The Murders At White House Farm by Carol Ann Lee

[Holly Goodhead]

The diameter of a Parker-Hale moderator is about three-quarters of an inch, a lot larger than any of the three burn marks.

When Dr V met CAL he disagreed with his own post mortem assessment and Malcom Fletcher's:

"With hindsight Vanezis disagrees: 'I've thought about this a lot, with the benefit of another twenty-eight years' experience.  If you put something hot against fairly thick clothing, you're more likely to burn the skin than the clothing because of the properties of the skin.  If you pushed a rifle against someone's back, that would fit in very nicely with the gun having already been fired and the muzzle still being hot when touching the back'.  He discounts the poker: 'No, I think it's the gun pressed against his skin.  I don't think you can read too much into the slight difference in the shape of the marks either.  They're all fairly circular, skin is not totally flat, and the way you hold something is not always the same.  My guess is that those marks are the effect of the muzzle of the rifle being prodded against Nevill's pyjama top whilst he was still alive.  The temperature is such that the clothing doesn't burn.  You don't need a lot of heat for that.  Don't forget that we're seeing those marks after death, which dries the skin and makes it darker.' "

[puglove]

When Dr V met CAL he disagreed with his own post mortem assessment and Malcom Fletcher's:

"With hindsight Vanezis disagrees: 'I've thought about this a lot, with the benefit of another twenty-eight years' experience.  If you put something hot against fairly thick clothing, you're more likely to burn the skin than the clothing because of the properties of the skin.  If you pushed a rifle against someone's back, that would fit in very nicely with the gun having already been fired and the muzzle still being hot when touching the back'.  He discounts the poker: 'No, I think it's the gun pressed against his skin.  I don't think you can read too much into the slight difference in the shape of the marks either.  They're all fairly circular, skin is not totally flat, and the way you hold something is not always the same.  My guess is that those marks are the effect of the muzzle of the rifle being prodded against Nevill's pyjama top whilst he was still alive.  The temperature is such that the clothing doesn't burn.  You don't need a lot of heat for that.  Don't forget that we're seeing those marks after death, which dries the skin and makes it darker.' "

That's the problem, the marks look very dark, which makes me think that they were old and unrelated to the murders. It's impossible to tell from black and white images.

[puglove]

I don't think so, had she put her hand to the wound it would have have blood on the palms and inner fingers and would have been completely smudged.  There would also have been a substantial amount of blood on the rifle and the trigger which there wasn't.

Bamber obviously moved Sheila's arms in order to stage the "suicide," so it's possible that droplets and smears of blood were transferred from her shoulder to her wrist then. He might have placed her right hand at the top of the barrel (so wrist on shoulder area) then moved the hand down to the trigger when he remembered that Sheila was right-handed. I doubt if she made any conscious, voluntary (or involuntary) movements after the first shot - the haemorrhage and resulting pocket of blood in her throat went nowhere, neither upwards and coughed out, or down into her lungs and/or stomach. And sadly it must be remembered that although the boys died almost instantly, BOTH had blood present in their airways, and Nicholas had blood in his stomach.

(It's also possible that Sheila's hand WAS at the top of the barrel because she grabbed it as Bamber pushed it into her neck - that might explain blood splashing onto her wrist, and the first shot missing it's target.)

[Holly Goodhead]

As far as I can see CAL has made a significant error in that she refers to the blood samples etc taken from the victims at post portem being sent direct to FSS.  Whereas according to Dr Vanezis' WS they were handed to EP and, according to a COLP interview, stored in the SoC fridge at chelmsford police station.

CAL makes ref to 9th Aug then moves on:

"Sheila's fingerprints and those of her parents were taken at the morturary by DSDavidson.  Her hand swabs, blood samples, stomach contents, liver and urine samples, together with June's blood and urine samples, and Nevill and the twins' blood samples, were submitted to the Forensic Science Laboratory in Huntingdon that morning".

Dr V's WS confirms they were all handed to EP and stored in the fridge at Chelmsford police station.  It's not clear to me when they were taken to FSS supposedly by a civilian driver.     

I think CAL  must have missed the point here as she appears to give both sides of any contentious aspects.  I would have expected her to draw on the COLP report where DS Davidson is interviewed about the samples and asked if he or others planted any blood from SC's sample in the silencer.  This was asked on the basis that he was responsible for the SoC fridge where the samples were stored.

 &%+((£

[puglove]

CAL makes ref to 9th Aug then moves on:

"Sheila's fingerprints and those of her parents were taken at the morturary by DSDavidson.  Her hand swabs, blood samples, stomach contents, liver and urine samples, together with June's blood and urine samples, and Nevill and the twins' blood samples, were submitted to the Forensic Science Laboratory in Huntingdon that morning".

Dr V's WS confirms they were all handed to EP and stored in the fridge at Chelmsford police station.  It's not clear to me when they were taken to FSS supposedly by a civilian driver.     

