Dr Vanezis Trial Testimony

[Vertigo Swirl]

I haven't seen any evidence that the pathologist;

Offered any opinion as to what the blunt object was.
Mentioned a broken nose.
Ran any DNA tests.
Denied that Sheila Caffell could have caused her father's injuries.
Tested any hair.
Tested clothing for fibres.

Yet all the above have been claimed. Perhaps these claims should be backed up by pointing out where they came from? Otherwise people might think misinformation is being used to make the crime look even worse than it undoutedly was.

I haven’t made any of those claims so why are you replying to me?

[Vertigo Swirl]

They have also played down what he said and ignored important terms like 'fractured suck' - you were silent on these issues.

Did you mean “fractured skull”?

[Myster]

Shall we have a whip-round to gift Caro a new keyboard?

[Myster]

... or suggest gently that predictive text isn't all it's cracked up to be?

[Eleanor]

... or suggest gently that predictive text isn't all it's cracked up to be?

It is actually a massive pain in the neck.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It is actually a massive pain in the neck.

I degree.

[Eleanor]

I degree.

Me Top Lasso.

[Caroline]

 

Did you mean “fractured skull”?

  - Probably. I type too fast - must learn to read back before posting!

[Caroline]

Shall we have a whip-round to gift Caro a new keyboard?

I don't think it would help. 

[Holly Goodhead]

Dr Vanezis trial testimony isn't all there was to determine Jeremy Bamber's guilt and he did make some omissions with the potential to have been vital, which were noted at a later date one of which (the handprint on Sheila Caffell's nightdress) was described as follows in the conclusions to Bamber's appeal ...

520

• Our conclusion was that we should not therefore admit the evidence and we have had no regard to it in reaching our conclusion. It can, however, be said about it that if it had been called at trial, it may well have represented yet another formidable string to the prosecution's bow in a case where even without any regard to that evidence, it has to be said that the prosecution were able to put forward a very strong case pointing to guilt.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2002/2912.html

***   ***   ***   ***

I think rather than - in my opinion - attempting to blind us all with a narrow science reflecting your firmly held point of view it might be time to give some consideration to the broader picture.

The above is perhaps the best evidence of JB's appalling defence at trial and 2002 appeal.

At the 2002 appeal forensic scientist Martyn Ismail was called by the prosecution to testify about SC's position as depicted in soc images. Point 514 +

http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html

He said after the second fatal gsw SC's head would have fallen back against the bedside cabinet but soc images show her head flat to the floor.  However first respondent A/PS Woodcock states in his wit stat SC's head was raised against the bedside cabinet.  Who moved SC at soc after she was first observed by A/PS Woodcock and soc images taken?  It wasn't JB as he was outside with police.

The defence was so poor that points that should have been a slam dunk for JB were allowed to be used against him by the prosecution.

[Common sense]

Thank you for taking the trouble to upload all of this Holly.

As a guilter I do not wish to stoop to the level of the CT and simply make things up.

The amount of supporters that have told me to "do my research" while claiming "it could have been rabbits blood but the jury were never told" and other such nonsense has left me with the strong impression that Bambers claims of innocence simply don't stand any scrutiny at all so the least I can do is base my opinion on solid facts.

I can't be bothered to read it all though, my important take away was that Vanezis was angry that he hadn't been called to the scene and stated that he would have raised concerns had he seen SC in situ.

The pathological evidence itself was simply inconclusive about who the perp was. 

[Common sense]

The above is perhaps the best evidence of JB's appalling defence at trial and 2002 appeal.

At the 2002 appeal forensic scientist Martyn Ismail was called by the prosecution to testify about SC's position as depicted in soc images. Point 514 +

http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html

He said after the second fatal gsw SC's head would have fallen back against the bedside cabinet but soc images show her head flat to the floor.  However first respondent A/PS Woodcock states in his wit stat SC's head was raised against the bedside cabinet.  Who moved SC at soc after she was first observed by A/PS Woodcock and soc images taken?  It wasn't JB as he was outside with police.

The defence was so poor that points that should have been a slam dunk for JB were allowed to be used against him by the prosecution.

I think the 2002 appeal was JBs own fault. Unlike an appeal referred by the single judge, a referral by the CCRC allows other points to be thrown in without permission. I doubt any QC would have annoyed the court with the idiotic and ultimately self defeating nonsense that only Bamber could have insisted upon.

I think any defence that brings up evidence of a body being moved post mortem when his client is accused of staging the scene would likely be struck off - a point emphasised by the CoA regarding the bible issue.

[Nicholas]

I think the 2002 appeal was JBs own fault. Unlike an appeal referred by the single judge, a referral by the CCRC allows other points to be thrown in without permission. I doubt any QC would have annoyed the court with the idiotic and ultimately self defeating nonsense that only Bamber could have insisted upon.

I think any defence that brings up evidence of a body being moved post mortem when his client is accused of staging the scene would likely be struck off - a point emphasised by the CoA regarding the bible issue.

Any news re the High court challenge with the CPS yet?

“The legal papers lodged by Bamber and his team at the end of last week argue that the CPS failed to follow a direction for complete disclosure made by the Appeal judges in 2002. His legal team accuses the CPS of rejecting a ballistics report without instructing an expert to examine its credentials, as per protocol.
https://www.thejusticegap.com/bambers-lawyers-challenge-cps-over-non-disclosure/

[Holly Goodhead]

I think the 2002 appeal was JBs own fault. Unlike an appeal referred by the single judge, a referral by the CCRC allows other points to be thrown in without permission. I doubt any QC would have annoyed the court with the idiotic and ultimately self defeating nonsense that only Bamber could have insisted upon.

I think any defence that brings up evidence of a body being moved post mortem when his client is accused of staging the scene would likely be struck off - a point emphasised by the CoA regarding the bible issue.

The evidence is there in black and white that SC was moved at soc after first respondents entered: A/PS Woodcock's wit stat and testimony from forensic scientist Martyn Ismail.

Other officers also thought SC had been moved at soc when shown soc images which were different from their initial recollections.  Blood stain analyst, Prof Herb Macdonnell also thought SC had been moved at soc.

Blood test results for the bible were not made available to the defence which begs the questions why and why didn't the defence pursue?  Although heavily blood stained and found at centre of crime noone knows whose blood?! 

[Nicholas]

The evidence is there in black and white that SC was moved at soc after first respondents entered: A/PS Woodcock's wit stat and testimony from forensic scientist Martyn Ismail.

Other officers also thought SC had been moved at soc when shown soc images which were different from their initial recollections.  Blood stain analyst, Prof Herb Macdonnell also thought SC had been moved at soc.

Blood test results for the bible were not made available to the defence which begs the questions why and why didn't the defence pursue?  Although heavily blood stained and found at centre of crime noone knows whose blood?!

The overall conclusion in the end was that SC body had been staged by Bamber