The moving rifle and the absence of fingerprints thereon.

[puglove]

I'd much rather see a convincing explanation as to why the gun wasn't plastered in Sheila's prints.    &%+((£

31

[Passer-by]

I've lost count of the number of times I've seen Sheila and Bamber's "charts done." It has about as much relevancy as asparamancy.

I'd much rather see a convincing explanantion as to why the gun wasn't plastered in Sheila's prints.    &%+((£

Because a member of EP 'made it safe' wearing gloves, which will have wiped a lot off.  I'd like to know why it wasn't covered in the prints of the colleague he handed it to, who admitted he wasn't wearing gloves.  We don't know who left it lying propped on the window sill, or how many other EP handled it either.

[Myster]

Cue for a song - "We can't go on together with suspicious minds!"

Usually the most straightforward answer is the true and accurate one - the rifle was held by its two metal strap lugs and placed out of the way by the window so as not to be disturbed and contaminated by others while the bodies were removed.

[Anna]

Because a member of EP 'made it safe' wearing gloves, which will have wiped a lot off.  I'd like to know why it wasn't covered in the prints of the colleague he handed it to, who admitted he wasn't wearing gloves.  We don't know who left it lying propped on the window sill, or how many other EP handled it either.

DI Cook put the gun by the window after the photos were taken.

[Passer-by]

Cue for a song - "We can't go on together with suspicious minds!"

Usually the most straightforward answer is the true and accurate one - the rifle was held by its two metal strap lugs and placed out of the way by the window so as not to be disturbed and contaminated by others while the bodies were removed.

This is when I need Holly here to dig out the bit in the court proceedings where they admitted handling it incorrectly 

[Myster]

This is when I need Holly here to dig out the bit in the court proceedings where they admitted handling it incorrectly 

Trial transcript of Ron Cook regarding handling of the rifle...

[Passer-by]

 

Thanks for finding some relevant transcripts!  What plod said isn't quite true though:  in the photographs of Sheila's head the gun barrel is quite clearly in different positions relating to it - the gun was certainly moved in between the photos being taken.  I find it quite disturbing to keep posting photos of the bodies, so I'm just going to assume you all know where the photos of that are without posting them.
 
Trying to find the bit for they guy who made it safe . . .

[John]

Thanks for finding some relevant transcripts!  What plod said isn't quite true though:  in the photographs of Sheila's head the gun barrel is quite clearly in different positions relating to it - the gun was certainly moved in between the photos being taken.  I find it quite disturbing to keep posting photos of the bodies, so I'm just going to assume you all know where the photos of that are without posting them.
 
Trying to find the bit for they guy who made it safe . . .

The rifle was moved and checked at least twice and by different officers who didn't necessarily witness the other doing it. It would have been checked by the first responders and then again before being removed from the body either during or after the photos were taken.

DI Ron Cook arrived around 9.20am which was nearly two hours after the first firearms officers entered the farmhouse and checked the rifle.

[Passer-by]

The rifle was moved and checked at least twice and by different officers who didn't necessarily witness the other doing it. It would have been checked by the first responders and then again before being removed from the body either during or after the photos were taken.

DI Ron Cook arrived around 9.20am which was nearly two hours after the first firearms officers entered the farmhouse and checked the rifle.

It's quite staggering how little gun crime we had then yet how casually they all meandered along when they could spare the time at EP!

[Passer-by]

So what's the story with Sheila having a print on the gun then?  It's one of those exquisite point/counterpoint elements of this case that their should be one print for either of them.

He used the gun normally, so his prints should be on there - so there would be no need to wipe them off.  However how did Sheila's get on there if she never handled the gun, and if it's possible for Bamber to somehow grip her finger on the gun to produce it, surely there would be lots more?

[Myster]

There were more fingerprints on the rifle, including three on the barrel, all of which couldn't be identified. Bamber explained to Julie that the mercenary he'd hired told him that a glove had come off during the fight in the kitchen, so seems reasonable to assume that Bamber could have worn some and disposed of them in the Aga combustion chamber, or took them home to hide or bin before the police had the chance to discover them.

[Passer-by]

There were more fingerprints on the rifle, including three on the barrel, all of which couldn't be identified. Bamber explained to Julie that the mercenary he'd hired told him that a glove had come off during the fight in the kitchen, so seems reasonable to assume that Bamber could have worn some and disposed of them in the Aga combustion chamber, or took them home to hide or bin before the police had the chance to discover them.

I think you mean 'Julie said Bamber explained to Julie . . .' 

It doesn't tell us how Sheila's print got on there though.

[Myster]

I think you mean 'Julie said Bamber explained to Julie . . .' 

It doesn't tell us how Sheila's print got on there though.

In the same way that a police practitioner takes a suspect's fingerprint, but using the greasy beeswax coating from a used bullet casing instead of an inkpad...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7N-4UNAzsw&feature=youtu.be&t=56s

[Passer-by]

In the same way that a police practitioner takes a suspect's fingerprint, but using the greasy beeswax coating from a used bullet casing instead of an inkpad...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7N-4UNAzsw&feature=youtu.be&t=56s

Good point!  But then -ahem! - wouldn't that leave residue on her fingers . . . ?

[Holly Goodhead]

CAL's book tells that DI Cook didn't wear gloves and moved the rifle by its straps.  According to him there would be no chance of removing prints from these locations.  This was all checked out by COLP and apparently he followed the correct procedures.

I've previously pointed out that it appears its a  misconception that if one touches a surface a print is deposited:

"Firearms are perhaps among the most difficult objects to yield good latent fingerprints. According to Clemens, technicians will typically get prints on only about ten percent of the guns that are inspected".

“Why are guns so difficult? There are a number of factors involved,” said Clemens. “One of them has to do with the textured nature of the area where the gun is being held. That area is not good for prints. Another factor has to do with how the firearm was treated before the crime. If the person took good care of it, then it probably has oil on it—which makes it almost impossible to get a good print. And if they have not taken care of it, the surface might be rusty—and rust is not good for lifting prints.”

http://www.evidencemagazine.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22

http://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/2013/10/27/why-we-dont-find-fingerprints-on-firearms/

Its interesting how stories have been built around the lack of prints: DS Jones interviewing JB put it to him that he wore gloves when he went out shooting bunnies on 6th.  JM's testimony refers to a glove falling off when NB was beaten with the rifle.  Paul Harrison's 'anonymous' letter claims JB wiped the rifle with the blue socks.  Think it was AE who made much of finding Margold gloves in the fields around WHF.

We know JB handled the rifle on many occasions so the fact one print from him was on the rifle was to be expected but why was SC's print on the rifle?