It's more than a little arrogant to make these claims given that the conclusions have been determined from a few amateur detectives on IA. The crime scene doesn't show that Bamber was innocent, far from it and his subsequent playing with the times - quite the opposite. How would a reconstruction put the gun in Sheila's hands? It could tell you where someone stood, but not who stood there. Also, the fact that Sheila's hand is still resting on the gun is highly suspicious - try it yourself, place your hand in the position and then totally relax.
I think you will find I'm the originator of the soc reconstruction. It was first discussed here and then on IA. Why arrogant? I've simply connected all the dots that others for whatever reason(s) haven't. If others disagree then they're free to counter my arguments.
JB has never needed to demonstrate his innocence. If defendants needed to demonstrate innocence half the population would be in prison.
Soc construction is important because the physical evidence at soc puts perp in bedroom shooting June and NB on the landing when he sustained his facial shots. Which in turn supports JB's claim of a call from NB ie NB in kitchen phoning JB, NB hears gunshots from perp shooting June, NB runs upstairs and sustains the facial shots on the landing. He turns to retreat downstairs and sustains the gunshot wounds to his rear on the stairs.
There's no reliable evidence of SC's found position evidenced by A/PS Woodcock's wit stat, and others, who have SC's head wedged up against the bedside cabinet and soc images that show her head flat to the floor.
