UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Alleged Miscarriages of Justice => Jeremy Bamber and the callous murder of his father, mother, sister and twin nephews. Case effectively CLOSED by CCRC on basis of NO APPEAL REFERRAL. => Topic started by: Tim Invictus on June 10, 2014, 09:44:34 PM
-
Holly do you really believe Neville called Jeremy to tell him Sheila had gone nuts with a gun? Presumably you think Neville wanted Jeremy's help?
8-)(--)
A 6ft4", 14 stone, 61 year old working farmer who is an ex-RAF wartime fighter pilot needed help from his wayward, nail varnish wearing, totally unreliable son! Do you really believe Neville would leave his grandsons and wife in danger to try and phone his son who would take at least 20 mins or so to get there?
Neville would easily have dealt with Sheila .... he put up a huge fight with Jeremy with we believe 4 bullets in him already!
The story is preposterous .... imho!
-
Holly do you really believe Neville called Jeremy to tell him Sheila had gone nuts with a gun? Presumably you think Neville wanted Jeremy's help?
8-)(--)
A 6ft4", 14 stone, 61 year old working farmer who is an ex-RAF wartime fighter pilot needed help from his wayward, nail varnish wearing, totally unreliable son! Do you really believe Neville would leave his grandsons and wife in danger to try and phone his son who would take at least 20 mins or so to get there?
Neville would easily have dealt with Sheila .... he put up a huge fight with Jeremy with we believe 4 bullets in him already!
The story is preposterous .... imho!
I firmly believe NB did call JB. The reasons I think this is that:
1. NB had a low opinion of the police as stated in RB's WS
"he (NB) commented that if they were like the police at Witham they were no more good than Dad's Army":
(bottom of 1st, top of 2nd)
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=513.0;attach=1651
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=513.0;attach=1652
2. The Bambers were private people as stated in CC's book:
"One of the most striking things about that day, although not altogether surprising for me, was the fact that, the more I talked to June and Nevill's relations, the more I realised none of them actually knew anything had been seriously wrong with Bambs - not even June's sister Pam. Many of them said that had they known, they would have been more than willing to help and share the burden. Why hadn't I contacted them and told them all about it? I couldn't believe what I was hearing and could only reply by saying that I didn't feel it had been my business to betray the Bamber's confidence. They were very private people whose decisions I had to respect - whether right or wrong. These people had no idea how much I'd need them as allies to convince June and Nevill of how strongly I felt Bamb's treatment should have been changed".
Why would NB call out EP who he likened to Dad's Army when he could call up JB who he had largely shaped and developed with the help of Gresham school? I think NB saw JB as a more reliable and capable source of assistance than EP, with the added benefit of privacy. I don't buy into NB and JB having anything other than a normal father/son relationship. I don't buy into any of the Bamber family members having abnormal relationships other than that between June and SC. In any event it is not clear what help NB required: distraction, disarming, confirmation for SC that there was no intention of uprooting her from London against her will etc, etc.
I don't believe there was any fight in the kitchen with anyone. I think the 4/5 gunshot wounds NB received upstairs (bedroom/stairs) rendered his completely defenceless against anyone by the time he reached the kitchen. I was reading some back posts a while back and I know your views on this conflict strongly with mine Tim so we will have to agree to disagree. In fact you stated that you place a lot of weight on this aspect of the case more so than the silencer and JM.
-
What happened here Holly... was it a chimps' tea party, did Sheila Caffell rearrange the furniture to make it look like somebody had fought with Nevill, or was this the usual way the Bambers left the kitchen before retiring to bed?
(http://i.imgur.com/IE2QXkL.jpg)
Those links are useless unless you're a member. You must be able to see them if they're on your computer, so upload them here and let's all have a look.
-
What happened here Holly... was it a chimps' tea party, did Sheila Caffell rearrange the furniture to make it look like somebody had fought with Nevill, or was this the usual way the Bambers left the kitchen before retiring to bed?
(http://i.imgur.com/IE2QXkL.jpg)
Those links are useless unless you're a member. You must be able to see them if they're on your computer, so upload them here and let's all have a look.
What is the debris behind the open door? And clutter on the dresser? WHF doesn't look very tidy and clutter free in any event but then you're talking to an OCD sufferer @)(++(* So take the unrelated debris and clutter out of the equation and to my eye the table settings look dishevelled, bit of broken crockery on the floor, two upturned stools and an upturned chair. As many have pointed out NB was a big, strong man and if he stumbled into the table and upturned chair/stools before finding himself in his favourite chair I think this could explain the appearance of the kitchen? NB received 4/5 gunshot wounds upstairs. He was losing blood fast both internally and externally and in great pain. Once at the foot of the stairs how did he end up in his favourite chair? I don't believe there was any struggle but poor NB must surely have been in shock and stumbling around. The shots he received upstairs would have killed him had the downstairs shots not done so before.
If some major struggle took place between NB and JB or SC fighting over the gun then I am surprised the two buckets situated near the sink containing bloody water and clothing didn't get knocked over?
I just copied the links from an old post of mine which I have access to as a guest. I thought you guys were all non-posting members and therefore had access to the library/archives on Blue. Obviously not so I will ask a Bluie friend if they can help and lift them over here 8(0(*
-
All the debris is on staircase S2 in the Ground Floor plan which looks like it served as a glory hole where the family's odds and ends were stored, behind a door which could seal it all off and which was later opened by the TFU during the initial search. I think normal kitchen phone was hidden under some newspapers/magazines on the Welsh Dresser bottom shelf.
The two buckets were in one corner out of harm's way so unlikely to have been knocked over, imo.
I don't think Nevill ever got the chance to sit down in his favourite chair. He lost his balance during the struggle and ended up where he was found - straddling the spindle back of it with his left leg supported by a woven dog bed.
If there was no struggle/fight why did Sheila feel the need to batter the rifle butt against some immovable object in the kitchen with such tremendous force that a piece was broken off it? Or for that matter use the rifle end to shatter the glass light shade?
Piece of rifle butt in front of cushions.
(http://i.imgur.com/ergSYEu.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/PgbLmcx.jpg?1)
-
I firmly believe NB did call JB. The reasons I think this is that:
1. NB had a low opinion of the police as stated in RB's WS
"he (NB) commented that if they were like the police at Witham they were no more good than Dad's Army":
(bottom of 1st, top of 2nd)
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=513.0;attach=1651
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=513.0;attach=1652
2. The Bambers were private people as stated in CC's book:
"One of the most striking things about that day, although not altogether surprising for me, was the fact that, the more I talked to June and Nevill's relations, the more I realised none of them actually knew anything had been seriously wrong with Bambs - not even June's sister Pam. Many of them said that had they known, they would have been more than willing to help and share the burden. Why hadn't I contacted them and told them all about it? I couldn't believe what I was hearing and could only reply by saying that I didn't feel it had been my business to betray the Bamber's confidence. They were very private people whose decisions I had to respect - whether right or wrong. These people had no idea how much I'd need them as allies to convince June and Nevill of how strongly I felt Bamb's treatment should have been changed".
Why would NB call out EP who he likened to Dad's Army when he could call up JB who he had largely shaped and developed with the help of Gresham school? I think NB saw JB as a more reliable and capable source of assistance than EP, with the added benefit of privacy. I don't buy into NB and JB having anything other than a normal father/son relationship. I don't buy into any of the Bamber family members having abnormal relationships other than that between June and SC. In any event it is not clear what help NB required: distraction, disarming, confirmation for SC that there was no intention of uprooting her from London against her will etc, etc.
None of which addresses the questions asked of how he would have the opportunity to call Jeremy let alone a reason.
The shooting started in the bedroom. There was no phone there and the killer opened fire on both parents.
There was no occasion to call Jeremy let alone a reason.
The evidence Jeremy called himself:
1) Nevill had no opportunity to call
A) The killer entered the bedroom and shot both parents a combined 11 times, there was no phone in the bedroom to use prior to the killer opening fire. All admit he didn't call after the shooting started because he could not speak and would have announced she had been shooting if that were the case.
B) There is no evidence at all that anything happened prior to the killer entering the bedroom to shoot the parents. The claim that the killer had Nevill downstairs not only is not supported by any evidence but makes no sense. If SHeila were having delusions she would not make a conscious decision to allow him to use th ephone, fail to shoot him while he was on the phone and then march him upstairs to shoot him in the bedroom with his wife. The tale makes no sense at all from the alleged standpoint of Sheila in a crazy rage and there is not a shred of evidence any such thing happened. Nevill woudl not have been given any opportunity to use the phone is the bottom line.
2) Even if by some miracle Nevill were given the opportunity to use the phone he had no reason to call Jeremy
A) Nevill was bigger and stronger than Jeremy so had a better physical ability than Jeremy to disarm Sheila
B) Nevill was in a position to disarm Sheila and had the necessity to do so, Jeremy would take 20 minutes or more to arrive. Why would he wait 20 minutes hoping Jeremy would arrive in time to disarm her instead of doing it himself?
C) Sheila and Jeremy did not get along. Seeing Jeremy would make things worse not better. The person with the calming effect on her an dbest chance of disarming her peacably was Nevill.
D) Jeremy had an answering machine and kept the phone on the bottom floor. Chances are the phone would not wake him up even if it rang incessantly and even if it did wake him he would take several minutes to reach the phone. The answering machine would pick up after 4-6 rings rings. So Nevill could at best expect to leave a message on an answering machine that might not be listened to until many hours later.
E) If Nevill was too worried to disarm her with his bare hands and truly in fear why would he risk being shot by sitting on the phone where he would be a dead duck if she caught him? It would take several minutes for Jeremy to answer and he would be an easy target the entire time. If truly in fear for his safety then he would have armed himself. There were guns, knives and other potential weapons that he would have grabbed if he had been left alone in the kitchen.
F) If too panicked to do anything himself he would have called police not put his son in harms way if he saw a real threat. So Nevill would not have called anyone unless he saw a real threat that he could not handle himself and for a threat that great he would not call Jeremy he would call police.
3) Jeremy lied about the phone being disconnected and being able to immediately use it
4) Sheila didn't beat or kill anyone else or even load the gun
A) Sheila would have had elevated lead levels on her hands had she loaded the bullets in the gun as claimed and in a frenzy loading fast would also have damaged at least the nail of the finger she used to push the bullets in the magazine
B) Sheila would have had back spatter of Nevill's blood on her body had she been the one who delivered the blows to Nevill in the kitchen. She also would have broken several nails by beating him so severely. The rifle stock broke and his head bashed in. One has to hold the rifle tightly to do this and when a rifle hits something hard there is a jolt to the person wielding it. The notion her nails would not have been touched is preposterous. She also would have cut her feet on the crockery on the floor of the kitchen and been likely to get step in blood or sugar.
C) The killer of the other 4 victims would have had high velocity back spatter as well as gunshot residue on the killer's body and clothing. She had neither.
D) There is no evidence at all to suggest she would be at risk for any delusions around 2:30 AM. Had she stopped taking her medication or were high on narcotics or drunk she could be at risk but none of these things were the case. Moreover, because of everyone else was sleeping there would be no risk of them causing agitaiton.
5) Sheila didn't kill herself
A) She was killed with the suppressor attached to the gun and could not have put it away after her death and could only have potentially killed herself with the suppressor if she stepped on the trigger with her toe but was seated when she was shot not standing.
B) Sheila was seated when killed and then moved flat shortly thereafter by someone else who moved her body flat. She can't have moved her own body after she was dead. Once flat blood dripped down the side of her neck and pooled on the floor.
C) The bible was placed in the pool of blood then repeatedly opened and closed while the blood was still wet. She could not have done these things since she was dead.
6) The evidence thus establishes that Sheila didn't do anything but rather was framed. There is substantial evidence that th eperson who framed her was Jeremy and this fake phone call is one of the ways he attempted to frame her. Since she didn't do anything the claim Nevill called to say she did is sheer nonsense. Jeremy lied about many things including telling police Sheila had fired all the guns in the house and had gone shooting with him. He admitted later he hadn't seen her shoot a gun.
What evidence is there that Nevill made this call? None.
The evidence is that someone made a call to Goldhanger, the phone was hung up at Goldhanger but never hung up at WHF and remained off the hook from the point of dialing until after police entered and hung the phone up.
-
All the debris is on staircase S2 in the Ground Floor plan which looks like it served as a glory hole where the family's odds and ends were stored, behind a door which could seal it all off and which was later opened by the TFU during the initial search. I think normal kitchen phone was hidden under some newspapers/magazines on the Welsh Dresser bottom shelf.
The two buckets were in one corner out of harm's way so unlikely to have been knocked over, imo.
I don't think Nevill ever got the chance to sit down in his favourite chair. He lost his balance during the struggle and ended up where he was found - straddling the spindle back of it with his left leg supported by a woven dog bed.
If there was no struggle/fight why did Sheila feel the need to batter the rifle butt against some immovable object in the kitchen with such tremendous force that a piece was broken off it? Or for that matter use the rifle end to shatter the glass light shade?
Piece of rifle butt in front of cushions.
(http://i.imgur.com/ergSYEu.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/PgbLmcx.jpg?1)
Is it possible the lampshade and butt end broke if the gun was used to inflict blows on poor NB once in the chair? As I understand it the butt end is often a separate piece to the main butt? I am hopeless at interpreting pics but to my eye the rifle found on SC as per soc pics looks to have an in tact butt end 8-)(--)
-
Is it possible the lampshade and butt end broke if the gun was used to inflict blows on poor NB once in the chair? As I understand it the butt end is often a separate piece to the main butt? I am hopeless at interpreting pics but to my eye the rifle found on SC as per soc pics looks to have an in tact butt end 8-)(--)
The thing at the end is called a butt plate. The stock cracked not the butt plate. A butt plate can be made of metal, rubber, bakelite, resin, or plastic. How strong and flexible they are will depend on age among other things. Over time they dry out and become lex flexible and more brittle.
When you batter someone or something with the butt of the rifle the wood runs the risk of splitting and did split in 1 place. The split is at the top of the stock where the stock meets the metal part of the rifle.
When you batter someone or something with the stock you are jabbing the stock into them/it. So imagine someone holding the gun in two hands with the barrel over their shoulder facing in back of them and the butt facing forward. They smash the butt into something for instance a wall.
This action makes the narrow portion of the wooden stock crash against the metal of the rifle.
Because the wood is so narrow there it is the weakest part. The wood can split in the process especially if the wood has any natural defects.
That is what happened the stress of the battering caused it to split at the top. It is not a gouge that occurred from the side the stock hitting something. The wood split as it was slamming into the metal part of the rifle.
(http://s12.postimg.org/ldlb6bwpp/anschutz.jpg)
-
Is it possible the lampshade and butt end broke if the gun was used to inflict blows on poor NB once in the chair? As I understand it the butt end is often a separate piece to the main butt? I am hopeless at interpreting pics but to my eye the rifle found on SC as per soc pics looks to have an in tact butt end 8-)(--)
A = Internally threaded boss of the metal "firing bolt/bullet" housing (34) to which the wooden rifle stock (35) is fixed using bolt (32). The broken-off piece is scooped out in the centre as it appears in the CS photograph to accommodate the boss and thus allow for the insertion of bolt (32) through the stock (35).
B = Part of the rifle butt which was damaged.
Anschutz 525 exploded diagram.
(http://i.imgur.com/CeN7Wi6.jpg?2)
Official photo of the damaged part of the stock compared with an intact one.
(http://i.imgur.com/YYpY1kQ.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/EqKsLZI.jpg)
Scipio and I disagree on this, but my view is that to break a piece off would involve hitting a solid object very forcefully such as the floor, table, worktop, chair or possibly the AGA towel rail, rather than a pliable giving human body. In other words when the fight was taking place a blow missed the intended soft target, and hit something hard instead. Unless of course the stock was previously damaged and weakened in that area.
If as you say, there was no fight and Nevill Bamber was by that time incapable of putting up any resistance, would there be any need for the assailant to inflict more heavy blows and in the process catch and break the lampshade when all it required was a bullet reload to finish the task?
-
I doubt the stock was previously damaged, the rifle was almost new.
It is possible the stock was broken by a forceful forward poke of the rifle barrel as Bamber was trying to fend of Neville while of bullets. The but butted (!) up to the metal stock where the damaged area is; the stock being pushed back hard could have caused that.
Perhaps when Bamber confesses he will publish such details!
-
I doubt the stock was previously damaged, the rifle was almost new.
It is possible the stock was broken by a forceful forward poke of the rifle barrel as Bamber was trying to fend of Neville while of bullets. The but butted (!) up to the metal stock where the damaged area is; the stock being pushed back hard could have caused that.
About nine or ten months old, but look at how scratched the wooden stock is if you enlarge the CS photo. I don't think these are scratches on the actual colour photo itself though. Might have had some rough treatment enough to weaken it in the field during that period... guess we'll never know.
-
I don't believe there was any fight in the kitchen with anyone. I think the 4/5 gunshot wounds NB received upstairs (bedroom/stairs) rendered his completely defenceless against anyone by the time he reached the kitchen. I was reading some back posts a while back and I know your views on this conflict strongly with mine Tim so we will have to agree to disagree. In fact you stated that you place a lot of weight on this aspect of the case more so than the silencer and JM.
The evidence of a fight in the kitchen is significant, the overturned chairs and crockery, the smashed lampshade, the marks left by the rifle barrel on the underside of the mantelpiece, the bruising to Neville's face etc etc...
-
A = Internally threaded boss of the metal "firing bolt/bullet" housing (34) to which the wooden rifle stock (35) is fixed using bolt (32). The broken-off piece is scooped out in the centre as it appears in the CS photograph to accommodate the boss and thus allow for the insertion of bolt (32) through the stock (35).
B = Part of the rifle butt which was damaged.
Anschutz 525 exploded diagram.
(http://i.imgur.com/CeN7Wi6.jpg?2)
Official photo of the damaged part of the stock compared with an intact one.
(http://i.imgur.com/YYpY1kQ.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/EqKsLZI.jpg)
Scipio and I disagree on this, but my view is that to break a piece off would involve hitting a solid object very forcefully such as the floor, table, worktop, chair or possibly the AGA towel rail, rather than a pliable giving human body. In other words when the fight was taking place a blow missed the intended soft target, and hit something hard instead. Unless of course the stock was previously damaged and weakened in that area.
If as you say, there was no fight and Nevill Bamber was by that time incapable of putting up any resistance, would there be any need for the assailant to inflict more heavy blows and in the process catch and break the lampshade when all it required was a bullet reload to finish the task?
Thank you Myster. You are brill with the images and explaining things 8((()*/
I wonder if the broken part of the butt was forensically examined to establish what it may have come into contact with: ceiling, aga, furniture, carpet fibres, biological matter etc? If it was used to hit NB and came into contact with bone would this not be strong enough to cause the broken butt?
-
The evidence of a fight in the kitchen is significant, the overturned chairs and crockery, the smashed lampshade, the marks left by the rifle barrel on the underside of the mantelpiece, the bruising to Neville's face etc etc...
John/Scipio
As far as I can see the soc photos show an upturned chair (single) and two upturned small stools (which look like they may have been used by the twins). I think if NB stumbled into the chairs/stools/table this could account for the upturned furniture and broken crockery. If the gun was swung around like a golf club then I guess this could account for the lampshade. Re the aga, as you might imagine, I tend to run with Peter Sutherst's expert evidence although I accept that the CCRC's expert countered this. I believe CC's WS refers to SC as throwing pots and pans.
Scipio
The other day, according to you, I had mental health issues and needed a shrink on the basis that I said I would not want to knowingly live in a home where mass murders took place! Now, again according to you, I have severe emotional scars as a result of being adopted and on the basis that I have made posts regarding the psychology of adoption and how this may have played a part in the WHF case. Although I think this is a feature of the case I don't think adoption is as important as the likely adverse effects of June's mental illness circa 1959 on SC. Of course it is clear for all to see you are a well-rounded individual! You might be interested in knowing that most of the studies and research about adoption have been produced by psychologists and psychiatrists hailing from your great country:
David Brodzinsky
Harold Grotevant
Marshall Schechter
Nancy Verrier
David Kerschner
We have nothing like this in the UK:
http://www.b......s.org/
We don't need to as England unsealed the records in 1976. Despite your country claiming to be "Leader Of The Free World" those American states who uphold 'sealed records' are the only places in the world who continue to do so.
-
The link doesn't work unless you want to donate a car 8((()*/ or you've got a bad credit rating. 8(8-))
-
Scipio and I disagree on this, but my view is that to break a piece off would involve hitting a solid object very forcefully such as the floor, table, worktop, chair or possibly the AGA towel rail, rather than a pliable giving human body. In other words when the fight was taking place a blow missed the intended soft target, and hit something hard instead. Unless of course the stock was previously damaged and weakened in that area.
A skull is not soft and forgiving it is quite hard. His skull was hit more than one time. The stock was pushed against the metal of the gun and it broke where the stock meets the metal. It could indeed have broken from smshing the skull the killer did not have to miss and hit a floor or other similar object to break it.
