Author Topic: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002  (Read 1582 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #15 on: February 17, 2018, 11:12:16 AM »
But they won't show that their tests were wrong - just (perhaps) different.

I think it is possible to repeat the tests on a like-for-like basis to determine whether or not jurors were misled.  The cartridges are precision engineered and weighed in grains (a grain = 0.0648 gram so gives some idea of the precision.  As I see it nothing could be simpler and more straight-forward.

If testees load cartridges into mag and black discolouration doesn't present this will finish Fletcher's testimony in this regard.  Fletcher also claimed the cartridges, bullets produced oil and wax upon firearm discharge which he expected to find on SC's nightdress.  Again if this doesn't present upon firearm discharge this will finish off another aspect of Fletcher's testimony.  Elliot claimed lead on swabs taken from testees hands after loading cartridges into mag was higher than swabs taken from SC's.  Again if the test is repeated and testees hands show no lead or similar levels to swabs taken from SC it will finish off Elliot's testimony in this regard.

It would need to be proven that Bambers case WAS affected by such failures - you're forgetting innocent until proven guilty.

Yes of course and I believe it will as above.  Where incompetence or wrongdoing exists it takes someone or something to shine a bright light on it.  The financial crisis was a mixture of incompetence and wrongdoing which only really hit home when Lehman Bros collapsed and RBS was about to run out of cash.  Other examples are VW emission rigging, phone hacking and child sex abuse by the likes of Savile.  They are able to fall under the radar for years and sometimes decades and then whoosh they're exposed warts n all! 

Malcolm Fletcher's experience extended beyond having an air rifle as a small boy. Any court would take a dim view rightly or wrongly) of questioning and experts credentials in such a manner

Yes at trial Fletcher claimed his relevant experience amounted to 13 years in the firearms dept and "a small amount of experience of having an air rifle as a small boy".  It will be sufficient to undermine Fletcher's tests and up to the authorities to address any incompetence and/or wrongdoing. 

No doubt in my mind the fall out from this case will be massive. 
« Last Edit: March 19, 2018, 02:12:49 PM by Holly Goodhead »

Offline Caroline

Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #16 on: February 17, 2018, 12:43:57 PM »
I think it is possible to repeat the tests on a like-for-like basis to determine whether or not jurors were misled.  The cartridges are precision engineered and weighed in grains (a grain = 0.0648 gram so gives some idea of the precision.  As I see it nothing could be simpler and more straight-forward.

If testees load cartridges into mag and black discolouration doesn't present this will finish Fletcher's testimony in this regard.  Fletcher also claimed the cartridges, bullets produced oil and wax upon firearm discharge which he expected to find on SC's nightdress.  Again if this doesn't present upon firearm discharge this will finish off another aspect of Fletcher's testimony.  Elliot claimed lead on swabs taken from testees hands after loading cartridges into mag was higher than swabs taken from SC's.  Again if the test is repeated and testees hands show no lead or similar levels to swabs taken from SC it will finish off Elliot's testimony in this regard.

Yes of course and I believe it will as above.  Where incompetence or wrongdoing exists it takes someone or something to shine a bright light on it.  The financial crisis was a mixture of incompetence and wrongdoing which only really hit home when Lehman Bros collapsed and RBS was about to run out of cash.  Other examples are VW emission rigging, phone hacking and child sex abuse by the likes of Savile.  They are able to fall under the radar for years and sometimes decades and then whoosh they're exposed warts n all! 

Yes at trial Fletcher claimed his relevant experience amounted to 13 years in the firearms dept and "a small amount of experience of having an air rifle as a small boy".  It will be sufficient to undermine Fletcher's tests and up to the authorities to address any incompetence and/or wrongdoing. 

No doubt in my mind the fall out from this case will be massive.

Holly, if you're paying for this, it's your money but, you'd be better spending it on yourself. I honestly do wish you good luck though. Least you have the courage of your convictions (pardon the pun).

Offline adam

Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #17 on: February 17, 2018, 03:55:18 PM »
Would have thought if Bamber was innocent it would have been proved by now.

