Jeremy Bamber - The three burn marks on Nevill's back

[Holly Goodhead]

You're a doubting Thomasina! 

Not if Carol Ann Lee and Paul Harrison have anything to do with it... they both think he's guilty as sin! 

Right... Lunchtime.

It's difficult to say what CAL's views are based on her book.  PH has hedged his bets with SC murdering NB and June, the twins are an unknown and NB murdering SC. 

[Holly Goodhead]

I have always doubted the so-called burn marks to NB's back and it seems I'm not alone.  According to Prof Knight's trial testimony he told the court he did not think they were burns.  It appears Dr Vanezis was not 100%.  As per the attached.

http://www.uc.pt/fmuc/DocumentosHomepage/2009/Maio/CVKnight

At the time of JB's trial Prof Knight was far more experienced than Dr Vanezis.

[scipio_usmc]

I have always doubted the so-called burn marks to NB's back and it seems I'm not alone.  According to Prof Knight's trial testimony he told the court he did not think they were burns.  It appears Dr Vanezis was not 100%.  As per the attached.

http://www.uc.pt/fmuc/DocumentosHomepage/2009/Maio/CVKnight

At the time of JB's trial Prof Knight was far more experienced than Dr Vanezis.

While I am no fan of Vanezis his claim that based on the photos they are not burns is hardly scientific.  Burns can and do look like that in photographs. The ultimate way to know whether a burn or a bruise would be examining the skin on person for searing.  Vanezis is the only one in a position to have done that.  The reason why it is preferred for defense experts to do their own autopsy is precisely because photos can't substitute for a physical examination.  Nothing he recorded about the attributes precludes them being burns and the photos can't prove they are not burns so we are effectively at Vanezis' mercy as to them being burns.

 

[Chiddies]

Could they not be cigarette burns

[Miss Taken Identity]

Could they not be cigarette burns

I have just seen this part of the thread and I agree, they do look like cigarette/cigar burns. They do not loo like 'moles'.

[Holly Goodhead]

Could they not be cigarette burns

The defence pathologist, Bernard Knight OBE, did not think they were burn marks.  He does however make the point that he didn't see them first hand but had to rely on soc images.

[barrier]

The defence pathologist, Bernard Knight OBE, did not think they were burn marks.  He does however make the point that he didn't see them first hand but had to rely on soc images.

So his defence wasn't up to much.

[Angelo222]

Were there matching holes in Nevill's pyjama top?

[Holly Goodhead]

So his defence wasn't up to much.

?

[Holly Goodhead]

Were there matching holes in Nevill's pyjama top?

No.  And there's no firm evidence they were burn marks or that they were inflicted on the night of the murders.

[Caroline]

No.  And there's no firm evidence they were burn marks or that they were inflicted on the night of the murders.

I am no expert but they look like old marks to me. However, we can never know what caused them.

[Nicholas]

MoJ's do occur.  How many thought Stefan Kiszko was innocent?  Not the appeal court judges first time around that's for sure.  And YET in the end it was proved 100% he was innocent and the perpetrator, Ronald Castree, was eventually caught and charged using DNA evidence.

Stefan Kiszko murdered Lesley Molseed

Ronald Castree appears to have been fitted up

And it wasn’t ‘proved 100%’ Kiszko was innocent - that’s your perception