-
John/Scipio
As far as I can see the soc photos show an upturned chair (single) and two upturned small stools (which look like they may have been used by the twins). I think if NB stumbled into the chairs/stools/table this could account for the upturned furniture and broken crockery. If the gun was swung around like a golf club then I guess this could account for the lampshade. Re the aga, as you might imagine, I tend to run with Peter Sutherst's expert evidence although I accept that the CCRC's expert countered this. I believe CC's WS refers to SC as throwing pots and pans.
The wounds on Nevill are consistent with being bashed with the weapon. The way a rifle is wielded to bash someone is to have one hand on the butt another hand on the fore grips and then to strike with the butt of the weapon. Holding the butt with 2 hands and swinging like a gold club would not explain his wounds. Both hands around the foregrip and bashing his head in would likely break the stock off entirely. In the meantime it still would not be tall enough to break the lampshade unless wielded like swinging an axe over the head. You will not get good leverage holding it over your head though. You swing it over your shoulder to have good control and leverage if you were going to hold it with both hands on the grip. But if you were going to use it th emost natural way and way that rifles are used to batter than it is with 1 hand on the grip, one on the most narrow portion of the stock and to strike with the buttplate. This would force the stock against the metla portion of th erifle and account for how the shard split off.
Using the side of the stock would result in a different break pattern. The stock would have to break away from the gun and at minimum be loosely attached if not completely separated.
Nevill and his killer fought over control of the weapon. The suppressor scratched against the mantle in the process. Instead of following the evidence you try making up a way for Jeremy to be innocent. That included you ignoring the evidence the suppressor scratched against the mantle and the various damage to the kitchen and to Nevill.
I don't care if you want to hide from reality or not but do not piss on my leg and then tell me it is raining out. You hiding from the evidence doesn't make it go away.
Scipio
The other day, according to you, I had mental health issues and needed a shrink on the basis that I said I would not want to knowingly live in a home where mass murders took place! Now, again according to you, I have severe emotional scars as a result of being adopted and on the basis that I have made posts regarding the psychology of adoption and how this may have played a part in the WHF case. Although I think this is a feature of the case I don't think adoption is as important as the likely adverse effects of June's mental illness circa 1959 on SC. Of course it is clear for all to see you are a well-rounded individual! You might be interested in knowing that most of the studies and research about adoption have been produced by psychologists and psychiatrists hailing from your great country:
David Brodzinsky
Harold Grotevant
Marshall Schechter
Nancy Verrier
David Kerschner
We have nothing like this in the UK:
http://www.b......s.org/
We don't need to as England unsealed the records in 1976. Despite your country claiming to be "Leader Of The Free World" those American states who uphold 'sealed records' are the only places in the world who continue to do so.
Your fixation on mental problems caused by adoption seems to stem from your own adoption. I do hope you get help for such problem because it is quite clear it eats away at you and you see everything though adoption goggles.
-
Jackie seems to have abandoned her own thread after making the stupid comment that no way would Jeremy not have been injured if he had been the one engaged in a struggle with Nevill; smaller, weaker Sheila would not have to be injured but Jeremy would have to be injured.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5584.30.html
With friends who make such dumb arguments Jeremy has no hope in hell of ever seeing the freedom.
-
Jackie seems to have abandoned her own thread after making the stupid comment that no way would Jeremy not have been injured if he had been the one engaged in a struggle with Nevill; smaller, weaker Sheila would not have to be injured but Jeremy would have to be injured.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5584.30.html
With friends who make such dumb arguments Jeremy has no hope in hell of ever seeing the freedom.
I'm going to start making allowances for your rudeness as having read some of your posts on the Amityville forum I think you might have an autistic spectrum disorder.
I haven't read Jackie's posts but I am sure they can't be any more "dumb" than your posts claiming NB engaged in a power struggle over the rifle with his assailant, using his two hands, when we know this was biologically impossible. I have pointed out to you previously that the pathologist, Dr Vanezis, stated that one of the gunshot wounds NB sustained in the bedroom rendered his left arm "TOTALLY IMPAIRED". However you continue to disregard the word "TOTALLY" and persist with nonsense claims. Anyone reading the pathology report objectively will appreciate that the gunshot wounds poor NB sustained in the bedroom left him as good as dead by the time he reached the kitchen.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4744.msg173421#msg173421
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4744.msg173537#msg173537
-
I'm going to start making allowances for your rudeness as having read some of your posts on the Amityville forum I think you might have an autistic spectrum disorder.
I haven't read Jackie's posts but I am sure they can't be any more "dumb" than your posts claiming NB engaged in a power struggle over the rifle with his assailant, using his two hands, when we know this was biologically impossible. I have pointed out to you previously that the pathologist, Dr Vanezis, stated that one of the gunshot wounds NB sustained in the bedroom rendered his left arm "TOTALLY IMPAIRED". However you continue to disregard the word "TOTALLY" and persist with nonsense claims. Anyone reading the pathology report objectively will appreciate that the gunshot wounds poor NB sustained in the bedroom left him as good as dead by the time he reached the kitchen.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4744.msg173421#msg173421
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4744.msg173537#msg173537
The pathologist can only render an opinion Holly, the truth might be somewhat different since the evidence indicates otherwise. Regardless of who the assailant was, the evidence from the scene points to a fight in the kitchen and unless there were two intruders who had a falling out (highly unlikely) then the only other explanation is that Nevill was involved. Whether he used two arms or one will only be known by his assailant. I tend to go with the one arm however given the blood on the wall half-way up the stairs which indicates a severely wounded Nevill came down them. Had Nevill had the use of both arms I think the outcome could have been very different.
-
The pathologist can only render an opinion Holly, the truth might be somewhat different since the evidence indicates otherwise. Regardless of who the assailant was, the evidence from the scene points to a fight in the kitchen and unless there were two intruders who had a falling out (highly unlikely) then the only other explanation is that Nevill was involved. Whether he used two arms or one will only be known by his assailant. I tend to go with the one arm however given the blood on the wall half-way up the stairs which indicates a severely wounded Nevill came down them. Had Nevill had the use of both arms I think the outcome could have been very different.
Afternoon Guv 8**8:/:
Well I guess as I disagree with Dr Ferguson's findings I can't have it both ways ie accept Dr Vanezis' findings and reject Dr Ferguson's findings 8-)(--) Although I guess it could be argued that pathology is an exact science and psychology less so 8-)(--)
All I can go on is that Dr Vanezis has stated with regard to gunshot wounds NB sustained in the bedroom that they were "Not immediately life threatening although could well have been if other injuries had not supervened. However, I cannot say that over what period of time this would have occurred". As a result of the three injuries sustained in the bedroom the pathologist identified:
-Extreme pain
-Substantial blood loss internal and external
-Total impairment of left arm
If the above is correct them imo this would render NB incapable of putting up any sort of fight with either JB or SC.
The crockery knocked of the table, upturned chair and stools and broken lampshade I believe were caused by NB/SC knocking into furniture and SC swinging the rifle.
It is well established across all relevant disciplines that those with 'disorganised attachments' (which is what I believe SC had due to abrupt changes in 'primary caregivers' and June's severe mental illness) have a propensity towards states of rage, aggression and violence. I have Googled 'disorganised attachment rage' and it has thrown up the following three links which are the first of 1,350,000.
http://www.traumaregister.co.uk/Articles/Serious_Violence_Trauma_Disorganized_Attachment.htm
http://www.daniel-sonkin.com/articles/anger_attachment.html
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=CbmNHMtwwO8C&pg=PA40&lpg=PA40&dq=disorganised+attachment+rage&source=bl&ots=-cSSFnIs_1&sig=Dd8BGvfolWkM2FecrDMh9IneUL0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tCnJU_uCJ6707AaC1YEo&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=disorganised%20attachment%20rage&f=false
The scratching of the Aga surround/mantle I believe was fabricated and I support Peter Sutherst's findings ie that the scratches were made AFTER the tragedy.
-
Afternoon Guv 8**8:/:
Well I guess as I disagree with Dr Ferguson's findings I can't have it both ways ie accept Dr Vanezis' findings and reject Dr Ferguson's findings 8-)(--) Although I guess it could be argued that pathology is an exact science and psychology less so 8-)(--)
All I can go on is that Dr Vanezis has stated with regard to gunshot wounds NB sustained in the bedroom that they were "Not immediately life threatening although could well have been if other injuries had not supervened. However, I cannot say that over what period of time this would have occurred". As a result of the three injuries sustained in the bedroom the pathologist identified:
-Extreme pain
-Substantial blood loss internal and external
-Total impairment of left arm
If the above is correct them imo this would render NB incapable of putting up any sort of fight with either JB or SC.
The crockery knocked of the table, upturned chair and stools and broken lampshade I believe were caused by NB/SC knocking into furniture and SC swinging the rifle. It is well established across all relevant disciplines that those with 'disorganised attachments' (which is what I believe SC had due to abrupt changes in 'primary caregivers' and June's severe mental illness) have a propensity towards states of rage, aggression and violence. I have Googled 'disorganised attachment rage' and it has thrown up the following three links which are the first of 1,350,000.
http://www.traumaregister.co.uk/Articles/Serious_Violence_Trauma_Disorganized_Attachment.htm
http://www.daniel-sonkin.com/articles/anger_attachment.html
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=CbmNHMtwwO8C&pg=PA40&lpg=PA40&dq=disorganised+attachment+rage&source=bl&ots=-cSSFnIs_1&sig=Dd8BGvfolWkM2FecrDMh9IneUL0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tCnJU_uCJ6707AaC1YEo&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=disorganised%20attachment%20rage&f=false
The scratching of the Aga surround/mantle I believe was fabricated and I support Peter Sutherst's findings ie that the scratches were made AFTER the tragedy.
Ignoring evidence doesn't make it go away.
Nevill had partial impairment of his left ar. That doesn't prevent his left hand from still functioning nor his right arm. Someone who faces the spectre of being killed is going to use their right arm and anything else they can to try to disarm a killer.
You are not following evidence you are ignoring it. Your claim Nevill did nothing and was simply beaten by someone in a rage is not supported by the evidence. She was in a rage so knocked over chairs and broke things doesn't cut it, why would she not do the same in the other rooms?
The moderator was obviously attached in order to break the light. That most likely happened while they were fighting over control of the gun. Similarly, the scratching of the aga corroborates such. Sutherst's findings are rejected by others as having any scientific validity. Dismissing evidence simply because it is not convenient doesn't help you in any way. Ther eis no rational way for the scratches to the aga to happen through any ordinary accident which would have left lateral marks simply. Sutherts offers no valid basis to try to dismiss the arks if you want to prove them planted you need something else. The photos he relied upon were poor quality and did not show the areas in question closeup let alone at the needed angles. You need qulity film and also NASA like equipment to try to do what he claims he acocmplished. He shot all his credibility to hell in claiming a tiny speck was able to be determined to be a tiny fleck of nail varnish that he matched to a tiny mark on Sheila's toe. He could not objectively demonstrate his findings to be accurate he just offered wild opinions that do not scientifically hold up to scrutiny.
In the meantime you ignore that the broken glass lampshade, and broken crockery would surely have cut her bare feet had she been running around in there wildly breaking things. She also would have been covered in blood. Saying she changed requires evidence, where is her dress or blouse full of back spatter? Did she commit the murders nude? The wild cleaning stories you have come up with can't result wounds to her feet that would have existed going away.
In the meantime why would she beat Nevill, her favorite person who instantly calmed her down in the past even when she was not medicated? The only acoc..ts people could present of her out of control was Freddie and he was astonished how she instantly calmed down upon seeing him. Severely beating Nevill for the hell of it doesn't work from any standpoint. The evidence establishes the gun was empty and that Nevill had to be beaten unconscious in order to be able to relaod to kill him. Things were distrubed during astruggle as he tried to disarm his attacker and grabbed the weapon. The attacker got sole control of the weapon and bashased Nevill with the stock. The killer operated in this fashion:
(http://s14.postimg.org/ask53t8td/rifle_strike.jpg)
You seem to picture the gun being wielded as a baseball bat though in fact it was bashed against him in such manner. He blocked with his right arm which received defensie wounds in the process and resulted in his watch being torn off. Your claim that Nevill was passed out already and his arm bashed by someone in a wild rage is absurd. He was actively defending the blows. Te killer struck him in the face multiple times breaking his nose and giving him black eyes. The killer eventually managed to bash his head in. In the process the stock broke. The force of the stock being forced into the metal of the gun caused a piece to split off the stock. That in turn would have scratched at minimum and more likely cut the killer's hand unless the killer had gloves . The break was right where the killers had would be. It would be just like when a wood handled shovel broke where I was holding it. I had on no gloves and the palm of my hand was gashed by the wood. Still today there is a mark where it happened. A feint white line but it is still there many years later. Mentla probles doe snot give someone magic skin on their feet and hands impervious to wounds and people in a rage are not careful and more likely to be wounded.
There would have been physical evidenc eproving she committed th emurders had she done so but ther eis none.
Worse she can't have killed herself. Discounting evidence doesn't make it go away you must rebut it with competent evidence in order to refute it.
Reliable evidence establishes she was shot and killed while seated propped up against something with the moderator attached to the weapon. After she was killed:
1) the moderator was removed from the rifle and put away in the closet
2) her body was moved flat before the blood finished flowing and drying thus resulting in blood going down the side of her neck and pooling on the floor
3) the bible was placed in the pool of blood that formed on the floor after she died. It was opened and closed with the blood still wet creating a mirror image.
She could not have done any of these things. The killer is the only one who would have been in the position to do these things.
totally unscienYour claim she was simply in a rage
Sutherst
-
Ignoring evidence doesn't make it go away.
Nevill had partial impairment of his left ar. That doesn't prevent his left hand from still functioning nor his right arm. Someone who faces the spectre of being killed is going to use their right arm and anything else they can to try to disarm a killer.
You are not following evidence you are ignoring it. Your claim Nevill did nothing and was simply beaten by someone in a rage is not supported by the evidence. She was in a rage so knocked over chairs and broke things doesn't cut it, why would she not do the same in the other rooms?
The moderator was obviously attached in order to break the light. That most likely happened while they were fighting over control of the gun. Similarly, the scratching of the aga corroborates such. Sutherst's findings are rejected by others as having any scientific validity. Dismissing evidence simply because it is not convenient doesn't help you in any way. Ther eis no rational way for the scratches to the aga to happen through any ordinary accident which would have left lateral marks simply. Sutherts offers no valid basis to try to dismiss the arks if you want to prove them planted you need something else. The photos he relied upon were poor quality and did not show the areas in question closeup let alone at the needed angles. You need qulity film and also NASA like equipment to try to do what he claims he acocmplished. He shot all his credibility to hell in claiming a tiny speck was able to be determined to be a tiny fleck of nail varnish that he matched to a tiny mark on Sheila's toe. He could not objectively demonstrate his findings to be accurate he just offered wild opinions that do not scientifically hold up to scrutiny.
In the meantime you ignore that the broken glass lampshade, and broken crockery would surely have cut her bare feet had she been running around in there wildly breaking things. She also would have been covered in blood. Saying she changed requires evidence, where is her dress or blouse full of back spatter? Did she commit the murders nude? The wild cleaning stories you have come up with can't result wounds to her feet that would have existed going away.
In the meantime why would she beat Nevill, her favorite person who instantly calmed her down in the past even when she was not medicated? The only acoc..ts people could present of her out of control was Freddie and he was astonished how she instantly calmed down upon seeing him. Severely beating Nevill for the hell of it doesn't work from any standpoint. The evidence establishes the gun was empty and that Nevill had to be beaten unconscious in order to be able to relaod to kill him. Things were distrubed during astruggle as he tried to disarm his attacker and grabbed the weapon. The attacker got sole control of the weapon and bashased Nevill with the stock. The killer operated in this fashion:
(http://s14.postimg.org/ask53t8td/rifle_strike.jpg)
You seem to picture the gun being wielded as a baseball bat though in fact it was bashed against him in such manner. He blocked with his right arm which received defensie wounds in the process and resulted in his watch being torn off. Your claim that Nevill was passed out already and his arm bashed by someone in a wild rage is absurd. He was actively defending the blows. Te killer struck him in the face multiple times breaking his nose and giving him black eyes. The killer eventually managed to bash his head in. In the process the stock broke. The force of the stock being forced into the metal of the gun caused a piece to split off the stock. That in turn would have scratched at minimum and more likely cut the killer's hand unless the killer had gloves . The break was right where the killers had would be. It would be just like when a wood handled shovel broke where I was holding it. I had on no gloves and the palm of my hand was gashed by the wood. Still today there is a mark where it happened. A feint white line but it is still there many years later. Mentla probles doe snot give someone magic skin on their feet and hands impervious to wounds and people in a rage are not careful and more likely to be wounded.
There would have been physical evidenc eproving she committed th emurders had she done so but ther eis none.
Worse she can't have killed herself. Discounting evidence doesn't make it go away you must rebut it with competent evidence in order to refute it.
Reliable evidence establishes she was shot and killed while seated propped up against something with the moderator attached to the weapon. After she was killed:
1) the moderator was removed from the rifle and put away in the closet
2) her body was moved flat before the blood finished flowing and drying thus resulting in blood going down the side of her neck and pooling on the floor
3) the bible was placed in the pool of blood that formed on the floor after she died. It was opened and closed with the blood still wet creating a mirror image.
She could not have done any of these things. The killer is the only one who would have been in the position to do these things.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/Themes/red-it-random/images/bbc/bold.gif
totally unscienYour claim she was simply in a rage
Sutherst
I have only read as far as your second sentence Scipio. You claim "Nevill had partial impairment of his left ar." I claim, based on the pathologist's report, "Regarding wound No. 7, in my view after the infliction of this wound the victims ability to use his left arm would be totally impaired".
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=205.0
There is no point in debating with you Scipio when you refuse to accept the pathologist's views. Go on call me a mental midget my little aspi as you did Victoria Principles on the Amityville forum:
http://www.amityvillefaq.com/truthboard/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=10235#p150254
Awww we all love ya really Scipio and accept you for what you are. I shan't bother with the emoticons hun. You've put up some good posts and due to your way of thinking we get a different perspective. Thank you Scipio.
-
Holly, the pathologists opinion is only as good as the information he had at the time he wrote the first report. Remember that he was furious when he later saw photos of an undisturbed Sheila lying in the master bedroom with no blood whatsoever across her face. Quite a different picture from that which confronted him in the morgue.
By the same token, Vanezis can only opine what physical impairment Nevill had following the first three shots which hit him. Vanezis saw Nevill in the morgue only after he had sustained a dreadful beating in the kitchen. Too much dependence is placed on opinion which contradicts the evidence. Vanezis gave an initial opinion about Sheila but that opinion was flawed since he did not have the benefit of having seen Sheila lying in the bedroom, I suggest the same applies in the case of Nevill. Vanezis did not see the murder scene and only visited the farmhouse after the bodies had been removed, a state of affair which he later complained to police about.
Nevill's ability to use his damaged arm would have been progressive, he may have had use of it initially but lost the use of it during the fight with his assailant, a fight which by the way happened and is not an invention.
-
I have only read as far as your second sentence Scipio. You claim "Nevill had partial impairment of his left ar." I claim, based on the pathologist's report, "Regarding wound No. 7, in my view after the infliction of this wound the victims ability to use his left arm would be totally impaired".
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=205.0
There is no point in debating with you Scipio when you refuse to accept the pathologist's views. Go on call me a mental midget my little aspi as you did Victoria Principles on the Amityville forum:
http://www.amityvillefaq.com/truthboard/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=10235#p150254
Awww we all love ya really Scipio and accept you for what you are. I shan't bother with the emoticons hun. You've put up some good posts and due to your way of thinking we get a different perspective. Thank you Scipio.
His arm was broken that means his use of his arm would be impared and limited. It doesn't mean his hand wasn't able to grip anything or to try.
I don't beleive you didn't read anything else. You can't refute what I wrote so you engage in your childish exercise to say why you are not going to respond to what I wrote to try to conceal that you can't.
You want ot pretend there was no fight in the kitchen and pretend that Sheila did it so you can go on and on about your mental theories which are all quite absurd but irrelevant so there is no need to burst your bubble about them either. There is no reason to even get to them since you have nothing at all to refute the evidence that convicted Jeremy. Refusing to face such evidence doesn't refute it.
-
Holly, the pathologists opinion is only as good as the information he had at the time he wrote the first report. Remember that he was furious when he later saw photos of an undisturbed Sheila lying in the master bedroom with no blood whatsoever across her face. Quite a different picture from that which confronted him in the morgue.
By the same token, Vanezis can only opine what physical impairment Nevill had following the first three shots which hit him. Vanezis saw Nevill in the morgue only after he had sustained a dreadful beating in the kitchen. Too much dependence is placed on opinion which contradicts the evidence. Vanezis gave an initial opinion about Sheila but that opinion was flawed since he did not have the benefit of having seen Sheila lying in the bedroom, I suggest the same applies in the case of Nevill. Vanezis did not see the murder scene and only visited the farmhouse after the bodies had been removed, a state of affair which he later complained to police about.
