Bullet DRH/5 (also referred to at the lab as item 49)

[Holly Goodhead]

4 bullets were found in the main bedroom.  June sustained 7 entry gsw's where 3 bullets exited and there's much evidence by way of trial testimony from Dr Vanezis and Malcolm Fletcher (MF) she sustained an 8th graze gsw unrelated to any of the other 7 gsw's.  This graze wound is likely to account for bullet DRH/5 which (MF) described as "whole".  Effectively this would account for the 4th bullet found in the bedroom.

NB also sustained a graze gsw but this entered his body at a shallow angle depositing bullet fragments in his chest cavity.  This suggests DRH/5 did not pertain to this wound since the wound caused the bullet to deposit fragments in NB's body as evidenced by the radiograph and DRH/5 was described by MF as whole

DRH/5 appears to have grazed June whilst she was in bed or in the process of getting out of and ricocheted back towards the shooter as per the casing layout diagram attached. 

Dr Vanezis' autopsy report notes SC had a graze wound to her abdomen in the left lumbar region which was covered with a dressing.  Was this graze caused by DRH/5?

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=199.0;attach=670

The velocity on the bullets used = 1040ft/s

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

[scipio_usmc]

4 bullets were found in the main bedroom.

False, fragments of 4 bullets were found in the bedroom. 3 exited June while the 4th was from a graze wound suffered by Nevill

there's much evidence by way of trial testimony from Dr Vanezis and Malcolm Fletcher (MF) she sustained an 8th graze gsw unrelated to any of the other 7 gsw's.

False on 2 different grounds

1) Vanezis wasn't sure whether the v shaped scratch on June's breast was a bullet graze wound or not.  He said it could be.  That is a far cry from presenting much evidence that it was a bullet graze wound. He simply said it was possible.

2) It is false that if it was a graze wound then it could not be from one of the other bullets that hit June or Nevill.
In fact if it was a bullet graze wound the only realistic explanation would be that it was the bullet that exited her forearm.  That bullet could have exited her forearm, grazed her breast and then entered her pillow.

This graze wound is likely to account for bullet DRH/5 which (MF) described as "whole".  Effectively this would account for the 4th bullet found in the bedroom.

False.  If the shaped scratch was caused by a bullet then it was caused by a bullet that moved vertically across her breast not horizontally.  That could only occur while she was lying down.  Since the shooter could not be behind her headboard that means the bullet passed over her body towards the pillow like the rest. DRH/5 wasn't found in her bed it was found by the dressing table so on the wrong side of the room. This was already explained to you but in your usual fashion you ignore reality and just post what you feel like much like you keep ignoring I gave you the exact measurements of DRH/5, 37 grains of the original 40 grains so 13% of the bullet missing yet you continue to falsely call it whole. 

NB also sustained a graze gsw but this entered his body at a shallow angle depositing bullet fragments in his chest cavity.  This suggests DRH/5 did not pertain to this wound since the wound caused the bullet to deposit fragments in NB's body as evidenced by the radiograph and DRH/5 was described by MF as whole

False. 

You continue to distort despite being corrected multiple times. 


Fact: Nevill did not have an entrance wound in his side where an entire bullet could have entered.  He had a scratches through which at most some small splinters could have entered.  Your claim that an entire bullet entered his side and was in his chest is patently false that is why it was not called an entrance wound.

Fact: the bullet grazed Nevill's arm, then grazed his side with a few slivers breaking off and the bulk of the bullet finally grazed his chest.

Fact: DRH/5 was not a whole bullet 13% of the bullet was missing. 13% of the bullet missing  is plenty to account for the tiny slivers observed in the xray that were too small for Vanezis to be able to find.

DRH/5 appears to have grazed June whilst she was in bed or in the process of getting out of and ricocheted back towards the shooter as per the casing layout diagram attached.

