Author Topic: Differences In Forensics And Trial Between WHF And Murder Of Jill Dando  (Read 11492 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Holly Goodhead

I know I've posted previously about the fact jurors were taken to Jill Dando's home to view soc which wasn't the case at WHF.  It would have been helpful to jurors to see how easy, difficult or impossible it was for JB to enter WHF and exit leaving the window secured from within. 

Also just reading that in the case of Jill Dando;

 “The post-mortem report, the injuries to her head, the markings (on the bullet) indicated a silencer couldn’t have been on the gun.”

I wonder why in one case it was possible to say a silencer wasn't used and in another the firearms 'expert' *Malcolm Fletcher was unable to say one way or another?

*Told the court his relevant experience included a small amount of experience with an air rifle as a small boy.
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUvVdTlA23w&list=RDYpkv0HeUvTc&index=2

Offline APRIL

I know I've posted previously about the fact jurors were taken to Jill Dando's home to view soc which wasn't the case at WHF.  It would have been helpful to jurors to see how easy, difficult or impossible it was for JB to enter WHF and exit leaving the window secured from within. 

Also just reading that in the case of Jill Dando;

 “The post-mortem report, the injuries to her head, the markings (on the bullet) indicated a silencer couldn’t have been on the gun.”

I wonder why in one case it was possible to say a silencer wasn't used and in another the firearms 'expert' *Malcolm Fletcher was unable to say one way or another?

*Told the court his relevant experience included a small amount of experience with an air rifle as a small boy.


I'm interested that something which still appears to be worrying you is what Malcolm Fletcher said in court and from which you seem to conclude -and would like us to believe- that his ONLY experience with firearms MAY stem from "a small amount of experience with an air rifle as a small boy". However, what he actually said was that his relevant experience INCLUDED...........which suggests to me that he'd had an interest in firearms which started in childhood.

I'm not going to begin to suggest what prompted one expert to be restrained in their assertions whilst another was so confident, but I can point out several variables. The skin covering a skull is tight. I imagine a firearm pressed, and fired, anywhere against it, the nozzle being unlikely to move, would leave very definite/measurable marks on skin or equally discernable marks where hair has been. Skin around the neck and throat is looser, the victim has time to move, their movements possibly blurring any definite marks, making it difficult to make finite claims on the use of a silencer. For others, we need to know what was the expert's mindset. If they're of the school that believes, and holds onto, one and one ALWAYS makes two, they will be firm and confident. If they believe there's a margin for error, their claims are likely to be less forceful. At the end of the day, it's down to a jury to come to a decision on what they've heard.

Offline Holly Goodhead

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0003w40/the-murder-of-jill-dando

@ 21 mins in the lead detective on the Jill Dando case, Chief Sup Hamish Campbell, talks about the fact a silencer wasn't used based on pathological evidence and the markings on the bullet.

@ 48 mins in a forensic scientist, Angela Shaw, who specialises in gunshot residue, talks about particles.  In JB's case we have no particles!

https://www.csofs.org/Angela-Shaw
« Last Edit: April 08, 2019, 03:10:50 PM by Holly Goodhead »
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUvVdTlA23w&list=RDYpkv0HeUvTc&index=2

Offline Holly Goodhead


I'm interested that something which still appears to be worrying you is what Malcolm Fletcher said in court and from which you seem to conclude -and would like us to believe- that his ONLY experience with firearms MAY stem from "a small amount of experience with an air rifle as a small boy". However, what he actually said was that his relevant experience INCLUDED...........which suggests to me that he'd had an interest in firearms which started in childhood.
 

I have posted MF's intro to the court numerous times so anyone can make of it what they will - attached below.  If you or a loved one were due to have some surgery and the surgeon said I work in the heart department and have done so for the past 13 years.  If you then asked what experience he/she had prior to this and they said a small amount of experience of 'Operation' (the game) as a child how reassured would you be you were in safe hands?

I'm not going to begin to suggest what prompted one expert to be restrained in their assertions whilst another was so confident, but I can point out several variables. The skin covering a skull is tight. I imagine a firearm pressed, and fired, anywhere against it, the nozzle being unlikely to move, would leave very definite/measurable marks on skin or equally discernable marks where hair has been. Skin around the neck and throat is looser, the victim has time to move, their movements possibly blurring any definite marks, making it difficult to make finite claims on the use of a silencer. For others, we need to know what was the expert's mindset. If they're of the school that believes, and holds onto, one and one ALWAYS makes two, they will be firm and confident. If they believe there's a margin for error, their claims are likely to be less forceful. At the end of the day, it's down to a jury to come to a decision on what they've heard.