Nevill's ability to use his damaged arm would have been progressive, he may have had use of it initially but lost the use of it during the fight with his assailant, a fight which by the way happened and is not an invention.
Dr Vanezis has always maintained that he is unable to confirm whether SC was murdered or took her own life.
My understanding of the role of a pathologist/autopsy is that his/her findings will mainly be based on a physical examination of a body not information imparted from others?
The wound to NB's left shoulder caused a comminuted fracture to the upper third of the humerus. On this basis I think Dr Vanezis was able to say with some certainty that the wound rendered NB's left arm totally impaired upon impact of the bullet/comminuted fracture.
May I ask what makes you so sure that a fight took place in the kitchen as that is not how I interpret it at all.
-
His arm was broken that means his use of his arm would be impared and limited. It doesn't mean his hand wasn't able to grip anything or to try.
I don't beleive you didn't read anything else. You can't refute what I wrote so you engage in your childish exercise to say why you are not going to respond to what I wrote to try to conceal that you can't.
You want ot pretend there was no fight in the kitchen and pretend that Sheila did it so you can go on and on about your mental theories which are all quite absurd but irrelevant so there is no need to burst your bubble about them either. There is no reason to even get to them since you have nothing at all to refute the evidence that convicted Jeremy. Refusing to face such evidence doesn't refute it.
May I suggest you read all the reports produced by the pathologist Dr Vanezis VERY CAREFULLY!
-
Dr Vanezis has always maintained that he is unable to confirm whether SC was murdered or took her own life.
My understanding of the role of a pathologist/autopsy is that his/her findings will mainly be based on a physical examination of a body not information imparted from others?
The role of an autopsy is mainly to ascertain cause of death and condition of the body. The cause of death was determined to have been 2 gunshot wounds delivered within seconds of one another. The condition of her body was no wounds, no damaged nails and no foreign blood.
Vanezis was no told about the struggle in the kitchen or that the gun could have had a moderator. Part of assessing whether she coudl have killed herself. Had tha thappened he would have heavily leaned towards murder as he did down the road when everything was revealed. Early on all he relied on was whether she potentially could have fired the gun 2 times and have reached the trigger. He said while the 2 shots gave him some concern he could not say it was impossible. He found no evidence to say it was definitely suicide and could not have been murder.
He said the nails and so forth were not his expertise others could evaluate those aspects.
Others did evaluate those aspects and they all crush you.
1) Sheila had dexterity problems even before being diagnosed with Schizophrenia. Those dexterity problems only worsened on her medication. She was not taking countering agent which would have mitigated some of the parkinson's like motions she engaged in. Worse though, without the countering agent she was over sedated and unlikely to have been able to do much, the oversedation limited her activities a great deal.
2) If she were in a rage out of control she would have been even more wild in her actions not more skilled. Not only does that present a problem for firing 25 shots without missing (which even anezis said would mean she had to be very skilled wiht the weapon to accomplish such), loading the wepaon with her dexterity problem and in the rage combined would result in her crashing her nails against the magazine and damaging them. Moreover, she would have had to touch the lead tips of the bullets which would discolor her fingers in addition to resulted in detectable elevated lead levels. At trial an expert handled the bullets loading them before the jury and showed his hands having visible discoloration and discussing the elevated levels detected consistently in testing.
3) There is zero evidence Sheila ever fired the weapon and zero that Sheila had any experience with any other semi-automatic weapons. Living on a far contianing shotguns doesn't even mean one will know how to fire shotguns. But that would not help make one skilled in using a semi-auto which operates differently. People assume you just load amagazine and shoot but that is not how it works. The initial round must be manually fed from the magazine into the chamber or the gun will not fire a bullet. After that the operation of the weapon feeds the bullets itself so it is a one time thing. Sheila would not have even know to chamber a round let alone how. Forget having the ability to land 25 rounds she would not have gotten off a shot. Vanezis was not told that she had never used such weapon ever and did not thus address such in his autopsy report. This is what the firearms experts discussed.
4) During the struggle in the kitchen a barefoot Sheila would have cut her feet on the broken ceiling lamp glass and broken crockery. She also would have had some abrasions and cuts or th elike on her hands in addition to brekaing hnails from battering Nevill. Wildly bashing things with an object when one has long nails results in damage to them. Her hand would have been exactly where the wood stock broke and therefore some damage would have resulted unless she had on protective gloves.
5) There was zero evidence on her body or clothing of having shot or beaten anyone. No high velocity spatter or medium velocity spatter from the victims though such would have been present on her clothing had she comitted the murders. That was not Vanezis's province to test her clothing for spatter or GSR so did not figure into the autopsy. Nor the fact that her hands exhibited no evidence of having loaded the weapon. So no evidence she loaded the weapon (no elevated lead levels on her hands), none she fired it (no GSR on her clothing or hands) and no evidence she was near the victims when they were shot/beaten (no spatter).
6) The moderator was clearly used in the kitchen and still used when Sheila was shot because her blood was inside
Advances in blood analysis tell us she was shot while seated propped up against something and moved flat after she was dead. After being moved flat a pool of blood formed on the floor. A bible was placed in that pool of blood. Someone opened and closed the bible while the blood was still wet. After her death SHeila could not have put the moderator away, moved her body flat, or opened an dclosed the bible in her blood. Someone else was there and killed eveyrone quite clearly.
Since there is so much evidence that established Sheila did nothing you want to refuse to discuss such and address only the very limited information Vanezis worked off of at autospy to assess whether Sheila could have done it.
What you are trying to do is obvious and invalid bordering on dishonest so a wastea of time and just harms your credibility.
The wound to NB's left shoulder caused a comminuted fracture to the upper third of the humerus. On this basis I think Dr Vanezis was able to say with some certainty that the wound rendered NB's left arm totally impaired upon impact of the bullet/comminuted fracture.
WHich fails in the least to dent my assertion that he still could have tried to use his left hand and has no bearing at all with anything I mentioned since it dusccusse dhim using his right hand which you have no ability at all to refute so keep pretending he was a 1 armed man to avoid having to admit your claims are all absurd abd baseless.
May I ask what makes you so sure that a fight took place in the kitchen as that is not how I interpret it at all.
I already told you countless times. ANd you even spent time asking about the height of the gun and light to try to pretend there was some way she could have done it without engaging against Nevill. You know the basis you jsut can't dent it.
Your interpretation is little more than you living in denial that it happened. You have no absis for your opinion at all other than the desire to believe it didn't happen because the fact it did compeltely crushes you.
Your intepretation that she was out of control so smashed things and knocked them over and wildy bashed Nevill while he was passed out is absurd. You have no evidence at all to suggest that happened you simply made it up.
How did they get in the kitchen in the first place? The killer fired 11 shots in the bedroom and then the gun was empty. At that point either Nevill ran away to the kitchen with the killer chasing him or the killer ran down to get more bullets and reload and Nevill chased the killer to try to prevent relaoding.
It woudl have taken some time for the wounds suffered int he bedroom to knock Nevill out. Otherwise he would not have even made it to the kitchen to begin wih. His wounds were the broken arm, graze wounds, piece of his lip shot off and jaw shattered. Untreated the wounds could have allowed him to bleed to death but clearly he didn't and pathologists all say he could have and did struggle with his killer.
The light was broken as the gun was struggled over by 2 tall men holding it up and down with the moderator attached fighting over control of it not a 5'7" girl holding the gun like an axe above her head. The scratched to the mantle were caused by the moderator zigzagging as contol of the gun was fought over not walking too close the the mantle and scratching it in that manner which would be a lateral mark simply and so wound the gun falling it would be a vertical mark not zig zagging all around.
Nevill didn't goin there ot just let his killer reload in peace or go in there with the killer on his tale to simply let the killer kill him in peace he went to get a weapon. If he wanted to use a phone he could have locked himself in the upstairs office where the 3rd phone was.
The killer didn't beat Nevill because he was passed out, the killer beat Nevill to be able to reload the gun in peace. If Nevill passed out the killer would simply have reloaded and shot him to death.
The killer broke Nevill's nose, gave him 2 black eyes and Nevill had defensive wounds on his arm indicating he tried to block the blows. His watch was torn off in the process. Your suggestion the killer beat his arms as he lay passed out are absurd. The killer bashed his head in with the rifle by bashing the stock into his head repeatedly. The butt was forced against the metal of the rifle and a piece broke off exactly where the killer would have been holding it. The killer's hand would have been damaged by that and that is regardless of whether he was unconscious or not by that point. Jeremy mentioned to Sheila a glove being torn off and if anything it was during that break when it happened. Only gloves would save someone from getting some kin dof scratch or cut from that.
Your suggestion that Sheila was simply going crazy breaking things in the kitchen and beating a knocked out Nevill is absurd. Nothing was knocked over or broken in any other room. No one else was beaten. If she did breka everything and run around on it she would have cut her feet anyway so you have no evidence at all to establish she was even in there as a bystander. Your theory is not based on evidence but simply a pathetic attempt to get around the evidence by pretending it doesn't exist.
Nevill is the one Freddie claimed calmed Sheila down from the worst episode he ever saw. She was off her medicide and out of control and as soon as she saw Nevill she instantly became calm and spoke coherently. The suggestion she would decide to beat him and only him, do so after he was unconscious and break everything in that room and only that room is absurd. You have no medical support at all he would walk in the kitchen and collapse unconscious let alone that she would beat his limp body.
Anyone with an ounce of integrity and honesty will admit there was a struggle in the kitchen where the killer beat Nevill severely until unconscious so the killer could reload the gun and shoot him to death.
-
The role of an autopsy is mainly to ascertain cause of death and condition of the body. The cause of death was determined to have been 2 gunshot wounds delivered within seconds of one another. The condition of her body was no wounds, no damaged nails and no foreign blood.
Vanezis was no told about the struggle in the kitchen or that the gun could have had a moderator. Part of assessing whether she coudl have killed herself. Had tha thappened he would have heavily leaned towards murder as he did down the road when everything was revealed. Early on all he relied on was whether she potentially could have fired the gun 2 times and have reached the trigger. He said while the 2 shots gave him some concern he could not say it was impossible. He found no evidence to say it was definitely suicide and could not have been murder.
He said the nails and so forth were not his expertise others could evaluate those aspects.
Others did evaluate those aspects and they all crush you.
1) Sheila had dexterity problems even before being diagnosed with Schizophrenia. Those dexterity problems only worsened on her medication. She was not taking countering agent which would have mitigated some of the parkinson's like motions she engaged in. Worse though, without the countering agent she was over sedated and unlikely to have been able to do much, the oversedation limited her activities a great deal.
Where is the evidence SC had dexterity problems. Do you have any expert evidence to this effect? Or is it based on AE's claims that SC was unable to pour tea in a cup; put beans on test and learn to drive? Look at the photo of SC with the rifle and note the manicured/varnished nails, plucked eyebrows and shaved legs. All these tasks require manual dexterity. Look at other photos and see full face make-up skilfully applied. SC was mother to two just turned 6 year old sons who would require help with dressing eg buttons, zips, tying shoelaces which again require manual dexterity.
2) If she were in a rage out of control she would have been even more wild in her actions not more skilled. Not only does that present a problem for firing 25 shots without missing (which even anezis said would mean she had to be very skilled wiht the weapon to accomplish such), loading the wepaon with her dexterity problem and in the rage combined would result in her crashing her nails against the magazine and damaging them. Moreover, she would have had to touch the lead tips of the bullets which would discolor her fingers in addition to resulted in detectable elevated lead levels. At trial an expert handled the bullets loading them before the jury and showed his hands having visible discoloration and discussing the elevated levels detected consistently in testing.
The shots were all close range with many near contact or contact. Difficult to miss. Where does Dr V say she would need to be skilled with firearms?
Nails are made of keratin which is one of the toughest biological properties. SC was a young mother living alone in a busy city. In the course of her everyday activities eg childcare, housework, cooking, shopping, travelling on public transport in London she would have subjected her nails/vanish to just as many hazards as loading and firing a weapon. Are you able to provide any evidence from ballistics to confirm that had SC fired the said weapon 25 times she would have caused damage to her nails/vanish?
Any lead/discolouration would be washed off by showering.
3) There is zero evidence Sheila ever fired the weapon and zero that Sheila had any experience with any other semi-automatic weapons. Living on a far contianing shotguns doesn't even mean one will know how to fire shotguns. But that would not help make one skilled in using a semi-auto which operates differently. People assume you just load amagazine and shoot but that is not how it works. The initial round must be manually fed from the magazine into the chamber or the gun will not fire a bullet. After that the operation of the weapon feeds the bullets itself so it is a one time thing. Sheila would not have even know to chamber a round let alone how. Forget having the ability to land 25 rounds she would not have gotten off a shot. Vanezis was not told that she had never used such weapon ever and did not thus address such in his autopsy report. This is what the firearms experts discussed.
DB states in the following "Coupled with the fact that she hadn't had any experience with guns [reluctantly adds] or very little".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i2CjYDJGTo @ 6.20 in
SC no doubt spent time as child with NB walking around the fields shooting. SC was a farmers daughter. Children pick up things without having to be sat down and shown. You don't need to be a nuclear physicist to load the said rifle and fire it. SC was from a birth family of academics and privately educated you seem to want to think of her as someone with learning difficulties.
4) During the struggle in the kitchen a barefoot Sheila would have cut her feet on the broken ceiling lamp glass and broken crockery. She also would have had some abrasions and cuts or th elike on her hands in addition to brekaing hnails from battering Nevill. Wildly bashing things with an object when one has long nails results in damage to them. Her hand would have been exactly where the wood stock broke and therefore some damage would have resulted unless she had on protective gloves.
Even if we assume that the broken crockery was not caused by the raid team, as per soc pics it amounted to just a few large pieces. The glass lampshade was unlikely to be crystal glass and again perhaps a 2/3 pieces? Unless it was in her path she would simply avoided it. You realise that NB was also barefooted and he too had no cuts to his feet. You have no idea when and how the stock broke. To claim it would cause hand damage is absurd.
5) There was zero evidence on her body or clothing of having shot or beaten anyone. No high velocity spatter or medium velocity spatter from the victims though such would have been present on her clothing had she comitted the murders. That was not Vanezis's province to test her clothing for spatter or GSR so did not figure into the autopsy. Nor the fact that her hands exhibited no evidence of having loaded the weapon. So no evidence she loaded the weapon (no elevated lead levels on her hands), none she fired it (no GSR on her clothing or hands) and no evidence she was near the victims when they were shot/beaten (no spatter).
All removed by showering with stained clothes in the buckets.
6) The moderator was clearly used in the kitchen and still used when Sheila was shot because her blood was inside
I don't believe that the silencer ever left the gun cupboard on that fateful night. Her blood may have been inside and if it was then I believe it was deliberately contaminated by EP with blood from SC's sample handed to EP by Dr V.
Advances in blood analysis tell us she was shot while seated propped up against something and moved flat after she was dead. After being moved flat a pool of blood formed on the floor. A bible was placed in that pool of blood. Someone opened and closed the bible while the blood was still wet. After her death SHeila could not have put the moderator away, moved her body flat, or opened an dclosed the bible in her blood. Someone else was there and killed everyone quite clearly.
Since there is so much evidence that established Sheila did nothing you want to refuse to discuss such and address only the very limited information Vanezis worked off of at autopsy to assess whether Sheila could have done it.
What you are trying to do is obvious and invalid bordering on dishonest so a waste of time and just harms your credibility.
Which fails in the least to dent my assertion that he still could have tried to use his left hand and has no bearing at all with anything I mentioned since it dusccusse dhim using his right hand which you have no ability at all to refute so keep pretending he was a 1-armed man to avoid having to admit your claims are all absurd and baseless.
Why do you think NB only had linear wounds to his right arm?
I already told you countless times. And you even spent time asking about the height of the gun and light to try to pretend there was some way she could have done it without engaging against Nevill. You know the basis you just can't dent it.
Your interpretation is little more than you living in denial that it happened. You have no basis for your opinion at all other than the desire to believe it didn't happen because the fact it did completely crushes you.
Your interpretation that she was out of control so smashed things and knocked them over and wildly bashed Nevill while he was passed out is absurd. You have no evidence at all to suggest that happened you simply made it up.
How did they get in the kitchen in the first place? The killer fired 11 shots in the bedroom and then the gun was empty. At that point either Nevill ran away to the kitchen with the killer chasing him or the killer ran down to get more bullets and reload and Nevill chased the killer to try to prevent reloading.
Given the shot NB received on the stairs ie downward it would seem SC followed NB downstairs. Why did NB head for the kitchen? He thought he could continue the conversation he started with JB before he run upstairs when he heard SC firing shots? To escape and raise the alarm and to deter JB from entering?
It would have taken some time for the wounds suffered in the bedroom to knock Nevill out. Otherwise he would not have even made it to the kitchen to begin with. His wounds were the broken arm, graze wounds, piece of his lip shot off and jaw shattered. Untreated the wounds could have allowed him to bleed to death but clearly he didn't and pathologists all say he could have and did struggle with his killer.
Dr V states NB put up a "spirited defense". He does not mention a "struggle".
The light was broken as the gun was struggled over by 2 tall men holding it up and down with the moderator attached fighting over control of it not a 5'7" girl holding the gun like an axe above her head. The scratched to the mantle were caused by the moderator zigzagging as contol of the gun was fought over not walking too close the the mantle and scratching it in that manner which would be a lateral mark simply and so wound the gun falling it would be a vertical mark not zig zagging all around.
If you want to claim the above you need to rule SC out by providing the following measurements to the nearest mm:
Height from kitchen floor to lowest point of lampshade
Height of SC
Arm length/reach of SC
Length of rifle with and without silencer (Now kindly provided by Myster)
I believe EP fabricated the scratches after the tragedy.
Nevill didn't go in there or just let his killer reload in peace or go in there with the killer on his tale to simply let the killer kill him in peace he went to get a weapon. If he wanted to use a phone he could have locked himself in the upstairs office where the 3rd phone was.
The killer didn't beat Nevill because he was passed out, the killer beat Nevill to be able to reload the gun in peace. If Nevill passed out the killer would simply have reloaded and shot him to death.
The killer broke Nevill's nose, gave him 2 black eyes and Nevill had defensive wounds on his arm indicating he tried to block the blows. His watch was torn off in the process. Your suggestion the killer beat his arms as he lay passed out are absurd. The killer bashed his head in with the rifle by bashing the stock into his head repeatedly. The butt was forced against the metal of the rifle and a piece broke off exactly where the killer would have been holding it. The killer's hand would have been damaged by that and that is regardless of whether he was unconscious or not by that point. Jeremy mentioned to Sheila a glove being torn off and if anything it was during that break when it happened. Only gloves would save someone from getting some kin dof scratch or cut from that.
You don't know when and how the stock was damaged. How could SC have told JB anything?
Your suggestion that Sheila was simply going crazy breaking things in the kitchen and beating a knocked out Nevill is absurd. Nothing was knocked over or broken in any other room. No one else was beaten. If she did break everything and run around on it she would have cut her feet anyway so you have no evidence at all to establish she was even in there as a bystander. Your theory is not based on evidence but simply a pathetic attempt to get around the evidence by pretending it doesn't exist.
The other rooms you refer to were bedrooms and the stairs. Not too much to break in those rooms. The other victims were perhaps not beaten as they didn't try to resist either verbally or physically.
Nevill is the one Freddie claimed calmed Sheila down from the worst episode he ever saw. She was off her medicine and out of control and as soon as she saw Nevill she instantly became calm and spoke coherently. The suggestion she would decide to beat him and only him, do so after he was unconscious and break everything in that room and only that room is absurd. You have no medical support at all he would walk in the kitchen and collapse unconscious let alone that she would beat his limp body.
Those with disorganised attachments are capable of extreme rage, aggression and violence as a result of the initial trauma.
Anyone with an ounce of integrity and honesty will admit there was a struggle in the kitchen where the killer beat Nevill severely until unconscious so the killer could reload the gun and shoot him to death.
-
By George you finally got it.
Where is the evidence SC had dexterity problems. Do you have any expert evidence to this effect? Or is it based on AE's claims that SC was unable to pour tea in a cup; put beans on test and learn to drive? Look at the photo of SC with the rifle and note the manicured/varnished nails, plucked eyebrows and shaved legs. All these tasks require manual dexterity. Look at other photos and see full face make-up skilfully applied. SC was mother to two just turned 6 year old sons who would require help with dressing eg buttons, zips, tying shoelaces which again require manual dexterity.
Hand eye coordination/depth perception required to drive and shoot accurately is not quite the same as applying makeup. Though we have no idea if she pained her own nails or not even someone with Parkinson's can do that it simply will take longer and be more messy than the average woman.