False.  A bullet grazing June's breast while she was lying down would hit her bed and would not ricochet off her bed or pillow.  Moreover that would require there to have been an additional bullet fragment from Nevill's graze wound that went unrecovered as well as a spent shell casing not recovered since you are presenting 26 shots having been fired.  You have zero evidence at all to support such and are not relying on any logica to come up with such suggestion.

Dr Vanezis' autopsy report notes SC had a graze wound to her abdomen in the left lumbar region which was covered with a dressing.  Was this graze caused by DRH/5?

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=199.0;attach=670

The velocity on the bullets used = 1040ft/s

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

No it was a scratch she had that predated the murders hence why she had a band-aid on it.  June's scratch on her breast could have pre-dated the murders as well there is no evidence of damage to her gown is such location.

[scipio_usmc]

[Holly Goodhead]

False, fragments of 4 bullets were found in the bedroom. 3 exited June while the 4th was from a graze wound suffered by Nevill

False on 2 different grounds

1) Vanezis wasn't sure whether the v shaped scratch on June's breast was a bullet graze wound or not.  He said it could be.  That is a far cry from presenting much evidence that it was a bullet graze wound. He simply said it was possible.

2) It is false that if it was a graze wound then it could not be from one of the other bullets that hit June or Nevill.
In fact if it was a bullet graze wound the only realistic explanation would be that it was the bullet that exited her forearm.  That bullet could have exited her forearm, grazed her breast and then entered her pillow.


False.  If the shaped scratch was caused by a bullet then it was caused by a bullet that moved vertically across her breast not horizontally.  That could only occur while she was lying down.  Since the shooter could not be behind her headboard that means the bullet passed over her body towards the pillow like the rest. DRH/5 wasn't found in her bed it was found by the dressing table so on the wrong side of the room. This was already explained to you but in your usual fashion you ignore reality and just post what you feel like much like you keep ignoring I gave you the exact measurements of DRH/5, 37 grains of the original 40 grains so 13% of the bullet missing yet you continue to falsely call it whole. 

False. 

You continue to distort despite being corrected multiple times. 


Fact: Nevill did not have an entrance wound in his side where an entire bullet could have entered.  He had a scratches through which at most some small splinters could have entered.  Your claim that an entire bullet entered his side and was in his chest is patently false that is why it was not called an entrance wound.

Fact: the bullet grazed Nevill's arm, then grazed his side with a few slivers breaking off and the bulk of the bullet finally grazed his chest.

Fact: DRH/5 was not a whole bullet 13% of the bullet was missing. 13% of the bullet missing  is plenty to account for the tiny slivers observed in the xray that were too small for Vanezis to be able to find.

False.  A bullet grazing June's breast while she was lying down would hit her bed and would not ricochet off her bed or pillow.  Moreover that would require there to have been an additional bullet fragment from Nevill's graze wound that went unrecovered as well as a spent shell casing not recovered since you are presenting 26 shots having been fired.  You have zero evidence at all to support such and are not relying on any logica to come up with such suggestion.

No it was a scratch she had that predated the murders hence why she had a band-aid on it.  June's scratch on her breast could have pre-dated the murders as well there is no evidence of damage to her gown is such location.

Scipio saying false doesn't make it so.  Most of my posts are supported by documentary evidence.  Most of your posts aren't.

Malcolm Fletcher was the ballistics expert in the case.  He was by all accounts a scientist.  The inference being careful and methodical.  As I said up thread when describing the bullets he used the following descriptions:

- Whole
- Nearly whole
- Half bullets
- Fragment
- Small fragments

Why would he describe bullets as whole if they were in fact nearly whole?  Four bullets were found in the bedroom:

- DRH/35 x 2  - aka as item 46 - both found in June's pillow and described as whole
- DRH/9 - aka item 50 - found June's side of the bed and described as nearly whole
- DRH/5 - aka item 49 - found near the dressing table opposite the foot of June's side of the bed and described as whole

Documentary evidence attached.

