense of the entire bullet is present.  BY DEFINITION any slugs recovered are fragments not entire bullets because when a bullet is fired part of the bullet breaks off just from being scored by the rifling.  More will break off upon impacts.  The only way to get a complete bullet through firing is in lab test firings and even then some can be lost depending upon the type of bullet and method used. A rifled barrel is going to score a bullet and if a bullet has no jacket then the lead bullet directly is being scored thus removing some of the bullet.  That which is scored off will turn to dust and be expelled out of the front.  That is part of what makes up the GSR expelled out of the muzzle.

It does not seem plausible to me that June and NB were in bed and JB crept in and opened fire.  June sustained most of her gsw's from a distance of 2 or 3 feet away all to her front ie none to her rear.  Yet with NB all his gsw's were sustained when the rifle was inches away from his skin

Putting aside the  unreliability of Vanezis range guesses, Vanezis said June's wounds were received with the gun at least 1 foot from her.  That is the distance of a standard ruler.  That is close not far and places the killer at the foot of the bed.  He didn't say the shooter was at least 2-3 feet away which would place the killer well outside of the area where the experts said the killer fired from.  The x would be where the killer wound be with the gun several feet away:


 
11 inches is still inches away from his face and yet not much different than the foot that Vanezis claimed with respect to June.

and crucially 2 of the 4 gsw's he sustained upstairs were to his rear.

They weren't to his rear.  The shots came at him sideways from a rearward position as opposed to sideways from the front.  That is to be expected when someone sits sideways on the bed to get up while a shooter is at the foot of the bed.

The 2 to his face went straight on and back with a trajectory of approx 20 degrees below the horizontal.  If the shooter was so close as to be able to inflict such wounds at close range whilst NB was seated in bed how did NB manage to get out of bed and turn to enable the shooter to inflict gsw's to his rear?

They were not totally straight, they had a slight angle, the lip was an oblique shot that went sideways through his teeth.

Nevill sits up in bed with the killer at the foot of the bed what is facing the shooter?  The front of his head. A shooter who is right handed will aim at which side?  The left.  A shooter not exactly in front of Nevill but more towards the middle of the bed will slightly angle the shots. After being shot in the face Nevill turns to his right in order to get out of bed.

So this is what someone would see when at the foot of the bed and someone sits up, they see the person's face:

 



This is what the killer sees when the person turns to get up out of bed:



The killer sees the side and part of the back. The killer can shoot the side but the angle of the bullet will be from back to the person's front. Hence why the shot to Nevill's shoulder was towards the rear of the shoulder moving forward and down. Hence the graze shot scraping the back of the arm, the side and then across the chest.

Nevill was not lying down he had to be sitting up when shot in the face.  I already explained why numerous times.  If lying down then the shots would have traveled upwards not downward.  If standing upright likewise they would have to have traveled upwards because only a shooter as tall or taller than Nevill would hold the weapon at a height where it would be downward.   

June in contrast was lying down when she suffered at least 1 of her shots and most likely 2.  The shots were from right to left. The killer was at middle of the foot of the bed and turned to aim at her. Her head was on her pillow when she was shot in the head according to blood experts who looked at the issue after the conviction.

3 of the bullets exited her and entered the bed. She probably was lying down when shot in the leg.  It is believed she raised her legs to try to protect herself. The evidence can't establish one way or another whether she was lying down when shot in the arm.  You can move your arm up above you body while lying down and it can be in the same spot when you sit up. She was seated when shot in the neck because the trajectory was downward.  If she were lying down the trajectory would have been upwards. Likewise she was seated when shot 2 times in the chest because the trajectories were downward.

So what the evidence supports is the killer shooting June at least 2 times while she was lying down then shooting her more as she was sitting up and shooting Nevill 4 times as he sat up and 2 more times after he turned to get out of bed.  All shots being fired from the foot of the bed.     

No experts have ever attempted a soc reconstruction.  It's all along the lines of JB crept into his parents bedroom and shot them.  Yet when you break down all the indvidual parts it simply doesn't add up and I have no doubt that experts creating a reconstruction based on exacts measurements of WHF, soc photos, autopsy report and photos and other data such as casings and bloodstaining or lack of will come to the same conclusion.

It adds up completely.  Jeremy walked in the bedroom and either woke them up then fired or he simply started firing and that woke them up.  He went to the foot of the bed and shot June while she was lying down, then either turned to Nevill after he popped up or continued to shoot June as she sat up and then turned to Nevill. 