My sister-in-law didn't help her kids do any of the things you mentioned ever and not because she was unable she was just too lazy and made my nieces and nephew fend for themselves early on in life. You seem to be assuming she did more than we know (though these menial tasks could be accomplised by someone with dexterity issues since time is not of the essence, trying to laod a gun before someone comes to while in a rage very queckly shaking and doing so without chipping nails is hard to imagine for anyone honest) If we go by what the boys told Colin she didn't help them much and they felt neglected. How much of that they made up we don't know though the part about her being vacant and ignoring people and the like seems to be a common observation.
Her odd behavior was diagnosed as being over sedated. We don't have much of a frame of reference to assess how she was with her kids before she was in such condition.
In any event the hand eye coordination of shooting is far different and if you have tremors like is typical of patients on Haldol it simply is going to be worse.
What is most amusing to me is how the wealth of information about how schizophrenics are unable to plan and carry out killings like this is completely ignored though you care so much supposedly about the health issues. All you really care about is broadcasting your silly psychology theories and that requires the pretense Sheila did it.
The shots were all close range with many near contact or contact. Difficult to miss. Where does Dr V say she would need to be skilled with firearms?
People can and often do miss at close range. Particularly people who never fired a gun before or the particular gun before. People with dexterity issues only makes it even worse. Nevill was moving around during some of the shots and 2 such shots were fired several feet away.
Only one wound was determined to be a contact wound- Sheila's fatal shot. Only one wound on each of the parents was assessed to even possibly have been close enough to result in drawback though even each of these wounds was seen as not likely to have been fired so close. Most wounds were not as close as you want to pretend. How is it that people firing wildly into crowds right next to them manage to miss so much? Firing wildly often results in misses even if you are close.
Firing wildly is not going to result in tight groupings like in the head of the twins and Nevill. Vanezis is the one who assessed the wounds and noted that even based on the distance of the shots someone would need to be skilled with the wepaon.
There is no evidence Sheila ever fired a gun period, no evidence Sheila ever fired a gun like the murder weapon let alone the murder wepaon. The first semiauto weapon ever on the farm was the murder weapon which was purchase November 30, 1984 so only months before the murders.
She would not know she needed to chamber a round let alone know how, that alone woudl have floiled her liek it did Lynette Fromme when she tried to kill US president Ford. She would not know how to release the magazine. She certainly would not have known how to load 11 rounds in the magazine. The killer went into the master bedroom with it loaded to capacity (11 rounds) shooting June 7 times and Nevill 4. Shooting wildly in a rage she would not have been able to hit every time.
You want to live in some fantasy land to pretend using a gun is just easy and instictive and she did it instead of actually looking at all the evidence.
The shots were close enough that she would have had high velocity spatter on her clothing and body though and of course would have had medium velocity spatter from Nevill's beating.
No problem you say she washed and changed her clothes though such woudl make no sense at all, there are no examples of that happeneing ever outside of ritualistic killings and there are no clothes with spatter and GSR that she could have changed out of. That alone means you ar esunk because the clothes woudl have to be there that she change dout of. To prove this you need the clothes that have spatter and GSR. She would have needed to be wearing gloves to avoid leaving her prints in blood somewhere and to avoid damage to her hands. Why would she wear them and where are they if she did?
What about the broken glass from the lampshade and broken crockery on the floor did she have magic feet?
The only way you can pretend she did it is by inoring all the evidence and making up things that make no sense and are not supported by any evidence at all.
Also ignoring the moderator evidence and insisting there was a giant conspiracy without any evidence and ignoring how her body had been moved and the bible opened and closed in her blood by the killer.
All so you can pretend she did it and then tell people about your silly psychology claims.
Nails are made of keratin which is one of the toughest biological properties. SC was a young mother living alone in a busy city. In the course of her everyday activities eg childcare, housework, cooking, shopping, travelling on public transport in London she would have subjected her nails/vanish to just as many hazards as loading and firing a weapon. Are you able to provide any evidence from ballistics to confirm that had SC fired the said weapon 25 times she would have caused damage to her nails/vanish?
Another straw argument. That seems all that Jeremy defenders are capable of. I explain how her nails would break from during the struggle, especially when beating someone with a rifle and would chip from loading the magazine unless a female is very careful in how she did such and you talk about the firing of the gun.
As I mentioned on the blue board I know someone who broke her nail wile firing a gun. Such happened only because she was careless and messing aorund. Her finger slipped and she pulled the trigger with her nail instead of finger. It broke. If a female pushes her figer against the trigger guard hard enough it could break too. If Sheila were wildly firing could she have chipped or broken her nails in one of these ways? Yes. How likely? I don't know it depends on how wild and out of control she would be.
I care about the braeing because that is where she would have been left with cuts and scratches that would have for sure been found on her dead body and would have resulted in broken nails. It is well documented that women chip and break nails during physical altercations but especially when wielding objects like the rifle.
For some reason Jeremy supporters keep imagining someone grabbing the gun by the barrel and swinging it like a sledge hammer.
1) the knurled end of the moderator would have scraped the killer
2) the iron sights would have scratch or cut the killer eithe rby the victim grabbing the weapon and pulling it in which case it would slide until the sights were against the hand of the killer and/or from the gun sliding and moving as the killer bashed it against something. The barrel provides a poor grip.
3) the gun would be top heavy holding it from the barrel with would make it unwieldy that not only would make it easy to fall out of the killer's hand when swinging it around worse it makes it easier to take away from the killer.
4) Had this actually happened then the stock would not have broken in the manner it did. The stock broke by the wood stock being pushed against the metal receiver. A piece sheered off because of the pressure between the buttplate and the metal receiver. If wielded in the manner claimed then the side of the stock would have been hit. Had the side been used instead of the buttplate then it would not have broken the way it did. Teh most likely break when using it in such manner is for it to break from the inside out.
The stock is only held on with a screw. If you remove the trigger guard scre you can pull the stock off. The receiver had a metal conical projection sticking off the rear. The stock has a hole cut in it so it can slide onto this projection. The trigger guard screw keeps it from coming off on its own. When the side of the stock is used as a hammer where is the pressure? The pressure and tension is the wood around the hole being forced against the metal projection. So it will crack the stock from the hole outward hole. It's not going to sheer a piece off the way it sheered. That is indicative of the motion from real of the stock to front.
5) Instead of the stock breaking there would be a chance of the barrel being damaged or breaking away from from the rifle. The gun breaks down here is the barrel:
(http://s11.postimg.org/7gnho5mub/525barrel.jpg)
The barrel slides into the receiver. Note the small portion of the barrel that slides in.
Wielding it like a sledge hammer has a good chance of ripping it out of the receiver. If it is not ripped out it could instead warp the barrel or bend it which could be catastrophic if you then try to fire the weapon afterwards.
Since the barrel was not damaged, did not come free from the receiver and the stock did not break from the inside out it is obvious it was not wielded like a bat. The damage indicates the back of the stock was being used when the stock broke and the person wielding it would have hand their hand in the narrow area of the stock in order to use the rifle in such manner and would have been damaged unless gloves were worn.
Jeremy knew the gun broke down and how fragile the barrel was and also would not have gottena good grip from the barrel and his father could then have taken it away so he would not have used it as a hammer he would have used a butt stroke against his father and hat is how it broke- a butt stroke. If he really did lose his glove as he told Sheila then the most likely time for that would have been when the stock broke that would be what yanked it off.
-
Any lead/discolouration would be washed off by showering.
DB states in the following "Coupled with the fact that she hadn't had any experience with guns [reluctantly adds] or very little".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i2CjYDJGTo @ 6.20 in
SC no doubt spent time as child with NB walking around the fields shooting. SC was a farmers daughter. Children pick up things without having to be sat down and shown. You don't need to be a nuclear physicist to load the said rifle and fire it. SC was from a birth family of academics and privately educated you seem to want to think of her as someone with learning difficulties.
You have no evidence she showered and bathed nor any reason why she would. You can't find a single case where someone decided to commit murder-suicide and after killing their family took a bath. It doesn't happen it is a stupid suggestion the best anyone could come up with is to raise bathing before ritualistic suicide which no one alleges was the case. Showering and bathing doesn't get rid of evidence on clothing anyway. The killer's clothing would have been covered with GSR, high velocity spatter and medium velocity spatter and gloves were used. No such clothing was found at WHF.
Your simplistic claims about guns have already been addressed and you have no rebuttal you just go back to the same stupid mantra over and over again.
Seeing someone shoot a gun doens't mean that you will be able to load and shoot it yourself. Iguarantee if I fire my semi-auto sniper rifle that you will not notice the steps I take asde from simply pulling the trigger and walking aorund me sometimes doesn't mean I will even perform such in your presence let alone you will understand and appreciate the subtle acts. Lynette Fromme grew up around guns and she failed to chamber around and was thus disarmed without a shot having been fired when she tried to kill president Ford. What rebuttal have you presented to this. Nothing you just ignore it and repeat the same mantra she would have known what to do no matter what because you actually don't care about the truth only pretending SHeila did it so you can present your psychology BS.
What semi-auto guns did they have on the farm? NONE until the murder weapon purchased at the end of 1984.
So if she was busy wathcing her father growing up and so forth then she would have seen him fire shotguns not a semi-auto. You ignore this time and again because it absolutely kills you. Walking with her father as he used a shotgun would not enable her to know how to use the murder weapon no matter how carefully she watched her father. Your simplistic she would have to know how to shoot any and all gun because she lived on a farm is simply pathetic and absurd.
The only thing worse is suggesting it is cake to just easily group shots and neve rmiss your first time using a wepaon you are unfamiliar with while in the middle of a crazy rage.
Even if we assume that the broken crockery was not caused by the raid team, as per soc pics it amounted to just a few large pieces. The glass lampshade was unlikely to be crystal glass and again perhaps a 2/3 pieces? Unless it was in her path she would simply avoided it. You realise that NB was also barefooted and he too had no cuts to his feet.
The killer broke the lamp by being right under it. Nevill was knocked down while the killer was supposedly standing on this mess swinging a rifle at Nevill battering him unconscious and then walked all around the kitchen afterwards. Nevill wasn't walking around was he? In fact the killed stepped on Nevill's feet and kicked his knees bruising them, probably in an effort to get him off his feet.
You have no idea when and how the stock broke. To claim it would cause hand damage is absurd.
The nature of the break demonstrates how it was being used. It was being used in a motion that demosntrates the back of the stock was being used to bash and the way that is done is by holding the weapon with one hand on the fore grip and the other on the narrow area of the stock.
Aside from no evidence the weapon was instead used as you claimed wither her holding the barrel that would still result in injury. The knurled grip of the moderator would cause damage to the arms and the iron sights would damage the wrist and hands. You never think things through you just make simplistic claims based on nothing other than your agenda.
All removed by showering with stained clothes in the buckets.
Again a completely absurd claim not supported by anything. You have no evidence she showered and bathed nor any reason why she would. You can't find a single case where someone decided to commit murder-suicide and after killing their family took a bath. It doesn't happen it is a stupid suggestion the best anyone could come up with is to raise bathing before ritualistic suicide which no one alleges was the case. Showering and bathing doesn't get rid of evidence on clothing anyway. The killer's clothing would have been covered with GSR, high velocity spatter and medium velocity spatter and gloves were used. No such clothing was found at WHF. The buck you cite contianed 2 pairs of panties and leggings all with the crotch stained thus indicative of being menstruated in during the day some time. Probably before she bought tampons and she went shopping that very day and had a supply of tampons including one inserted inside her when killed!
Where is the gown or blouse with GSR and blood spatter from the victims? It wasn't in the buckets so try again.
I don't believe that the silencer ever left the gun cupboard on that fateful night. Her blood may have been inside and if it was then I believe it was deliberately contaminated by EP with blood from SC's sample handed to EP by Dr V.
What you believe doesn't matter what you can provide evidence of matters. You have no evidentiary basis to assert such happened. You have no rational basis to believe it happened. The evidence says it did and unless you can refute that evidence it is a thorn that prevents your claims from being taken seriously. Just dismissing it because you don't want to face it doesn't make it go away.
Why do you think NB only had linear wounds to his right arm?
He had skin ripped off a finger, bruising to his elbow and his forearm had "relatively linear" wounds. The butt of the stock jabbing into his arm made the gauges. Yhe flat bottom, top or sides of the stock do not make gauges like that. It was made by the butt of the rifle glancing off and digging in.
(http://s27.postimg.org/jzo0w7qwz/arm1.jpg)
The buttplate has ridges and can thus gauge but worse loo at the corners of the butt
(http://s27.postimg.org/qmoxdztoj/arm2.jpg)
Nevill raised his right arm blocking his face with it. Elbow was facing to his right and his hand to his left. The killer was striking his arm with the butt of the rifle.
Given the shot NB received on the stairs ie downward it would seem SC followed NB downstairs. Why did NB head for the kitchen? He thought he could continue the conversation he started with JB before he run upstairs when he heard SC firing shots? To escape and raise the alarm and to deter JB from entering?
He didn't receive any shots on the stairs. If he was hit while running away down the stairs that would even be worse to try to claim Sheila made such a shot. There is zero evidence of a shot on the stairs. The shell casing would have been at the bottom of the stairs not the top if a killer were aiming at him as he was below running down the stairs. The killer would have shot him in the back and the only shots that coudl have been fired from the top of the stairs as he ran down based on angle of impact is one of the shots in the top of his head which woudl have made him collapse and which Vanzis said was clearly fired int he kitchen as all 4 shots were fired at the same range and tightly grouped and had they been delivered elsewher ehe would have passed out and not made it ot the kitchen. the shell caseing against the wall in the hall was somehow stuck to a shoe of either the killer or police and tracked up there because 4 shots were fired in the kitchen and only 3 casings were there. The only odd casing was in the hall and it could not have gotten in that location unless someone were shooting in that direction from th vicinity of Sheila's room.
The other 4 shots were all side profile shots and thus could not have been fired from someone standing behind Nevill so can't have been delivered on the stairs. Nevill's left side was facing the killer when the shots were fired.
The killer fired 11 rounds at June and Nevill in the master bedroom. That alone proves it was Jeremy, Sheial would not have loaded the gun to capacity. The gun was empty when either Nevill fled the bedroom with his killer giving chase or alternatively he chased his killer. Since he probably did not move that fast and left blood on the walls it is quite possible he was tailing his killer and could not catch up uintil the kitchen. It seems unlikely his killer would not catch up sooner. Why would his killer go the the kitchen? To get more ammo which Nevill woudl have every reason to try to stop. Why would Nevill go to the kitchen? Most likely to grab a weapon be it a knife, gun or something else available in the kitchen. The guns were stored in the back kitchen AKA office kitchen.
Dr V states NB put up a "spirited defense". He does not mention a "struggle".
A spirited defense is a struggle. It certainly refutes your claim Nevill passed out and his limp body was bludgeoned.
If you want to claim the above you need to rule SC out by providing the following measurements to the nearest mm:
Height from kitchen floor to lowest point of lampshade
Height of SC
Arm length/reach of SC
Length of rifle with and without silencer (Now kindly provided by Myster)
I believe EP fabricated the scratches after the tragedy.
I don't need to rule her out. The moderator had ot be attached to break the lampshade. That could have been accomplished by Sheila or Jeremy fighting with Nevill over it though much more likely Jeremy since he was taller and the higher the gun the easier to take away from sheila. The moderator attached period sinks Jeremy by your own admission that if it was attached then Jeremy is guilty so I have zero need to say she was too short to have broken the light with the moderator attached.
You need to provide evidence that the moderator was not attached and that the blood and paint were planted. you can't you have not even a detialed theory of how it came about let alone any evidence it is possible to plant blood in the manner it was found. You just refuse to believe the evidence. Taht doens't make it go away it just akes your opinion baseless.
You don't know when and how the stock was damaged. How could SC have told JB anything?
We do indeed know when and how. The broken piece was in the kitchen so it obviously was broke off while Nevill was being bludgeoned not some other time prior to the murders especially since the gun by Jeremy's own admission was unbroken prior ot the murders.
The way it was sheered off indicates the butt striking something hard and dorcing the stock into the receiver. This was all explained already.
You have nothing to rebut my points or evidence anymore than you have anything to establish the evidence on and in the mdoerator was planted. You just dismiss anythign you don't want to face. taht doesn't refute it though and doesn't make it go away.
The other rooms you refer to were bedrooms and the stairs. Not too much to break in those rooms. The other victims were perhaps not beaten as they didn't try to resist either verbally or physically.
Those with disorganised attachments are capable of extreme rage, aggression and violence as a result of the initial trauma.
There was plenty to break in the bedrooms and knock over. There were also victims to attack and bash in the bedrooms. Why only Nevill when he was the man who clamed her down instantly in the past? You have nothing at all to answer any of these questions.
Only the most dishonest Jerem supporters refuse to admit that Nevill was beaten because the killer was out of ammunition and needed to reload but Nevill was trying to disarm the killer and the killer had to knock him out in order ot be able to reload and then be able to shoot him dead.
-
It is claimed that had SC been responsible she would have incurred some damage to her nails/varnish. However there is no scientific evidence for this hypothesis. Dr V was asked to comment on SC's nails. He stated it was outside of his expertise and was the province of a ballistics expert.
Nails are made of keratin - one of the strongest biological properties:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keratin
The US military (seems to be common to other countries) stipulate female nail length is no longer than one quarter of an inch from the finger tip:
"All personnel will keep fingernails clean and neatly trimmed. Females will not exceed a nail length of 1/4 inch, as measured from the tip of the finger. Females will trim nails shorter if the commander determines that the longer length detracts from the military image, presents a safety concern, or interferes with the performance of duties."
http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/army/a/armygrooming_3.htm
Rules also apply to varnish:
"Females will not wear shades of lipstick and nail polish that distinctly contrast with their complexion, that detract from the uniform, or that are extreme. Some examples of extreme colors include, but are not limited to, purple, gold, blue, black, white, bright (fire-engine) red, khaki, camouflage colors, and fluorescent colors. Soldiers will not apply designs to nails or apply two-tone or multi-tone colors to nails."
If females in the US miliatry are likely to break/chip their nails/varnish during the course of their duties surely they would wear their nails much shorter than the one quarter of an inch allowed? Or are we to assume that US female soldiers are s...ks who have chipped broken nails/varnish?
SC's nails even featured as an aspect of the prosecution's case. Here's the extract from 2002 appeal document:
"f) Her clothing was relatively clean and she was not injured in the way that might be expected of somebody involved in a struggle. Her long fingernails were still intact and undamaged."
And yet as far as I am aware, other than WPC Jeapes, Glynnis Howard (scientist FSS) Claire Powell author of Murder at White House Farm - Story 8(0(* of Jeremy Bamber, the WHF case has been devoid of females acting in a professional capacity.
Female Input:
WPC Jeapes (? Manning ?)
Claire Powell - Author
Glynnis Howard - Scientist
Male Input:
All EP excl 1 above
All legal representatives to date
All scientists and other expert witnesses excl 1 above
All journalists
All authors excl 1 above
This extends to Blue and Red where we have males who by and large attempt to dominate. Surely this cannot be right in 2014? Would the case be where it is today if those capable of influencing the direction had been gender balanced? When I say where the case is today I mean would females have gone along with 4 murders/1 suicide without first assessing all aspects?
Would a female perspective:
Make no difference?
Make a difference negatively?
Make a difference positively?
8**8:/:
>@@(*&)
-
By George you finally got it.
Hand eye coordination/depth perception required to drive and shoot accurately is not quite the same as applying makeup. Though we have no idea if she pained her own nails or not even someone with Parkinson's can do that it simply will take longer and be more messy than the average woman.
My sister-in-law didn't help her kids do any of the things you mentioned ever and not because she was unable she was just too lazy and made my nieces and nephew fend for themselves early on in life. You seem to be assuming she did more than we know (though these menial tasks could be accomplised by someone with dexterity issues since time is not of the essence, trying to laod a gun before someone comes to while in a rage very queckly shaking and doing so without chipping nails is hard to imagine for anyone honest) If we go by what the boys told Colin she didn't help them much and they felt neglected. How much of that they made up we don't know though the part about her being vacant and ignoring people and the like seems to be a common observation.
Her odd behavior was diagnosed as being over sedated. We don't have much of a frame of reference to assess how she was with her kids before she was in such condition.
In any event the hand eye coordination of shooting is far different and if you have tremors like is typical of patients on Haldol it simply is going to be worse.
What is most amusing to me is how the wealth of information about how schizophrenics are unable to plan and carry out killings like this is completely ignored though you care so much supposedly about the health issues. All you really care about is broadcasting your silly psychology theories and that requires the pretense Sheila did it.
People can and often do miss at close range. Particularly people who never fired a gun before or the particular gun before. People with dexterity issues only makes it even worse. Nevill was moving around during some of the shots and 2 such shots were fired several feet away.
Only one wound was determined to be a contact wound- Sheila's fatal shot. Only one wound on each of the parents was assessed to even possibly have been close enough to result in drawback though even each of these wounds was seen as not likely to have been fired so close. Most wounds were not as close as you want to pretend. How is it that people firing wildly into crowds right next to them manage to miss so much? Firing wildly often results in misses even if you are close.