He's been protesting his innocence for 33 years. Backed 24/7 by lawyers, websites, authors, MP's & Campaign teams. Even Nugs said he is doing outside work.

However the Jeremy Bamber forum, which is 'pro' Bamber,  has supporters spending most of their time fire fighting incriminating evidence rather than showing how he is innocent.

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #18 on: February 17, 2018, 03:58:49 PM »
Holly, if you're paying for this, it's your money but, you'd be better spending it on yourself. I honestly do wish you good luck though. Least you have the courage of your convictions (pardon the pun).

But I haven't got any convictions! 

These points are minor in relation to the blood and silencer and at best can only ever form secondary points to an appeal. 

As part of the 1989 appeal, when Rivlin was still running with the mixed blood theory, he suggested the flake of blood would not withstand the environment within the silencer eg hot gasses etc.  I'm sure you will recall the mixed blood theory involves a theory whereby blood spattered back from NB and June's gsw's and/or the beating NB sustained resulting in combined blood group test results which match SC's blood group test results as a stand alone.  To demonstrate this wasn't so FSS claimed it placed blood within a number of silencers, discharged the same rifle 25 times and claimed the blood wasn't compromised in that it was still able to produce blood group test results.  This is at odds with all other forensic literature and to my mind tells me there was something wrong at the lab.  Bearing in mind blood serology testing requires a good quality sample.  Blasting 25 bullets through the silencer with the accompanying hot gases would obliterate any blood.

I don't think FSS was run by forensic scientists as we know them today.  Rather it housed a bunch of guys (and they were mainly guys) with science degrees eg biology, chemistry and made it up on the hoof in an attempt to show whatever the police were looking for. 


Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #19 on: February 17, 2018, 04:05:53 PM »
Would have thought if Bamber was innocent it would have been proved by now.

He's been protesting his innocence for 33 years. Backed 24/7 by lawyers, websites, authors, MP's & Campaign teams. Even Nugs said he is doing outside work.

However the Jeremy Bamber forum, which is 'pro' Bamber,  has supporters spending most of their time fire fighting incriminating evidence rather than showing how he is innocent.

These things run deep like financial crisis and child sex abuse scandals.  Often they are flagged up by the minority years before the proverbial s**t hits the fan but their concerns are brushed aside by the powers that be!

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #20 on: March 13, 2018, 06:35:27 PM »
IMO those most responsible for JB's plight (if you believe him innocent) are the lawyers both at trial and 1989 and 2002 appeal hearings.   

I've already highlighted how MT QC appealed against police officers disturbing soc in kitchen based on hearsay evidence from a police officer whilst overlooking direct evidence from a police officer showing unknown other(s) disturbing soc in bedroom ie SC.  Unless SC moved significantly as a result of biological functions post death.  The latter was suggested by friends: a former police officer and a former paratrooper.  In any event what's important is direct evidence shows SC moved and in all probability the bible and rifle too.  Impossible JB was responsible. 

The hand swabs took up a significant amount of time at appeal.  I accept gun crime is low in UK but it isn't unheard of.  Surely Terzeon, Rivlin, Lawson, Turner and Duck between them had some experience?  Or if they didn't they were able to turn to others who did eg colleagues, forensic scientists.  I'm simply dumbfounded how poor it all is.

Hand swabs were taken from SC at 3.15pm on 7th Aug using a special kit for capturing gunshot residue.  They were submitted to lab on 9th but returned to EP as they were sent in with an unrelated firearm which was thought to present a risk of contamination.  Even if this wasn't so the swabs presented numerous other issues:

GSR dissipates after a few hours which is exacerbated upon movement.  DI Cook moved SC's hand for DC Bird to photograph underneath. 

DC Hammersley placed SC's hands in bags.  The bags were not examined.  SC was then placed in a body bag and moved to the path lab.  DC Hammersley then swabbed SC's hands approx 3.15pm.

Even if GSR presented the prosecution could argue SC was found in a room where a firearm had been discharged numerous times including twice over her body with her hand in contact with the rifle. 

The presence or absence of GSR could be argued either way and could never provide anything meaningful.

