The single flake measuring a 1/4 of an inch (6.25mm) was separated into five parts for each test. I'm sure the "smears" and "splashes" on the rifle were of a similar size to the separated parts of the flake circa 1.25mm. Do you have any visuals for the blood on the rifle?
The blood on the rifle was not restricted to the wooden stock.
71. The rifle bore blood smearing on the barrel in the region of the fore-sight and around the mechanism and there were splashes of blood to the left side of the weapon.
http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html
The only blood in or on the silencer attributed to SC was the flake. The only other blood that was capable of grouping was blood on the upper baffles which produced results for A and EAP BA.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=276.0;attach=929
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=276.0;attach=931
The blood stains on the metal portion of the rifle were even smaller than the stains on the stock. Nevill's arms and skull provided minimal levels of blood to hit the weapon. Potentially his jaw could deposit more blood but it still would still be back spatter and not necessarily that big. We don't know precisely how much blood was flowing outside of his jaw/lip versus inside. We also don't know if he got hit in the jaw. We know he was punched or stuck in the nose/eye region but it is unclear whether damage to his jaw was done by the bullets alone or being hit.
Aside from the fact that spatter is not very big, larger bits of spatter travel less far. So only the smallest spatter could travel to the metal parts of the weapon. The larger spatter would not travel as far so only hit the stock and killer. Larger doesn't mean large though the terms are relative. As I already mentioned the killer was touching the stock both during the bludgeoning and after to fire the weapon so the blood was disturbed. It did not instantly dry.
Enough blood remained right inside the opening for Lincoln to test it and determine it was group A. Since it was not a large amount he didn't do an AK test. He wanted to make sure there was enough material to get a blood type result. Some of the material he lifted from the 8 baffles he did AK tests on but got no results and the rest he did blood typing but got no results. He didn't expect to get any considering how small the traces he found were.
Should he have divided the blood near the opening in half and done blood typing on half and AK testing on the other? Even in hindsight there is no way to know whether dividing it would have resulted in samples too small to get results. Had he or the lab saved some of this blood instead of expending it we would have had blood to DNA test but they didn't think at the time about such potential down the road.
So all we know is that Lincoln removed group A blood and the lab removed group A blood with AK1 which only could have come from Sheila.
Finding any victim blood in there is bad for your position. The notion Sheila went to the closet to get the moderator to attach it and use it then removed it and put it away in the closet before killing herself is absurd. In any even even the defense's own expert conceded the blood the prosecution tested could have come only from Sheila.
Boutflour had no idea what blood type Sheila was let alone knew he even had the same enzymes so notions he planted his blood inside are not the least bit credible. Furthermore, if he had used a dropper it would not have hit the first 8 baffles nor have left a flake in between the first 2 baffles. The distribution of blood was blood in diminishing quantity on each successive baffle. That is consistent with drawback. The largest drops can't travel as far plus each baffle blocks the ones behind to an extent. Only smaller drops can travel deeper inside and there will be fewer and fewer drops left as they hit the prior plates.
Time and again I see the same argument from Jeremy supporters/former supporters who doubt the blood evidence. They argue Jeremy's lawyers would not be trying to do tests to discredit the blood in the moderator if Jeremy did in fact use the moderator because Jeremy would know tests might confirm his guilt.
The same argument has been made when lawyers of convicted rapists demanded DNA tests. Guess what a sizable number of such convicts are proven to be guilty by such tests despite demanding them. They hope and pray that someone else's DNA was on the victim or that the results will somehow end up providing a way for the defense to attack despite being guilty.
Convicted people have nothing to lose they are already jailed and thus a test that fails to help them is meaningless. They want any and all testing in hopes of trying to twist the results in their favor.
In another case many years after the conviction DNA testing was done on a scarf (victim was strangled with it), victims shirt and victim's bra. It was all the DNA of the same person. The convict could not be excluded. DNA testing of a thumbnail revealed DNA of and unknown male that was ruled out as being that of the convict.
Did the defense conceded defeat since the testing they demanded supported guilt of their client? No they argued the convicts DNA was on the scarf because it was his scarf and there was so much DNA on it the killer must have gotten it on his hands and then transferred such DNA to the shirt and bra.
But they rule out any chance of contamination of DNA to the thumb and say the DNA on the thumb must have belonged to the killer. Experts though said the complete opposite they said that since the DNA was the same person on all 3 objects this supports it being the killer's DNA particularly since the statistical odds were significant when the suspect was tied to the victim by other evidence. They said when other evidence ties the victim to the donor the odds are significant. As for the thumbnail, they noted:
1) the victim was bound thus unlikely to have been able to scratch her attacker
2) when a victim scratches an attacker there is some sort of trauma to the nails but was none
3) the fingers not thumb are mainly used to scratch
4) no precautions were taken during the collecting of evidence or handling of evidence in the lab to prevent DNA contamination
5) the amount of DNA found was very tiny and had to be replicated just to be able to get a result and thus it is ripe for contamination on a variety of levels.
Defense lawyers have no problem trying to twist results and supporters or other people with an agenda do the same. So the notion that if Jeremy used the moderator he would not allow his lawyers etc to do testing is nonsense. He wants testing so he and his advocates can try to twist the results in his favor.
Trying to twist results accomplishes little though in most instances. The testing they are doing can't prove it is impossible to ever get results after superglue fuming and thus s a waste of time. ONLY if they can prove to a court that testing results can never be obtained after superglue fuming would this provide a basis to vacate the conviction. They would need to plan a est so large it has the ability to prove such. But we already know they have successfully achieved results in the past and that this would be a complete waste of time.
At most supporters will spin the results and try to use them for propaganda purposes to the public. That won't help Jeremy get his conviction vacated.