Firing wildly is not going to result in tight groupings like in the head of the twins and Nevill. Vanezis is the one who assessed the wounds and noted that even based on the distance of the shots someone would need to be skilled with the wepaon.
There is no evidence Sheila ever fired a gun period, no evidence Sheila ever fired a gun like the murder weapon let alone the murder wepaon. The first semiauto weapon ever on the farm was the murder weapon which was purchase November 30, 1984 so only months before the murders.
She would not know she needed to chamber a round let alone know how, that alone woudl have floiled her liek it did Lynette Fromme when she tried to kill US president Ford. She would not know how to release the magazine. She certainly would not have known how to load 11 rounds in the magazine. The killer went into the master bedroom with it loaded to capacity (11 rounds) shooting June 7 times and Nevill 4. Shooting wildly in a rage she would not have been able to hit every time.
You want to live in some fantasy land to pretend using a gun is just easy and instictive and she did it instead of actually looking at all the evidence.
The shots were close enough that she would have had high velocity spatter on her clothing and body though and of course would have had medium velocity spatter from Nevill's beating.
No problem you say she washed and changed her clothes though such woudl make no sense at all, there are no examples of that happeneing ever outside of ritualistic killings and there are no clothes with spatter and GSR that she could have changed out of. That alone means you ar esunk because the clothes woudl have to be there that she change dout of. To prove this you need the clothes that have spatter and GSR. She would have needed to be wearing gloves to avoid leaving her prints in blood somewhere and to avoid damage to her hands. Why would she wear them and where are they if she did?
What about the broken glass from the lampshade and broken crockery on the floor did she have magic feet?
The only way you can pretend she did it is by inoring all the evidence and making up things that make no sense and are not supported by any evidence at all.
Also ignoring the moderator evidence and insisting there was a giant conspiracy without any evidence and ignoring how her body had been moved and the bible opened and closed in her blood by the killer.
All so you can pretend she did it and then tell people about your silly psychology claims.
Another straw argument. That seems all that Jeremy defenders are capable of. I explain how her nails would break from during the struggle, especially when beating someone with a rifle and would chip from loading the magazine unless a female is very careful in how she did such and you talk about the firing of the gun.
As I mentioned on the blue board I know someone who broke her nail wile firing a gun. Such happened only because she was careless and messing aorund. Her finger slipped and she pulled the trigger with her nail instead of finger. It broke. If a female pushes her figer against the trigger guard hard enough it could break too. If Sheila were wildly firing could she have chipped or broken her nails in one of these ways? Yes. How likely? I don't know it depends on how wild and out of control she would be.
I care about the braeing because that is where she would have been left with cuts and scratches that would have for sure been found on her dead body and would have resulted in broken nails. It is well documented that women chip and break nails during physical altercations but especially when wielding objects like the rifle.
For some reason Jeremy supporters keep imagining someone grabbing the gun by the barrel and swinging it like a sledge hammer.
1) the knurled end of the moderator would have scraped the killer
2) the iron sights would have scratch or cut the killer eithe rby the victim grabbing the weapon and pulling it in which case it would slide until the sights were against the hand of the killer and/or from the gun sliding and moving as the killer bashed it against something. The barrel provides a poor grip.
3) the gun would be top heavy holding it from the barrel with would make it unwieldy that not only would make it easy to fall out of the killer's hand when swinging it around worse it makes it easier to take away from the killer.
4) Had this actually happened then the stock would not have broken in the manner it did. The stock broke by the wood stock being pushed against the metal receiver. A piece sheered off because of the pressure between the buttplate and the metal receiver. If wielded in the manner claimed then the side of the stock would have been hit. Had the side been used instead of the buttplate then it would not have broken the way it did. Teh most likely break when using it in such manner is for it to break from the inside out.
The stock is only held on with a screw. If you remove the trigger guard scre you can pull the stock off. The receiver had a metal conical projection sticking off the rear. The stock has a hole cut in it so it can slide onto this projection. The trigger guard screw keeps it from coming off on its own. When the side of the stock is used as a hammer where is the pressure? The pressure and tension is the wood around the hole being forced against the metal projection. So it will crack the stock from the hole outward hole. It's not going to sheer a piece off the way it sheered. That is indicative of the motion from real of the stock to front.
5) Instead of the stock breaking there would be a chance of the barrel being damaged or breaking away from from the rifle. The gun breaks down here is the barrel:
(http://s11.postimg.org/7gnho5mub/525barrel.jpg)
The barrel slides into the receiver. Note the small portion of the barrel that slides in.
Wielding it like a sledge hammer has a good chance of ripping it out of the receiver. If it is not ripped out it could instead warp the barrel or bend it which could be catastrophic if you then try to fire the weapon afterwards.
Since the barrel was not damaged, did not come free from the receiver and the stock did not break from the inside out it is obvious it was not wielded like a bat. The damage indicates the back of the stock was being used when the stock broke and the person wielding it would have hand their hand in the narrow area of the stock in order to use the rifle in such manner and would have been damaged unless gloves were worn.
Jeremy knew the gun broke down and how fragile the barrel was and also would not have gottena good grip from the barrel and his father could then have taken it away so he would not have used it as a hammer he would have used a butt stroke against his father and hat is how it broke- a butt stroke. If he really did lose his glove as he told Sheila then the most likely time for that would have been when the stock broke that would be what yanked it off.
http://www.autism.org.uk/about-autism/autism-and-asperger-syndrome-an-introduction/high-functioning-autism-and-asperger-syndrome-whats-the-difference.aspx
-
Some claim that had SC been in the kitchen/responsible then she would have suffered cuts to her bare feet from the broken crockery and lampshade. NB was found bare-footed in the kitchen and yet Dr V did not identify any cuts/abrasions etc to his feet. >@@(*&)
-
Some claim that had SC been in the kitchen/responsible then she would have suffered cuts to her bare feet from the broken crockery and lampshade. NB was found bare-footed in the kitchen and yet Dr V did not identify any cuts/abrasions etc to his feet. >@@(*&)
NB wasn't running aorund on the broke crockery wildly attackign anyone wa she?
You assert Sheila was doing that but since you ignore eveyr single aspect including the lack of any clothing with spatter from he victims is is not surprising.
Try actually responding to my rebuttals of your points if you dare.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/RrUlAHF.jpg?1)
This from the 2002 Appeal:
71. The rifle bore blood smearing on the barrel in the region of the fore-sight and around the mechanism and there were splashes of blood to the left side of the weapon. The appearance of the blood staining was consistent with it having been used to strike somebody who was already bleeding. On analysis the blood was found to be human blood but tests to determine grouping were unsuccessful. A "pull-through" on the barrel of the rifle was conducted for any traces of blood within the weapon. There were none.
-
Hi
What does KM positive mean. Does it mean human blood or blood from a certain type of blood for example A. >@@(*&)
-
Hi
What does KM positive mean. Does it mean human blood or blood from a certain type of blood for example A. >@@(*&)
Positive for blood using the Kastle Meyer blood test
-
As scipio-usmc posted above, the KM or Kastle-Meyer test merely determines whether a substance is blood. You can read a bit more about it at the link below. It would be really interesting to know if a DNA test has been done now to establish for sure that the blood on the rifle belonged to Nevill or even his assailant. If such a LCN test hasn't been done it most certainly should have been.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kastle–Meyer_test
-
Some claim that had SC been in the kitchen/responsible then she would have suffered cuts to her bare feet from the broken crockery and lampshade. NB was found bare-footed in the kitchen and yet Dr V did not identify any cuts/abrasions etc to his feet. >@@(*&)
Don't need to think very much about that one, do you Holly? By the time the assailant had caught up with and started to bludgeon a bare-footed Nevill and before the shade was shattered, JB was on the table side of the kitchen where most of the broken glass/crockery fragments on the floor and the marks under the shelf are visible. Nevill was on the window side, (obvious from where his body ended up) where little if any broken pieces can be seen on the lino or matting in the "bucket" photo.
-
It is claimed that had SC been responsible she would have incurred some damage to her nails/varnish. However there is no scientific evidence for this hypothesis. Dr V was asked to comment on SC's nails. He stated it was outside of his expertise and was the province of a ballistics expert.
Nails are made of keratin - one of the strongest biological properties:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keratin
The US military (seems to be common to other countries) stipulate female nail length is no longer than one quarter of an inch from the finger tip:
"All personnel will keep fingernails clean and neatly trimmed. Females will not exceed a nail length of 1/4 inch, as measured from the tip of the finger. Females will trim nails shorter if the commander determines that the longer length detracts from the military image, presents a safety concern, or interferes with the performance of duties."
http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/army/a/armygrooming_3.htm
Rules also apply to varnish:
"Females will not wear shades of lipstick and nail polish that distinctly contrast with their complexion, that detract from the uniform, or that are extreme. Some examples of extreme colors include, but are not limited to, purple, gold, blue, black, white, bright (fire-engine) red, khaki, camouflage colors, and fluorescent colors. Soldiers will not apply designs to nails or apply two-tone or multi-tone colors to nails."
If females in the US miliatry are likely to break/chip their nails/varnish during the course of their duties surely they would wear their nails much shorter than the one quarter of an inch allowed? Or are we to assume that US female soldiers are s...ks who have chipped broken nails/varnish?
SC's nails even featured as an aspect of the prosecution's case. Here's the extract from 2002 appeal document:
"f) Her clothing was relatively clean and she was not injured in the way that might be expected of somebody involved in a struggle. Her long fingernails were still intact and undamaged."
And yet as far as I am aware, other than WPC Jeapes, Glynnis Howard (scientist FSS) Claire Powell author of Murder at White House Farm - Story 8(0(* of Jeremy Bamber, the WHF case has been devoid of females acting in a professional capacity.
Female Input:
WPC Jeapes (? Manning ?)
Claire Powell - Author
Glynnis Howard - Scientist
Male Input:
All EP excl 1 above
All legal representatives to date
All scientists and other expert witnesses excl 1 above
All journalists
All authors excl 1 above
This extends to Blue and Red where we have males who by and large attempt to dominate. Surely this cannot be right in 2014? Would the case be where it is today if those capable of influencing the direction had been gender balanced? When I say where the case is today I mean would females have gone along with 4 murders/1 suicide without first assessing all aspects?
Would a female perspective:
Make no difference?
Make a difference negatively?
Make a difference positively?
8**8:/:
>@@(*&)
You forgot Julie and Susie whose inputs were crucial to the case. 8(0(*
-
Dr Vanezis has always maintained that he is unable to confirm whether SC was murdered or took her own life.
My understanding of the role of a pathologist/autopsy is that his/her findings will mainly be based on a physical examination of a body not information imparted from others?
The wound to NB's left shoulder caused a comminuted fracture to the upper third of the humerus. On this basis I think Dr Vanezis was able to say with some certainty that the wound rendered NB's left arm totally impaired upon impact of the bullet/comminuted fracture.
May I ask what makes you so sure that a fight took place in the kitchen as that is not how I interpret it at all.
The autopsy was inconclusive thus why the pathologist was unable to say one way or another if the two wounds which Sheila suffered were inflicted by AN Other or self inflicted. That said however, the substantial evidence gathered from the crime scene tells a different story.
As far as Nevill's wound to his arm is concerned, the pathologist can only give an opinion based on the autopsy. Again, the very substantial evidence from the crime scene paints a wholly different picture.
One would have to be totally blind to evidence and the crime scene photos taken in the kitchen to come to such a conclusion that a fight of some sort didn't take place in the kitchen. Clearly Nevill was beaten up badly in the kitchen which leads to only one conclusion and that is that his killer ran out of ammunition.
-
NB wasn't running aorund on the broke crockery wildly attackign anyone wa she?
You assert Sheila was doing that but since you ignore eveyr single aspect including the lack of any clothing with spatter from he victims is is not surprising.
Try actually responding to my rebuttals of your points if you dare.
"Who dares wins" ?>)()< but there's not going to be anything "for your eyes only" 8**8:/:
Your post
Quote from: scipio_usmc on July 12, 2014, 05:33:34 PM
The killer and Nevill fought over the rifle. Think about 4 hands on the rifle pulling it in different directions. How would that particular rifle be tall enough to break the lampshade? Wihtout the moderator attached the barrel will not extend above the heads of those struggling. A struggle with Sheila would feature the gun lower than Jeremy because she was shorter. Even with Jeremy and Nevill the barrel would have been below their heads not above. The only way the gun would have been long enough is with the moderator attached. The scratches to the aga confirm it was indeed attached as they struggled.
Above you claim that NB was engaged in struggle with his assailant with both using their hands to fight for control of the rifle (this is despite NB's left arm being totally impaired). During this struggle you claim the glass lightshade was smashed. According to you this rules SC out as she did not sustain any cuts to her feet. And yet you refuse to accept that NB was also bare-footed and he too did not sustain any cuts to his feet.
You go further to rule out SC and claim she was not tall enough to smash the lightshade with the rifle (even though we have no idea how the lightshade was broken). This is despite having no idea of:
Height from floor to lowest point of lampshade.
Height of SC and length of arm and reach
-
You forgot Julie and Susie whose inputs were crucial to the case. 8(0(*
Hello Boss 8**8:/:
No I didn't forget them. My post made reference to those operating in a "professional capacity". I will always maintain that this is a very important feature of the case ie lack of female professional input. I am by no means some raving feminist who refuses to shave her legs either.
-
As scipio-usmc posted above, the KM or Kastle-Meyer test merely determines whether a substance is blood. You can read a bit more about it at the link below. It would be really interesting to know if a DNA test has been done now to establish for sure that the blood on the rifle belonged to Nevill or even his assailant. If such a LCN test hasn't been done it most certainly should have been.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kastle–Meyer_test
Thank you for the KM link John and Scipio for bringing to our attention. I am confused. It appears the KM test was available from 1903 and yet the LCN DNA testing carried out in 2001/02 on the silencer was unable to identify the source of DNA ie blood etc 8-)(--) Does this mean KM and LCN DNA cannot be used together to at least rule in/out blood being the source of DNA? This is all getting beyond me and I think I am getting confused.
-
Thank you for the KM link John and Scipio for bringing to our attention. I am confused. It appears the KM test was available from 1903 and yet the LCN DNA testing carried out in 2001/02 on the silencer was unable to identify the source of DNA ie blood etc 8-)(--) Does this mean KM and LCN DNA cannot be used together to at least rule in/out blood being the source of DNA? This is all getting beyond me and I think I am getting confused.
The KM test seemingly only determines if the blood was human. There was insufficient sample material collected from the silencer baffles for any further testing beyond that which occurred in 2001. That said however, it is beyond much doubt that the DNA found within the silencer came from Sheila since the odds of it being someone elses is several million to one. Additionally, given that only a very small number of people could have handled the rifle/silencer and given that Sheila was not related to any of them, those odds become so small as to make it a dead cert that the DNA found within the silencer had to come from Sheila.
My earlier point however was directed at the several smears and spots of blood found on the rifle itself. Has anyone ever come across any documents which show that this blood was DNA tested?
-
Hi
What does KM positive mean. Does it mean human blood or blood from a certain type of blood for example A. >@@(*&)
Hi Patti. I meant to say hi earlier. Hope all is going well with your new venture 8(>(( I will endeavour to give you a call before I go away on hol.
What may I ask brings you to Red? Would it by any chance be the drop dead gorgeous guys we are blessed with here? They are all mine Patti. You have Mike, Gladys and Nelly don't be greedy 8)-)))
-
The KM test seemingly only determines if the blood was human. There was insufficient sample material collected from the silencer baffles for any further testing beyond that which occurred in 2001. That said however, it is beyond much doubt that the DNA found within the silencer came from Sheila since the odds of it being someone elses is several million to one. Additionally, given that only a very small number of people could have handled the rifle/silencer and given that Sheila was not related to any of them, those odds become so small as to make it a dead cert that the DNA found within the silencer had to come from Sheila.
My earlier point however was directed at the several smears and spots of blood found on the rifle itself. Has anyone ever come across any documents which show that this blood was DNA tested?
I support the findings of the scientists and appeal court judges in that the LCN DNA testing were rendered "completely meaningless" from both a prosecution and defence perspective due to the potential for contamination.
504. Mr Webster then reviewed in detail the history of the handling of the moderator and the various opportunities for contamination. He considered the fact that Dr Lincoln had taken out all the baffles and tested them all. He referred to the fact that both Mr Hayward and Mr Fletcher had handled the moderator in the witness box, a place where other exhibits were produced without any precautions being taken to avoid contact. He pointed to the fact that the judge specifically told the jury that they could "empty the baffles out later" and that it could not be established what use had been made of the moderator by the jury during their deliberations or what other exhibits may have been in their possession. He observed that the judge had told the jury that if they handled any of the clothing, they should put on plastic gloves for their own protection, thus giving rise to the possibility that blood stained items were examined by the jury with no precautions being taken to ensure that if they then went to handle the baffles there was not contamination.
505. Mr Webster concluded at paragraph 102:
"The CCRC, in their statement of reasons, more or less excluded the possibility of contamination. In my opinion, the Commission was wrong to do so."
506. We have no doubt at all that if this evidence had been placed before a jury, they would have concluded, as we do, that in accordance with the emphasised part of Mr Webster's report quoted above, the DNA testing results were rendered completely "completely meaningless".
-
The KM test seemingly only determines if the blood was human. There was insufficient sample material collected from the silencer baffles for any further testing beyond that which occurred in 2001. That said however, it is beyond much doubt that the DNA found within the silencer came from Sheila since the odds of it being someone elses is several million to one. Additionally, given that only a very small number of people could have handled the rifle/silencer and given that Sheila was not related to any of them, those odds become so small as to make it a dead cert that the DNA found within the silencer had to come from Sheila.
My earlier point however was directed at the several smears and spots of blood found on the rifle itself. Has anyone ever come across any documents which show that this blood was DNA tested?
The blood exhibits were not retained so could not be tested for DNA. At any rate the tests done to such blood destroy DNA and the age in combo with this meant there would have been little chance of successfully doing so. The main complain about destruction of exhibits was blood samples like June's but June's sister voluntarily agreed ot provide her DNA since the mitochondrial DNA would match (So myuch for her being invovle din a plot to plant evidence).
Unless Jeremy's blood were found on it, DNA would accomplish nothing anyway. The blood of every victim could have been on it, but Nevill and June's would definitely be based on the spatter in the bedroom and the nature of the beating in the kitchen. I would expect some blood from sheila as well given the nature of the first shot. Since the some of the blood was smeared that means it was touched by the killer in some way and could have been transferred by the killer.
The wepaon was still being used and handled by the killer which means some could have been removed and transferred. The bottom line is that testing the blood found outside of the gun for DNA could hurt Jeremy but not help so that why his lawyers made no big deal about it that was helpful. No one knows if he cuts his hand and bled on it or not. He was not carefully inspected until September when it would be too late.
I have small cuts and scratches all over my hands. You have to look carefully to find them. Not even Julie looked carefully at his hands she was looking for major wounds. All it takes is a drop of blood to be found by the prosecution that you don't know you left and you can be screwed.
-
I support the findings of the scientists and appeal court judges in that the LCN DNA testing were rendered "completely meaningless" from both a prosecution and defence perspective due to the potential for contamination.
504. Mr Webster then reviewed in detail the history of the handling of the moderator and the various opportunities for contamination. He considered the fact that Dr Lincoln had taken out all the baffles and tested them all. He referred to the fact that both Mr Hayward and Mr Fletcher had handled the moderator in the witness box, a place where other exhibits were produced without any precautions being taken to avoid contact. He pointed to the fact that the judge specifically told the jury that they could "empty the baffles out later" and that it could not be established what use had been made of the moderator by the jury during their deliberations or what other exhibits may have been in their possession. He observed that the judge had told the jury that if they handled any of the clothing, they should put on plastic gloves for their own protection, thus giving rise to the possibility that blood stained items were examined by the jury with no precautions being taken to ensure that if they then went to handle the baffles there was not contamination.
505. Mr Webster concluded at paragraph 102:
"The CCRC, in their statement of reasons, more or less excluded the possibility of contamination. In my opinion, the Commission was wrong to do so."
506. We have no doubt at all that if this evidence had been placed before a jury, they would have concluded, as we do, that in accordance with the emphasised part of Mr Webster's report quoted above, the DNA testing results were rendered completely "completely meaningless".
I totally disagree, you cannot get a 13 marker match from contamination since Sheila's DNA had very little in common with anyone who ever handled the silencer. Under UK law a 13 marker match has no significance but in the real world it means the chances of it not matching Sheila are millions to one. Given that the blood found in the silencer in 1985 was the same group as Sheila I find the 'just a coincidence theory' to be a theory too far.
-
I totally disagree, you cannot get a 13 marker match from contamination since Sheila's DNA had very little in common with anyone who ever handled the silencer. Under UK law a 13 marker match has no significance but in the real world it means the chances of it not matching Sheila are millions to one. Given that the blood found in the silencer in 1985 was the same group as Sheila I find the 'just a coincidence theory' to be a theory too far.
