Could Sheila Caffell have defeated Nevill Bamber?

[Caroline]

Had they come across a wetsuit that was damp, I think that would have looked suspicious. They wouldn't have been ransacking the house for it either---if Jeremy had showered in it or washed it, it would have been hanging up drying somewhere conspicuous. Nobody puts damp clothing at the back of a wardrobe!

There is no way they would be looking in wardrobes and even if they did, why would they have need to feel wether a wetsuit was damp or not? I don't believe he worse the wetsuit but I don't any significance in then n to finding it - they weren't looking for it until it was suggested.

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Well, there should be concrete evidence if a jury is going to convict somebody of murder.  And, that concrete evidence is supposed to be beyond reasonable doubt.

You have already been warned about making personal remarks about other posters, BTW.

It’s extremely rare to have concrete evidence: if that were the case you wouldn’t need juries.

All types of evidence can be flawed, so the best case against a suspected criminal is one in which different types of evidence reinforce one another. Even DNA can be flawed, such as contamination during the collection and in the lab processing.  Pathologists can reach different conclusions.  Fingerprint analysis can be biased by experts. Circumstantial evidence may have innocent explanations.

However, when multiple types of evidence reinforce one another, the case becomes solid.

Hence why Jeremy Bamber was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt

[ISpyWithMyEye]

I've seen no evidence of the whereabouts of his wetsuit.

The police saw evidence: they found it in his messy locked bedroom which was filled with boxes, magazines and general clutter.

So don’t worry yourself that you haven’t seen the evidence: you weren’t required to be informed.

But to cast aside your doubts, the wetsuit was found at WHF — inside his LOCKED bedroom that held no valuables — and prior to him murdering all his family the wetsuit was always kept at Goldhanger. Don’t you think it odd that it suddenly got to WHF?  His flippers didn’t make their way to WHF, nor his snorkel — just his wetsuit...😌

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Don't know why Bamber's wet suit would be at WHF. He had lived in his cottage a long time.

If he committed the crime in it, why not cycle back in it. Rather than leave it at the crime scene.

Jeremy couldn’t cycle back wearing his wetsuit as it was wet after standing under the shower to wash away any blood he no doubt received through back spatter & in the struggle with Nevill.  He then dried it with a towel (which he took back to Goldhanger and stuck in his washing machine); then put dried wetsuit in his bedroom — and locked the door for some reason...

He also couldn’t cycle back wearing the wetsuit just in case he was spotted, which he wasn’t as there was no-one around in the dead of night. But he wasn’t taking any chances: in the same way he didn’t drive to commit the murders in case a neighbour heard his car leave, then return.

[John]

It’s extremely rare to have concrete evidence: if that were the case you wouldn’t need juries.

All types of evidence can be flawed, so the best case against a suspected criminal is one in which different types of evidence reinforce one another. Even DNA can be flawed, such as contamination during the collection and in the lab processing.  Pathologists can reach different conclusions.  Fingerprint analysis can be biased by experts. Circumstantial evidence may have innocent explanations.

However, when multiple types of evidence reinforce one another, the case becomes solid.

Hence why Jeremy Bamber was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt

I totally agree.

[Holly Goodhead]

Jeremy couldn’t cycle back wearing his wetsuit as it was wet after standing under the shower to wash away any blood he no doubt received through back spatter & in the struggle with Nevill.  He then dried it with a towel (which he took back to Goldhanger and stuck in his washing machine); then put dried wetsuit in his bedroom — and locked the door for some reason...

He also couldn’t cycle back wearing the wetsuit just in case he was spotted, which he wasn’t as there was no-one around in the dead of night. But he wasn’t taking any chances: in the same way he didn’t drive to commit the murders in case a neighbour heard his car leave, then return.

A . 22 rifle and subsonic ammo are unlikely to generate back spatter.

The non-gsw's NB sustained in the beating didn't produce any blood.

The rifle contained so little blood it was impossible to group unlike the 1/2 " flake of blood in the silencer!

