For Those That Believe JB Guilty...

[Holly Goodhead]

I posted this week about Sheila not having any oil, blood or gun shot residue on her or her nightdress.  Meaning she either changed & had a vigourous shower after killing herself, or someone else killed her.

This is an important point & was put into the library. However had no response from supporters.

I've realised supporters like to support Bamber on the basis of possible hidden evidence from EP, claimed withheld knowledge from fellow supporters, or Julie's actions of identifying the twins & staying fairly loyal for 20 days.

The only forensic evidence really brought up by supporters is the silencer, most accusing the relatives of fabricating this. But they don't elaborate and refuse to answer questions on how the relatives expertly achieved this big, risky and complicated frame.

The exceptions are Holly & Mike although Mike rarely interacts with other posters.

As far as I can see SC's found state is entirely consistent with her being the perp.  There's no need for a "ritual" cleanse with or without harsh abrasives to remove gunshot residue (gsr); change of clothes; pondering the idea that SC may have been naked etc, etc. 

Backspatter (Blood from gunshot wounds (gsw's))

An excerpt taken from a book entitled "Principles of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: Theory and Practice" authored by Stuart H James of James and Associates forensic scientists:

"There is no valid scientific basis to relate estimates or establish probabilities for the production of impact spatter resulting from gunshot".

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8_fKBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA148&lpg=PA148&dq=MacDonnell+and+Brooks+gunshots+barrel+of+gun&source=bl&ots=BsKjA30yol&sig=f1pLI-d1mAM3mNDHVvmSpTpz2xA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjetMS94uTPAhWJLMAKHcEvCcwQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=MacDonnell%20and%20Brooks%20gunshots%20barrel%20of%20gun&f=false

http://www.bloodevidence.com/jamesassoc.html

As I have pointed out previously the rifle contained so little blood it was not even possible to group the stains.  Why would it then follow SC would sustain any blood to her person/nightdress?  The stains on the rifle were described as "smears" and "splashes" which were probably deposited on the rifle when NB was beaten with a "blunt instrument" most probably the rifle.

Blood serology testing was used in the investigation and trial.  This type of testing requires a relatively large sample of blood in good quality.  Afaik blood on SC's person wasn't tested and only two areas of the nightdress were tested meaning any small stains will have fallen under the radar.  Had all of this evidence been retained then it would be possible to apply DNA testing.

Gun Oil From Firearm

There is no reason to believe an abudance of oil would be present on the rifle to the extent it would transfer to the users clothes/person.  Whether SC was murdered or took her own life the rifle was found across her person so unless the rifle was only oiled one side then I dont understand why the absence of such is any way suspicious?

Gunshot Residue

All the forensic text books basically say the same thing ie lack of or presence of GSR is inconclusive.  Movement and time can dissipate GSR.  In this case SC's hands were not swabbed until PM so many hours after death and after some considerable movement. 

Whether SC fired the rifle 25/26 times or JB did, SC was found in an enclosed environment where a firearm had been discharged a number of times and twice over her body with the rifle found resting across her nightdress/person.  So clearly an absence of GSR means squat.
 

[adam]

As far as I can see SC's found state is entirely consistent with her being the perp.  There's no need for a "ritual" cleanse with or without harsh abrasives to remove gunshot residue (gsr); change of clothes; pondering the idea that SC may have been naked etc, etc. 

Backspatter (Blood from gunshot wounds (gsw's))

An excerpt taken from a book entitled "Principles of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: Theory and Practice" authored by Stuart H James of James and Associates forensic scientists:

"There is no valid scientific basis to relate estimates or establish probabilities for the production of impact spatter resulting from gunshot".

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8_fKBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA148&lpg=PA148&dq=MacDonnell+and+Brooks+gunshots+barrel+of+gun&source=bl&ots=BsKjA30yol&sig=f1pLI-d1mAM3mNDHVvmSpTpz2xA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjetMS94uTPAhWJLMAKHcEvCcwQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=MacDonnell%20and%20Brooks%20gunshots%20barrel%20of%20gun&f=false

http://www.bloodevidence.com/jamesassoc.html

As I have pointed out previously the rifle contained so little blood it was not even possible to group the stains.  Why would it then follow SC would sustain any blood to her person/nightdress?  The stains on the rifle were described as "smears" and "splashes" which were probably deposited on the rifle when NB was beaten with a "blunt instrument" most probably the rifle.

