Could fingerprints still be identified from the casings?

[scipio_usmc]

Eley subsonic extra hollow-point was 37.5 grain

Eley subsonic extra plus hollow-point was 40 grain

Eley subsonic extra was discontinued shortly after SE plus came on the seen because no one would want slightly lighter rounds.  SE plus was subsequently renamed simply subsonic-hollowpoint when they redid their packaging.

They were also selling a subsonic extra lead round nose that was 40 grain but it was discontinued and not renamed when they redid their packaging.

This Bamber photo shows the SE hollow-point packaging:



Here is what that packaging looked like in full I actually found someone selling new-oldstock a while ago:





Eley could not tell me for sure whether the 37.5 grain was still available in 1985.

For fun here is the lead round nose SE package:

[Myster]

A short promo video and FAQs about the CERA LT...

http://www.consolite.co.uk/Forensics/CERALTfaq.html

A brief talk with Dr John Bond about the recovery of fingerprints from till receipts, but not the CERA LT system unfortunately...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/22XD8sykDhpm0cgnBB20GWG/the-future-of-fingerprint-analysis

Better add one to your cart, Holly, while there's an offer on... it's only $0.00!  Cheap at half the price...

http://www.crimesciences.com/StoreBox/fingerprintdevelopment/cf-ceralt.htm

[Myster]

More on the CERA system from 2008... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlVhSCu1sSE

[Holly Goodhead]

New techniques for recovering fingerprints from paper too:

http://www.wiley-vch.de/vch/journals/2002/press/201244press.pdf

I was thinking about the bible but I'm not sure what, if anything, this could prove or disprove since SC or JB could of handled the bible at anytime.  Unless of course fingerprints could be revealed in the blood? 

Seems recovering fingerprints has moved on leaps and bounds so it might even be possible to recover more prints from the rifle.  If enought of SC's prints are recovered overlaying JB's this might show she was the last person to handle the rifle.  I would imagine a fingerprint expert and others are able to say with some certainty whether fingerprints are as result of an individual actually operating as opposed to a third party planting them by manipulating a victims hand.  Also it takes a *little time for the corrosive effect to work so if JB was responsible and wore gloves I would of thought this would cause a sort of smudging effect on any of SC's prints from earlier that eve (* states "little time" in the lit but no indication of the actual time involved). 

 &%+((£

[Holly Goodhead]

Eley subsonic extra hollow-point was 37.5 grain

Eley subsonic extra plus hollow-point was 40 grain

Eley subsonic extra was discontinued shortly after SE plus came on the seen because no one would want slightly lighter rounds.  SE plus was subsequently renamed simply subsonic-hollowpoint when they redid their packaging.

They were also selling a subsonic extra lead round nose that was 40 grain but it was discontinued and not renamed when they redid their packaging.

This Bamber photo shows the SE hollow-point packaging:



Here is what that packaging looked like in full I actually found someone selling new-oldstock a while ago:





Eley could not tell me for sure whether the 37.5 grain was still available in 1985.

For fun here is the lead round nose SE package:

MF's General Examination Record doesn't make reference to "Extra" or "Plus".  I believe this key features doc pertains to the bullets used which are 40 grain:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=197.0;attach=659

http://www.eley.co.uk/eley-subsonic-hollow

[Holly Goodhead]

Scipio I posted the thread for you to read through but here's the post containing my email exchange with Eley.  They confirm paraffin wax has always been used on the subsonics as a lubricant.  As you will see from the key features doc (above) it is described as "non-greasy" and "Firm hydrocarbon lubricant to reduce residues".
Yet at trial MF described it as "greasy" and in CAL's book/her interview with MF he refers to the lubricant as beeswax?  MF's description is nonsensical; if there was such an abundance of wax flying around as he describes surely it would clog up the workings of the rifle?  How would any land on the shooter?  I visited a gun shop to check them out and as I'm sure you know it's only the bullet head that's coated in a very thin film of wax.  The bullet head moves through the mechanical parts of the rifle and ejects out the barrel.  The casing is uncoated and ejects out the ejection port. 

