Author Topic: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.  (Read 1244 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Holly Goodhead

Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« on: July 11, 2018, 03:14:31 PM »
I have never been able to reconcile either JB or SC burning NB's back.  Why single out NB?  Also we know the rifle does not get hot enough from firing alone to cause burn marks and no other obvious implement was found in the vicinity. 

Prof Knight did not think the marks were burn marks as per attached trial testimony.

Is there any evidence they were even caused on the night of the murders?

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« Reply #1 on: July 11, 2018, 03:38:04 PM »
Just reread Dr V's TT:

Arlidge:  Can you tell how recent they were?

Dr V:  They appeared to be pretty recent.  By this I mean they appeared to be associated with the same time as the  other injuries we saw to the body and did not appear to be old wounds.


Offline adam

Re: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« Reply #2 on: July 12, 2018, 12:28:54 AM »
There are several reasons why Bamber would burn Nevill's back. He would be composed enough to do this & may have even considered this as an option beforehand if unsure if someone was dead.

This may have been another reason why the silencer was taken off.

Bamber lifted a lifeless Nevill onto the coal scuttle, to make it easy to lift Nevill's pyjama top up.

« Last Edit: July 12, 2018, 06:46:17 AM by adam »

Offline adam

Re: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« Reply #3 on: July 12, 2018, 12:34:30 AM »
The COA mention the burn marks as part of the list of his scene of crime injuries. They believe his burn marks occurred on the massacre night.

42. The examination of Nevill Bamber's body also revealed black eyes and a broken nose, linear bruising to the cheeks, lacerations to the head, linear type bruising to the right forearm, bruising to the left wrist and forearm and three circular burn type marks to the back. The linear marks were consistent with Mr Bamber having been struck with a long blunt object, possibly a gun.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2018, 06:45:06 AM by adam »

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« Reply #4 on: July 12, 2018, 09:48:04 AM »
There are several reasons why Bamber would burn Nevill's back. He would be composed enough to do this & may have even considered this as an option beforehand if unsure if someone was dead.

This may have been another reason why the silencer was taken off.

Bamber lifted a lifeless Nevill onto the coal scuttle, to make it easy to lift Nevill's pyjama top up.

But why single out NB?  How could he be sure other victims were dead?

If I recall correctly Dr Vanezis told CAL the marks, which he identified as burns, could have been inflicted through the pyjama top without damaging the fabric since the top contained no burn marks. But why go down the back vertically and not across horizontally? 

I maintain the marks were old injuries from NB's back injury/surgery when he sustained a plane crash WW2. Post death the marks then took on an altered appearance.

Offline APRIL

Re: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« Reply #5 on: July 12, 2018, 10:55:59 AM »
But why single out NB?  How could he be sure other victims were dead?

If I recall correctly Dr Vanezis told CAL the marks, which he identified as burns, could have been inflicted through the pyjama top without damaging the fabric since the top contained no burn marks. But why go down the back vertically and not across horizontally? 

I maintain the marks were old injuries from NB's back injury/surgery when he sustained a plane crash WW2. Post death the marks then took on an altered appearance.

Off the top of my head, it's just possible that those prod marks? HAD they occurred that night, were inflicted because it had taken much more effort to dispatch Nevill than the others. I once suggested the marks MAY have been the result of minor procedures. I still believe that to be a possibility, as is your own suggestion of injuries going back to WW2.

Offline adam

Re: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« Reply #6 on: July 12, 2018, 12:29:17 PM »
But why single out NB?  How could he be sure other victims were dead?

If I recall correctly Dr Vanezis told CAL the marks, which he identified as burns, could have been inflicted through the pyjama top without damaging the fabric since the top contained no burn marks. But why go down the back vertically and not across horizontally? 

I maintain the marks were old injuries from NB's back injury/surgery when he sustained a plane crash WW2. Post death the marks then took on an altered appearance.

Nevill would be singled out because he put up a big fight after getting shot 4 times. Bamber wanted to make sure he was dead. Nevill was also near the aga.

Bamber couldn't burn everyone's back. Espescially Sheila's ! He was more convinced everyone else was dead. He also had time limits.

No need to check on two 6 year olds after they had been shot 8 times while they slept. They couldn't incriminate Bamber even if they survived. Bamber was satisfied his final two shots into June had killed her.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2018, 12:47:21 PM by adam »

Offline Caroline

Re: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« Reply #7 on: July 12, 2018, 01:55:56 PM »
But why single out NB?  How could he be sure other victims were dead?

If I recall correctly Dr Vanezis told CAL the marks, which he identified as burns, could have been inflicted through the pyjama top without damaging the fabric since the top contained no burn marks. But why go down the back vertically and not across horizontally? 

I maintain the marks were old injuries from NB's back injury/surgery when he sustained a plane crash WW2. Post death the marks then took on an altered appearance.

I don't know where the marks came from but can't see Bamber (or Sheila for that matter) buring Nevil's back. I

Offline Alice

Re: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« Reply #8 on: July 12, 2018, 02:46:45 PM »
If these were really old wounds from the war I think it is more than likely some other family member would have been aware and it would be known about. I mean is there any one of us who hasn't seen our Dad without his shirt when swimming or getting changed? Old scars go white with the healing process and these are definitely dark, I'm really not buying that!

