Thanks David.
As I see it WHF was an extremely complex soc/trial, UK's only unwitnessed mass shooting, where ballistics and pathology overlap requiring world class experts at the top of their game akin to Lionel Messi in the world of football. Maybe Major Mead was more a Wayne Rooney. 
I don't think so. Its only a seemingly complex soc/trial when you first look into it. Once you purge your mind of all the BS this case has generated and see what is left its actually rather straight forward.
I would like to read Major Mead's trial testimony but it doesn't seem available? It's one thing saying the silencer wasn't used and another showing why not and overcoming the blood evidence which it seems the Major was unable to do at trial?
A witness can only answer questions that are asked. Mead was a witness introduced by the defence. Thus his initial examination (Like Bernard Knight) would have been by Rivlin QC who was pursuing his silencer was used blood mixture theory. Need I say more? Rivlin is not going to ask him any questions about whether the silencer was used or not because Rivlin is trying to persuade the jury that Sheila used it.
Major Mead was an expert witness in the MacLennan Enquiry. MacLennan was a policeman who was secretly a homosexual and was about to be charged and arrested by the Hong Kong Police for soliciting male escorts. Under colonial law he would be facing a possible life sentence. He shot himself in the chest five times with a handgun inside his property that has all windows and doors secured from within. Sound familiar?
Maybe this is why Rivlin hired him? so he could question him on his experience of it and hope the jury would pick up on it.
Also according to Shelley. Mead said the shooter didn't need any shooting skills to hit the targets at that close range.
Had the Major argued otherwise would Turner at 2002 appeal have pursued ground 12 ie NB using the phone AFTER he sustained the gsw's upstairs with a police officer then using the phone and removing the blood from NB's facial wounds? Another numpty lawyer.
Undisclosed evidence confirms a call was made by the police in WHF on that morning. Since the phone was allegedly found off the hook. The police must have either used that very phone or placed the handset back on the cradle and used the office phone. Either way the phone was tampered with.
Of course it would make sense for Rivlin to have argued that Neville made the call and then returned upstairs and as a result got shot. Since he could have and didn't it does not constitute a fresh argument. Thus cannot be used at appeal unless 'fresh evidence' comes to light that supports it.
No need for technicalties. As far as I'm concerned an acquittal is in the bag on the following basis:
Basis for referral to DPP/CoA
- Forensic tests to show the silencer and blood were fabricated
Its already been established that the silencer was not on the gun when the shots to Sheila's were inflicted. CCRC/COA are clinging onto the paint and scratch marks in order to claim the silencer was merely used and Sheila would not have used it thus cannot be the killer.
According to them as long as the silencer left the gun cupboard that night/morning the killer was not Sheila. It makes sense but to uphold a murder conviction on that basis without consulting a Jury on it is a complete joke.
Acquittal will be achieved with direct proof Sheila was involved. Either via newly discovered or withheld evidence.
- Soc reconstruction showing NB was shot on the landing stairs facing towards the main bedroom with perp stood inside main bedroom with barrel extending onto landing. This obviously lends support to NB calling JB.
- SC suffering an attachment disorder due to June's mental illness circa 1959 which leads to a propensity towards violence, aggression, suicide and filicide.
Not necessary once you show Sheila's involvement.
- Non disclosure of bloodstains on bible lending support to June walking around bed with it ie her bloodstains not JB faffing around causing mirror staining. This can't be proved as bible destroyed but CoA likely to give point on strength of other points and the fact it was destroyed against standard procedures for maintaing exhibits.
What would prevent prosecutors from arguing that JB staged the bible after June dropped it?
Furthermore the notion that June clung onto the bible in the face of death then dropped it as she walked back towards the hallway makes no sense.
- Forensic tests showing hand swab evidence wrong
There is nothing wrong with them. In isolation you can deduce several interpretations of what happened. Its the one that fits into the larger picture that is probably the correct one.
- Forensic tests showing fingerprints found on rifle ie 1 from JB and 1 from SC consistent with both recently handling rifle ie JB bunny hunting on 6th Aug and SC as perp early hours 7th Aug
Defence and prosecution don't dispute JB handled the gun on the evening of the 6th. Defence and prosecution don't dispute Sheila's prints got on the gun on the early hours of the 7th. What they do dispute is how exactly Sheila's prints got there.
- I understand poor defence can also be a ground of appeal although as you might imagine this isn't without difficulties. In any event it isn't needed for an acquittal.
Its the most straight forward way to get an acquittal. In this case the bar is so high you will need Rivlin to admit to it so it cannot be disputed. Its my opinion that Rivlin now hopes JB is guilty for the sake of his own legal career and legacy. Does the JB haunt him? who knows. The fact he almost split the jury without making any allegations of wrongdoing or conspiracy I find rather impressive. After all who is the root cause of JBs conviction? Its not Rivlin. Its easy to criticize him in hindsight.