Yes there's the pathology of the wounds but there's also the markings on the bullets.  In the case of WHF either 25 or 26 bullets were fired.  Many fragmented but some were whole or virtually whole and yet according to Malcolm Fletcher he was unable to discern whether or not a silencer was used?  Has anyone ever carried out any independent tests in an attempt to check MF's findings and see if it is possible to determine whether or not a silencer was used? 
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUvVdTlA23w&list=RDYpkv0HeUvTc&index=2

Offline APRIL

 

I have posted MF's intro to the court numerous times so anyone can make of it what they will - attached below.  If you or a loved one were due to have some surgery and the surgeon said I work in the heart department and have done so for the past 13 years.  If you then asked what experience he/she had prior to this and they said a small amount of experience of 'Operation' (the game) as a child how reassured would you be you were in safe hands?

Yes there's the pathology of the wounds but there's also the markings on the bullets.  In the case of WHF either 25 or 26 bullets were fired.  Many fragmented but some were whole or virtually whole and yet according to Malcolm Fletcher he was unable to discern whether or not a silencer was used?  Has anyone ever carried out any independent tests in an attempt to check MF's findings and see if it is possible to determine whether or not a silencer was used?

Well naturally, should I have believed the surgeon's only prior experience had been that which you describe, I would, undoubtedly, have had grave concerns. However, whilst I feel I'd be unlikely to challenge an expert, I do accept that some can slip through nets, as in a recent case of an NHS 'psychiatrist' in this area who'd been treating patients for years when it was discovered she had no psychiatric qualifications -one assumes she got away with it -albeit it's arguable that the potential for damage may be greater- because damage done to an already damaged mind shows rather less than damage done to an already damaged body? I don't believe she was struck off, simply returned to what her medical qualifications allowed. I think that in most circumstances there may be found a margin for error.

In answer to your question regarding independent tests being carried out to test MF's findings. HAD such been carried out and discrepancies found, we'd surely be straying into the realms of (even more) conspiracy theories -involving high finance?- if it's being suggested that the results were hidden? Surely there must be some forensic scientists/firearms specialists out there who are more concerned about the integrity of their work, than financial reward?

 There's an interesting programme presently being aired in which living relatives of the previously convicted -and hanged- challenge the courts decision. The evidence accrued by two barristers is then heard by a, now retired, High Court judge. Thus far, of those I've watched, he's only found one conviction unsafe.

Offline Holly Goodhead

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0003w40/the-murder-of-jill-dando

@ 21 mins in the lead detective on the Jill Dando case, Chief Sup Hamish Campbell, talks about the fact a silencer wasn't used based on pathological evidence and the markings on the bullet.

@ 48 mins in a forensic scientist, Angela Shaw, who specialises in gunshot residue, talks about particles.  In JB's case we have no particles!

https://www.csofs.org/Angela-Shaw

And I've no idea why it was deemed relevant for jurors to visit Jill Dando's doorstep along with other relevant sites but not relevant for jurors to visit WHF, Bourtree Cottage and the route JB supposedly took on his mother's bike?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2106301/Jill-Dando-killer-Barry-George-visits-streets-where-she-died.html
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUvVdTlA23w&list=RDYpkv0HeUvTc&index=2

Offline Holly Goodhead

Well naturally, should I have believed the surgeon's only prior experience had been that which you describe, I would, undoubtedly, have had grave concerns. However, whilst I feel I'd be unlikely to challenge an expert, I do accept that some can slip through nets, as in a recent case of an NHS 'psychiatrist' in this area who'd been treating patients for years when it was discovered she had no psychiatric qualifications -one assumes she got away with it -albeit it's arguable that the potential for damage may be greater- because damage done to an already damaged mind shows rather less than damage done to an already damaged body? I don't believe she was struck off, simply returned to what her medical qualifications allowed. I think that in most circumstances there may be found a margin for error.

In answer to your question regarding independent tests being carried out to test MF's findings. HAD such been carried out and discrepancies found, we'd surely be straying into the realms of (even more) conspiracy theories -involving high finance?- if it's being suggested that the results were hidden? Surely there must be some forensic scientists/firearms specialists out there who are more concerned about the integrity of their work, than financial reward?

 There's an interesting programme presently being aired in which living relatives of the previously convicted -and hanged- challenge the courts decision. The evidence accrued by two barristers is then heard by a, now retired, High Court judge. Thus far, of those I've watched, he's only found one conviction unsafe.

I've no idea what tests, if any, the defence expert Major Mead undertook.  But it seems to me it would be something black and white: discharge rifle with ammo used 26 times with and without silencer and then  microscopically examine the bullets in an attempt to determine whether or not any differences exist between those fired with a silencer and those fired without a silencer.  For all I know it may well have been done and MF may well have been right in this regard.  I've never seen the Major's trial testimony.

That prog sounds interesting but I would prefer to hear the opinions of forensic scientists rather than barristers and judges whose opinions are no more valid than ours.  They are trained in law and many have no more than O levels, or the equivalent of, in science subjects.
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUvVdTlA23w&list=RDYpkv0HeUvTc&index=2

Offline APRIL

I've no idea what tests, if any, the defence expert Major Mead undertook.  But it seems to me it would be something black and white: discharge rifle with ammo used 26 times with and without silencer and then  microscopically examine the bullets in an attempt to determine whether or not any differences exist between those fired with a silencer and those fired without a silencer.  For all I know it may well have been done and MF may well have been right in this regard.  I've never seen the Major's trial testimony.

