It’s you who’s got it all wrong
Oh dear, I've got it all wrong again! Go on then.....
There was no confusion between the relatives at all
They all went to WHF to do a search as Jeremy was flogging off sentimental valuable items prior to probate. I have the wills.
Whilst searching, and unlike the police who only did a basic search; who didn’t seal off the crime scene; destroyed evidence by burning it at Jeremy’s request and Taff’s orders, when looking in the cupboard THOROUGHLY they found the silencer tucked away in a box at the very back. It had been put there purposely in the hope it wouldn’t be spotted — which it wasn’t. At first.
That silencer was NEVER kept in that box. Ever. It was ALWAYS attached to the rifle, along with the scope.
Upon discovering it, one of them heat it carefully on the edges, realising it was the silencer and realising it was strange why it had been hidden, he also realised he shouldn’t touch it in case any evidence was on it.
They couldn’t leave it at WHF — for obvious reasons.
They put it in a clean bag and took it home, they immediately rang the police to tell them they’d found something they should look at. The officer said he would relay the message. For some reason Taff Jones either never read his messages, or the officer didn’t relay it to the correct team.
When Boutflours went there two days later, appalled at their sloppiness, it was THEN they told DS Jones, who immediately went to the Eatons.
DS Jones was unaware they’d found the silencer; he had no idea what they had.
Then perhaps you should take this up with Colin Caffell, whose version of what happened is slightly different, in that he says the confusion was on the part of the cousins, not the police. I can't get hold of a copy of David Boutflour's statement, but I notice in Ann Eaton's statement she skips over the issue, merely stating that the police were "then contacted".
It’s BS he was drunk — someone said previously he was, which is utter shit — he was in duty and hadn’t had any alcohol at all.
Peter Eaton must be lying then when he said that Jones had drunk most of the bottle. What else is Peter Eaton lying to us about? And why would he lie about Stan Jones like that?
He realised the significance and urgency if the find, so placed it carefully in a kitchen roll inner and secured it with tape. He then took it to the station. In the event, although the one grey hair was lost AFTER Jones delivered it to the station, his method of transporting it was excellent given the conditions. Forensics discover all the blood inside, including the red paint which was still on the outer.
Let's just recap - according to the prosecution witnesses, this key evidence was missed by the police, despite a search of the property and despite some of them suspecting Bamber from the start;
it was then removed from the crime scene without authority from police;
it was then examined and tampered with in the witnesses' own home and in the process, some forensic traces on it were destroyed forever;
it was then collected by a police officer, on duty, who drank most of a bottle of whiskey, put the evidence in a bog roll, and transported it in the boot of his car.
Your understanding if ballistics and physics is dire.
Is it?
Back spatter will almost always enter the silencer or barrel, providing one isn’t shooting from many yards away.
Almost always, you say? There are some forensic ballistics experts who'd like to have a word with you....
Several of the gunshots on the bodies were CONTACT shots, which ALWAYS produce back spatter.
Now you're strawmanning. I did not say that contact shots do not produce back spatter. But you state that contact wounds will always produce back spatter. That's not what the literature says, and anyway, we're dealing here with the question of back spatter traces in the rifle or moderator, a different thing.
They know for a FACT the moderator was used, not just because it contained Sheila's blood and June & Nevill’s, but then FACT — and please try to understand this...it’s very simple — there was NO blood inside the barrel
I’m becoming tired of explaining things that some people can’t grasp.
They may know for a fact
that, or any, moderator was used,
we don't. You may want to take as red what they say,
I won't.