Good morning John
Even if the DNA was a 20/20 match it could still be there as a result of contamination. Eg I invite you round for a cuppa. You leave skin cells, sweat/fingerprints and saliva on mug. You leave. I put the mug you drank out of in the dishwasher. As a result I end up with your skin cells and sweat/fingerprints on my hand. My neighbour then calls to invite me round for a cuppa. I accept and as I handle the neighbour's mug I transfer your DNA on my hand to the neighbour's mug. Your DNA is now on a mug you have never touched or been anywhere near.
As the CoA doc states, as DNA testing was not even envisaged in 85/86 no precautions were taken to protect exhibits from contamination eg jurors handling SC's and June's bloody nighties alongside the silencer/emptying baffles. Therefore it is highly likely jurors contaminated the silencer/baffles with June and SC's DNA whether that be skin cells, blood etc.
As you probably know different techniques are available to identify DNA. One being LCN DNA. This technique was chosen as it is capable of producing a result from just a few skin cells and as the blood from the original sample 85/86 had all but been swabbed away it offered a possibility. The downside is the risk of contamination as outlined above. Also LCN DNA is incapable of identifying the source eg blood, sweat, skin cells etc.
Had the CCRC have been switched on they would not have referred the case to CoA.
It really is "utterly meaningless" as per the scientists and 3 appeal court judges. If you personally choose to believe otherwise that's obviously your prerogative. I like a man with an independent mind. *
This link explains the incredibly small amounts of biological matter required for a LCN DNA result. As you will see we are talking amounts so small they are not even visible to the naked eye. Talking of naked must jump in the shower. *
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_copy_number
* Would like to have 8**8:/: but it appears that your good self and Myster do not appreciate my coquettishness 8(8-))
-
The KM test seemingly only determines if the blood was human. There was insufficient sample material collected from the silencer baffles for any further testing beyond that which occurred in 2001. That said however, it is beyond much doubt that the DNA found within the silencer came from Sheila since the odds of it being someone elses is several million to one. Additionally, given that only a very small number of people could have handled the rifle/silencer and given that Sheila was not related to any of them, those odds become so small as to make it a dead cert that the DNA found within the silencer had to come from Sheila.
My earlier point however was directed at the several smears and spots of blood found on the rifle itself. Has anyone ever come across any documents which show that this blood was DNA tested?
That actually is a good point. I've not seen any document that relates to any tests of DNA from the rifle. It would be interesting to see the results.
What happened to the rifle? Has it been destroyed?
-
Good morning John
Even if the DNA was a 20/20 match it could still be there as a result of contamination. Eg I invite you round for a cuppa. You leave skin cells, sweat/fingerprints and saliva on mug. You leave. I put the mug you drank out of in the dishwasher. As a result I end up with your skin cells and sweat/fingerprints on my hand. My neighbour then calls to invite me round for a cuppa. I accept and as I handle the neighbour's mug I transfer your DNA on my hand to the neighbour's mug. Your DNA is now on a mug you have never touched or been anywhere near.
As the CoA doc states, as DNA testing was not even envisaged in 85/86 no precautions were taken to protect exhibits from contamination eg jurors handling SC's and June's bloody nighties alongside the silencer/emptying baffles. Therefore it is highly likely jurors contaminated the silencer/baffles with June and SC's DNA whether that be skin cells, blood etc.
As you probably know different techniques are available to identify DNA. One being LCN DNA. This technique was chosen as it is capable of producing a result from just a few skin cells and as the blood from the original sample 85/86 had all but been swabbed away it offered a possibility. The downside is the risk of contamination as outlined above. Also LCN DNA is incapable of identifying the source eg blood, sweat, skin cells etc.
Had the CCRC have been switched on they would not have referred the case to CoA.
It really is "utterly meaningless" as per the scientists and 3 appeal court judges. If you personally choose to believe otherwise that's obviously your prerogative. I like a man with an independent mind. *
This link explains the incredibly small amounts of biological matter required for a LCN DNA result. As you will see we are talking amounts so small they are not even visible to the naked eye. Talking of naked must jump in the shower. *
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_copy_number
* Would like to have 8**8:/: but it appears that your good self and Myster do not appreciate my coquettishness 8(8-))
I do understand how cross contamination works Holly and thank you for the example. My question to you is how would Sheila's DNA get deep into the silencer in the first place? Surely there would be several other DNA profiles found there too if as you suggest it was contaminated?
The fact that only one profile was found, a match with Sheila Caffell is significant don't you think?
-
That actually is a good point. I've not seen any document that relates to any tests of DNA from the rifle. It would be interesting to see the results.
What happened to the rifle? Has it been destroyed?
I wouldn't have thought it would be destroyed, it is probably still in storage or has been given to its rightful owner.
-
Where does anyone think this Anschutz 525 (first page, bottom left) came from? It's a contemporary photo related to the case from the Anglia Press Agency, possibly taken by the same photographer who shot the other APA ones in the magazine. Don't think it was taken at the gunsmiths, but possibly at WHF because the white-painted panelling behind the holder (maybe a plain clothes policeman) is similar to woodwork there. Or was this man known to the family, a relative or friend perhaps? Why does it have an undamaged stock and a cylindrical light-shield missing from over the end sight, unlike the actual murder weapon? I've been unable to find any reference to this rifle anywhere.
(http://i.imgur.com/Q8uBrSZ.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/ZKeaPQ0.jpg)
-
The rifle being held by the guy in the jumper was probably a rifle similar to that used in the murders and photographed simply for media purposes. Clearly, it's not the murder weapon imo.
-
I wouldn't have thought it would be destroyed, it is probably still in storage or has been given to its rightful owner.
It is in a police museum
-
It is in a police museum
Which museum, scipio?
Don't think it will be on display to the public any time soon, if ever, because of concern for the sensitivities of surviving relatives.
The only one I know of is Room 101 at Scotland Yard, although exhibits there only relate to London-based crimes...
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/met-polices-infamous-black-museum-2133820 (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/met-polices-infamous-black-museum-2133820)
Think the Anschutz is more likely to be bagged under lock and key should it be required for any future forensic examination. Read once that his support team had asked for it to be released re the USA tests, although I may be mistaken about this.
-
It is in a police museum
If what you claim is correct, I find it difficult to comprehend how an item of evidence could find its way into a police museum when further testing was inevitable. That is unless it has been accepted that the rifle and sound moderator has been so contaminated so as to be beyond any further use as evidence.
-
If what you claim is correct, I find it difficult to comprehend how an item of evidence could find its way into a police museum when further testing was inevitable. That is unless it has been accepted that the rifle and sound moderator has been so contaminated so as to be beyond any further use as evidence.
I would say you are correct in the latter observation Mr K., the contamination factor must put all testing beyond doubt at this stage and for ever more. Not that I have any doubts about the conviction given the mountain of evidence against him.
-
If what you claim is correct, I find it difficult to comprehend how an item of evidence could find its way into a police museum when further testing was inevitable. That is unless it has been accepted that the rifle and sound moderator has been so contaminated so as to be beyond any further use as evidence.
I disagree that testing of it in the future would be inevitable. I see no value at all in testing it, there is little significance given the uncareful handling of it at trial.
At any rate Jeremy supporters claim it is in a museum and that it had been on exhibit in Derby among other places. It is not at the EP museum because I checked that early on. If they are totally full of crap then I have no idea what they could have gained from such a lie. If it is still in police custody along with the moderator I sitll se eno use at all either can potentially serve at this late date.
-
I didn't want to start a new thread for this and I think this is an appropriate place to post about SC's fingernails.
It is often stated that had SC been responsible this would have resulted in damage to her fingernails, which were found to be intact. This was the official line by the prosecution as per CoA doc. Others are on record supporting this eg David Boutflour in the ITV docu.
Dr Vanezis did not want to commit to stating whether or not loading and firing the rifle would result in nail damage. He said it was the province of ballistics. As far as I am aware no evidence exists to support of reject the prosecution's claim?
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18124332.600-fingernails-have-the-strength-of-hooves.html
Prof Ennos is now at the university of Hull 8(0(*
-
A light bulb (enclosed by a glass shade at the time) hanging in WHF kitchen, not much higher than the top of the red AGA surround. Compare the height of the door to that of person of average height. The shade easily reached and caught by the end of a rifle being waved about, once the table had been pushed towards the Welsh Dresser during a struggle... no need for pedantry about the exact distance of the shade from the floor to be measured in mm.
(http://i.imgur.com/4mCOSWx.jpg)
-
A light bulb (enclosed by a glass shade at the time) hanging in WHF kitchen, not much higher than the top of the red AGA surround. Compare the height of the door to that of person of average height. The shade easily reached and caught by the end of a rifle being waved about, once the table had been pushed towards the Welsh Dresser during a struggle... no need for pedantry about the exact distance of the shade from the floor to be measured in mm.
(http://i.imgur.com/4mCOSWx.jpg)
I agree that there's no need for pedantry in terms of a person of average height being able to reach the glass lampshade, enclosing the hanging bulb, with the rifle assuming no optical illusions exist in the photo. If you take a ruler and measure certain things I think some optical illusions are at play though? However I thought we were trying to determine whether the rifle alone was long enough without silencer and also whether we could rule SC in or out based on the fact that she was shorter in height than JB? I have seen arguments here and elsewhere stating SC was not tall enough to reach the lampshade. And that the silencer must have been attached as the rifle alone was not long enough. If someone wishes to make these sorts of assertions then as far as I can see it is necessary to have precise measurements otherwise it is just guesswork?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4744.msg172841#msg172841
-
I think either Jeremy Bamber or Sheila Caffell (with arms extended upwards) could have reached the shade while holding the 50" long Anschutz, even without a 7" moderator fitted. My theory is that the shade shattered because the rifle was drawn backwards in an attempt to stop Nevill getting hold of it, or to get enough force behind it to strike a blow at him. Or even that Jeremy Bamber lost his balance and fell back towards the table while holding the rifle with arms raised.
My argument was that a struggle/fight of some sort occured in the kitchen which resulted in the lampshade getting broken, when you were arguing that nothing of the kind took place and that Nevill alone stumbled about pushing the table, upsetting all the crockery on it and knocking over numerous chairs and stools.
Examine the length of the unmoderated Anschutz this policeman is holding and imagine if he was flailing it about in WHF kitchen with arms raised above his head... do you think he could have hit the shade easily?
(http://i.imgur.com/afBgZBV.jpg)
I do believe the moderator was fitted though, making it even more certain that the rifle broke the shade and which also caused the scratch marks under the mantle-shelf, whereas you think that it was a deliberate fix and plant by the rest of the family in an attempt to implicate Jeremy Bamber for the murders.
-
Prof Ennos is now at the university of Hull 8(0(*
That research story smells fishy to me... just like the city of your Alma mater? &%+((£
-
That research story smells fishy to me... just like the city of your Alma mater? &%+((£
http://www2.hull.ac.uk/science/bbes/ourstaff/academicstaff/profrolandennos.aspx ?>)()<
-
I know he's genuine as is the story, but you put a 8(0(* after the University of Hull as if the place was an old stamping ground of yours! Does Hull still smell of fish or have they cured it?
-
I know he's genuine as is the story, but you put a 8(0(* after the University of Hull as if the place was an old stamping ground of yours! Does Hull still smell of fish or have they cured it?
The 8(0(* was to imply that I had been in touch with Prof Ennos (I haven't).
Do I sound like I hang out in Hull? Huh [hands on hips] ?8)@)-)
Man goes into a vets in Hull, with his cat in a basket.
"Is it a tom?" asked the vet.
"Nay lad, 'ave got it ere in't basket".
-
Only a Yorkshire lass like Andy would get that, although I just managed to fathom it as a Lanky lad. Scipio would have no chance!
But to get back to your nail argument... do you know if Sheila was anaemic (through menses) at the time, because that could have made her nails brittle, fragile and thus more easily broken if she'd attempted to load any bullets?
-
Only a Yorkshire lass like Andy would get that, although I just managed to fathom it as a Lanky lad. Scipio would have no chance!
But to get back to your nail argument... do you know if Sheila was anaemic (through menses) at the time, because that could have made her nails brittle, fragile and thus more easily broken if she'd attempted to load any bullets?
The pathology reports describes SC as "well nourished". I assume if she was anaemic she would not be described as "well nourished"?
As far as I am aware SC was physically healthy. Her medi records only show minor ailments: chest infection/congestion, thrush/candida and acne. I assume if she suffered with heavy periods so much that she became anaemic it would appear on her medi records?
Even without my recent link I have always thought the nail argument weak at best. Surely you must have observed women in your life carry out all manner of activities with long fingernails which hasn't resulted in damage? I just don't see that loading and firing a rifle is any more or less hazardous than loads of other activities women with long fingernails carry out on a daily basis.
This certainly isn't aimed at you Myster, or anyone in particular, but I do think this whole nail argument smacks a bit of sexism eg 'oh be careful you don't break a nail'. Which in days gone by is something a man would say to a woman if she was found to be doing just about anything other than sitting pretty. I also think there's a perception that as SC was an attractive woman suffering from mental illness she was a bit of an air head. Her best friend as per Wilkes book:
Her best friend, Caroline Elston herself educated to degree level @ Liverpool uni, said "Those who thought Sheila was stupid were wrong she was not". She also said Sheila was talkative and was able to talk about anything (Wilkes book).
SC's maternal birth family (grandfather and uncle that I know of) were/are academics and NB and June appear to have been of above average intelligence. Coupled with the fact that SC was privately educated ie smaller class sizes etc I just don't buy into SC being anything other than an intelligent woman more than capable of picking up a rifle and loading and firing it without causing damage to her long fingernails.
-
Well-nourished usually refers to the person being of normal or above average weight, rather than skinny or anorexic.
No, the women I've known closely are not model types who spend a lot of their time preening themselves. They've all been practically inclined with shortish nails. My mother had koilonychia for several years, which made her nails very brittle until her doctor diagnosed pernicious anaemia and prescribed iron dextran and cyanocobalamin by injection. But even mild anaemia can affect nail strength, and this may have been present but not picked up on by Sheila's doctor.
All we have is a very blurry image of her long polished nails, and the pathologist's statement that they were undamaged, unless there are other pictures you know of. If photos of her clean feet taken during post-mortem have turned up, other clearer shots of her hands and nails could exist which only the police, pathologist and lawyers have seen.
I've no doubt that Sheila might have been able to load the magazine, possibly without damaging her nails... if, but only if she'd been shown how to and was very familiar with the procedure, but according to her husband she hated guns and never used them. Whether she could have done this under the extreme pressure and speed required during an assassination without damaging any of them is unlikely in my opinion.
It was Sandra not Caroline Elston who also said that Sheila was lacking in confidence, gullible and insecure so she always seeking reassurance.
-
Well-nourished usually refers to the person being of normal or above average weight, rather than skinny or anorexic.
No, the women I've known closely are not model types who spend a lot of their time preening themselves. They've all been practically inclined with shortish nails. My mother had koilonychia for several years, which made her nails very brittle until her doctor diagnosed pernicious anaemia and prescribed iron dextran and cyanocobalamin by injection. But even mild anaemia can affect nail strength, and this may have been present but not picked up on by Sheila's doctor.
All we have is a very blurry image of her long polished nails, and the pathologist's statement that they were undamaged, unless there are other pictures you know of. If photos of her clean feet taken during post-mortem have turned up, other clearer shots of her hands and nails could exist which only the police, pathologist and lawyers have seen.
I've no doubt that Sheila might have been able to load the magazine, possibly without damaging her nails... if, but only if she'd been shown how to and was very familiar with the procedure, but according to her husband she hated guns and never used them. Whether she could have done this under the extreme pressure and speed required during an assassination without damaging any of them is unlikely in my opinion.
It was Sandra not Caroline Elston who also said that Sheila was lacking in confidence, gullible and insecure so she always seeking reassurance.
All victims were described in the pathology reports as being "well nourished". No doubt it mean something specific to a pathologist.
I didn't necessarily mean women that you know intimately, but women that you observe in your local community/workplace etc eg shops, banks, PO etc that have long nails and are constantly putting stress on their nails through their work duties.
I think children absorb a lot from their environment without actually needing detailed explanations. They are often like sponges surprising parents and others with their new found knowledge/skill without any apparent direct explanations/instructions? SC was a farmer's daughter and no doubt both consciously and subconsciously observed NB and others loading and firing weapons? I think it is accepted SC went beating so if she was that opposed to shooting surely she would have declined? DB is on record as saying SC had very little experience with guns. I am not sure how much experience is required to load and fire a rifle at mainly stationary targets at close range? I hope that doesn't sound facetious - its not meant to be - I genuinely have no idea? Also we have no idea whether SC had school friends etc that may have lived on farms and therefore been exposed to some further experience? Same for the farmhand SC had a relationship with as a teenager?
Yes I stand corrected it was Sandra Elston. I think I was getting muddled with another friend/acquaintance who was nurse Caroline Heath? By all accounts it sounds as though SC was lacking in confidence, gullible, insecure and sought reassurance from others (all features of a 'disorganised attachment') but this might not have been the case with those she knew intimately eg she threw pots and pans at Colin and struck him. I am not sure that the lack of confidence etc would prevent her from loading and firing a weapon in an environment she was very familiar with against her family due to a distortion in her mind/thinking as a result of her mental illness? 8(8-))
-
Back on topic, whichever way you look at it I have great difficulty believing that Sheila could ever have taken Nevill on without incurring injury of some sort. That and the fact that only one bullet failed to find its target leads me to only one conclusion and that is that Sheila could not be the assailant.
-
A light bulb (enclosed by a glass shade at the time) hanging in WHF kitchen, not much higher than the top of the red AGA surround. Compare the height of the door to that of person of average height. The shade easily reached and caught by the end of a rifle being waved about, once the table had been pushed towards the Welsh Dresser during a struggle... no need for pedantry about the exact distance of the shade from the floor to be measured in mm.
(http://i.imgur.com/4mCOSWx.jpg)
That is quite high and worse over the table which means the gun hit it not straight up and down with someone under it but rather with the gun held diagonally (which lowers the weapon) I fail to see how the gun would be long enough without the moderator to break it if the weapon were being held in any normal fashion even by Jeremy let alone shorter Sheila.
The weapon would be held something like this with them struggling over it, I fail to see how it is long enough without the moderator attached to hit that lampshade:
(http://www.amfedjujitsu.com/images/Online%20Instruction/Picture_0787.jpg)
We know the weapon was not that high for long because it was lower when it scratch the mantle.
-
I think either Jeremy Bamber or Sheila Caffell (with arms extended upwards) could have reached the shade while holding the 50" long Anschutz, even without a 7" moderator fitted. My theory is that the shade shattered because the rifle was drawn backwards in an attempt to stop Nevill getting hold of it, or to get enough force behind it to strike a blow at him. Or even that Jeremy Bamber lost his balance and fell back towards the table while holding the rifle with arms raised.
My argument was that a struggle/fight of some sort occured in the kitchen which resulted in the lampshade getting broken, when you were arguing that nothing of the kind took place and that Nevill alone stumbled about pushing the table, upsetting all the crockery on it and knocking over numerous chairs and stools.
Examine the length of the unmoderated Anschutz this policeman is holding and imagine if he was flailing it about in WHF kitchen with arms raised above his head... do you think he could have hit the shade easily?
(http://i.imgur.com/afBgZBV.jpg)
I do believe the moderator was fitted though, making it even more certain that the rifle broke the shade and which also caused the scratch marks under the mantle-shelf, whereas you think that it was a deliberate fix and plant by the rest of the family in an attempt to implicate Jeremy Bamber for the murders.
Why would Jeremy be flailing it over his head? His father was tlaler than him, to prevent it from being taken away he needs to keep it as close to his chest as he can and in fact you strike with it to try to gain sole control. Part of the technique of disarming someone who has a rifle is to first move the barrel away from you and then to grab it with both hands and move it towards the person to try to hit them with it.
Holding it above the head is what you do if some kid tries to grab it from you and you are playing keep away but then they can nail you in the balls or stomach because your hands are above your head.
They would be fighting over it something like this and the moderator making it longer enables it to hit the light while being held at such an angle:
(http://www.amfedjujitsu.com/images/Online%20Instruction/Picture_0787.jpg)
You seem to be picturing it like this which makes no sense:
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_8up7h6T0Kzc/SwD8h6-MMII/AAAAAAAAOqA/46K40jW4ysQ/s1600/saddam+shooting+(AP).jpg)
-
I didn't want to start a new thread for this and I think this is an appropriate place to post about SC's fingernails.
It is often stated that had SC been responsible this would have resulted in damage to her fingernails, which were found to be intact. This was the official line by the prosecution as per CoA doc. Others are on record supporting this eg David Boutflour in the ITV docu.
Dr Vanezis did not want to commit to stating whether or not loading and firing the rifle would result in nail damage. He said it was the province of ballistics. As far as I am aware no evidence exists to support of reject the prosecution's claim?