That prog sounds interesting but I would prefer to hear the opinions of forensic scientists rather than barristers and judges whose opinions are no more valid than ours.  They are trained in law and many have no more than O levels, or the equivalent of, in science subjects.


Which begs the question, which is it better to have, a decision in law, or justice?

Offline Holly Goodhead


Which begs the question, which is it better to have, a decision in law, or justice?

An idea might be that lawyers have to undertake further qualifications in whatever areas of law they wish to practice in and stop flitting about being a jack of everything and a master of nothing.  Eg lawyers working on cases involving firearms: WHF, Rettendon Murders, Jill Dando, Carl Bridgwater undertake qualifications in ballistics. 

 
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUvVdTlA23w&list=RDYpkv0HeUvTc&index=2

Offline APRIL

An idea might be that lawyers have to undertake further qualifications in whatever areas of law they wish to practice in and stop flitting about being a jack of everything and a master of nothing.  Eg lawyers working on cases involving firearms: WHF, Rettendon Murders, Jill Dando, Carl Bridgwater undertake qualifications in ballistics. 

 


I hear what you say and in theory, I think it's a good idea. It could work well in large city firms, but in the rural provinces? Wouldn't this mean that they'd have to choose, in advance, which area to specialize in? Could it mean that they were prevented from taking on other cases because they lacked the qualifications held by others who had chosen them? Might not doing such put limitations on their careers?

Offline adam

Re: Differences In Forensics And Trial Between WHF And Murder Of Jill Dando
« Reply #10 on: April 08, 2019, 08:03:21 PM »
And I've no idea why it was deemed relevant for jurors to visit Jill Dando's doorstep along with other relevant sites but not relevant for jurors to visit WHF, Bourtree Cottage and the route JB supposedly took on his mother's bike?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2106301/Jill-Dando-killer-Barry-George-visits-streets-where-she-died.html

Showing the jurors the whole route Bamber cycled, would mean walking them 3 miles. Although there was more than one route he could take.

Suspect both the prosecution & defence accepted it was possible to cycle. Did the prosecution ever dispute Bamber could cycle the route?

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Differences In Forensics And Trial Between WHF And Murder Of Jill Dando
« Reply #11 on: April 08, 2019, 09:54:00 PM »
Showing the jurors the whole route Bamber cycled, would mean walking them 3 miles. Although there was more than one route he could take.

Suspect both the prosecution & defence accepted it was possible to cycle. Did the prosecution ever dispute Bamber could cycle the route?

Yes I guess taking jurors on a number of possible cycle routes wasn't practical and wouldn't really prove much if anything but I don't see why jurors were not taken to WHF to check out the windows.
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUvVdTlA23w&list=RDYpkv0HeUvTc&index=2

Offline Caroline

Re: Differences In Forensics And Trial Between WHF And Murder Of Jill Dando
« Reply #12 on: April 08, 2019, 10:03:30 PM »
 

I have posted MF's intro to the court numerous times so anyone can make of it what they will - attached below.  If you or a loved one were due to have some surgery and the surgeon said I work in the heart department and have done so for the past 13 years.  If you then asked what experience he/she had prior to this and they said a small amount of experience of 'Operation' (the game) as a child how reassured would you be you were in safe hands?

Yes there's the pathology of the wounds but there's also the markings on the bullets.  In the case of WHF either 25 or 26 bullets were fired.  Many fragmented but some were whole or virtually whole and yet according to Malcolm Fletcher he was unable to discern whether or not a silencer was used?  Has anyone ever carried out any independent tests in an attempt to check MF's findings and see if it is possible to determine whether or not a silencer was used?

I don't know why you keep dwelling on this. It sounds to me that MF was being flippant and with good reason; 13 years is a long time to work in a particular field and Aldridges question seems to be dismissive of his 13 years experience.

Offline Caroline

Re: Differences In Forensics And Trial Between WHF And Murder Of Jill Dando
« Reply #13 on: April 08, 2019, 10:05:47 PM »
Yes I guess taking jurors on a number of possible cycle routes wasn't practical and wouldn't really prove much if anything but I don't see why jurors were not taken to WHF to check out the windows.

Especially the shower room window which Sergeant Stephen Golding found unlocked. The same window that Bamber used when he returned to WHF to collect documents.

Offline Myster

Re: Differences In Forensics And Trial Between WHF And Murder Of Jill Dando
« Reply #14 on: April 09, 2019, 04:22:37 AM »
I don't know why you keep dwelling on this. It sounds to me that MF was being flippant and with good reason; 13 years is a long time to work in a particular field and Aldridges question seems to be dismissive of his 13 years experience.
Holly's favourite motto:  "Never waste an opportunity to take a pop at MF"