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

[Myster]

The lower non-fatal neck wound: 

"injured soft tisse and fractured bone but has not actually immediately damaged any of the vital organs, such as the brain or the spinal chord".

Seriously though... Unless one has been hit by a .22 in the neck, then no-one knows what it would be like. It's possible that she fainted after the first neck shot, so even without a second could have bled out until dead.

[APRIL]

Seriously though... Unless one has been hit by a .22 in the neck, then no-one knows what it would be like. It's possible that she fainted after the first neck shot, so even without a second could have bled out until dead.

Certainly. The first wound was mortal, as opposed to fatal.

[Holly Goodhead]

Seriously though... Unless one has been hit by a .22 in the neck, then no-one knows what it would be like. It's possible that she fainted after the first neck shot, so even without a second could have bled out until dead.

Yes I agree but as Dr Vanezis said it will vary from person to person. 

It is possible SC may have lost consciousness.  On the other hand she may not have.  Had the second gsw not supervened then yes the first gsw may well have eventually proved fatal.  But the bottom line is that there's not a shred of pathological evidence to suggest SC could not have inflicted both gsw's.  Conversley there's no evidence suggesting she did.

Did the jury convict on the pathological evidence?  Unlikely since it doesn't touch the threshold of beyond reasonable doubt.   

[Holly Goodhead]

Certainly. The first wound was mortal, as opposed to fatal.

According to Dr Vanezis "if left neglected it would certainly have caused a great deal of morbidity if not fatal outcome".

As an aside I wonder what affect, if any, Haloperidol had on SC's constitution in terms of her ability to cope with any pain and shock?

[Myster]

effect 

[Holly Goodhead]

effect 

Arrgh...I had 'effect' and then changed it to 'affect' 

[Myster]

Arrgh...I had 'effect' and then changed it to 'affect' 

Makes allot of difference!

[Holly Goodhead]

Makes allot of difference!

Not two much eye hope or eye won't make cents    I'm already poorly understood by many! 

[APRIL]

According to Dr Vanezis "if left neglected it would certainly have caused a great deal of morbidity if not fatal outcome".

As an aside I wonder what affect, if any, Haloperidol had on SC's constitution in terms of her ability to cope with any pain and shock?

I'm delighted that he appears to agree with my own assessment

[Holly Goodhead]

I'm delighted that he appears to agree with my own assessment

Yep but only if left neglected.

A little Google search turns up conflicting outcomes for research and studies on Haloperidol and pain relief.  Like most of these things it may well depend on the individual's biochemistry.

[APRIL]

Yep but only if left neglected.

A little Google search turns up conflicting outcomes for research and studies on Haloperidol and pain relief.  Like most of these things it may well depend on the individual's biochemistry.

Yes, I noted that. I also noted that he didn't go quite as far as saying she could have survived. I absorbed as much as I could on the "conflicting outcomes for research and studies on Haloperidol and pain relief". The effects are always dependent on the individual patient.

[John]

John:
Two shot suicides are common enough. It was a deceptive angle for Sheila, and the first shot was essentially a flesh wound, and she either slumped or deliberately realigned for the second shot. I have looked at it closely too, and Charlie Wilkes confirmed with a 22 of his own, unloaded of course.
She is lucky she had two bullets. She loaded two after she emptied a whole cartridge of bullets into her children.

The first shot resulted in a very serious wound to the throat, certainly nothing akin to a flesh wound.  In any event, had she shot herself her fingers would have been covered in blood following the first failed shot with blood smearing across her throat.  None of this occurred as evidenced by the smear free police photos.

[Holly Goodhead]

The first shot resulted in a very serious wound to the throat, certainly nothing akin to a flesh wound.  In any event, had she shot herself her fingers would have been covered in blood following the first failed shot with blood smearing across her throat.  None of this occurred as evidenced by the smear free police photos.

From CAL's interview with Dr Vanezis:

"Vanezis recorded in his initial notes: 'Blood-stained palm print on nightdress matches bloodstains appear to have been transferred from r.hand...Both hands not contaminated apart from bloodstains'.  But in court he declared that Sheila's hands were 'completely free of blood and if she'd pressed against the nightdress I would have still seen some traces of blood on her palms.  He explained that blood on her nightdress 'appearedto have been transferred from her wrist' although 'the palms of her hand were certainly not contaminated with blood, but there was spotting of blood associated and close to the wrist.' "

"Asked to address the discrepancy today, Vanezis muses: 'I'm not sure whether I said that after the blood had been washed from her hands'.  Regarding his courtroom statement about the stain on her nightdress, he reflects: 'The smear in the blood on her neck wounds is obviously from putting her hand up to it. Her fingers could then have made the marks on her nightdress because there are three streaks forming the stain - two together and one slightly apart. The marks could be from her wrist, but the thickness of them definitely resembles fingers and she certainly has some blood on the side of her hand.  There's also a line through the streaks where the material has folded, giving a slightly distorted pattern'. The blood trails evident on Sheila's lower right arm, together with substantial blood staining on the right side of the nightdress in the armpit area and below, reinforced the probability that she had raised her hand to her neck".

He does seem to flip-flop around  &%+((£

[Myster]

From CAL's interview with Dr Vanezis:

"Vanezis recorded in his initial notes: 'Blood-stained palm print on nightdress matches bloodstains appear to have been transferred from r.hand...Both hands not contaminated apart from bloodstains'.  But in court he declared that Sheila's hands were 'completely free of blood and if she'd pressed against the nightdress I would have still seen some traces of blood on her palms.  He explained that blood on her nightdress 'appearedto have been transferred from her wrist' although 'the palms of her hand were certainly not contaminated with blood, but there was spotting of blood associated and close to the wrist.' "

"Asked to address the discrepancy today, Vanezis muses: 'I'm not sure whether I said that after the blood had been washed from her hands'.  Regarding his courtroom statement about the stain on her nightdress, he reflects: 'The smear in the blood on her neck wounds is obviously from putting her hand up to it. Her fingers could then have made the marks on her nightdress because there are three streaks forming the stain - two together and one slightly apart. The marks could be from her wrist, but the thickness of them definitely resembles fingers and she certainly has some blood on the side of her hand.  There's also a line through the streaks where the material has folded, giving a slightly distorted pattern'. The blood trails evident on Sheila's lower right arm, together with substantial blood staining on the right side of the nightdress in the armpit area and below, reinforced the probability that she had raised her hand to her neck".

He does seem to flip-flop around  &%+((£

You might well  &%+((£

I take it the smear he's referring to is the one (or what I believe are two) across the second fatal wound?

If those three linear stains on her nightdress are from her fingers and the result of putting them first on the neck wound, which was supposedly instantly fatal, how come she then placed her hand on the rifle near the trigger when it should realistically have flopped down onto the floor by her right side?

ETA: ... or remained resting on or near her neck?

[adam]

You might well  &%+((£

I take it the smear he's referring to is the one (or what I believe are two) across the second fatal wound?

If those three linear stains on her nightdress are from her fingers and the result of putting them first on the neck wound, which was supposedly instantly fatal, how come she then placed her hand on the rifle near the trigger when it should realistically have flopped down onto the floor by her right side?

ETA: ... or remained resting on or near her neck?

The second shot was instantly fatal. After putting her hand onto her neck after the first shot, her bloodied hand could have gone anywhere.