I have very recently posted trial testimony from MF where he agrees with Ed Lawson QC that through a process of elimination DRH/5 had to have pertained to a graze gsw sustained by June ie a gsw unrelated to any of the 7 that entered her body.  This also confirms by definition a total of 26 gunshots were fired.

Documentary evidence attached.

Trial testimony from the above confirms the gsw NB sustained to his elbow/chest entered his chest at a shallow angle. 

Documentary evidence attached.

We have no way of knowing how and when SC sustained the wound to her abdomen.  All we know is the pathologist noted such in the autopsy report.  I haven't seen any expert opinion about when or what caused this. 

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Holly Goodhead]

I thought unspent bullets found at WHF eg kitchen worktop/gun cupboard and subsequently examined weighed 37 grains?  The Eley website shows they currently weigh 40 grains but we have no way of knowing whether any manufacuring tweaks have taken place during this period which may have altered the weight.

According to a post by David1819 and some unsourced snippet the bullets used at WHF weighed 2.26 grams which amounts to 34.87 grains so rounded up 35 grains. 

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7974.msg378160.html#msg378160

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

I note the muzzle velocity has changed slightly too so my guess is that it is down to manufacturing tweaks or computer rounding.  The difference between 35 grains and 40 grains is less than 1/3 of a gram.  Tiny.   

[scipio_usmc]

I thought unspent bullets found at WHF eg kitchen worktop/gun cupboard and subsequently examined weighed 37 grains?  The Eley website shows they currently weigh 40 grains but we have no way of knowing whether any manufacuring tweaks have taken place during this period which may have altered the weight.

According to a post by David1819 and some unsourced snippet the bullets used at WHF weighed 2.26 grams which amounts to 34.87 grains so rounded up 35 grains. 

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7974.msg378160.html#msg378160

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

I note the muzzle velocity has changed slightly too so my guess is that it is down to manufacturing tweaks or computer rounding.  The difference between 35 grains and 40 grains is less than 1/3 of a gram.  Tiny.

Mike is the original source of the bogus claim the complete bullets weighed 35 grains.  I produced evidence that Eley had 37 grain not 35 but that was long ago and they were 40 at the time of the murders.  David has joined Mike as a fellow scammer and nothing he says is trustworthy.  The actual weight of the unfired ammunition used in the murders was 40 grains. The typical variation can be 39 grains to 41 and occasionally a little more but it depends on the manufacturer.  Eley is more consistent than others, they are more expensive for a reason.   

There are different ways to test velocity and it changes over the course of a flight so you are going to get different sources listing slightly different velocities. The only significance of the velocity for this case is that it was less than the speed of sound so doesn't create a sonic boom. Bullets that are supersonic create a sonic boom upon exiting a barrel and thus create additional noise. The more noise the better chance of waking up others in the house. Of course there are cases where people were murdered by 9mm and other weapons having high velocities where a person sleeping in an adjoining room failed to wake up. It depends upon how sound one sleeps as well. A louder report has a better chance of waking up someone or being heard by people who are awake but still might not. People who are awake can hear a noise and yet not appreciate what the noise was.

[david1819]

Mike is the original source of the bogus claim the complete bullets weighed 35 grains.  I produced evidence that Eley had 37 grain not 35 but that was long ago and they were 40 at the time of the murders.  David has joined Mike as a fellow scammer and nothing he says is trustworthy.

The plot thickens. It seems Eley themselves joined Mike way back in the 80s and even began scamming their own advertised specifications!

[Holly Goodhead]

The plot thickens. It seems Eley themselves joined Mike way back in the 80s and even began scamming their own advertised specifications!

I emailed Eley last week seeking clarification on the weight of bullets manufactured during 1984.

The bullets are not straightforward.  For a start MF claimed in his interview with CAL that the lubricant used was beeswax - Eley confirmed for me it has always used parrafin wax for the subsonic hollow.  Then the CoA doc refers to the "same" and "similar" bullets used in tests.  Lol how similar is similar?  Obviously tests needs to be carried out on a like-for-like basis.

