New Forensic Work or Completion of Existing Work

[Holly Goodhead]

So it doesn't appear any direct challenge has been made on the blood/flake.  Possible reasons why not:

- No mileage from a biological perspective

- No mileage from a legal perspective in that John Hayward's evidence could have been challenged pre trial or at trial.

- Overlooked due in part to over reliance on John Hayward's testimony

[Holly Goodhead]

"Since blood and other body fluid evidence is biological and is rapidly decomposed by bacteria and mold, it is absolutely essential that such evidence is handled properly".

"Deliver biological evidence to the laboratory as rapidly as possible, since certain blood group factors decompose within a few days".

"It is best to deliver the evidence in person; however, if this is impossible, the evidence should be sent in a styrofoam cooler containing a freezer brick, not ice, by certified mail to that laboratory".

But the blood flake wasn't analysed for some 5 weeks and was subjected to heat and hot gasses in the silencer and ambient temperature over some 5 weeks  &%+((£

http://www.firearmsid.com/KSP%20Evidence%20Manual/Biological%20Evidence.htm

[Holly Goodhead]

I was just re-reading my JB books  well actually only the bits about the blood.  According to SL's book Geoffrey Rivlin arranged tests to determine the affect of heat from the rifle/firing/silener/gases for JB's '88/'89 appeal.  No mention of the method or results/conclusion and more importantly who carried out these tests.  No mention of the fact the flake wasn't analysed until 10th Sept and in the interim had been kept at ambient temperature.

[Myster]

I was just re-reading my JB books  well actually only the bits about the blood.  According to SL's book Geoffrey Rivlin arranged tests to determine the affect of heat from the rifle/firing/silener/gases for JB's '88/'89 appeal.  No mention of the method or results/conclusion and more importantly who carried out these tests.  No mention of the fact the flake wasn't analysed until 10th Sept and in the interim had been kept at ambient temperature.

Here's another potboiler for you to read.  Spot the deliberate mistakes.  I'll give you a clue to the first one... it's on the cover!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B01AT0A71W/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=B01AT0A71W&linkCode=as2&tag=sellmescouk-21#reader_B01AT0A71W

[Holly Goodhead]

Here's another potboiler for you to read.  Spot the deliberate mistakes.  I'll give you a clue to the first one... it's on the cover!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B01AT0A71W/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=B01AT0A71W&linkCode=as2&tag=sellmescouk-21#reader_B01AT0A71W

Thanks but I think I'll give this one a miss!

[Holly Goodhead]

 The 'flake' of blood 'found' in the silencer was incapable of withstanding the environment from the claimed 'draw-back' on 7th Aug to 13th Sep when it was analysed by John Hayward at the lab and produced results for antigens, enzymes and a protein:  ABO groupings, Erythrocyte Acid Phosphatase, Adenylate Kinase and Haptoglobin.  Meaning the silencer was accidentally or deliberately contaminated.

- Heat from discharge of 25 cartridges fired in quick succession

- Hot gasses from fatal wound

- Ambient temperature from 7th Aug to 13th Sept

- Cyanoacrylate fuming at Sandridge using the prototype cabinet evaporating ethyl cyanoacrylate at 120 degrees Celsius and venting to the atmosphere.

[Myster]

Thanks but I think I'll give this one a miss!

He/she must have changed the previous misleading cover - a knife in a bloody pool - after reading here.  Other mistakes in the text still remain.

[Myster]

The 'flake' of blood 'found' in the silencer was incapable of withstanding the environment from the claimed 'draw-back' on 7th Aug to 13th Sep when it was analysed by John Hayward at the lab and produced results for antigens, enzymes and a protein:  ABO groupings, Erythrocyte Acid Phosphatase, Adenylate Kinase and Haptoglobin.  Meaning the silencer was accidentally or deliberately contaminated.

- Heat from discharge of 25 cartridges fired in quick succession

- Hot gasses from fatal wound

- Ambient temperature from 7th Aug to 13th Sept

- Cyanoacrylate fuming at Sandridge using the prototype cabinet evaporating ethyl cyanoacrylate at 120 degrees Celsius and venting to the atmosphere.

