As much as I disagree with her conclusions, Holly does at least approach the case from a serious angle and is prepared to argue her version of events, unlike the CT who are just plain mad and operating a cult. I respect Holly for that.
I share her disdain for Bambers poor understanding of his own case and the CT whose various members have allowed him to not just muddy his own waters but take a great big steaming dump in them.
From what I can gather, what she is trying to do is undermine the blood/silencer evidence which, if it's possible, would be enough on it's own to render the conviction unsafe and the CoA would order a retrial. This is basically trying to overturn the conviction on a technicality and goes nowhere near proving him innocent which IMO, can't be done. There is too much evidence against him.
CS, there was more than enough overwhelming evidence against JB without the silencer. Jeremy’s QC, who was one of the top in the UK, was unable to explain how Sheila’s blood came to be in the silencer. Blood spatter gives distinct patterns, and as no-one knew Sheila’s blood group; no-one knew her blood was even inside the silencer until forensics examined it microscopically; no-one knew the pattern back spatter makes; no-one knew how to make that same pattern even if they did know the pattern; then how could Sheila’s blood have ended up in a dried flake on the eighth baffle?
Taking it a step further, how could anyone have got a sample of Sheila’s wet blood when she’d been dead for weeks? We’ve established it couldn’t have been menstrual blood, so explain how Sheila’s blood was found in a dried flake on the eight baffle when the forensic scientists took it apart?
One needs solid evidence from forensic experts to put forward a case that proves the original findings were wrong, and as it stands there’s nothing at all that suggests otherwise. Holly obviously has her reasons for being so eager to try and prove JB was innocent, and in some ways I admire her tenacity, but I’m sorry to say that I believe she has either been bamboozled by JB or she has some other motive. She isn’t an idiot, yet she accepts every word he says. How’s that? Nor do I believe for a second that Jeremy is some “slow” impressionable Twit who is being told what to say and do by his team. He’s been imprisoned for 35 years and has learned a heck of a lot in that time; that’s on top of him already having a sly, devious nature and being a manipulator. It’s himself who’s the architect of what’s happened — and he has to pay the price.
And just to reiterate what I said previously, even without the evidence of the silencer, all the overwhelming evidence from the witness, Julie, who told the court things about the murders only Jeremy could have known; the fact he lied repeatedly; the fact he knew how to break in and leave WHF house leaving it looking secure; the fact he lied about the phone calls and timings...proves without doubt that only he could have murdered his family.
Which makes trying to discredit the findings of the silencer a complete waste of time.