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18124332.600-fingernails-have-the-strength-of-hooves.html
Prof Ennos is now at the university of Hull 8(0(*
Vanezis knew nothing about the weapon so deferred to the firearms expert who stated loading the 10th round was exceedingly hard. Beting someone and rapidly trying to load the weapon would chip the nails. Worse the stock brekaing would do damage to the hand that was holding the stock unless wearing gloves.
The killer's clothes would have been covered in medium volicy spatter from beating Nevill the same way the weapon was. In addition the killer's clothing would have GSR on it, Sheila's had none which is one of many reasons the experts said she didn't kill herself. She supposedly hugged the weapon to kill herself with the exact area that discharges GSR being near her gown and yet not a single particle...
WHile you and Alia was ot pretend female nails that are long can't breka or chip there is a tremendous volume of evidence that says otherwise.
-
Why would Jeremy be flailing it over his head? His father was tlaler than him, to prevent it from being taken away he needs to keep it as close to his chest as he can and in fact you strike with it to try to gain sole control. Part of the technique of disarming someone who has a rifle is to first move the barrel away from you and then to grab it with both hands and move it towards the person to try to hit them with it.
Holding it above the head is what you do if some kid tries to grab it from you and you are playing keep away but then they can nail you in the balls or stomach because your hands are above your head.
They would be fighting over it something like this and the moderator making it longer enables it to hit the light while being held at such an angle.
By flailing I meant moving it about in an uncontrolled way (by definition) as if JB lost his balance, when wrestling for control of the rifle and moved/fell backwards shoving the table towards the Welsh Dresser in the process. In other words, just like the guy on the right of your photo if the guy on the left suddenly lost his grip. I didn't mean holding it up with one arm like Hussein is doing.
(http://i.imgur.com/5jcq62B.jpg)
Not sure though that Nevill was capable of using his left arm at all, because it was so severely damaged upstairs, leaving only his right hand to grab and hold onto the rifle butt (which isn't the case in the above photo, where two are used). So if handicapped in this way, Nevill using just his bodyweight might only have been able push Jeremy backwards, making him lose balance. If it didn't happen like the above, maybe JB drew the rifle backwards above his head simply to get enough force behind it to reign blows on Nevill, catching the lamp-shade with the end while he did so.
-
By flailing I meant moving it about in an uncontrolled way (by definition) as if JB lost his balance, when wrestling for control of the rifle and moved/fell backwards shoving the table towards the Welsh Dresser in the process. In other words, just like the guy on the right of your photo if the guy on the left suddenly lost his grip. I didn't mean holding it up with one arm like Hussein is doing.
(http://i.imgur.com/5jcq62B.jpg)
Not sure though that Nevill was capable of using his left arm at all, because it was so severely damaged upstairs, leaving only his right hand to grab and hold onto the rifle butt (which isn't the case in the above photo, where two are used). So if handicapped in this way, Nevill using just his bodyweight might only have been able push Jeremy backwards, making him lose balance. If it didn't happen like the above, maybe JB drew the rifle backwards above his head simply to get enough force behind it to reign blows on Nevill, catching the lamp-shade with the end while he did so.
Nevill was on the defensive. He tried to either strip the rifle away or simply to move it so that it was not aimed at him. His left arm was substantially limited so he couldn't do much to Jeremy without releasing the rifle. Most of the struggle consisted of Nevill holding on to the rifle with his right hand as Jeremy tried to gain sole control.
Eventually that did happen and at that point Jeremy struck Nevill with it repeatedly. All Nevill could do at that point was to try to block the blows with his right arm. He blocked a substantial amount of blows but eventually got nailed in the face and head and upon being knocked out his chance of preventing Jeremy from relaoding was gone. That was his only real hope to survive.
I doubt at any time the weapon was above Jeremy's head as they were sturggling over it or that upon gaining sole control Jeremy had it above his head and hit the light. Much more likely is that they simply bumped into firniture as they fought over the rifle and the length thanks to the moderator resulted in it crashing into things and knocking things over including breaking the lampshade as the rifle was held diagnoally as they stood next to the table.
Nevill's left arm would not have had a good grip so he mainly would have had 1 arm to jerk the gun and Jeremy was trying to pull it the opposite direction. So the gun was moving around a lot. That explains why it scratched underneatht he mantle and yet knocked things on the floor and even hit the lampshade.
If Nevill's arm had not been broken chances are Jeremy would not have been able to finish off Nevill. Nevill probably would have kicked Jeremy's ass in but for that injury. Jeremy had no wounds to his face because Nevill could only grasp the rifle not also strike at Jeremy. It wound up being a key shot though it was a mistake in the sense the goal was to shoot his head or chest not his arm.
-
I am not being pedantic nor (god forbid) ever supporting Bamber's case but it should be noted that it would not be necessary for the 'exceedingly hard to load 10th bullet' to have been loaded into the magazine to account for the 25 shots fired.
-
I am not being pedantic nor (god forbid) ever supporting Bamber's case but it should be noted that it would not be necessary for the 'exceedingly hard to load 10th bullet' to have been loaded into the magazine to account for the 25 shots fired.
The reason such is particularly noteworthy is because Sheila would have likely damaged her nails loading it.
If only 9 rounds had been loaded in the gun when she went upstairs that presents a big problem because 8 were used to shoot her kids and then 2 on herself and the gun was then empty. If 9 rounds were loaded that means she would have to have reloaded another single round after the 1st shot to herself.
It is a bigger problem than you think...
-
The reason such is particularly noteworthy is because Sheila would have likely damaged her nails loading it.
If only 9 rounds had been loaded in the gun when she went upstairs that presents a big problem because 8 were used to shoot her kids and then 2 on herself and the gun was then empty. If 9 rounds were loaded that means she would have to have reloaded another single round after the 1st shot to herself.
It is a bigger problem than you think...
Hello Scipio. I was beginning to feel you were neglecting me in favour of Angel of the North. Southern girls are best - they understand personal hygiene.
I am not sure that we can determine load numbers and sequence? Surely many permutations exist? It is said that poor little Daniel received 5 bullet wounds in quick succession due to the arc but how reliable is this? We have no accurate decibel reading for the .22 being fired with and without silencer within a closed environment to hazard a guess whether the twin shot last would wake? Small children can sleep through a lot of noise. If SC, she may have loaded the rifle until she found it difficult and then reloaded.
No scientific evidence exists to show that loading the rifle, however difficult, would have caused SC to damage her longish fingernails:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18124332.600-fingernails-have-the-strength-of-hooves.html
I am only interested in evidence that is measurable and can be backed up by proven scientific methods.
-
Hello Scipio. I was beginning to feel you were neglecting me in favour of Angel of the North. Southern girls are best - they understand personal hygiene.
I am not sure that we can determine load numbers and sequence? Surely many permutations exist? It is said that poor little Daniel received 5 bullet wounds in quick succession due to the arc but how reliable is this? We have no accurate decibel reading for the .22 being fired with and without silencer within a closed environment to hazard a guess whether the twin shot last would wake? Small children can sleep through a lot of noise. If SC, she may have loaded the rifle until she found it difficult and then reloaded.
No scientific evidence exists to show that loading the rifle, however difficult, would have caused SC to damage her longish fingernails:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18124332.600-fingernails-have-the-strength-of-hooves.html
I am only interested in evidence that is measurable and can be backed up by proven scientific methods.
I don't know who you are referring to as the Angels.
While you and Alias suggest women's long nails are iunbrekaable in fact there is a substantial number of cases in which they chip or break through ordinary life things in addition to sports and during not ordinary.
Long nails even break from typing if not careful. In fact just this week a corworker broke her nail pushing abutton to close a minivan door. Apparently now families are so lazy they can't close a damn door manually there is a button to push to close the sliding doors. She whined her ass off to eveyrone about her finger, it was quite annoying.
Women routinely break nails when their nails are long and they use objects to beat things even baseball bats. The rifle stock broke. The notion she bashed Nevill with the rifle and nothing happened to her nails is not credible but even more absurd is the notion nothing happened to her hand when the stock broke right where she would have been holding it. Jeremy's glove was torn off by some notion during the struggle according to what he told Julie and most likely it was torn off when the stock broke. But so too is it absurd that she didn't get blood of Nevill on her gown/shirt/blouse during the struggle.
That is before even looking at the moderator evidence.
As for the shots the medical assessment that they were fired in rapid succession because of the tight grouping as well as the medical repercussions that was unchallenged by the defense and you have nothing to refute it.
For sure the shooting started in the master bedroom and had there been shots fired elsewhere before that then the parents would not have been shot in the master bedroom, certainly not June in bed.
She was shot at least 4 times while in bed, 1 while lying down with her head on the pillow. She was shot in the chest 2 times while either seated or standing and passed out on the floor. During this same exchange Nevill was shot 4 times. That is 10 shots. The only question is did the gun have 10 or 11 bullets in it at this time and thus was June shot in between the eyes at this time or later on? There is no way that June would have been able to survive long with the shot to her head (the shot near her ear that was delivered while her head was on her pillow). That is why she didn't make it out of the bedroom while Nevill was able to. June had been immobilized before Nevill and the killer fled the room. So when the killer returned to the bedroom after killing Nevill in the kitchen the killer found June in the same position as when the killer left- collapsed on the floor. The only shot that could could have been delivered while she was lying on the floor is the shot between her eyes. The trajectory of the rounds precludes any other shot being fired while she was in that position and if she could have walked further she would have left the room not collapsed by her bed.
If one shot had been fired in each boy and then the killer ran to the master bedroom before June could even get up then that leaves only 8-9 rounds though at least 10 were definitely fired before Nevill left the room.
Thus we know for a fact the shooting started in the master bedroom. Indeed that is where it should start because the biggest threat are the parents, they are the most dangerous and would need to be killed first.
So there is only 1 unknown variable in the first shooting incident. Was 10 or 11 rounds fired into the parents?
The next shooting incident was in the kitchen. The gun was epty when the killer and Nevill left the master bedroom and was still empty during thestruggle or there would not have been any struggle. While you want to pretend Nevill wasn't beaten severely with the rifle clearly he was. After knocking him out the killer reloaded at least 4 rounds and shot him 4 times killing him.
The killer then went upstairs with the gun loaded with either 10 or 11 rounds. If June was shot in between the eyes at this point the gun had 11 rounds- 1 expended on June, 8 on the boys and the last 2 on Sheila.
It already doesn't work that the boys were shot 1 time each before the parents but why would Sheila later shoot them addiitonal times anyway? If she only shot them once and returned later she would have found them dead. Why would she have shot them another 2/4 times respectively?
If Sheila only loaded 9 rounds then that leaves either 8 for the boys and 1 for her mother or if 11 had been used at the outselt then it leaves 8 for the boys and 1 for her. Why would she go downstairs and load an extra round
so that she had 2 to use on herself?
-
I don't know who you are referring to as the Angels.
While you and Alias suggest women's long nails are iunbrekaable in fact there is a substantial number of cases in which they chip or break through ordinary life things in addition to sports and during not ordinary.
Long nails even break from typing if not careful. In fact just this week a corworker broke her nail pushing abutton to close a minivan door. Apparently now families are so lazy they can't close a damn door manually there is a button to push to close the sliding doors. She whined her ass off to eveyrone about her finger, it was quite annoying.
Women routinely break nails when their nails are long and they use objects to beat things even baseball bats. The rifle stock broke. The notion she bashed Nevill with the rifle and nothing happened to her nails is not credible but even more absurd is the notion nothing happened to her hand when the stock broke right where she would have been holding it. Jeremy's glove was torn off by some notion during the struggle according to what he told Julie and most likely it was torn off when the stock broke. But so too is it absurd that she didn't get blood of Nevill on her gown/shirt/blouse during the struggle.
That is before even looking at the moderator evidence.
As for the shots the medical assessment that they were fired in rapid succession because of the tight grouping as well as the medical repercussions that was unchallenged by the defense and you have nothing to refute it.
For sure the shooting started in the master bedroom and had there been shots fired elsewhere before that then the parents would not have been shot in the master bedroom, certainly not June in bed.
She was shot at least 4 times while in bed, 1 while lying down with her head on the pillow. She was shot in the chest 2 times while either seated or standing and passed out on the floor. During this same exchange Nevill was shot 4 times. That is 10 shots. The only question is did the gun have 10 or 11 bullets in it at this time and thus was June shot in between the eyes at this time or later on? There is no way that June would have been able to survive long with the shot to her head (the shot near her ear that was delivered while her head was on her pillow). That is why she didn't make it out of the bedroom while Nevill was able to. June had been immobilized before Nevill and the killer fled the room. So when the killer returned to the bedroom after killing Nevill in the kitchen the killer found June in the same position as when the killer left- collapsed on the floor. The only shot that could could have been delivered while she was lying on the floor is the shot between her eyes. The trajectory of the rounds precludes any other shot being fired while she was in that position and if she could have walked further she would have left the room not collapsed by her bed.
If one shot had been fired in each boy and then the killer ran to the master bedroom before June could even get up then that leaves only 8-9 rounds though at least 10 were definitely fired before Nevill left the room.
Thus we know for a fact the shooting started in the master bedroom. Indeed that is where it should start because the biggest threat are the parents, they are the most dangerous and would need to be killed first.
So there is only 1 unknown variable in the first shooting incident. Was 10 or 11 rounds fired into the parents?
The next shooting incident was in the kitchen. The gun was epty when the killer and Nevill left the master bedroom and was still empty during thestruggle or there would not have been any struggle. While you want to pretend Nevill wasn't beaten severely with the rifle clearly he was. After knocking him out the killer reloaded at least 4 rounds and shot him 4 times killing him.
The killer then went upstairs with the gun loaded with either 10 or 11 rounds. If June was shot in between the eyes at this point the gun had 11 rounds- 1 expended on June, 8 on the boys and the last 2 on Sheila.
It already doesn't work that the boys were shot 1 time each before the parents but why would Sheila later shoot them addiitonal times anyway? If she only shot them once and returned later she would have found them dead. Why would she have shot them another 2/4 times respectively?
If Sheila only loaded 9 rounds then that leaves either 8 for the boys and 1 for her mother or if 11 had been used at the outselt then it leaves 8 for the boys and 1 for her. Why would she go downstairs and load an extra round
so that she had 2 to use on herself?
Angel of the North is a reference to Caroline's stated geographical location (Durham) which seems to have caused some considerable controversy. The Angel of the North is a giant sculpture situated alongside the A1, a main road connecting London and Edinburgh, and some 10 miles north of Durham. Hence my nickname for Caroline is 'Angel of the North' 8)-)))
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_of_the_North
You certainly seem to have made a mark on the ladies Scipio. Angel of the North has converted. So too Susan and April. Might be your influence or just a coincidence. Oh and puglove is pregnant with your truth baby. That's what I call the Lynx effect 8)--))
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pio5Uiupa8Q
I haven't seen any posts from Alias re SC's nails so I don't know what her views are. I certainly haven't said that women have unbreakable nails. What I am saying is that it is by no means a certainty that SC's nails would break if she loaded and fired the rifle 25 times. Even a woman leading a sedentary lifestyle would expose her nails to many potential hazards on a daily basis carrying out every day mundane tasks and I don't see loading and firing a rifle and potentially using it to rain blows on NB as anymore or less hazardous. There's much scientific evidence showing that fingernails are in fact strong and robust which is largely due to the biological material they are made of ie keratin. These myths re SC's nails have been perpetuated over the decades as imo JB's defence at trial was very weak and did not sufficiently challenge the prosecution's case.
You have no real idea how the stock broke. Was it forensically examined to look for fibres from a glove you claim JB was wearing when he carried out the murders and came off when the stock broke? How would the stock breaking cause a glove to come off? The stock may have broken when/if it came into contact with NB or any number of objects. I don't see the fact that SC did not sustain any injuries to her nails and/or hand is indicative of anything. Think of pro female tennis players hitting serves at 131 mph and their opponent returning them. This does not cause hand and/or nail damage. If the rifle was used to beat NB with it doesn't follow that the perp's hand was necessarily over the stock. As the broken stock was not forensically examined we have no idea whether or not it might have yielded some clues.
The pathologist describes the incident in the kitchen as a "spirited defence". To my mind this could mean that NB simply used his right arm (left being "totally impaired") to shield himself from the rifle being used to rain down blows. I do not believe there was any "violent struggle" due to the injuries NB sustained in the bedroom. If NB was in some sort of fight with JB or SC and wrestling over the gun then how come the soles of his feet were free of blood, glass from the broken lampshade and sugar that *spilled from the knocked over bowl. *Not clear whether this was caused before or after the raid team entered.
I agree June is likely to have been shot first whilst she was in bed although it is by no means clear. If we had decibel readings for the rifle fired with and without a silencer within an enclosed environment we might have a clearer idea about noise levels to determine the likelihood of victims waking from the sound of gunshot alone. Had NB have been in the bedroom when June was shot then imo he would have been short first as he was the greatest threat to either JB or SC. Arguably more of a threat to JB if the motivation was greed and getting away with it, rather than SC suffering with a mental illness. NB was not shot in bed but whilst he was standing in the bedroom. If JB was responsible surely he would have ensured that he shot NB whilst he was still in bed?
JB claims he left the mag full and a bullet in the breech but we do not know whether NB emptied after JB left. I think it is impossible to say with any certainty who was shot first and whether the shooter returned later to fire more shots at the victims and if so when.
Whether a multi-disciplinary approach of PROFESSIONALS using up to date methods and technologies could throw new light on the situation I don't know but it is far from clear to me what went on.
-
scip:
While you and Alias suggest women's long nails are iunbrekaable
I haven´t really said that. What I said (on blue) is that some people have nails that don´t break, me being one of them. My nails are in a sense "soft", I can bend them in two directions, but they don´t break. They don´t break when I´m, say, playing Volley Ball, doing house chores, using them as a screw driver - whatever I fancy using them for! 8)--)) The structure is very strong because they are flexible. I can´t be the only one in the world with nails like that!
It is not a given that Sheila´s fingernails would have broken by loading a gun, that´s all I´m saying - not that "women´s long nails are unbreakable".
-
scip: I haven´t really said that. What I said (on blue) is that some people have nails that don´t break, me being one of them. My nails are in a sense "soft", I can bend them in two directions, but they don´t break. They don´t break when I´m, say, playing Volley Ball, doing house chores, using them as a screw driver - whatever I fancy using them for! 8)--)) The structure is very strong because they are flexible. I can´t be the only one in the world with nails like that!
It is not a given that Sheila´s fingernails would have broken by loading a gun, that´s all I´m saying - not that "women´s long nails are unbreakable".
I find I damage my nails (split rather than break) when I'm cleaning (remember my OCD) and take my gloves off and cant be bothered to put them back on and end up exposing my nails to nasty's like Viakal - great for lime scale but not great for nails.
This whole thing about SC's nails surely requires a bio mechanic to give his/her opinion. Dr Vanezis said he was not competent to comment on SC's nails and that it was the province of ballistics. Maybe, but also biomechanics I would think. To my mind the biomechanical movement of loading and firing the weapon and possibly using as a club to beat poor NB is no different from many other biomechanical movements that a typical woman would routinely undertake on a daily basis which would not necessarily cause any sort of nail and/or hand damage.
I have no idea if the defence tried to counter this at trial? Probably not since they appear to me to have been very much asleep at the wheel. ?8)@)-)
-
The role of an autopsy is mainly to ascertain cause of death and condition of the body. The cause of death was determined to have been 2 gunshot wounds delivered within seconds of one another. The condition of her body was no wounds, no damaged nails and no foreign blood.
Vanezis was no told about the struggle in the kitchen or that the gun could have had a moderator. Part of assessing whether she coudl have killed herself. Had tha thappened he would have heavily leaned towards murder as he did down the road when everything was revealed. Early on all he relied on was whether she potentially could have fired the gun 2 times and have reached the trigger. He said while the 2 shots gave him some concern he could not say it was impossible. He found no evidence to say it was definitely suicide and could not have been murder.
He said the nails and so forth were not his expertise others could evaluate those aspects.
Others did evaluate those aspects and they all crush you.
1) Sheila had dexterity problems even before being diagnosed with Schizophrenia. Those dexterity problems only worsened on her medication. She was not taking countering agent which would have mitigated some of the parkinson's like motions she engaged in. Worse though, without the countering agent she was over sedated and unlikely to have been able to do much, the oversedation limited her activities a great deal.
2) If she were in a rage out of control she would have been even more wild in her actions not more skilled. Not only does that present a problem for firing 25 shots without missing (which even anezis said would mean she had to be very skilled wiht the weapon to accomplish such), loading the wepaon with her dexterity problem and in the rage combined would result in her crashing her nails against the magazine and damaging them. Moreover, she would have had to touch the lead tips of the bullets which would discolor her fingers in addition to resulted in detectable elevated lead levels. At trial an expert handled the bullets loading them before the jury and showed his hands having visible discoloration and discussing the elevated levels detected consistently in testing.