[scipio_usmc]

The plot thickens. It seems Eley themselves joined Mike way back in the 80s and even began scamming their own advertised specifications!

Posting an ad from the 1970s or even early '80s doesn't establish anything with respect to what Eley was selling in late 1984.  They were selling 40 grain bullets at the time of the murder.  Trying coming  up with an ad that is dated and pertains to the actual time period in question.  They were selling 37.5 grain bullets in the early 1980s but by the time of the murders they had phased out for 40 grain. No one wanted the smaller grain once 40 was available.

The defense had no way to refute the bullets were 40 grain thus didn't. You and Mike have no such ability either since the lawyers couldn't do so at a much closer period in time.   

[scipio_usmc]

I emailed Eley last week seeking clarification on the weight of bullets manufactured during 1984.

The bullets are not straightforward.  For a start MF claimed in his interview with CAL that the lubricant used was beeswax - Eley confirmed for me it has always used parrafin wax for the subsonic hollow.  Then the CoA doc refers to the "same" and "similar" bullets used in tests.  Lol how similar is similar?  Obviously tests needs to be carried out on a like-for-like basis.

I contacted Eley more than 2 years ago when Mike was making his nonsense claims.  They said the research department would have to look into when they transitioned to 40 grain and they never got back to me. So don't hold your breath waiting...

Same = same batch = same ammunition supply = the ammunition that was in Nevill's kitchen

Similar= ammunition of the same kind as Nevill purchased but not from Nevill's supply

They used up much of the unspent ammunition that had been sitting in the kitchen for testing.  They used such to be the control for casings and bullets fired from the Anshutz.  The ammunition used in the murders was compared to such control items. 21-23 of the 29 bullets in the kitchen (there was another bullet in the tray as well so 30 total but that was given a different exhibit number). 

For subsequent testing related exclusively to the moderator they didn't use Nevill's ammunition supply.

[scipio_usmc]

Scipio saying false doesn't make it so.  Most of my posts are supported by documentary evidence.  Most of your posts aren't.

You are projecting Holly.  I didn't merely post that your claims are false I explained how and why they are false.

Your claim that your evidence supports you is flat out wrong and untrue.

Even though I posted the exact examination record with the exact weight of the fragment you continue to false claim it was a complete bullet not missing anything simply because in a report Fletcher said it had the APPEARANCE of a whole bullet.

You are doing the same distorting that the Campaign Team engages in which you criticized.  Fletcher also said PV/20 had the appearance of a whole bullet. It clearly wasn't a whole bullet though since 13 plus grains were missing. When he wrote appeared to be whole he didn't mean that they were complete bullets of the same weight as the unfired bullet.

I presented the actual weight on his inspection records proving they were not whole.

The same way the Campaign team misrepresented it as whole to try to pretend the PV/20 used at trial was not the same object removed by Vanezis so are you misrepresenting because you desperately want DRH/5 to be unrelated to Nevill.

That is not your position being well supported it is a distortion.

That's hardly the only distortion you made.

Though the experts said it is possible the scratch on June's breast was made by a bullet they also said it might not have been they had no way to be sure. You want to pretend they said it definitely was a bullet graze.

Moreover, though he experts said if it was a bullet graze it could have been made by one of the bullets that entered June you misrepresented that they said it had to be from an 8th bullet.

It was all of my assertions which wer euspported while none of yours are supported except in your own mind. 

Malcolm Fletcher was the ballistics expert in the case.  He was by all accounts a scientist.  The inference being careful and methodical.  As I said up thread when describing the bullets he used the following descriptions:

- Whole
- Nearly whole
- Half bullets
- Fragment
- Small fragments

Why would he describe bullets as whole if they were in fact nearly whole?  Four bullets were found in the bedroom:

- DRH/35 x 2  - aka as item 46 - both found in June's pillow and described as whole
- DRH/9 - aka item 50 - found June's side of the bed and described as nearly whole
- DRH/5 - aka item 49 - found near the dressing table opposite the foot of June's side of the bed and described as whole

Documentary evidence attached.

