I despair sometimes of the rubbish posted on the Jeremy Bamber forum.

[Myster]

And David no idea why you keep quoting Prof Knight who published an article pre JB's trial stating women almost never use firearms to commit suicide or words to this effect as though it is relevant to JB's case?  Most adult women don't suffer mental illness and those that do will in the main not visit family homes where firearms and ammunition are accessible.  It would probably take an actuary to apply statistical meaning to Prof Knight's statement in the context of JB's case, a fact JB's defence may not have addressed. 

If I said in the 1950's most car accidents involved male drivers would this mean female drivers were better drivers etc?  No it would mean most drivers were male therefore stastically they had more accidents as they spent more time on roads behind the wheels.   

I blame Harry Enfield. 

[Myster]

Jan and Steve_uk regular contributors to the Blue forum completely oblivious to JB's blood group:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=260.0;attach=844

Steve_uk see me for some detention and punishment 

Jan you need to up your game otherwise you will remain on the bench 

Seriously do you guys read the docs?  You've both made in excess of 8k posts and no idea of JB's blood group.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8537.msg407603.html#msg407603

 

Is watching blue implode better than enjoying wimmins' footy? 

[Myster]

Is watching blue implode better than enjoying wimmins' footy? 

Had more satisfaction listening to Martin van Beynen's recent podcast series on the Bain murders. Hard going and would be better transcribed to read, but...

http://stuff.libsyn.com/

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/93827727/martin-van-beynen-why-the-david-bain-story-needed-to-be-told-one-more-time

[Holly Goodhead]

Is watching blue implode better than enjoying wimmins' footy? 

There's no comparison.  The wimmins football is sublime and thankfully very few tatoos in sight!  England play Portugal this eve ko 7.45pm Ch4.   

[Myster]

STOP PRESS:

I am sitting on new information which establishes Jeremy Bambers innocence beyond doubt!!!

Stay tuned in, because by tomorrow all will be revealed...

Goodnight, everybody..

 

[Myster]

That must be one of his shortest ever posts!

But hey... desperate measures are needed to stop the old tumbril rattling its way to the guillotine.

[John]

Dr Vanezis and Prof Knight told the jury it was possible SC shot herself twice.

Expert speak for not impossible.  But highly improbable all the same.

[Holly Goodhead]

Expert speak for not impossible.  But highly improbable all the same.

As far as I can see Dr Vanezis was resolute during his trial testimony stating it was impossible to conclude from the pathological evidence whether SC took her own life or she was murdered. 

Prof Knight at trial:

Sheila is the only shooting of the whole 5 where the bullets have gone upwards.  Now to shoot upwards obviously one must put the gun under the chin with the butt down there at the bottom.  For a third party to do this seems rather extroidinary, to shoot upwards through the throat, because he would have to hold the gun under her neck when she is obviously upright because of the blood splashing, and although it is not impossible it seems a strange thing to happen.  As I say it is the only death of the five where the wounds went upwards and not downwards or straight through.  So, I think it would be difficult for someone else to do this without her objecting.

The following is an extract from the CoA:

467. The next feature of Mr Webster's evidence which left us unimpressed was the way in which he criticised Mr Hayward for assessing the chance that the blood was not a mixture as being a remote chance. He said that a remote chance was equivalent to the chance that he might be struck by lightning as he left the court building. We think that that was to suggest something far less likely than that which Mr Hayward had sort to convey to the jury. Forensic scientists are used to putting probabilities on a scale that a jury can understand. At one end of the scale is a very strong chance, at the other a remote chance. To suggest that it was giving the chance as being so unlikely that it could effectively be discounted is to distort what Mr Hayward was saying. Mr Webster's own assessment of the chance as a "real" chance is unhelpful. Whether there is a very strong chance of something happening or a remote chance of it happening, it is a real chance. A real chance does nothing to assess the likelihood of something happening in a way that a jury could properly understand.

As you will see the appeal court judges state "Forensic scientists are used to putting probabilities on a scale that a jury can understand."  No such probabilities were given by Dr Vanezis or Prof Knight.

From Dr DiMaio - pathologist with expertise in gunshot wounds:

Suicides in which multiple gunshot wounds are present are uncommon, but
not rare. These wounds may involve only one area, e.g., the head, or multiple
areas, such as the head and chest. Multiple gunshot wounds confined exclusively
to the head are the least common, whereas those of the chest are the
most common. A lack of knowledge of anatomy, flinching at the time the
trigger is pulled, defective ammunition, ammunition of the wrong caliber,
or just missing a vital organ, account for such multiple wounds.Occasionally,
individuals have shot themselves simultaneously in the head with two different
weapons (Figure 14.10).
Wounds that may appear to be fatal on initial examination may not be
so on autopsy. Thus, in an individual who shot himself four times in the
chest and once in the head with a .22-caliber pistol, one would assume that
the head wound was the fatal shot. However, the autopsy revealed that the
bullet flattened out against the frontal bone, and death was due to one of the
four gunshot wounds of the chest, with one bullet going through the heart.
The largest number of gunshot wounds in a suicide that the author is
aware of is nine.5 The weapon was a nine-shot .22-caliber revolver. All nine
bullets entered the chest, with one perforating a vital organ, the left lung,
causing massive hemorrhage, hemothorax, and death.

[Myster]

But that court testimony is false.  The first bullet to Sheila was delivered almost perpendicular to her neck, therefore not upwards!