How do you know all 25 were fired so quickly? There must have been lulls in shooting when the barrel and moderator cooled down - loading the magazine twice, moving from room to room, up and down stairs, the struggle and beating in the kitchen. Even when experts fired the rifle rapidly many times, the moderator only remained slightly warm to the touch.

What were the ambient temperatures during those seven days?  Were you in the EPHQ and Home Office lab in 1985?

[Holly Goodhead]

He/she must have changed the previous misleading cover - a knife in a bloody pool - after reading here.  Other mistakes in the text still remain.

Oh yeah  &%+((£

[Holly Goodhead]

How do you know all 25 were fired so quickly? There must have been lulls in shooting when the barrel and moderator cooled down - loading the magazine twice, moving from room to room, up and down stairs, the struggle and beating in the kitchen. Even when experts fired the rifle rapidly many times, the moderator only remained slightly warm to the touch.

What were the ambient temperatures during those seven days?  Were you in the EPHQ and Home Office lab in 1985?

The CoA seemed to set a precedence at JB's 2002 appeal in this regard:

472. Mr Hayward, in contrast, has we are satisfied taken some steps to satisfy himself that he is right. He started from the proposition clearly supported by evidence that within the sound moderator there would be a very turbulent motion when the rifle was discharged. This by its very nature would produce forces that would tend to mix the blood from the two sources. In addition, the unscrewing of the sound moderator to remove it involved a twisting motion through a number of complete turns, which again would facilitate mixing. Starting from this proposition, it seemed to Mr Hayward that the only likelihood of an unmixed flake of blood would be if the blood from one source dried and blood from the other source then fell upon it. That possibility was recognised and experiments were carried out to see what happened when blood was in the moderator and other shots were discharged. First the temperature of the sound moderator was established after 25 shots had been fired through it. The temperature was found to be 24.5 degrees centigrade, which is substantially less than body temperature, and hence not likely to result in any speedy drying of the blood on the moderator. The further test that was carried out was to introduce blood onto the baffles and cause the rifle to be fired to see whether the blood did in fact dry. It did not and hence the conclusion was drawn that the blood would not have dried more quickly in the moderator than on some other non-porous surface. Having regard to the time span involved, it was therefore unlikely that blood from one person would have dried before the other person was shot. It seems to us that this investigative approach is precisely the sort of experimentation that one would expect from a scientist before a theory was advanced as being capable of being relied upon.

Where do you get 7 days from?  The blood on the outside of the silencer was tested on 13th Aug the 'flake' inside was not identified and tested until 12th Sept.

On the 15th August the silencer underwent Cyanoacrylate fuming at Sandridge.  This involved evaporating ethyl cyanoacrylate at 120 degrees celsius and venting to the atmosphere.  An absolute no no with blood used for conventional serological testing (which is what John Hayward did) is humidity. 

Blood used in conventional serological testing requires a good quality sample and any exposure to heat and humidity will quickly degrade making it useless.  Do you never question why the 'flake' 'found' in the silencer was the only exhibit capable of producing full results for sereological testing by way of Erythrocyte Acid Phosphatase (EAP Enzyme), Adenylate Kinase (AK Enzyme) and Haptoglobin (HP Protein)?  Whereas other exhibits were only capable of confirming ABO groupings and/or human blood in origin.  We are told NB sustained a severe beating with the rifle which contained "splashes" and "smears" of blood.  This blood would not be subjected to the same degree of heat on the outside of the rifle that the 'flake' was inside the silencer along with the hot gasses.  The blood on the outside of the rifle was analysed on 13th Aug and before it was subjected to Cyanoacrylate fuming at Sandridge.

[scipio_usmc]

I was just re-reading my JB books  well actually only the bits about the blood.  According to SL's book Geoffrey Rivlin arranged tests to determine the affect of heat from the rifle/firing/silener/gases for JB's '88/'89 appeal.  No mention of the method or results/conclusion and more importantly who carried out these tests.  No mention of the fact the flake wasn't analysed until 10th Sept and in the interim had been kept at ambient temperature.

Obviously the tests failed to help Jeremy or there would have been an attempt to use them.  Why they failed is pretty obvious. It didn't get hot enough to dry the blood rapidly let alone so hot that it would provide a basis to say it would be impossible to get any results.   

