Someone else who noted...was correct

[scipio_usmc]

This is quite a horrible thought but is it possible Crispy could have interfered with the victims and/or SoC eg bible, rifle, casings?  I have no experience of dogs so I have no idea what the poor little thing would do.  Would it (was Crispy a he or she?) be aware the victims were deceased, think they were sleeping or be oblivious? 

AE said Crispy jumped on her lap at JB's cottage so I'm wondering if it might have clambered on top of the rifle/SC?

Also while I'm on the subject of Crispy it appears he/she moved about ie from kitchen (tel op heard?) to bedroom but no evidence of paw prints in blood? 

And, this is a really horrible thought, but I believe June's legs had smears of blood on is it possible Crispy might have licked them? 

DI Cook (think it was him) said he put Crispy in the wardrobe as he didn't want him/her interfering with SoC but by this time potentially he/she had been roaming around unfettered for some 4 hours.

There wasn't any suggestions that Crispy had some great love for Sheila that he would want to go to her. Dogs usually stay away from dead things. while a dog could potentially knock a rifle off a body if sitting on the person they would not transfer a gun to a body.

If Jeremy but the Bible on Sheila then maybe the dog could knock it off.  But it would be unlikely to stay to the same exact page, in fact it would be likely to close.  The chance of it staying open to the same page and landing in the pool of blood seems pretty far fetched.  Moreover placing it directly on her body would be stupid how would it get there after she shot herself?  Even Jeremy should have realized that she would not lay down. Have the Bible on her body then shoot herself while it was on her body.  That seems ludicrous.

How he screwed up was placing it in her pool of blood by her face instead of placing it by her waist. He seemed to associate head- reading not fulling considering that when you put it down you do so by your waist not your head.    That's another argument the prosecution missed making.

Police saw something was wrong with where it was located.  Maybe they never told the prosecutor and the prosecutor never realized it himself or maybe the prosecutor didn't want to complicate the case and felt the moderator evidence was enough.  Sometimes when you make too many arguments you confuse a jury.

[scipio_usmc]

I've always felt SC's location was odd but thinking about it now I wonder if Crispy was under the bed (this is where I believe he/she was found) that's what caused SC to be there.  It is said SC was an animal lover.  Crispy may have hidden under the bed as a result of all the noise outside and he/she wanted to be close to June.

I don't think an animal psychologist has ever given an opinion?

Wasn't June his "mommy"? She was on the other side of the bed.  Some dogs hide under beds, some under desks and some in other places.  Maybe he ran to hide from police under the bed.  Maybe he was there a long time we have no idea. Some dogs and cats hide from strangers others confront them, it depends on the animal.

I doubt Crispy could be heard from the kitchen phone if barking under the bed I suspect Crispy went there later when the raid team broke in.  He was alone and then heard the door get broken in an a lot of strangers so was probably very scared.

[Holly Goodhead]

Wasn't June his "mommy"? She was on the other side of the bed.  Some dogs hide under beds, some under desks and some in other places.  Maybe he ran to hide from police under the bed.  Maybe he was there a long time we have no idea. Some dogs and cats hide from strangers others confront them, it depends on the animal.

I doubt Crispy could be heard from the kitchen phone if barking under the bed I suspect Crispy went there later when the raid team broke in.  He was alone and then heard the door get broken in an a lot of strangers so was probably very scared.

Yes June was Crispy's "mommy" but I'm not sure which side or end of the bed he/she was found just under the bed. 

Yes I doubt the tel op would hear Crispy barking upstairs but he/she may have been in the kitchen at some point.  His/her basket was in the kitchen.  If in the kitchen there's no evidence of glass/blood on paws or transferred elsewhere.

[david1819]

Once again you demonstrate how poor your reading comprehension skills are.  I didn't claim they looked in the ejection port I stated that looking through the vents you can see that there is no bullet in the magazine and that the bolt is open.  I said that because the vents are what was facing up. I showed what it looks like with the bolt open and you can see the vents are on the opposite side.

While from a distance you can't see through the vents, looking up close at the vents you can easily look through them and see whether the bolt is closed or open and whether there is a bullet or not in the magazine. Looking through the vents and seeing Sheila's gown would make it quite clear the bolt was open.

When I use the words vents I meant vents.  When I use the word ejection port I mean ejection port. The words I choose actually are meant to accurately describe what I am referring to.  I deliberately choose my words.

You are correct in theory but that is not how the rifle was actually safety checked. It was checked as it was being removed from the body

[scipio_usmc]

You are correct in theory but that is not how the rifle was actually safety checked. It was checked as it was being removed from the body

Both references are referring to when Woodcock removed it after the initial photos were taken.

He said that before handing it over to the crime scene officers he looked inside the chamber to be sure it was clear.  He said that he didn't physically touch it until after the photos were taken.

No other police claim to have touched it physically prior to this or to have seen anyone physically touch it prior to this.

Prior to this they supposedly just visually looked at it to make sure it was safe.

Montgomery is the other officer who supposedly said it was safe but in no statement does he claim to have touched it physically or does anyone else claim to have seen him touch it physically.

[John]

For some reason the statement by PC Collins is not available so the possibility that he checked/moved the rifle cannot be dismissed.

[scipio_usmc]

For some reason the statement by PC Collins is not available so the possibility that he checked/moved the rifle cannot be dismissed.

There relevant portions of Collins statements:

[Myster]

A demonstration of how to shoot yourself with in the foot.

I reckon if Sheila had used her big toe to push the trigger, she would have fallen back, knocked herself unconscious on the bedside cabinet, and been found with her toe still locked in the trigger guard. They should have loaded a live bullet to see how capable the demonstrator was in recovering her composure to fire a fatal second shot!