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6629.msg274439#msg274439

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6629.msg278382#msg278382

[Holly Goodhead]

1) Fletcher's descriptions match perfectly with what Eley sold and what Nevill purchased.  Nevill purchased Eley 22LR subsonic hollow-points. That is what all the bullets tested were including the 30 in the kitchen. Nevill didn't purchase any other ammunition.  Such ammunition had a E on the back of the casing just like Fletcher described and the bullets were hollow points. I don't know what thread you are talking about but your inclinations are wrong. I asked Eley to research whether they sold any 37.5 grain hollow-points at the time or they were 40 at that point but Eley agents never got back to be they only said they sold 37.5 in the past not when they ceased.  So it is possible they were  only 37.5 grain not 40 but no way to know for sure which Eley was selling at the time.   

MF's description, and more importantly trial testimony, doesn't appear to match at all (see post above).  I had a long tel con with the marketing exec and was told Eley are happy to assist with any enquiries so I'm sure I can obtain further email clarification if required. 

2) They tested bullets from the SAME source = they test fired bullets from the supply of 30 that was found in the kitchen.  The 22LR hollow-points they used for the loading test was not from the kitchen supply because nearly all of the were expended. they used the same kind of bullets but not from the supply that had been in the kitchen.  Only something like 3 if that of the kitchen bullets were not used in the test firing.

There's much evidence the bullets were not from the same source.  Not only does it state this in the CoA but MF's description and trial testimony doesn't correspond with the manufactureres tech spec.

3) The evidence that proved Jeremy did it is the proof that Sheila can't have killed herself.  Whose prints were on the shell casings doesn't change that.  She can't have killed herself regardless of whether she handled the ammunition or not and could have handled it for innocent reasons.   It doesn't impact the major legs of the case so the COA would view it as irrelevant and not capable of disturbing the verdict.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say SC can't have killed herself.  The pathologist has always made it clear he is unable to conclude murder or suicide and I'm not prepared to override his views with my own take.  Neither will the CCRC or CoA.  The perp must have loaded at least 13 additional cartridges.  If SC's fingerprints are on the cases then it's almost certain the CoA will overturn JB's conviction.  Why would she handle 13 bullets for "innocent reasons"?

Judges decide whether new evidence is objectively strong enough to undercut a major leg of a case and objectively would get a jury to acquit.  They look at the evidence sufficient for the jury to convict and then look at whether than can be undermined.  Her prints on the casings would undermine neither Julies testimony nor the evidence that she can't have killed herself.  Nor would it undermine the evidence that had she loaded the ammunition at the time of the killings that she would have had evidence on her hands.  A fingerprint on a casing but a lack of lead would evidence touching the case innocently not loading it into a magazine.

You grossly overestimate how an Appeals Court would view it. 

A good lawyer looks at what convicted the person and then tried to undermine that red herrings won't cut it. The jury was told they could convict based on either of 2 things:

1) if they believed Julie's testimony

2) the evidence proving Sheila could not have killed herself   

It is not some accident that on appeal lawyers have tried to find ways to attack Julie's credibility and the moderator evidence that is what was used at trial to convict her.

Evidence she loaded and fired the weapon is what the defense needs not evidence she simply touched the casings but didn't load it and didn't fire the weapon.   

Take the George case.  The prosecution told jurors that proof George fired a weapon and did it was the fact that he had a single grain of gunshot residue on him.   For whatever reason the defense did a horrible job and failed to get an expert to counter this.  The main premise of their case was bogus.  It takes a lot more than a single grain to establish one fired a weapon very recently.  A single grain is easy to transfer and much more than a single grain will deposit on a shooter.  Defense experts undermined the main plank of the case establishing he fired a weapon and thus his conviction was overturned.  Without this bogus claim the jury would not have convicted.

The defense needs to establish she loaded bullets and fired the gun and could have killed herself to get a new trial. Evidence she simply handled some of the bullets at some point in time and didn't even touch the lead bullet as would happen when you load them into a magazine would not cut it.  Only Julie recanting would be the other way to get a new trial.

JM's testimony is JM's testimony.  It will not withstand 13 cases with SC's fingerprints on nor will the silencer. 

I've previously posted the CCRC and CoA criteria which fits perfectly IF the cases have SC's fingerprints on.  It's all academic at this stage as firstly we don't even know if the cases still exist.  Secondly if they do exist they might have no prints on or JB's proving without any shadow of doubt JB is guilty as charged.