I have very recently posted trial testimony from MF where he agrees with Ed Lawson QC that through a process of elimination DRH/5 had to have pertained to a graze gsw sustained by June ie a gsw unrelated to any of the 7 that entered her body.  This also confirms by definition a total of 26 gunshots were fired.

Documentary evidence attached.

Trial testimony from the above confirms the gsw NB sustained to his elbow/chest entered his chest at a shallow angle. 

Documentary evidence attached.

We have no way of knowing how and when SC sustained the wound to her abdomen.  All we know is the pathologist noted such in the autopsy report.  I haven't seen any expert opinion about when or what caused this.

His descriptions regarding "appearance" are irrelevant.  All they relate to is how much of a profile of the bullet he could get to try to get the lands and grooves.  He weighed all the fragments. The weights of bullets he said were whole in appearance were well short of the weight of complete unfired bullets.  The weights are what control as to whether a bullet is whole or not, not his assessment of the appearance. His status as an expert is unable to render a 20 grain fragment, 23 grain fragment or even a 35 grain fragment as being a whole bullet.  If he were claiming such he would be dead wrong and his own records detailing the weights would prove him wrong.  But he wasn't representing them as being complete bullets  of the same weight as the unfired bullets. He was speaking to a different issue in his report.  People are misrepresenting what he meant to suit their own agenda.

Whole bullet= 40 grain/2.59 grams

Here are the descriptions used by Fletcher along with his weights and in parenthesis is the percentage of a complete bullet such weight represents:

Whole
DRH/35A 2.44 grams (94.2%)
DRH/35B 2.43 grams (93.8%)
PV/2 2.4267 grams (93.69%)
PV/24 2.4208 grams (93.47%)
DRH/5 2.42 grams (93.44%)
DRH/36 2.42 grams (93.44%)
PV/23 2.29 grams (88.4%)
PV/19 2.16 grams (83.39%)
PV/29 2.13 grams (82.24%)
PV/31 2.1223 grams (81.94%)
PV/4 2.099 grams (81%)
PV/20 1.5453 grams (59.66%)

Nearly Whole

PV/30 2.03 grams (78.38%)
PV/36 2.03 grams (78.38%)
PV/3 1.9368 grams (74.78%)
PV/11 1.93 grams (74.52%)
PV/34 1.7972 grams (69.39%)
PV/25 1.79 grams (69.11%)
PV/26 1.7783 grams (68.66%)
DRH/9 1.67 grams (64.48%)
PV/8 1.63 grams (62.9%)

Half of bullet
PV/10 1.14 grams (44%)

Fragment
PV/35 no weight listed

Small Fragment
PV/5 no weight listed
PV/9 no weight listed


---------

What is quite obvious is that there is a big variation between the weights of bullet fragments he called whole.  In fact, 1 bullet fragment he called whole (PV/20) weighs less than every single fragment that he called nearly whole.

[Holly Goodhead]

I contacted Eley more than 2 years ago when Mike was making his nonsense claims.  They said the research department would have to look into when they transitioned to 40 grain and they never got back to me. So don't hold your breath waiting...

Same = same batch = same ammunition supply = the ammunition that was in Nevill's kitchen

Similar= ammunition of the same kind as Nevill purchased but not from Nevill's supply

They used up much of the unspent ammunition that had been sitting in the kitchen for testing.  They used such to be the control for casings and bullets fired from the Anshutz.  The ammunition used in the murders was compared to such control items. 21-23 of the 29 bullets in the kitchen (there was another bullet in the tray as well so 30 total but that was given a different exhibit number). 

For subsequent testing related exclusively to the moderator they didn't use Nevill's ammunition supply.

If I don't hear from Eley I will take a trip to their offices in Sutton Coldfield.  Not so easy to be ignored/fobbed off when one is standing there 

"Same" and "similar" are your interpretations. 