[Holly Goodhead]

But that court testimony is false.  The first bullet to Sheila was delivered almost perpendicular to her neck, therefore not upwards!

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=205.0;attach=730

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=205.0;attach=732

According to Dr Vanezis the angle of the lower wound was slightly upwards from the horizontal by about 10 - 20 degrees with the neck in the neutral position. 

[Myster]

Samson, you obviously have little, if any, understanding of those with a narcissistic personality intent on getting their hands on their family's wealth.  Bamber's own defence team were advised that the memory of the terrible nature of what he'd done had been shoved to the back of his mind, then dropped off as if it never existed. Bamber and Bain... two peas out of the same pod imo.

Why is it that you constantly avoid all the other evidence and focus on only one particular part of the case, i.e. the "suicide" shot which is open to different interpretations, not just yours?  There was nothing to stop David Bain sneaking out from behind the bay window and firing at close range whilst his father was engrossed in prayer with eyes shut and oblivious to anyone being present. Some killers just get lucky. Then we have the ejected bullet casing position nowhere near where it should have landed, and that mysterious self-balancing magazine case.

I thought "Black Hands" was a thorough expose of David Bain's involvement... well done, Martin van Beynen.

[Holly Goodhead]

Samson, you obviously have little, if any, understanding of those with a narcissistic personality intent on getting their hands on their family's wealth.  Bamber's own defence team were advised that the memory of the terrible nature of what he'd done had been shoved to the back of his mind, then dropped off as if it never existed. Bamber and Bain... two peas out of the same pod imo.

Why is it that you constantly avoid all the other evidence and focus on only one particular part of the case, i.e. the "suicide" shot which is open to different interpretations, not just yours?  There was nothing to stop David Bain sneaking out from behind the bay window and firing at close range whilst his father was engrossed in prayer with eyes shut and oblivious to anyone being present. Some killers just get lucky. Then we have the ejected bullet casing position nowhere near where it should have landed, and that mysterious self-balancing magazine case.

I thought "Black Hands" was a thorough expose of David Bain's involvement... well done, Martin van Beynen.

The only source for the above is author Roger Wilkes.  Completely unreliable imo.  No name for the mystery psychologist or members of JB's defence involved in this alleged conversation.  In the same way I can't see Dr Vanezis overlooking numerous marks on the victims, I can't see JB's defence sitting around gossiping with book authors, especially given the high profile and contentious nature of the case and the fact JB has always protested his innocence and continually looked for ways to appeal his sentence. 

[Myster]

The only source for the above is author Roger Wilkes.  Completely unreliable imo.  No name for the mystery psychologist or members of JB's defence involved in this alleged conversation.  In the same way I can't see Dr Vanezis overlooking numerous marks on the victims, I can't see JB's defence sitting around gossiping with book authors, especially given the high profile and contentious nature of the case and the fact JB has always protested his innocence and continually looked for ways to appeal his sentence. 

So by that same token CAL is also unreliable when she recalled Sheila's best friend, Tora Tomkinson, saying -"I just knew she couldn't have done it!", or in interviewing Vanezis, Fletcher and Ainsley, 30 years later.

It was a case conference on the eve of trial, which included an eminent psychiatrist (who probably did not wish to be named in the book) in the presence of Geoffrey Rivlin, Ed Lawson, et al.

[Holly Goodhead]

Explain David Bain's blood-soaked opera gloves hidden under Stephen's bed, Holly.  Surely you don't think Bain senior would actually go to the trouble of searching for and wearing them to prevent fingerprints, if he intended to commit suicide?!!!

Or Bain's various fits which first responders to the scene and even his jailer friend later noted and dismissed as fake. Listen to the Episode Four video of Graeme Stanley recalling his odd behaviour...

https://interactives.stuff.co.nz/blackhands/evidence/

Given the rifle belonged to DB why would he worry about fingerprints if he was the perp?  Why would he choose white opera gloves?  He had an early morning paper round and the murders occured during the winter months so I'm assuming he had winter gloves?  Were the gloves checked for gsr and other debris?  Were the gloves "hidden"?  The blood stains are described as "smears" so maybe RB picked them up to wipe something? 

I'll listen to the "odd behaviour" later but I see the same thing in all these cases and I don't consider it evidence of anything.  Blimey if I found myself charged with some crime I can hear it all now. "She was a bit odd...she called herself Naughty Nun on an internet forum dedicated to debating the case of Jeremy Bamber.  Then she was banned and reinvented herself as Holly Goodhead on another forum where she spent hours posting about Jeremy Bamber.  She was adopted too!  Says it all really.  Must be guilty.  I only wish we could find a way of circumventing the legal process.  We all know she's guilty and it would save the state thousands of pounds".   

[Holly Goodhead]

So by that same token CAL is also unreliable when she recalled Sheila's best friend, Tora Tomkinson, saying -"I just knew she couldn't have done it!", or in interviewing Vanezis, Fletcher and Ainsley, 30 years later.

It was a case conference on the eve of trial, which included an eminent psychiatrist (who probably did not wish to be named in the book) in the presence of Geoffrey Rivlin, Ed Lawson, et al.

No because CAL has quoted all sources and if she was found misquoting then potentially those misquoted could sue her/publishers.

So we are told but would Rivlin and Lawson relay this to Roger Wilkes circa 1994 knowing JB was appealing his sentence?  (Around this time JB was represented by David Martin Sperry, Isabelle Gillard and Ewen Smith).  If they did where's the evidence the "eminent psychiatrist" actually met with JB to carry out a formal assessment?