I think CAL  must have missed the point here as she appears to give both sides of any contentious aspects.  I would have expected her to draw on the COLP report where DS Davidson is interviewed about the samples and asked if he or others planted any blood from SC's sample in the silencer.  This was asked on the basis that he was responsible for the SoC fridge where the samples were stored.

 &%+((£

Hey Holl!

I genuinely don't understand the science here, but do you think that Sheila's blood could have been planted in the baffles from either diluted, degraded blood from the buckets, or samples taken at the scene and held before they were stored in the fridge? (Bearing in mind Scipio's explanation of how difficult it is to replicate spatter on said baffles?)

[Myster]

When Dr V met CAL he disagreed with his own post mortem assessment and Malcom Fletcher's:

"With hindsight Vanezis disagrees: 'I've thought about this a lot, with the benefit of another twenty-eight years' experience.  If you put something hot against fairly thick clothing, you're more likely to burn the skin than the clothing because of the properties of the skin. If you pushed a rifle against someone's back, that would fit in very nicely with the gun having already been fired and the muzzle still being hot when touching the back'. He discounts the poker: 'No, I think it's the gun pressed against his skin.  I don't think you can read too much into the slight difference in the shape of the marks either.  They're all fairly circular, skin is not totally flat, and the way you hold something is not always the same.  My guess is that those marks are the effect of the muzzle of the rifle being prodded against Nevill's pyjama top whilst he was still alive.  The temperature is such that the clothing doesn't burn.  You don't need a lot of heat for that.  Don't forget that we're seeing those marks after death, which dries the skin and makes it darker.' "

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeLsEeE0zTI&feature=youtu.be&t=4m17s

[Holly Goodhead]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeLsEeE0zTI&feature=youtu.be&t=4m17s

I've always maintained that a multi-disciplinary approach is required.  Phillip Boyce is an expert in ballistics not pathology:

http://www.forensicequity.com/philip-boyce-bsc.-msc---firearms-expert-e-6.html

In any event the tests are not on a like for like basis:

- PB heated the outside of the rifle which would produce a different result than the rifle heating up internally from firing?

-  If the murders were carried out in quick succession ie over a few minutes what would the effect be in terms of temperature compared with the test which showed PB firing repeatedly and then checking the temperature?

Need a metallurgist.

Also is a sheet of pig skin capable of simulating human skin?  Was NB dead or alive when he received the burns?  This would surely affect the outcome of the actual burn marks?

There's a huge difference between the muzzle of a rifle heating up and a silencer both as a result of firing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tJ7heDIqXU

With the unsilenced rifle the hot gasses dissipate in the atmosphere.  With a silencer fitted they largely dissipate within the silencer's expansion chamber and baffles meaning the silencer retains the heat:

http://sploid.gizmodo.com/a-silencer-cut-in-half-is-pretty-cool-indeed-1689112501

As far as I can see the tests require experts in pathology, ballistics, metallurgy, (biology?)

[Holly Goodhead]

Hey Holl!

I genuinely don't understand the science here, but do you think that Sheila's blood could have been planted in the baffles from either diluted, degraded blood from the buckets, or samples taken at the scene and held before they were stored in the fridge? (Bearing in mind Scipio's explanation of how difficult it is to replicate spatter on said baffles?)

Well I'm no expert puglove!  I think it is unlikely the bloody water would be capable of producing the blood results: grouping along with the two enzymes and one protein.  And distributing the way in which it was found within the silencer ie a flake.   

DS Davidson was one of the officers present at post-mortem and was party to SC's blood sample being handed over to EP by Dr V.  DS Davidson was also responsible for the SoC fridge at Chelmsford police station.  As far as I can see there were no particular safeguards to prevent him or others tampering with the sample. And quite a flimsy audit trail in samples being transported from Chelmsford police station to FSS and checked in by FSS in terms of signatures on seals, quantity by way of number of samples and amounts contained within each vial.

Serological testing of blood and any results is dependent upon the quality of blood.  As far as I can see any sort of heat, even prolonged ambient temperature, would render any blood sample useless.  This begs the question how the blood sample/flake could have withstood the heat from the silencer (see post above) and yet still be capable of producing results for blood group along with the two enzymes and one protein  &%+((£

The silencer can easily be dissembled and reassembled:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGrGCnStmrk

I haven't seen any evidence that the blood found within the silencer in terms of distribution and location  corresponded exclusively with draw-back from a firearm.

COA Doc:

 75. Traces of blood in the form of smears were found in three places on the outside of the moderator: on the flat surface at the muzzle end, in the knurled end and in the ridge at the gun end of the device. The blood on the outside of the moderator was confirmed to be of human origin but there were insufficient quantities to permit grouping analysis.

76. Inside the moderator, on the four or five baffles nearest to the end from which the bullet would exit, there was a considerable amount of blood. At one point blood had pooled to form a flake when it dried, and this flake was subjected to group testing.