Tests were carried out on the bullets in terms of firing etc.  And other tests were carried out re handling and lead deposits.  It is the latter where "same" and "similar" were referred to.  In any event it might be indicative that due care was not being taken.

As I've said previously MF claimed the lubricant used on the bullets fired at WHF contained beeswax.  And yet Eley confirmed for me that the subsonic hollow point have always been lubricated with paraffin wax. 

Imo there's much reason to be sceptical about all of this. 

[attachment deleted by admin]

[scipio_usmc]

If I don't hear from Eley I will take a trip to their offices in Sutton Coldfield.  Not so easy to be ignored/fobbed off when one is standing there 

"Same" and "similar" are your interpretations. 

Tests were carried out on the bullets in terms of firing etc.  And other tests were carried out re handling and lead deposits.  It is the latter where "same" and "similar" were referred to.  In any event it might be indicative that due care was not being taken.

As I've said previously MF claimed the lubricant used on the bullets fired at WHF contained beeswax.  And yet Eley confirmed for me that the subsonic hollow point have always been lubricated with paraffin wax. 

Imo there's much reason to be sceptical about all of this.

I doubt that will accomplish much, you will be dealing with some clerical worker who was probably born after the murders and won't have the first clue how to research the issue.

Not only do we not know when the chart is from we don't know if it contains a typo, the magazine may have accidentally taken the same weight from the hyper velocity ammo.

The defense and Fletcher would have been concerned had Nevill's ammo been 35 or even 37.5 grain since some of the bullet fragments were heavier than that. A bullet fragment by definition is only a portion of a whole so can't weigh more than a complete bullet.  This nonsense was made up by Mike to support his nonsense about police ammo being used on the victims.

While I would have liked Eley to provide me with direct evidence to put this nonsense to rest it is no big loss since I know for a fact these are 40 grain:



and moreover Know for a fact that 7 of the bullet fragments well exceeded 35 grain yet the defense and Fletcher didn't see that as a problem though they would have if Mike's nonsense were correct.

 

[Holly Goodhead]

You are projecting Holly.  I didn't merely post that your claims are false I explained how and why they are false.

Your claim that your evidence supports you is flat out wrong and untrue.

Even though I posted the exact examination record with the exact weight of the fragment you continue to false claim it was a complete bullet not missing anything simply because in a report Fletcher said it had the APPEARANCE of a whole bullet.

You are doing the same distorting that the Campaign Team engages in which you criticized.  Fletcher also said PV/20 had the appearance of a whole bullet. It clearly wasn't a whole bullet though since 13 plus grains were missing. When he wrote appeared to be whole he didn't mean that they were complete bullets of the same weight as the unfired bullet.

I presented the actual weight on his inspection records proving they were not whole.

The same way the Campaign team misrepresented it as whole to try to pretend the PV/20 used at trial was not the same object removed by Vanezis so are you misrepresenting because you desperately want DRH/5 to be unrelated to Nevill.

That is not your position being well supported it is a distortion.

That's hardly the only distortion you made.

Though the experts said it is possible the scratch on June's breast was made by a bullet they also said it might not have been they had no way to be sure. You want to pretend they said it definitely was a bullet graze.

Moreover, though he experts said if it was a bullet graze it could have been made by one of the bullets that entered June you misrepresented that they said it had to be from an 8th bullet.

It was all of my assertions which wer euspported while none of yours are supported except in your own mind. 

His descriptions regarding "appearance" are irrelevant.  All they relate to is how much of a profile of the bullet he could get to try to get the lands and grooves.  He weighed all the fragments. The weights of bullets he said were whole in appearance were well short of the weight of complete unfired bullets.  The weights are what control as to whether a bullet is whole or not, not his assessment of the appearance. His status as an expert is unable to render a 20 grain fragment, 23 grain fragment or even a 35 grain fragment as being a whole bullet.  If he were claiming such he would be dead wrong and his own records detailing the weights would prove him wrong.  But he wasn't representing them as being complete bullets  of the same weight as the unfired bullets. He was speaking to a different issue in his report.  People are misrepresenting what he meant to suit their own agenda.