It's not necessary to take apart the prosecutions case if something new can be introduced that was unavailable at trial and puts a new complexion on the case.  No one knows what weight the jury gave to aspects of the prosecutions case.  Jurors may have totally disregarded JM's testimony.  If the defence at trial were able to demonstrate SC's fingerprints were on the casings the perp must have loaded then they might have returned a different verdict and this is what the CCRC and CoA will consider.  Furthermore once the CCRC make a referral to the CoA the defendant is entitled to legal aid for legal services and further tests to strengthen a case even further.

[Myster]

  Please Lord, may these casings no longer exist so that I won't have to listen to your errant disciple, naughty nun, rant on about them for ever more.  AMEN

[Admin]

Has anyone written to Essex Police asking if the casings exist?

[Holly Goodhead]

As far as I can see it is the prosections responsibility to maintain all trial exhibits indefinitely?  Which makes sense I guess as the defence could launch an appeal at any time and yet we know in JB's case some exhibits were destroyed.  If I'm right about this it could potentially produce an undesirable outcome as I think the court might take a dim view and err on JB's side as they did at his previous appeal hearing with June's DNA:

160. The appellant subsequently made a formal complaint to the Essex Police about their handling of his case. In 1991, the City of London Police at the request of the Home Office, carried out an investigation of the appellant's complaint. To conduct that inquiry a vast amount of documentation was gathered, access to which has been given to the appellant's legal advisers and some of the material gathered in that way is relied upon in support of the grounds of appeal.

161. On 24 September 1993, the appellant petitioned the Home Secretary seeking a reference to the Court of Appeal. During consideration of the petition, the Home Office declined to disclose to the appellant expert evidence that it had obtained.

162. On 25 July 1994, the petition was refused.

163. On 28 November 1994, the appellant succeeded in a challenge by way of judicial review of the decision refusing to supply the expert report. The Home Office then supplied the evidence and agreed to reconsider the petition in the light of any further representations that might be made on behalf of the appellant.

164. There then followed a lengthy period of correspondence but no further representations were made. The CCRC in its reference (at paragraph 5.4) records:

"However it is clear from the correspondence that the case was still live and awaiting further representations at least at the end of 1995."

165. In February 1996, the Essex police destroyed many of the original trial exhibits without reference to the appellant or his legal representatives. It might have been necessary for this court to examine the circumstances in which this had happened. The police officer responsible contended that it was done without his appreciating that there was any on-going legal process that might require the further use of the exhibits. However, during argument it was agreed that the court could protect the appellant's position by making assumptions in his favour and that, therefore, it was unnecessary to resolve precisely how this came about.

I would only want to see JB's conviction overturned on solid reliable evidence.  I'm not suggesting the court would go as far as assuming the casings contained SC's fingerprints but they would surely have to make some consession?

[Admin]

I refer you to my original question Holly.

[Holly Goodhead]

I refer you to my original question Holly.

I guess EP will only respond to JB or his legal representatives.  I've no idea whether they have enquired about the casings.  I'm sure JB will have spies monitoring the forums and feeding back anything significant.  Perhaps JB is cacking his pants!

[Myster]

I guess EP will only respond to JB or his legal representatives.  I've no idea whether they have enquired about the casings.  I'm sure JB will have spies monitoring the forums and feeding back anything significant.  Perhaps JB is cacking his pants!

... knowing that his fingerprints are on every casing* and all will soon be revealed, thanks to Drs. Bond and Goodhead.

*if they exist.

[Myster]

This CERA LT machine complete is only around £27,250 (in the USA at least), so there should be a few in UK forensic labs and police forces. Testing looks so simple - eight images taken around the circumference of each casing and stitched together to make one.  Then compare with JBs and SCs original prints which EP should still have... job done!

Were any prints found on the casings using conventional powder dusting in '85/86?

[Holly Goodhead]

... knowing that his fingerprints are on every casing* and all will soon be revealed, thanks to Drs. Bond and Goodhead.

*if they exist.

If JB was responsible he would surely have worn gloves? 

If they do exist it might partly reveal the order of deaths too.