Someone standing at the foot of the bed in the middle or a little towards Nevill's side is going to target which side of the woman in that photo?  (Because the photo is so big you have to scroll to see the woman, at first I wondered where the hell the woman went but she is there if you scroll) The shots will hit her right side and travel right to left.  The shots will hit Nevill towards the left.

Nevill turns his upper body to get out of bed.  Which side faces the killer?  His left side butt the killer is to the rear and left of Nevill at this point.

There is no mystery at all, it is fully what would be expected.

The casings would shoot to June's side of the bed and to the floor near June.  That is where the casings were.

The only mysteries of any sort are 1) where did DRH/5 ricochet from after grazing Nevill.  That's the only thing out of place that can't have landed naturally where it was found. 2) When exactly did he shoot June between the eyes and did he have to move her body at all 3) Why did June walk to Nevill's side of the bed after being shot and 4) did Nevill chase Jeremy or Jeremy chase Nevill to the kitchen. 
 

The reason they are mysteries is because they can't be answered by any evidence other than Jeremy telling the truth and he may not even know why June walked around the bed because he may not have been in the room when she did so and it is doubtful he would know anything about the bullet that ricocheted either. 

[Holly Goodhead]

The report you keep quoting from is not the examination records.  The first thing the lab did was examine the bullets and write up an examination record for each bullet and casing.  The examination record details the exact weight and rifling characteristics. The lab examination record details the weight as 37 grains and 8 lands and grooves.

His report described the general appearance of bullets he doesn't claim any of them are whole in the sense of the entire bullet is present.  BY DEFINITION any slugs recovered are fragments not entire bullets because when a bullet is fired part of the bullet breaks off just from being scored by the rifling.  More will break off upon impacts.  The only way to get a complete bullet through firing is in lab test firings and even then some can be lost depending upon the type of bullet and method used. A rifled barrel is going to score a bullet and if a bullet has no jacket then the lead bullet directly is being scored thus removing some of the bullet.  That which is scored off will turn to dust and be expelled out of the front.  That is part of what makes up the GSR expelled out of the muzzle.



Putting aside the  unreliability of Vanezis range guesses, Vanezis said June's wounds were received with the gun at least 1 foot from her.  That is the distance of a standard ruler.  That is close not far and places the killer at the foot of the bed.  He didn't say the shooter was at least 2-3 feet away which would place the killer well outside of the area where the experts said the killer fired from.  The x would be where the killer wound be with the gun several feet away:


 
11 inches is still inches away from his face and yet not much different than the foot that Vanezis claimed with respect to June.


They weren't to his rear.  The shots came at him sideways from a rearward position as opposed to sideways from the front.  That is to be expected when someone sits sideways on the bed to get up while a shooter is at the foot of the bed.

They were not totally straight, they had a slight angle, the lip was an oblique shot that went sideways through his teeth.

Nevill sits up in bed with the killer at the foot of the bed what is facing the shooter?  The front of his head. A shooter who is right handed will aim at which side?  The left.  A shooter not exactly in front of Nevill but more towards the middle of the bed will slightly angle the shots. After being shot in the face Nevill turns to his right in order to get out of bed.

So this is what someone would see when at the foot of the bed and someone sits up, they see the person's face:

 



This is what the killer sees when the person turns to get up out of bed:



The killer sees the side and part of the back. The killer can shoot the side but the angle of the bullet will be from back to the person's front. Hence why the shot to Nevill's shoulder was towards the rear of the shoulder moving forward and down. Hence the graze shot scraping the back of the arm, the side and then across the chest.

Nevill was not lying down he had to be sitting up when shot in the face.  I already explained why numerous times.  If lying down then the shots would have traveled upwards not downward.  If standing upright likewise they would have to have traveled upwards because only a shooter as tall or taller than Nevill would hold the weapon at a height where it would be downward.   

June in contrast was lying down when she suffered at least 1 of her shots and most likely 2.  The shots were from right to left. The killer was at middle of the foot of the bed and turned to aim at her. Her head was on her pillow when she was shot in the head according to blood experts who looked at the issue after the conviction.