Therefore unlikely the perp sustained any back spatter.

A wetsuit is porous so what would be the point in wearing it?

[Holly Goodhead]

It’s extremely rare to have concrete evidence: if that were the case you wouldn’t need juries.

All types of evidence can be flawed, so the best case against a suspected criminal is one in which different types of evidence reinforce one another. Even DNA can be flawed, such as contamination during the collection and in the lab processing.  Pathologists can reach different conclusions.  Fingerprint analysis can be biased by experts. Circumstantial evidence may have innocent explanations.

However, when multiple types of evidence reinforce one another, the case becomes solid.

Hence why Jeremy Bamber was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt

About a month after the murders Det Sup Kinnelly (spelling?) carried out a review of the case and concluded murder/suicide.  Shortly after this the blood flake was identified inside the silencer and JM's testimony emerged.

JB was found guilty primarily on a flake of blood found within the silencer.

[ISpyWithMyEye]

The only test used in an attempt to determine whether or not someone has discharged a firearm is a test for gunshot residue. 

SC's hands were swabbed during post mortem using a kit for this specific purpose.  The swabs were then sent to FSS with an unrelated firearm and as such rejected.

Forensics PROVED there was no gun residue on Sheila’s hands, nor anyone else’s blood spatter

Whatever are you talking about?!

[ISpyWithMyEye]

If you've already made up your mind and/or the best you can do is make facetious comments why should I bother?

The case involves a mass shooting unwitnessed by independent others as such its unique in British criminal history and not straightforward.

You’ve sidestepped the question, Holly

That’s because you can’t answer it as it proves Jeremy’s guilt

The FACT is:

There was NO gun residue on Sheila’s hands

There was NO gun residue on Sheila’s nightdress

There was NO blood from Nevill on Sheila’s body or nightdress — and she’d have been covered in it

There was NO sugar, NO glass fragments on her feet, which proved she hadn’t walked in the kitchen

There’s was NO blood on her feet at all

There’s was NO blood down her nightdress which proved she couldn’t have walked about after being shot the first time

There was only ONE if her fingerprints on the rifle which Jeremy obviously created by pressing her finger on the rifle when she was dead — the rifle would’ve been COVERED in her fingerprints, blood, spatter and tissue



When you have evidence like that you don’t NEED witnesses

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Believe he may have had a wet suit on underneath ordinary clothes. It would be good body protection.

There would be no incriminating evidence on the wet suit. Espescially after a shower. Wet suits probably cost a bit, so he would not want to dump it. He left the damp wet suit ar WHF, knowing he would have access to WHF soon to collect it.

His other clothes from the night were disposed of.

It’s also highly suspicious that when Jeremy slowly poodled up the lane to meet the police on that August evening, they were surprised to see him wearing a tee-shirt beneath not one, but TWO jumpers — plus a jacket

It wasn’t a bitterly cold winter’s night — it was summer

Yes, the air can chill at night even in August, but I’ve not met anyone wearing TWO jumpers. Ever.

The police were wearing their normal uniforms and didn’t feel cold at all...

There must have been a reason why Jeremy wore two thick jumpers on top of his tee-shirt...

What is obvious is that when he first went back to Goldhanger he didn’t get changed for bed; he had no intention of going to bed at all

He even lied to the police and said he’d pulled the second jumper on whilst driving, claiming that was why he was going so slowly. But that doesn’t add up at all. It wasn’t particularly cold. His car had a heater. And what’s the chances of having a spare jumper in your car?  What would be the point?  Not forgetting how materialistic he was and how crooked his mind worked: he bought good quality clothes beyond his means, so he’d hardly leave an expensive jumper in his car as an invitation for someone like him to spot it, smash the window and run off with it.


There’s definitely something amiss about that


 

[ISpyWithMyEye]

If you've already made up your mind and/or the best you can do is make facetious comments why should I bother?