Offline Real justice

Re: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« Reply #9 on: July 12, 2018, 05:51:44 PM »
But why single out NB?  How could he be sure other victims were dead?

If I recall correctly Dr Vanezis told CAL the marks, which he identified as burns, could have been inflicted through the pyjama top without damaging the fabric since the top contained no burn marks. But why go down the back vertically and not across horizontally? 

I maintain the marks were old injuries from NB's back injury/surgery when he sustained a plane crash WW2. Post death the marks then took on an altered appearance.
Could be Holly, a lot of old miners used to have blue scarring from wounds inflicted underground, I had a slight blue scar above one of my eyes (faded now) the wounds never got the thorough washout, normally like Alice said they eventually heal white, but if dirt has got in they tend to heal blueish.

No longer do we see blue scars on bodies and faces where broken skin healed over the coal dust. Dilapidated buildings and slag heaps are the reminders.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2018, 05:58:00 PM by Real justice »

Offline adam

Re: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« Reply #10 on: July 12, 2018, 06:45:14 PM »
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9528.msg441998.html#msg441998

Even David is saying they are burn marks. His thread posts highlights experts, who also say they are burn marks. The COA say they 'appear to be burn marks'.

---------------

There are several reasons why Bamber burned Nevill's back -


Bamber had put Nevill onto a coal scuttle where his bare back was easily available.

Nevill was immobilised.  He would not fight back from the burns.

The aga was next to Nevill.

There were rifles available to heat & use.

Bamber wanted to make sure Nevill was dead for reasons mentioned.

Bamber was composed & calculated enough to calm down after the kitchen fight to do burn Nevill's back.

Bamber had time to burn Nevill's back.

Bamber had to ensure Nevill was dead as Nevill would incriminate him if he survived.

Bamber may have considered this option beforehand if he felt he had to check for life.

If this was considered beforehand by Bamber, he could have brought his own burning item.

If a rifle nozzle would take several minutes to heat sufficiently, Bamber could attend to other framing business.

The evidence is Bamber took off the silencer after shooting Sheila. So had the rifle nozzle available to burn Nevill's back. Although as said other rifles were available.

There are no other credible alternative explanations why Nevill would have what experts say there are three recent burn marks on his back which are the same size as rifle nozzles.

Burning Nevill's back is an effective way to check for life. A partially concious Nevill would certainly react.

Nevill was only shot 4 times upstairs. Bamber may have burnt Nevill's back prior to or while shooting him again downstairs. Bamber would not have known how many more shots were needed at Nevill after the kitchen fight. Burning his back after 1-4 shots is a way to check for life.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2018, 08:29:44 PM by adam »

Offline Myster

Re: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« Reply #11 on: July 12, 2018, 06:59:43 PM »
If these were really old wounds from the war I think it is more than likely some other family member would have been aware and it would be known about. I mean is there any one of us who hasn't seen our Dad without his shirt when swimming or getting changed? Old scars go white with the healing process and these are definitely dark, I'm really not buying that!

My dad would never remove his shirt in public... because he was soooo hairy and afraid people would think he was a neanderthal throwback!  8(8-))
Yet more impressive tickling of the ivories... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=em1YBCZ46xg

Offline Myster

Re: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« Reply #12 on: July 12, 2018, 07:13:47 PM »
Here we go again, and again, and again... ad infinitum...

Maybe they were caused by a red-hot brass casing (the missing one) which bounced off the AGA wall / wooden surround and onto his back, becoming lodged temporarily between skin and pyjama top.

One for the gals...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxQXBueF4Bc

... and one for the guys...

https://youtu.be/1Q116cKnsTQ?t=44s


Yet more impressive tickling of the ivories... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=em1YBCZ46xg

Offline adam

Re: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« Reply #13 on: July 12, 2018, 07:31:27 PM »
Here we go again, and again, and again... ad infinitum...

Maybe they were caused by a red-hot brass casing (the missing one) which bounced off the AGA wall / wooden surround and onto his back, becoming lodged temporarily between skin and pyjama top.

One for the gals...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxQXBueF4Bc

... and one for the guys...

https://youtu.be/1Q116cKnsTQ?t=44s

You jest of course.

The three marks were all of the same size, shape & shade. They were caused at the same time.

They were all dark burns suggesting they were recent. Surely burn marks would fade 

I burnt my forearm with an iron once. A small burn. The burn stayed for several months before totally disappearing.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2018, 07:34:39 PM by adam »

Offline adam

Re: Prof Knight's Trial Testimony Re Marks to NB's back.
« Reply #14 on: July 12, 2018, 08:34:13 PM »
Not sure why Sheila would go from a violent & murderous killer, to calmly burning Nevill's back. Although it was impossible for her to lift Nevill onto the coal scuttle anyway.

Why wouldn't Sheila burn everyone else's back ? I have already answered this for Bamber.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2018, 06:39:50 AM by adam »