3) There is zero evidence Sheila ever fired the weapon and zero that Sheila had any experience with any other semi-automatic weapons. Living on a far contianing shotguns doesn't even mean one will know how to fire shotguns. But that would not help make one skilled in using a semi-auto which operates differently. People assume you just load amagazine and shoot but that is not how it works. The initial round must be manually fed from the magazine into the chamber or the gun will not fire a bullet. After that the operation of the weapon feeds the bullets itself so it is a one time thing. Sheila would not have even know to chamber a round let alone how. Forget having the ability to land 25 rounds she would not have gotten off a shot. Vanezis was not told that she had never used such weapon ever and did not thus address such in his autopsy report. This is what the firearms experts discussed.
4) During the struggle in the kitchen a barefoot Sheila would have cut her feet on the broken ceiling lamp glass and broken crockery. She also would have had some abrasions and cuts or th elike on her hands in addition to brekaing hnails from battering Nevill. Wildly bashing things with an object when one has long nails results in damage to them. Her hand would have been exactly where the wood stock broke and therefore some damage would have resulted unless she had on protective gloves.
5) There was zero evidence on her body or clothing of having shot or beaten anyone. No high velocity spatter or medium velocity spatter from the victims though such would have been present on her clothing had she comitted the murders. That was not Vanezis's province to test her clothing for spatter or GSR so did not figure into the autopsy. Nor the fact that her hands exhibited no evidence of having loaded the weapon. So no evidence she loaded the weapon (no elevated lead levels on her hands), none she fired it (no GSR on her clothing or hands) and no evidence she was near the victims when they were shot/beaten (no spatter).
6) The moderator was clearly used in the kitchen and still used when Sheila was shot because her blood was inside
Advances in blood analysis tell us she was shot while seated propped up against something and moved flat after she was dead. After being moved flat a pool of blood formed on the floor. A bible was placed in that pool of blood. Someone opened and closed the bible while the blood was still wet. After her death SHeila could not have put the moderator away, moved her body flat, or opened an dclosed the bible in her blood. Someone else was there and killed eveyrone quite clearly.
Since there is so much evidence that established Sheila did nothing you want to refuse to discuss such and address only the very limited information Vanezis worked off of at autospy to assess whether Sheila could have done it.
What you are trying to do is obvious and invalid bordering on dishonest so a wastea of time and just harms your credibility.
WHich fails in the least to dent my assertion that he still could have tried to use his left hand and has no bearing at all with anything I mentioned since it dusccusse dhim using his right hand which you have no ability at all to refute so keep pretending he was a 1 armed man to avoid having to admit your claims are all absurd abd baseless.
I already told you countless times. ANd you even spent time asking about the height of the gun and light to try to pretend there was some way she could have done it without engaging against Nevill. You know the basis you jsut can't dent it.
Your interpretation is little more than you living in denial that it happened. You have no absis for your opinion at all other than the desire to believe it didn't happen because the fact it did compeltely crushes you.
Your intepretation that she was out of control so smashed things and knocked them over and wildy bashed Nevill while he was passed out is absurd. You have no evidence at all to suggest that happened you simply made it up.
How did they get in the kitchen in the first place? The killer fired 11 shots in the bedroom and then the gun was empty. At that point either Nevill ran away to the kitchen with the killer chasing him or the killer ran down to get more bullets and reload and Nevill chased the killer to try to prevent relaoding.
It woudl have taken some time for the wounds suffered int he bedroom to knock Nevill out. Otherwise he would not have even made it to the kitchen to begin wih. His wounds were the broken arm, graze wounds, piece of his lip shot off and jaw shattered. Untreated the wounds could have allowed him to bleed to death but clearly he didn't and pathologists all say he could have and did struggle with his killer.
The light was broken as the gun was struggled over by 2 tall men holding it up and down with the moderator attached fighting over control of it not a 5'7" girl holding the gun like an axe above her head. The scratched to the mantle were caused by the moderator zigzagging as contol of the gun was fought over not walking too close the the mantle and scratching it in that manner which would be a lateral mark simply and so wound the gun falling it would be a vertical mark not zig zagging all around.
Nevill didn't goin there ot just let his killer reload in peace or go in there with the killer on his tale to simply let the killer kill him in peace he went to get a weapon. If he wanted to use a phone he could have locked himself in the upstairs office where the 3rd phone was.
The killer didn't beat Nevill because he was passed out, the killer beat Nevill to be able to reload the gun in peace. If Nevill passed out the killer would simply have reloaded and shot him to death.
The killer broke Nevill's nose, gave him 2 black eyes and Nevill had defensive wounds on his arm indicating he tried to block the blows. His watch was torn off in the process. Your suggestion the killer beat his arms as he lay passed out are absurd. The killer bashed his head in with the rifle by bashing the stock into his head repeatedly. The butt was forced against the metal of the rifle and a piece broke off exactly where the killer would have been holding it. The killer's hand would have been damaged by that and that is regardless of whether he was unconscious or not by that point. Jeremy mentioned to Sheila a glove being torn off and if anything it was during that break when it happened. Only gloves would save someone from getting some kin dof scratch or cut from that.
Your suggestion that Sheila was simply going crazy breaking things in the kitchen and beating a knocked out Nevill is absurd. Nothing was knocked over or broken in any other room. No one else was beaten. If she did breka everything and run around on it she would have cut her feet anyway so you have no evidence at all to establish she was even in there as a bystander. Your theory is not based on evidence but simply a pathetic attempt to get around the evidence by pretending it doesn't exist.
Nevill is the one Freddie claimed calmed Sheila down from the worst episode he ever saw. She was off her medicide and out of control and as soon as she saw Nevill she instantly became calm and spoke coherently. The suggestion she would decide to beat him and only him, do so after he was unconscious and break everything in that room and only that room is absurd. You have no medical support at all he would walk in the kitchen and collapse unconscious let alone that she would beat his limp body.
Anyone with an ounce of integrity and honesty will admit there was a struggle in the kitchen where the killer beat Nevill severely until unconscious so the killer could reload the gun and shoot him to death.
Hi Scipio
Are you coming out to play?
Re your point 5 above as follows:
"No high velocity spatter or medium velocity spatter from the victims though such would have been present on her clothing had she committed the murders".
If high and medium velocity spatter were noticeable on say JB's clothing/being then surely he would realise that EP, the pathologist and others would think it strange that SC appeared so clean?
-
JB was crafty but not that clever Holly. If he wanted to get away from the scene aqap I guess he didn't even think to himself whether he should spray some blood on Sheila's nightdress - in just the same way that you make a shopping list, rush through the supermarket and come home thinking you'd bought everything, then realize you forgot something important but it's too late to go back.
I bet JB cursed himself for overlooking that, especially when he viewed Sheila's spotless nightdress photo and the pathologist's report with his defence team. He probably thought - "Hope they don't bring that up at trial"
It's the missed detail that catches murderers out - remember the case of "Acid Bath Haigh" who thought he had completely eliminated Olive Durand-Deacon with sulphuric acid, only for the pathologist Keith Simpson to discover undissolved gallstones and plastic dentures in the fatty sludge that was left.
-
JB was crafty but not that clever Holly. If he wanted to get away from the scene aqap I guess he didn't even think to himself whether he should spray some blood on Sheila's nightdress - in just the same way that you make a shopping list, rush through the supermarket and come home thinking you'd bought everything, then realize you forgot something important but it's too late to go back.
I bet JB cursed himself for overlooking that, especially when he viewed Sheila's spotless nightdress photo and the pathologist's report with his defence team. He probably thought - "Hope they don't bring that up at trial"
It's the missed detail that catches murderers out - remember the case of "Acid Bath Haigh" who thought he had completely eliminated Olive Durand-Deacon with sulphuric acid, only for the pathologist Keith Simpson to discover undissolved gallstones and plastic dentures in the fatty sludge that was left.
JB grew up on a working farm and was present at shoots. Surely he would have witnessed vermin, birds, livestock, game being shot/killed and the resulting spatter?
JM tells us that JB planned the murders over many months and yet he appears to have made so many ?basic? mistakes?
-
Jeremy badly misjudged the impact a .22 calibre bullet would have on the human body thus why there was an overkill with the twins. This leads me to believe that they were executed after Nevill and June and possibly even after Sheila had sustained the first non lethal shot to her neck.
Many posters have asked the question over the years as to why was Sheila so compliant? My suggestion is that Bamber used the twins as a bargaining tool and told Sheila he wouldn't touch them as long as she did what he asked...the poor girl had no option.
Jeremy was not expecting a physical encounter in the kitchen, he thought one or two rounds to the head would be enough to put Nevill and June down, he was mistaken. It must have come as quite a shock to him to see Nevill make it downstairs in a vain attempt to summon help. The fight over the kitchen table was not part of his murderous masterplan. No doubt he beat Nevill with the empty rifle after wrestling with him over it and as Nevill lay slumped in his chair Bamber reloaded before firing further bullets into his head from above.
There is no way any scenario involving Sheila being in the kitchen fits with the known evidence. This whole 'Sheila done it' fantasy is a fabrication by Tesko and the Jeremy Bamber forum. There only ever were two suspects in this case, Jeremy and Sheila, the evidence on so many levels is compelling in that the latter was not culpable. Jeremy did it, pure and simple!
-
I read the following for the first time yesterday as I was looking for something else. It's a WS from DI Cook which seems to support my view that there was no "struggle" as such in the kitchen between NB and SC or JB as NB was too badly injured from the injuries he received upstairs to put up any sort of resistance. He also suggests much of the kitchen soc was caused by the raid team:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=168.0;attach=291
"I have been asked what I made of what appeared to have been a violent struggle in the kitchen between Mr Bamber and his assailant. I am aware that by looking at the photographs they might suggest such a struggle but at the time it did not appear that way to me. I could only see two things broken, one was a lampshade and the other a plate or bowl. There was also brown sugar on the floor but it was confined to one small area. I later learnt that the chairs and brown sugar had been so knocked over by the firearms unit when they rushed about the house looking for Sheila. Yes Mr Bamber must have put up some resistance but must have been limited because of the bullet wounds to his neck and one, I think to his left arm, which caused the bone to be smashed. So at that time it did appear feasible that Sheila could have killed her father".
-
Clearly they wrestled over the rifle evidenced by the scratch marks under the mantle, the smashed lampshade, the piece of wood broken off the stock and the smashed crockery and overturned table and chairs. Not really something a petite young woman could have got away with and not ended up with blood on her or bruise marks.
-
Clearly they wrestled over the rifle evidenced by the scratch marks under the mantle, the smashed lampshade, the piece of wood broken off the stock and the smashed crockery and overturned table and chairs. Not really something a petite young woman could have got away with and not ended up with blood on her or bruise marks.
It is not clear to me that any wrestling took place due the injuries sustained in the bedroom specifically his "totally impaired" left arm. I believe the scratch marks were fabricated as per Peter Sutherst's (difficult name to pronounce if you have the misfortune of being short tonged) findings.
-
It is not clear to me that any wrestling took place due the injuries sustained in the bedroom specifically his "totally impaired" left arm. I believe the scratch marks were fabricated as per Peter Sutherst's (difficult name to pronounce if you have the misfortune of being short tonged) findings.
If as you believe there was no fight/struggle in the kitchen, and Sheila just watched as her dad staggered around before coming to rest straddled on a chair back, can you tell me how you think a piece got broken off the rifle butt?
-
From the 2002 appeal:
41. Nevill Bamber, who was wearing his pyjamas had been shot eight times. There were two wounds to the right side and two to the top of the head. If not immediately fatal, the combined effect of these four injuries would have been immediate unconsciousness and incapacitation. There was a wound to the left side of the lip and another to the left part of the lower jaw. This injury caused severe fracturing of the jaw, of the teeth in that area and damaged soft tissue in the neck and the larynx. These features of this particular injury and the resultant flow of blood into the mouth meant, in the pathologist's opinion, that Nevill Bamber would not have been able to engage in purposeful talk. There were also gunshot wounds to the left shoulder and a grazing wound above the left elbow.
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.
-
From the 2002 appeal:
41. Nevill Bamber, who was wearing his pyjamas had been shot eight times. There were two wounds to the right side and two to the top of the head. If not immediately fatal, the combined effect of these four injuries would have been immediate unconsciousness and incapacitation. There was a wound to the left side of the lip and another to the left part of the lower jaw. This injury caused severe fracturing of the jaw, of the teeth in that area and damaged soft tissue in the neck and the larynx. These features of this particular injury and the resultant flow of blood into the mouth meant, in the pathologist's opinion, that Nevill Bamber would not have been able to engage in purposeful talk. There were also gunshot wounds to the left shoulder and a grazing wound above the left elbow.
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.
Morning Adam
The above points from the CoA doc have been extracted from the pathologist's report. The problem I have with this case in general is the appalling communication. Eg lay people incorrectly interpreting documents written by professionals, in your post above the pathologist. When I say lay people I don't just mean the likes of us but anyone not trained in pathology eg jury, judge, prosecution and defense counsel etc. Sorry I'm rambling but as an example when I read point 42 above initially I thought either JB or SC must have given NB a black eye by a punch to the face but I think you will find that some of the injuries are in effect secondary from gunshot. By this I mean a bullet can ricochet around internally. This is particularly common with shots to the skull and the type of weapon and ammo used at WHF. You Can Google to check it out: gunshot wound internal ricochet. I think June also had a black eye Adam?
The burns marks to NB's back I don't believe are anything to do with WHF. I'm out and about at the mo but will post a link to my previous posts on this. I will be interested in your take.
-
If as you believe there was no fight/struggle in the kitchen, and Sheila just watched as her dad staggered around before coming to rest straddled on a chair back, can you tell me how you think a piece got broken off the rifle butt?
It should have been analysed by FSS but I don't believe it was? I wonder if it still exists? I think it probably broke as it came into contact with NB's bones. I guess it could be any hard object eg table but no record of any damage.
The only damage I've read about to WHF property is the aga surround by way of scratch marks, broken lampshade and the obvious blood staining. I'm wondering if any damage was caused by bullets ricocheting either before or after entry but not noted? If so could it be that the butt broke as it hit furniture: table, chairs, stools but not noted. I don't believe the relatives noted any property damage other than that above.
-
Morning Adam
The above points from the CoA doc have been extracted from the pathologist's report. The problem I have with this case in general is the appalling communication. Eg lay people incorrectly interpreting documents written by professionals, in your post above the pathologist. When I say lay people I don't just mean the likes of us but anyone not trained in pathology eg jury, judge, prosecution and defense counsel etc. Sorry I'm rambling but as an example when I read point 42 above initially I thought either JB or SC must have given NB a black eye by a punch to the face but I think you will find that some of the injuries are in effect secondary from gunshot. By this I mean a bullet can ricochet around internally. This is particularly common with shots to the skull and the type of weapon and ammo used at WHF. You Can Google to check it out: gunshot wound internal ricochet. I think June also had a black eye Adam?
The burns marks to NB's back I don't believe are anything to do with WHF. I'm out and about at the mo but will post a link to my previous posts on this. I will be interested in your take.
Adam, here's the link to the burn marks:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=292.msg134570#msg134570
-
I created a thread on the expensive Arizona tests on the Blue forum.
Not sure of the point. If it showed it was burn marks from the rifle without the silencer (which it didn't), it just means the silencer was taken off beforehand.
-
I created a thread on the expensive Arizona tests on the Blue forum.
Not sure of the point. If it showed it was burn marks from the rifle without the silencer (which it didn't), it just means the silencer was taken off beforehand.
That is one interpretation.
As far as I am concerned it goes back to my post above about appalling communication in that someone has marked on the pathology report "Gun forced into back" and this has taken on a life of its own:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=199.0;attach=680
The pathologist does not make any ref to the burn marks occurring during the tragedy:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=292.msg134570#msg134570
-
It is not clear to me that any wrestling took place due the injuries sustained in the bedroom specifically his "totally impaired" left arm. I believe the scratch marks were fabricated as per Peter Sutherst's (difficult name to pronounce if you have the misfortune of being short tonged) findings.
That is because you are too biased to face the issue rationally.
You took a post where cook admits a struggle took place and says he didn't realize it initially and suggest this proves there was no struggle though it doesn't prove such at all. Cook didn't know anything about the injuries Nevill suffered that proved there was a struggle nor was aware of the extent of damage to the room.
He was even under the erroneous belief the raid team knocked over the sugar though that was not the case.
There is no doubt at all Nevill was severely beaten, the gun butt was broken by hitting him with it and that this occurred because the gun was empty and the killer needed Neivll unconscious to be able to reload the weapon.
Saying you refuse to face the evidenc ejust makes you living in irrational denial nothing more.
-
Of course there was a scuffle in the kitchen. Nevill Bamber was beaten to a pulp by a rifle wielding maniac. Question is, did he know who his assailant was?
-
Of course there was a scuffle in the kitchen. Nevill Bamber was beaten to a pulp by a rifle wielding maniac. Question is, did he know who his assailant was?
I think NB's limitations were as per the autopsy report a "spirited defence". This imo does not mean a "violent struggle" or "scuffle". Imo this meant NB raising his only operable arm (right) to shield himself from blows raining down from the rifle.
Sadly I think we can safely assume that NB was aware of the identity of his assailant since all concerned agreed there were only two possibilities: JB or SC.
-
That is because you are too biased to face the issue rationally.
You took a post where cook admits a struggle took place and says he didn't realize it initially and suggest this proves there was no struggle though it doesn't prove such at all. Cook didn't know anything about the injuries Nevill suffered that proved there was a struggle nor was aware of the extent of damage to the room.
He was even under the erroneous belief the raid team knocked over the sugar though that was not the case.
There is no doubt at all Nevill was severely beaten, the gun butt was broken by hitting him with it and that this occurred because the gun was empty and the killer needed Neivll unconscious to be able to reload the weapon.
Saying you refuse to face the evidenc ejust makes you living in irrational denial nothing more.
What possible reason(s) do I have for being bias towards a convicted mass murderer (including 2 small sleeping children)? I have looked at all the info in the public domain and my interpretation is that JB's conviction is unsafe and I believe he is the victim of a MoJ.
On the other hand it could be argued that all the lay prosecution witnesses had something to gain by seeing JB sent down and were therefore bias even if they were not consciously aware of this:
Relatives - retain the Speakman dynasty in the bloodline. Why did they not donate the estate of June and NB to a charity or set up some sort of endowment for the benefit of the local community? Assets that were difficult to break-up eg shares in OCP the relatives could have retained majority shareholdings/control and appointed a trustee to hold the assets and pay dividends to. Had the tragedy at WHF not have occurred the normal course of events would not have seen the relatives benefiting financially. I am not saying the relatives thought JB innocent and stitched him up to retain an in tact Speakman dynasty as I do think they genuinely believe him to be guilty but nonetheless it has a certain whiff about it.
JM - No criminal record for her part in OCP, cheque book fraud, selling illegal recreational drugs. And possibly charges dropped that EP might have threatened her with eg accomplice to murder, perverting the course of justice if she refused to 'cooperate'. 25k NoW deal. Retains her dignity in terms of 'well yes he dumped me but look what an evil monster he was'. Again had JB not been sent down she would not have benefitted from the NoW deal. So why not donate the money to a charity.
Both above could have legitimately claimed any out of pocket expenses (if they incurred any) as a result of the tragedy eg I believe JM had to have time off work but I'm not sure if it was paid or unpaid.
Doris Foakes - Was reliant upon (as were her family) the Speakman dynasty for work and housing.
Mary Mugford - As would be expected supported her daughter.
James Richard - Was a friend of JM's and is likely to be supportive of that friend.
I don't think the last three really said anything incriminating. They were pretty much one off sentences that were obviously taken out of context. EG Doris Foakes "I'm not going to share my money with my sister". I find it very unlikely that JB would walk up to DF and blurt out "I'm not going to share my money with my sister". It really makes little sense but attempts to provide a reason for JB murdering SC eg 'I'm not going to share my parents' estate with my sister'. I think I recall reading something in RB's WS where he suggests that JB should share his dividend from OCP with SC. If this is the case then I can understand JB's sentiments as SC made no contribution towards the running of OCP.
I didn't take a post about DI Cook as you claim above. It is information contained in his signed WS. He was present at the scene some 2 hours after the raid team broke-in. When he evaluated the scene in theory nothing should have been tampered with and the raid team should have made clear what if anything they moved. He also attended the PM and was briefed by Dr V on the full extent of NB's injuries. On the back of this information he states:
- It didn't appear to him there was a struggle
- Only 2 things broken: plate or bowl and lampshade
- He was advised that the raid team knocked over the chairs and sugar bowl
- That NB was only able to put up limited resistance because of the bullet wounds to his neck and arm
- Appeared feasible to him that SC could have killed her father
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=168.0;attach=291
I am not saying NB was not severely beaten and the rifle butt didn't break but this doesn't prove anything. SC could have continued beating NB when he was dead or nearly dead. SC or JB did not need to beat NB to reload the rifle as the poor man was almost dead by the time he reached the kitchen; the pathology report tells us this.
No doubt Tracie Andrews didn't need to stab her boyfriend some 30 or 40 times? It's what people do when they get in a rage.
http://murderpedia.org/female.A/a/andrews-tracie.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rage_(emotion)