The case involves a mass shooting unwitnessed by independent others as such its unique in British criminal history and not straightforward.

What WOULD be unique if it had of been Sheila who’d murdered her family

She’d have been the first and only female in all history to have shot dead her mother, father, two sons and then herself

She’d also have been the first female in UK history to have shot herself dead, not once, but TWICE

She’d have gone down in history as having been the first person to have shot herself in the throat despite being unable to pull the trigger as her fingers couldn’t reach, and then shoot herself a SECOND time when she was partially paralysed having fractured her spine where the bullet ended, and unable to breathe properly as her throat pumped up with blood effectively drowning her

[ISpyWithMyEye]

,

Did the police find his damp wetsuit at WHF?  Surely, if they had, they would have thought it suspicious and not been so quick to blame Sheila?

They only found the wetsuit weeks later

Remember, the inept DCI Jones believed Jeremy’s account of events, despite all the other police being highly suspicious of him.  DCI Jibes was a bully and intimidated everyone, thus why Jeremy almost got away with it and wasn’t arrested until weeks later — by which time his wetsuit had been bone dry for weeks

Wetsuits dry relatively quickly, especially when you haven’t been diving: just showered wearing it, then dried it off

[ISpyWithMyEye]

They did look into his bedroom, but as has been said, the use of a wetsuit was far from their minds at that stage. It was only when Robert Boutflour started to throw out some ideas of how the crime was committed that questions were asked.

Don’t forget, Jeremy told Julie he planned to wear his wetsuit if he carried out the killings. She thought he was joking, but he wasn’t.

He always kept the wetsuit at his house, so the fact it was mysteriously at WHF, and his flippers/snorkel etc were at Goldhanger absolutely stinks

[ISpyWithMyEye]

A . 22 rifle and subsonic ammo are unlikely to generate back spatter.

The non-gsw's NB sustained in the beating didn't produce any blood.

The rifle contained so little blood it was impossible to group unlike the 1/2 " flake of blood in the silencer!

Therefore unlikely the perp sustained any back spatter.

A wetsuit is porous so what would be the point in wearing it?

But the .22 did indeed produce back spatter — forensics proved that

And the beating Nevill sustained in the struggle did indeed produce blood — he suffered facial and head injuries from being struck with the rifle.  Nevill obviously didn’t bleed when he was ruthlessly kicked and beaten AFTER he was dead

The rifle must have had blood on it due to the beating alone — a shaft broke off when he was hit over the head with it!  Jeremy certainly released all his pent-up hatred that night...and then he simply rinsed the gun under the tap in the kitchen sink.  That’s why when the gun was forensically tested they found hardly any fingerprints....it would’ve have been covered otherwise. The fact there were barely any prints is irrefutable proof  it was wiped/washed clean.

I dare say Jeremy the perp didn’t have much back spatter or blood on him, except for Nevill’s during the violent struggle. Whatever, he showered it off...

Wetsuits are NOT porous. They’re made of Neoprene (invented in the 1950s) and are designed to dry quickly






[attachment deleted by admin]

[Vertigo Swirl]

You’ve sidestepped the question, Holly

That’s because you can’t answer it as it proves Jeremy’s guilt

The FACT is:

There was NO gun residue on Sheila’s hands

There was NO gun residue on Sheila’s nightdress

There was NO blood from Nevill on Sheila’s body or nightdress — and she’d have been covered in it

There was NO sugar, NO glass fragments on her feet, which proved she hadn’t walked in the kitchen

There’s was NO blood on her feet at all

There’s was NO blood down her nightdress which proved she couldn’t have walked about after being shot the first time

There was only ONE if her fingerprints on the rifle which Jeremy obviously created by pressing her finger on the rifle when she was dead — the rifle would’ve been COVERED in her fingerprints, blood, spatter and tissue



When you have evidence like that you don’t NEED witnesses

When Holly has rebutted each one of these facts with precise forensic evaluation and explanation then I will start to take her (and others) seriously.  Until then...