As I said above a special swabbing kit was used to capture GSR which I understand is invisible to the naked eye and contains particles unique to firearm discharge residue in that the particles contain materials used in the cartridges.  To qualify as GSR particles have to contain a number of the materials used in the manufacture of the cartridges.

In his infinite wisdom FSS scientist, Brian Elliot, took it upon himself to test the swabs for lead in an attempt to link SC's hands with the handling of cartridges.  Surely everyone can see this simply isn't possible to do for a number of reasons:

- GSR presents on a shooters hand/person/clothes upon firearm discharge.  It presents indiscriminately ie covers a wide area so all that is required is a random swipe to capture the fall-out.  Attempting to link the hand swabs with handling discriminates in that everyone will handle the cartridges differently ie firmer/lighter touch and hold them in different positions.  Consider how people hold a writing pen.  Also it would require DC Hammersley and Brian Elliot to swab the hands in exactly the same location and there's no evidence this happened.  And all of this is before we even consider lead was present in the atmosphere and everyday items in the mid 80's coupled with other facts ie the very low levels present from SC and testees and the fact control swabs were not taken from testees to determine any lead already on hands. 

The results of the hand swab tests do not show it was unlikely SC handled cartridges. 

No such test for handling cartridges features in forensic textbooks nor is it offered by forensic service providers.

The lawyers were utterly useless in not picking up on these aspects and yet afaik there's no body, as in organisation, who deals with such complaints? 
« Last Edit: March 13, 2018, 07:51:56 PM by Holly Goodhead »

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #21 on: March 13, 2018, 08:26:17 PM »
A poster on the Madeleine McCann board uses the following tag:

Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

You might think this was a good starting point for defence lawyers but it seems not in JB's case.


Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #22 on: March 14, 2018, 12:42:23 PM »
To add insult to injury the CoA 2002 appeal states at point 177:

177. At trial Brian Elliott, a scientist from the Home Office Forensic Science Laboratory, gave evidence that the item DRH/33 described as "Swabbing Kit – hands of Sheila Caffell" had been received at the laboratory on 13 September 1985. He said that tests had been carried out for the presence of lead and that only "very low levels of lead have been detected on the two hand swabs".He further reported that tests had been carried out on two members of the laboratory staff who had loaded eighteen cartridges, similar to those used to shoot those who died at White House Farm, into the magazine of the rifle, and "significantly higher levels of lead" had been detected. Clearly if this evidence was right it cast doubt upon Sheila Caffell having loaded the cartridges into the gun and thus to her having killed the others and then herself.

Surely anyone would realise that such a test needs to be carried out on a like-for-like basis not just throwing in "similar" cartridges. 

Then at point 187:

"The hands – were swabbed – swabs rejected by the laboratory. Later raised by D/Superintendent Ainsley in conference at the laboratory when the laboratory again stated that it was too costly to do and that it would be expected to show a positive result as the body of Sheila was in a room contaminated by gunfire. D/Superintendent Ainsley made issue that the swabs should be examined and if not done he wished a statement to explain why it had not been done. As a result they were examined and found to be virtually negative of residue, i.e. lead, oil and propellant."

The swabbing kit used to swabs SC's hands was designed to capture the fall-out from firearm discharge ie gunshot residue not lead, oil and propellant.  If SC was perp there's no reason her hands would contain lead, oil and propellant. 

176. It is necessary to start by examining those parts of the evidence which are not in issue. It is clear that the police from an early stage appreciated the possible significance of the state of Sheila Caffell's hands and of anything that might connect them with the use of the gun. To preserve any available evidence, the hands were covered with plastic bags before the body was removed. When the post-mortem examination of the bodies of Nevill Bamber & Sheila Caffell took place later that day an officer, DC Hammersley, took swabs from the hands of Sheila Caffell using a special kit made for taking samples for testing for firearm residues.  He labelled the swabs with the reference DRH/33. There is evidence from which it can be established that these samples were taken at 3.15 p.m. on 7 August.

I just can't get my head round how these people can be so incompetent.