3 of the bullets exited her and entered the bed. She probably was lying down when shot in the leg.  It is believed she raised her legs to try to protect herself. The evidence can't establish one way or another whether she was lying down when shot in the arm.  You can move your arm up above you body while lying down and it can be in the same spot when you sit up. She was seated when shot in the neck because the trajectory was downward.  If she were lying down the trajectory would have been upwards. Likewise she was seated when shot 2 times in the chest because the trajectories were downward.

So what the evidence supports is the killer shooting June at least 2 times while she was lying down then shooting her more as she was sitting up and shooting Nevill 4 times as he sat up and 2 more times after he turned to get out of bed.  All shots being fired from the foot of the bed.     

It adds up completely.  Jeremy walked in the bedroom and either woke them up then fired or he simply started firing and that woke them up.  He went to the foot of the bed and shot June while she was lying down, then either turned to Nevill after he popped up or continued to shoot June as she sat up and then turned to Nevill. 




Someone standing at the foot of the bed in the middle or a little towards Nevill's side is going to target which side of the woman in that photo?  (Because the photo is so big you have to scroll to see the woman, at first I wondered where the hell the woman went but she is there if you scroll) The shots will hit her right side and travel right to left.  The shots will hit Nevill towards the left.

Nevill turns his upper body to get out of bed.  Which side faces the killer?  His left side butt the killer is to the rear and left of Nevill at this point.

There is no mystery at all, it is fully what would be expected.

The casings would shoot to June's side of the bed and to the floor near June.  That is where the casings were.

The only mysteries of any sort are 1) where did DRH/5 ricochet from after grazing Nevill.  That's the only thing out of place that can't have landed naturally where it was found. 2) When exactly did he shoot June between the eyes and did he have to move her body at all 3) Why did June walk to Nevill's side of the bed after being shot and 4) did Nevill chase Jeremy or Jeremy chase Nevill to the kitchen. 
 

The reason they are mysteries is because they can't be answered by any evidence other than Jeremy telling the truth and he may not even know why June walked around the bed because he may not have been in the room when she did so and it is doubtful he would know anything about the bullet that ricocheted either.

Your first para is covered in my previous post on the thread about DRH/5.

Dr Vanezis did not estimate the distance of shots.  This task fell to ballistics expert Malcolm Fletcher.  He estimated the distance of shots sustained by June as follows:

1 x > 1 foot away - right side of head, above ear
2 x within 2 feet - right shoulder, base of neck
1 x > 3 feet away - right forearm
1 x > 2 feet away - right side, lower rib cage
1 x unable to determine - right side of chest
1 x < 1 foot away - above bridge of nose

Conversely the distance of shots sustained by NB are as follows:

2 x within inches - lip and jaw
2 x > feet away - shoulder and elbow/chest

I have attached a statement from MF in the regard.  I'm missing the page re NB's shoulder and elbow/chest shot but have taken the info from the CoA doc:

"The remaining injuries to the arm were caused when the gun was at least two feet from the body".  (Point 64).

There's a significant distance between the distance of gsw's sustained by June and NB's facial gsw's sustained when the muzzle was within inches of his skin.  This is crucial along with the fact that all June's wounds were inflicted to her front and two of NB's upstairs gsw's were inflicted to his rear. 

At trial Dr Vanezis described NB's facial gsw's going straight in and backwards. The wound to his left shoulder as the outer aspect and the graze wound to his elbow/chest as above the left elbow. Trial testimony attached and body image locating wound sites.  There's no evidence he sustained any wounds to his side.  How can NB have sustained two facial gsw's whilst seated or partially seated in bed before getting out of bed, getting past JB with a loaded firearm and JB then inflicing two gsw's to NB's rear as he flees the bedroom?  The totality of the physcial evidence doesn't support this at all.  The totality of the physical evidence by way of blood or lack of, casings, distance of shots, trajectories and wound tracks supports the following:

NB and SC downstairs.  NB calls JB.  SC goes upstairs and shoots June.  NB appears on the landing stairs and sustains the gsw's to his lip and jaw whilst he is stood on the landing stairs and SC is in the doorway of the main bedroom.  NB then retreats and is on the main stairs facing down towards the hall with SC behind when she inflicts the gsw's to NB's shoulder and elbow. 

None of the bullets entered the bed as you claim.  Two entered June's pillow with one on the bed and another by the dressing table.   

[scipio_usmc]

Your first para is covered in my previous post on the thread about DRH/5.