[scipio_usmc]

A demonstration of how to shoot yourself with in the foot.

I reckon if Sheila had used her big toe to push the trigger, she would have fallen back, knocked herself unconscious on the bedside cabinet, and been found with her toe still locked in the trigger guard. They should have loaded a live bullet to see how capable the demonstrator was in recovering her composure to fire a fatal second shot!

The bullets would not have been fired at the right angles anyway in those shots. The gun needed to be to her right side so the bullets could travel left to right in addition to trying to work out the right angle at which the gun was upwards.

Since she could not remove the moderator when dead that exercise was pointless anyway.  The fact she could not shoot herself with her hands is all that the prosecution needed to establish to provide a motive for Jeremy to remove the moderator and put it away.

   

[Holly Goodhead]

A demonstration of how to shoot yourself with in the foot.

I reckon if Sheila had used her big toe to push the trigger, she would have fallen back, knocked herself unconscious on the bedside cabinet, and been found with her toe still locked in the trigger guard. They should have loaded a live bullet to see how capable the demonstrator was in recovering her composure to fire a fatal second shot!

Who initiated this?  This just shows how incompetent this country is in assessing death by firearms. 

In order to establish what was or wasn't possible would surely require SC's precise measurements eg arm length/span, length of finger etc.  In any event as Scipio said it's all a nonsense as SC could not have shot herself once then replaced the silencer in the gun cupboard and then shot herself fatally in the bedroom.  I guess they were just trying to show that it wasn't necessary for JB to remove the silencer, as claimed by the prosecution, as SC could reach the trigger with it on.

[scipio_usmc]

Who initiated this?  This just shows how incompetent this country is in assessing death by firearms. 

In order to establish what was or wasn't possible would surely require SC's precise measurements eg arm length/span, length of finger etc.  In any event as Scipio said it's all a nonsense as SC could not have shot herself once then replaced the silencer in the gun cupboard and then shot herself fatally in the bedroom.  I guess they were just trying to show that it wasn't necessary for JB to remove the silencer, as claimed by the prosecution, as SC could reach the trigger with it on.

The defense would say well she could have used her toes so Jeremy had no need to remove the moderator after.

The prosecution will say either Jeremy didn't think of that or wondered if the evidence could prove she wasn't in such a position when she was shot so it was better to pretend she shot herself by hand.  He did afterall shoot her by standing to her side not directly in front of her.

The thing is the prosecution just needed to give a plausible motive for Jeremy to remove the moderator not to prove beyond a reasonable doubt why he did so.   So saying well he could have pretended she stepped on it doesn't do much to rebut the argument from the prosecution.  The defense's main task was to establish it wasn't used but had nothing good to use in such regard. Their own experts were of no use especially Lincoln.

They lucked out that the prosecution was stupid and missed the rifle would not have landed on her body nice and neat.  That's often times the kind of this a smart lawyer will ask his experts and then they say oh well now that you ask...  They often don't broach things on their own. Vanezis clearly notes the bullets traveling right to left though so the prosecution should have gotten a clue.  Granted I ignored the issue too for a long time but I am not trying a case I am just reading about it for sport. I also think it was experts hired by others not the prosecution that first pointed out Sheila was moved flat and then prosecution experts were obtained to assess such.     

 

[Holly Goodhead]

There relevant portions of Collins statements:

It's interesting how PC Collins notes injuries to her neck and chin but only one casing? 

[scipio_usmc]

It's interesting how PC Collins notes injuries to her neck and chin but only one casing?

The other one was under her body or at least on the other side of her and thus hidden by her body.  It depends on which statement you read.  Obviously if entirely under her body it would mean she was moved and placed upon it. It's unclear that is the case though since some say it was simply on the other side of her body and it appears there are photos that show both. While these photos have not been released to the public they are referenced at various times. Thus I don' use the statement that says it was under her as proof her body was placed upon it because under her could simply be a poor choice of words and not mean her body directly on top of it but merely very close to her side. 

[Holly Goodhead]

The other one was under her body or at least on the other side of her and thus hidden by her body.  It depends on which statement you read.  Obviously if entirely under her body it would mean she was moved and placed upon it. It's unclear that is the case though since some say it was simply on the other side of her body and it appears there are photos that show both. While these photos have not been released to the public they are referenced at various times. Thus I don' use the statement that says it was under her as proof her body was placed upon it because under her could simply be a poor choice of words and not mean her body directly on top of it but merely very close to her side.

How do we know SC wasn't blocking entry to the box room and someone didn't move her body to gain access?  The casing might then have been situated under the door, or the other side of the partially opened door, when observed by PC Collins?  Even if she wasn't moved opening the door may have partially concealed the casing from inside the main bedroom, moved SC's arm, the rifle and bible?  Two SoC photos exist one showing the door closed the other about half open?

[scipio_usmc]

How do we know SC wasn't blocking entry to the box room and someone didn't move her body to gain access?  The casing might then have been situated under the door, or the other side of the partially opened door, when observed by PC Collins?  Even if she wasn't moved opening the door may have partially concealed the casing from inside the main bedroom, moved SC's arm, the rifle and bible?  Two SoC photos exist one showing the door closed the other about half open?

The casing to her left is the one we can't see and that the initial police didn't see for the most part. It is the one that 1 statement says was under her body while the rest say to the left.  That has nothing to do with the door it's in between her body and the bed. I think that since her body blocked the view and thus concealed it that is why the one said it was under her body I suspect.