Whole bullet= 40 grain/2.59 grams

Here are the descriptions used by Fletcher along with his weights and in parenthesis is the percentage of a complete bullet such weight represents:

Whole
DRH/35A 2.44 grams (94.2%)
DRH/35B 2.43 grams (93.8%)
PV/2 2.4267 grams (93.69%)
PV/24 2.4208 grams (93.47%)
DRH/5 2.42 grams (93.44%)
DRH/36 2.42 grams (93.44%)
PV/23 2.29 grams (88.4%)
PV/19 2.16 grams (83.39%)
PV/29 2.13 grams (82.24%)
PV/31 2.1223 grams (81.94%)
PV/4 2.099 grams (81%)
PV/20 1.5453 grams (59.66%)

Nearly Whole

PV/30 2.03 grams (78.38%)
PV/36 2.03 grams (78.38%)
PV/3 1.9368 grams (74.78%)
PV/11 1.93 grams (74.52%)
PV/34 1.7972 grams (69.39%)
PV/25 1.79 grams (69.11%)
PV/26 1.7783 grams (68.66%)
DRH/9 1.67 grams (64.48%)
PV/8 1.63 grams (62.9%)

Half of bullet
PV/10 1.14 grams (44%)

Fragment
PV/35 no weight listed

Small Fragment
PV/5 no weight listed
PV/9 no weight listed


---------

What is quite obvious is that there is a big variation between the weights of bullet fragments he called whole.  In fact, 1 bullet fragment he called whole (PV/20) weighs less than every single fragment that he called nearly whole.

Please refrain from making any personal comments about other posters eg "projecting".  It is sufficient to say you disagree setting out your arguments.  Thanks.

Where's the documentary evidence supporting your arguments?

This thread is about DRH/5 and whether or not it pertained to an 8th gsw sustained by June which bruised her chest but didn't enter her body.  DRH/5 was found by the dressing table and described as "whole" by Malcolm Fletcher.  As you know when bullets leave a silencer/barrel they do so at tremendous speed.  The muzzle velocity of the Eley subsonic hollow points is 1040ft/s.  Yep that's 1040 feet per second.  Some on IA thought it might be possible for NB to dodge bullets.   Clearly the potential for a bullet to ricochet is significant especially when fired indoors!  In fact NB was involved in a shooting accident whereby a bullet he fired ricocheted off a tree blinding June's father in one eye who happened to be standing next to NB.  So it is entirely feasible that DRH/5 hit June without pentrating her body and ricocheted back towards the shooter. 

According to you DRH/5 pertains to a graze wound sustained by NB.  However the court/jury were told by MF that this bullet pertained to an 8th gsw sustained by June as outlined above.  Documentary evidence attached.

The upshot of all of this is that you want to claim NB was shot in the bedroom and I maintain he wasn't. 

[Holly Goodhead]

I doubt that will accomplish much, you will be dealing with some clerical worker who was probably born after the murders and won't have the first clue how to research the issue.

Not only do we not know when the chart is from we don't know if it contains a typo, the magazine may have accidentally taken the same weight from the hyper velocity ammo.

The defense and Fletcher would have been concerned had Nevill's ammo been 35 or even 37.5 grain since some of the bullet fragments were heavier than that. A bullet fragment by definition is only a portion of a whole so can't weigh more than a complete bullet.  This nonsense was made up by Mike to support his nonsense about police ammo being used on the victims.

While I would have liked Eley to provide me with direct evidence to put this nonsense to rest it is no big loss since I know for a fact these are 40 grain:



and moreover Know for a fact that 7 of the bullet fragments well exceeded 35 grain yet the defense and Fletcher didn't see that as a problem though they would have if Mike's nonsense were correct.

There's no mention of bullet weights in MF's trial testimony.  Version 1 refers to the fact that the first page is present.  In version 2 it is missing.

[attachment deleted by admin]