Just like the mysterious burns on Neville's back, the self closing window which didn't self close, the three sound moderators which morphed into one, the scratches under the mantel, the police were in conversation with someone within the farmhouse, the trick of light at the upstairs window and the phone call which Neville was supposed to have made.
Anyone who believes that a petite light framed girl could kill her parents including fighting with her father in the kitchen, kill her sleeping children and then administer two shots to her neck and still end up looking like someone out of a glamour mag has to be totally bonkers imo.
Note for Holls. Vanezis only visited the crime scene AFTER the bodies had been removed. He did not witness Sheila lying on the bedroom floor. He was shocked when he saw the police photos after he had conducted the autopsy as they told a very different story.
Based on trial testimony from Dr Vanezis and Prof Knight there doesn't appear to be anything conclusive about the burns. Personally I think the burns are unrelated to soc. Did anyone check NB's medi records for old injuries?
Many of the others aspects of the case you have mentioned are largely irrelevant post trial. By this I mean they are not capable of advancing the case one way or another post conviction so there's little point, if any, in discussing them further.
The fact SC was of average build and above average height based on the average British female in the 1980's is neither here nor there. If SC was the perp she had the upper hand in that she was in possession of a loaded firearm.
You seem to have a mental image of how a woman would appear having carried out the WHF massacre which in your opinion is incompatiable with soc?
Police surgeon, Dr Craig, with 30 years experience visted soc at circa 8.30pm, he was of the opinion SC was responsible and had taken her own life. Chief Sup Harris and DCI Jones had between them some 60 plus years experience and had presided over some 100 murder investigations. They both concluded SC was responsible. I have no doubt in the final analysis they will be proved right.
I'm not sure what else the pathologist could have learned from observing SC at soc? He obviously had the benefit of soc images. No doubt his verdict would have remained the same ie unable to confirm murder or suicide?