The "special kit" was made specifically for taking samples for testing for firearm residues.  PERIOD!  Not lead, oil and propellant.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2018, 12:51:44 PM by Holly Goodhead »

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #23 on: March 14, 2018, 12:49:31 PM »
I'm beginning to think MT QC's teacher may have been right:

Turner’s mother was given a letter saying her seven-year-old son should go to “a school for the educationally subnormal” but refused to believe it. She took him off to an IQ test, in which he scored highly. “I was – I am – a dyslexic.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9716069/Devils-advocate-Michael-Turner-prepares-for-his-toughest-case.html



Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #24 on: March 14, 2018, 01:28:09 PM »
https://www.forensicmag.com/article/2008/08/controversy-concerning-gunshot-residues-examinations

Fundamentally, GSR examiners are seeking microscopic particles containing lead (Pb), barium (Ba), and antimony (Sb) which, for the purposes of this article, are found uniquely in combination only in the primers of firearms cartridges. A particle composed of PbBaSb, fused together in a single unit, which exhibits the correct morphology (shape and appearance) to an experienced examiner is termed a unique particle. The examination itself consists of computer-controlled scanning electron microscope examinations of samples from suspect areas (commonlysuspect shooter’s hands) to locate the particles coupled with an X-rayanalyzer and an EDS, for energy dispersive analysis of X-rays to determine the elemental composition of the particles.


Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #25 on: April 15, 2018, 10:17:31 PM »
David just for you...

I refute your theory about SC's palm print appearing in/on the bible.

I refute MT QC's theory SC handled the bible and the open pages represented her state of mind.

- The bible belonged to June and was kept in/on her bedside cabinet.  June was  deeply religious to the point the CoA described it as obsessive.  She attended weekly bible classes.

- The bible was collected at soc and given the exhibit number DRH/44.  Unlike all other bloodstained exhibits tested at FSS bloodstain test results for the bible were not made available.  Of course the defence should have chased up but they didn't. 

- Fingerprint testing revealed the following:

52. The Bible found by Sheila Caffell's body, belonged to her mother and was normally kept in a cupboard to the right of her bed. It was examined for fingerprints. Many belonged to June Bamber and there were a small number of insufficient detail for comparison, save for one which appeared to have been made by a small child.

- Bearing in mind we know from A/PS Woodcock's WS that SC was moved between 7.30am - 10.30am we have no precise idea of the bibles found position. 

- The pathologist stated SC's palms and fingers were uncontaminated with blood.  The reverse was so for June.

- The bible is full of Abrahamic myths with themes along the lines of the open pages.  To my mind saying the open pages represent SC's state of mind is akin to the overweight horoscope guy in the tabloids, Russell someone.

- SC wasn't particularly religious.  Has she been she would have taken her own bible to WHF

My theory re the bible is that June having sustained gsw's in bed and getting out bed reached for her bible in her hour of need.  She walked from her side of the bed to NB's and back where she collapsed.  As she started to lose consciousness NB's side of the bed she dropped the bible. 

Why do you believe  SC sought out the bible and what evidence do you have for this? 

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #26 on: April 17, 2018, 09:42:10 AM »
David "Catty" is calling...

You accued me of being "catty" and "nasty" towards MT QC on the basis he blocked my emails.  In response to your accusations I said I would set out my reasons why IMO the 2002 appeal was pants where MT QC was lead counsel.  I've posted about the bible - ground 9.  Do you have any intention of responding? 

Offline Stephanie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2131
  • Total likes: 49
  • I was conned by Simon Hall & many others
Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #27 on: April 17, 2018, 10:02:50 AM »
David just for you...

I refute your theory about SC's palm print appearing in/on the bible.

I refute MT QC's theory SC handled the bible and the open pages represented her state of mind.

- The bible belonged to June and was kept in/on her bedside cabinet.  June was  deeply religious to the point the CoA described it as obsessive.  She attended weekly bible classes.

- The bible was collected at soc and given the exhibit number DRH/44.  Unlike all other bloodstained exhibits tested at FSS bloodstain test results for the bible were not made available.  Of course the defence should have chased up but they didn't. 