Dr Vanezis did not estimate the distance of shots.  This task fell to ballistics expert Malcolm Fletcher.  He estimated the distance of shots sustained by June as follows:

1 x > 1 foot away - right side of head, above ear
2 x within 2 feet - right shoulder, base of neck
1 x > 3 feet away - right forearm
1 x > 2 feet away - right side, lower rib cage
1 x unable to determine - right side of chest
1 x < 1 foot away - above bridge of nose

Conversely the distance of shots sustained by NB are as follows:

2 x within inches - lip and jaw
2 x > feet away - shoulder and elbow/chest

I have attached a statement from MF in the regard.  I'm missing the page re NB's shoulder and elbow/chest shot but have taken the info from the CoA doc:

"The remaining injuries to the arm were caused when the gun was at least two feet from the body".  (Point 64).

There's a significant distance between the distance of gsw's sustained by June and NB's facial gsw's sustained when the muzzle was within inches of his skin.  This is crucial along with the fact that all June's wounds were inflicted to her front and two of NB's upstairs gsw's were inflicted to his rear. 

At trial Dr Vanezis described NB's facial gsw's going straight in and backwards. The wound to his left shoulder as the outer aspect and the graze wound to his elbow/chest as above the left elbow. Trial testimony attached and body image locating wound sites.  There's no evidence he sustained any wounds to his side.  How can NB have sustained two facial gsw's whilst seated or partially seated in bed before getting out of bed, getting past JB with a loaded firearm and JB then inflicing two gsw's to NB's rear as he flees the bedroom?  The totality of the physcial evidence doesn't support this at all.  The totality of the physical evidence by way of blood or lack of, casings, distance of shots, trajectories and wound tracks supports the following:

NB and SC downstairs.  NB calls JB.  SC goes upstairs and shoots June.  NB appears on the landing stairs and sustains the gsw's to his lip and jaw whilst he is stood on the landing stairs and SC is in the doorway of the main bedroom.  NB then retreats and is on the main stairs facing down towards the hall with SC behind when she inflicts the gsw's to NB's shoulder and elbow. 

None of the bullets entered the bed as you claim.  Two entered June's pillow with one on the bed and another by the dressing table.

"Of the seven injuries suffered by June Bamber, five were shots from the gun held at least one foot away from the body. The bullet wound between the eyes was fired from less than one foot away, and could have been with the gun in contact with the skin, although he viewed that as unlikely. Mr Fletcher was unable to estimate the range of the shot which had caused the injury to the right side of Mrs Bamber's chest."

"In respect of the eight shots into Nevill Bamber's body, the six to his head and face were fired when the rifle was within a few inches of the skin. The remaining injuries to the arm were caused when the gun was at least two feet from the body."


http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2002/2912.html

Those were the estimates presented at trial and they were not supported by any hard evidence.  There was no explanation of the basis of his estimates other than exploration of the reasoning for interpreting wounds as contact or near contact.  Experts are supposed to explain the basis of their claims so their claims can be tested.

The main way to tell distance is by the powder burn damage and other wound damage attributes.  Experts are frequently proven wrong when other experts opine.  Sometimes they will establish there is no way to tell the distance other times they may actually explain and prove a different distance is correct by taking into account things the other expert failed to. The main thing he was supposed to assess was whether wounds were contact wounds, he was not on solid footing on other estimates he was just wildly guessing. June was under the covers when she was shot so how would that enable her to get GSR surrounding the wound?  The 2 head shots are the only exceptions to that. That alone makes trying to assess the range of the other shots difficult. Nevill's clothing likewise created difficulties.  The head shots in contrast were not covered. He still didn't explain the basis of his opinion with respect to the headshots but it is more credible he was able to assess those distances than the rest though he could have screwed them up too since he never proved his point with credible analysis.

By the way, it turns out that Fletcher posited the same thing I did about the bullet from the arm crossing her chest and ending up in the pillow.  He must have posited it in his direct examination because on cross the defense questioned such where he said it is possible but not a certainty that her breast wound was from a bullet but if it were from a bullet then it could have been from the bullet that exited her arm:



and it was broached again on the prosecution's recross:


 

Fletcher never bothered to fully explore what happened to the bulk of the bullet that grazed Nevill nor did the prosecution request him to.  It was not important to the case so they didn't care.  Of course today we have a different attitude and want to cover all bases regardless but they didn't.