The silencer was the only exhibit capable of producing blood results for grouping, two enzymes and one protein.  Many other exhibits were tested:

- Rifle
- Carpet
- Wallpaper

None were capable of producing results for the enzymes and protein and yet the silencer was despite being exposed to considerable heat.  &%+((£ &%+((£ &%+((£ &%+((£ &%+((£ &%+((£ &%+((£ &%+((£ &%+((£ &%+((£

[Myster]

Well I'm no expert puglove!

    Don't worry about it Holls... an ex is a has-been and a spurt is a drip under pressure. 

[Angelo222]

Am I missing something wrt the burn marks?  What does it matter how or who was responsible for them?

Anything interested worth debating in the book Holls??

[Myster]

...such as whether a silencer can be easily deceived or not  &%+((£
or if the pillows in Wakefield are hop-filled and fluffier than those in Full Sutton so he can a better night's sleep. 

[Holly Goodhead]

Am I missing something wrt the burn marks?  What does it matter how or who was responsible for them?

Anything interested worth debating in the book Holls??

I had written the burn marks off as totally irrelevant.  Mainly based on Dr V not mentioning them when asked by the police and defence about injuries NB sustained other than gunshot wounds.  Well I guess he may have mentioned them but the info is certainly not on Blue or Red.  CAL met with Dr V and he discusses his thoughts on the burns at length.  Although he is unable to say with any certainty what caused them. 

JB's recent defence argued that the burn marks were caused by the end of the rifle and not the silencer. 

Myster and others have suggested a hot bullet exiting, ricocheting and catching NB.  If this was the case I am surprised other victims didn't suffer similar burn marks   

If either JB or SC deliberately pushed the hot rifle/silencer into NB's back why?  It has been suggested to check for life.  Surely it was obvious?  Again why NB and not other victims?  Other suggestions have included branding, something to do with the devil.  Again why NB and not other victims?

No earth shattering revelations. But lots of new bits of information eg AP confirms that JM asked him twice, post tragedy, about renting a villa in Ibiza.  She also asked JB to bring June's bike to London for her to use around college.

The book just deals with the facts as they have been reported via WS's, interviews with CAL etc, etc.  The author doesn't give anything away about her own personal views.  If I had to hazard a guess I would say she's inclined to see JB as guilty.  It will be interesting to see readers' conclusions who have no fixed ideas and know little, or nothing, about the case!

[Holly Goodhead]

...such as whether a silencer can be easily deceived or not  &%+((£
or if the pillows in Wakefield are hop-filled and fluffier than those in Full Sutton so he can a better night's sleep. 

CAL makes ref to JB's recent transfer to Wakefield. (I guess it's easy enough to make last minute alterations until the print button is pushed).  He spent almost 15 years at Full Sutton: "He was suddenly and unexpectedly transferred to Wakefield prison".

[Myster]

As I said before, the move's suspicious and definitely something to do with the 30th anniversary. For his own protection, just in case an inmate spies an opportunity to attack him as a result of seeing the contents of the two books as well, maybe?

I bet quite a few in Full Sutton and Wakefield are going to have a thorough read, even they're not available in the prison libraries. Paul Harrison's is damning of Bamber, but his conclusion that Sheila was also involved and somehow manipulated like a puppet isn't convincing at all, imo... of which more later. Although Carol Ann Lee is somewhat cagey committing herself in the Yorkshire Post, I'm sure she's certain of the truth too.

[Holly Goodhead]

I'm puzzled by the following:

"The blood on the nightdress was Sheila's own; both Fletcher and Vanezis agree that had she been the killer, blood from the other victims would have been detected on the garment". 

How did they arrive at this conclusion?  Observing the blood stains or analysing the blood?  If the former why didn't Dr V (and others) seize on this straight away?  If the latter I haven't seen any evidence that any of the exhibits were capable of yielding full serological results (capable of distinguishing the victims' blood from one another) other than the silencer?  Some exhibits were capable of yielding blood group results.  SC and June shared the same group.

The CoA doc states the rifle contained smears and splashes consistent with it being used to strike somebody who was already bleeding:

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.

If it's case that the perp would have sustained back spatter to his/her person then why did the rifle not contain back spatter (fine mist)?  Especially given that with most shots, if not all, the rifle was much closer to the victims than the perp?  Back spatter travels in the opposite direction of the bullet towards the shooter from the entrance wound but there doesn't appear to have been back spatter elsewhere?  Some must surely land elsewhere eg carpet, walls, furniture etc?  I'm not convinced that back spatter would result with the small calibre rifle and low velocity bullets used.  By Dr V's own admission he makes ref to... with the benefit of another 28 years experience etc, etc.  Forensic science and ballistics was very much in its infancy in the 1980's? 

Regardless of any delays in JB coming under the spotlight it seems to me the staff and tests carried out at FSS were woefully inadequate.  Not least the lack of communication between the various professionals.  I imagine our American cousins laughing their socks off!