- Fingerprint testing revealed the following:

52. The Bible found by Sheila Caffell's body, belonged to her mother and was normally kept in a cupboard to the right of her bed. It was examined for fingerprints. Many belonged to June Bamber and there were a small number of insufficient detail for comparison, save for one which appeared to have been made by a small child.

- Bearing in mind we know from A/PS Woodcock's WS that SC was moved between 7.30am - 10.30am we have no precise idea of the bibles found position. 

- The pathologist stated SC's palms and fingers were uncontaminated with blood.  The reverse was so for June.

- The bible is full of Abrahamic myths with themes along the lines of the open pages.  To my mind saying the open pages represent SC's state of mind is akin to the overweight horoscope guy in the tabloids, Russell someone.

- SC wasn't particularly religious.  Has she been she would have taken her own bible to WHF

My theory re the bible is that June having sustained gsw's in bed and getting out bed reached for her bible in her hour of need.  She walked from her side of the bed to NB's and back where she collapsed.  As she started to lose consciousness NB's side of the bed she dropped the bible. 

Why do you believe  SC sought out the bible and what evidence do you have for this
?

What did Bamber tell the police about the bible when he was questioned under caution and what was his argument at trial regarding this? Nevermind what came later re SC psychiatrist. Psychopaths have a knack at persuading anyone to fall for their manufactured tales. What was Bambers argument at trial?
"When flying monkeys come calling, just click your ruby slippers together and remember that even narcs can be defeated once you know the truth"

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #28 on: April 17, 2018, 10:42:36 AM »
What did Bamber tell the police about the bible when he was questioned under caution and what was his argument at trial regarding this? Nevermind what came later re SC psychiatrist. Psychopaths have a knack at persuading anyone to fall for their manufactured tales. What was Bambers argument at trial?

JB was questioned about the bible during his interviews.  He was asked whether he had ever handled it and he said he may have done to hit June's small dog Crispy. 

JB's trial transcript doesn't appear to have survived so I don't know what if anything he said about it at trial. 

I don't recall reading anything from SC's psychiatrist re the bible but I've only read his WS's not TT. 

There's no evidence SC or JB handled the bible.  It's the only bloodstained exhibit where the bloodstain test results remain unknown.  This is one of the many reasons I say the lawyers and judges were incompetent and negligent in that they all assumed, wrongly IMO, the blood originated from SC.  The evidence points to June.

 

Offline Stephanie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2131
  • Total likes: 49
  • I was conned by Simon Hall & many others
Re: Analysis of CoA Hearing 2002
« Reply #29 on: April 17, 2018, 11:21:19 AM »
The hearing was set out over 522 points as follows:

POINTS          ASPECT OF CASE                      %

1- 174                Background                           33.33%

175 - 213           Handswabs Processing             7.47%

214 - 232           Handswabs Tests                     3.63%  (Total handswabs 11.1%)

233 - 260           Disturbance Kitchen by EP        5.36%

261 - 288           Windows                                 5.36%

289 - 330           Timing tel call - JM                   8.04%

331 - 366           Credibility of JM                       6.89%  (Total JM 14.55%)

367 - 377           Letter from CC                         2.10%

378 - 391           WS of CC                                 2.68%

392 - 404           Photo "I hate this place"           2.49%

405 - 421           Bible                                       3.25%

422 - 427           Inheritance                              1.14%

428                    Porsche                                   0.19%

429 - 443           Tel Kitchen                               2.87%

444 - 451           Scars on hands                         1.53%

452 - 475           Blood inside silencer                  4.59%

476 - 508           DNA                                         6.32% (Total silencer 10.91%)

509 - 511           Police misconduct                      0.57%

512 - 520           Conclusion by judges incl call
                         for fresh evidence by prosc re
                         SC moved in bedroom               1.72%

521 - 522           General Observation by judges  0.38%

The background of this case cannot be erased. No amount of mathematical equations will minus out the fact that Jeremy Bamber was responsible for what he told police both when outside WHF, during police questioning, to witnesses and during his trial.

All subsequent theories have not been able to break down the back story that makes up the case of Jeremy Bamber.
"When flying monkeys come calling, just click your ruby slippers together and remember that even narcs can be defeated once you know the truth"