The reality in this case is that Jeremy removed the scope in anticipation of committing the murders, killed everyone while the moderator was attached then removed it, put it in the closet and made up lies about the gun not being able to be stored with the scope and moderator attached and about how he thus found it with them unattached and left it out with them unattached.

These various lies were proven false and in combination with his lies about Nevill phoning him totally sunk him,  Julie ratting him out made matters worse of course.

[Holly Goodhead]

Obviously the tests failed to help Jeremy or there would have been an attempt to use them.  Why they failed is pretty obvious. It didn't get hot enough to dry the blood rapidly let alone so hot that it would provide a basis to say it would be impossible to get any results.   

The reality in this case is that Jeremy removed the scope in anticipation of committing the murders, killed everyone while the moderator was attached then removed it, put it in the closet and made up lies about the gun not being able to be stored with the scope and moderator attached and about how he thus found it with them unattached and left it out with them unattached.

These various lies were proven false and in combination with his lies about Nevill phoning him totally sunk him,  Julie ratting him out made matters worse of course.

I think I'll rely on tests/conclusions of independent forensic scientists    Lets see if we can make it front page instead of just online.  Watch this space 

[scipio_usmc]

I think I'll rely on tests/conclusions of independent forensic scientists    Lets see if we can make it front page instead of just online.  Watch this space 

They already spoke.  They not only spoke at trial where they refuted the notion the moderator got hot enough to dry blood rapidly but in other cases where drawback was successfully type tested and even DNA tested.  You ignore such for some reason but ignoring it accomplishes nothing.  Your hopes are pie in the sky simply. 

[scipio_usmc]

I think it is quite amusing that on blue David is insisting he has found new forensic evidence that exonerates Jeremy.

People suggested he simply made the claim to brag and get attention because he refuses to post what this supposed evidence is.  He responded that he did it to revitalize the site and spark new debate but how could he spark new debate if he won't reveal any details to discuss?

One of the most hilarious claims is that the evidence needs to be kept a secret to prevent the authorities from seeing it and then setting out to refute it.  The authorities will not attempt to refute it unless and until the allegations are made in a legal setting they don't waste their time on allegations raised outside of the process. In the meantime if it needs to be hidden because it is unable to withstand scrutiny then it is nonsense.  The best way to test claims are to hold them out to allow full scrutiny and see if the claims can be refuted.

If David is scared of people here or on blue refuting his claims and thus is afraid to post them then it doesn't bode well for such claims...

Here is what NGB described the work as being:

"The material sent to me by david1819 is in the form of a report, which includes images and diagrams as well as text.  It is well written and well presented.  It analyses an important part of the evidence in the case, using methods not applied previously.  Although he accepts that he is not an expert in the relevant field, he has researched published works by experts in the field, quoting relevant extracts in support of his conclusions.  He has also studied relevant photographs and made calculations and measurements using techniques which to me seem appropriate."

[david1819]

I think it is quite amusing that on blue David is insisting he has found new forensic evidence that exonerates Jeremy.

People suggested he simply made the claim to brag and get attention because he refuses to post what this supposed evidence is.  He responded that he did it to revitalize the site and spark new debate but how could he spark new debate if he won't reveal any details to discuss?

One of the most hilarious claims is that the evidence needs to be kept a secret to prevent the authorities from seeing it and then setting out to refute it.  The authorities will not attempt to refute it unless and until the allegations are made in a legal setting they don't waste their time on allegations raised outside of the process. In the meantime if it needs to be hidden because it is unable to withstand scrutiny then it is nonsense.  The best way to test claims are to hold them out to allow full scrutiny and see if the claims can be refuted.

If David is scared of people here or on blue refuting his claims and thus is afraid to post them then it doesn't bode well for such claims...

Here is what NGB described the work as being:

"The material sent to me by david1819 is in the form of a report, which includes images and diagrams as well as text.  It is well written and well presented.  It analyses an important part of the evidence in the case, using methods not applied previously.  Although he accepts that he is not an expert in the relevant field, he has researched published works by experts in the field, quoting relevant extracts in support of his conclusions.  He has also studied relevant photographs and made calculations and measurements using techniques which to me seem appropriate."

How many false promises have I made in the past Scip? None! Is my name Mike? No!