Blood serology testing was used in the investigation and trial.  This type of testing requires a relatively large sample of blood in good quality.  Afaik blood on SC's person wasn't tested and only two areas of the nightdress were tested meaning any small stains will have fallen under the radar.  Had all of this evidence been retained then it would be possible to apply DNA testing.

Gun Oil From Firearm

There is no reason to believe an abudance of oil would be present on the rifle to the extent it would transfer to the users clothes/person.  Whether SC was murdered or took her own life the rifle was found across her person so unless the rifle was only oiled one side then I dont understand why the absence of such is any way suspicious?

Gunshot Residue

All the forensic text books basically say the same thing ie lack of or presence of GSR is inconclusive.  Movement and time can dissipate GSR.  In this case SC's hands were not swabbed until PM so many hours after death and after some considerable movement. 

Whether SC fired the rifle 25/26 times or JB did, SC was found in an enclosed environment where a firearm had been discharged a number of times and twice over her body with the rifle found resting across her nightdress/person.  So clearly an absence of GSR means squat.

This is why I praised you & Mike earlier. As you will discuss all aspects.

Unfortunately the published 2002 appeal says very damaging things about Sheila's condition. Some of which, such as the nails I haven't mentioned.

Sheila either changed and had a vigourous shower with specialist cleaning agents after she had died. Or someone killed her.

[adam]

47. The firearms officers who were the first to see her body noted that her feet and hands were "perfectly clean". Her fingernails were well manicured and not broken and there were no marks or indentations on any of her fingers. All her fingertips were clean and free from any blood, dirt or powder and there appeared to be no trace of any lead dust or coating which is usual when handling .22 ammunition.

48. The act of loading the magazine of an automatic weapon (carried out at least twice in this case) would be expected to leave visible traces of the lubricant and the materials from the bullets on the hands.

49. DC Hammersley, the Scenes of Crimes Officer placed plastic bags over Sheila Caffell's hands and feet before her body was removed from the farmhouse. He saw some blood staining to the back of the right hand, but apart from that the hands, to his eye were clean and the nails intact. The deceased's feet were also free from blood staining and from any debris such as sugar.

50. Following removal of the bags at the mortuary, Sheila Caffell's hands and forehead were swabbed. Extremely low traces of lead were detected when the swabs were examined. Such levels being consistent with the levels found from the handling of every day things around the house. These results were compared to hand swabs taken from volunteers at the laboratory who were required to load the magazine with eighteen rounds of ammunition. Significantly higher traces of lead were found than those recorded on the hands of Mrs Caffell. The scientist Mr Elliott gave evidence that if Sheila Caffell had loaded eighteen cartridges into a magazine he would have expected the hand swabs to have revealed appreciably higher deposits of lead.

51. Mrs Caffell's nightdress was bloodstained. When tested the blood was consistent with being her own blood. The garment was also examined for the presence of any firearm discharge residues or oil from the rifle. No such traces were found. The scientist gave evidence that there would be a strong chance of finding such residues or markings on the clothing of an individual who had fired a rifle.

[adam]

The court of appeal made 20 points of evidence showing that Sheila had not fired a rifle.

It was impossible for Sheila to put herself in this condition. Both while alive as it was not simply a case of having that 'mysterious' shower. And certainly she was not able to remove all evidence off her,  after killing herself.

A submitted counter argument today is that the Court of Appeal judgement was in 2002 !!!! ????

[Holly Goodhead]

This is why I praised you & Mike earlier. As you will discuss all aspects.

Why not?  I'm more interested in aspects of the case that are underpinned by science as opposed to aspects that are subjective and impossible to prove either way eg lay witness testimony, whether or not NB called JB, JB's behaviour pre and post tragedy etc, etc. 

Unfortunately the published 2002 appeal says very damaging things about Sheila's condition. Some of which, such as the nails I haven't mentioned.

As far as forensics go the published 2002 appeal is rooted in the dark ages.  Also it  was drafted by 3 appeal court judges who probably don't know any more about the forensic aspects than contributors to this forum.  They are lawyers not forensic scientists.

Sheila either changed and had a vigourous shower with specialist cleaning agents after she had died. Or someone killed her.

SC's found in state is entirely consistent with her being the perp:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8100.msg409838#msg409838

[adam]

Why not?  I'm more interested in aspects of the case that are underpinned by science as opposed to aspects that are subjective and impossible to prove either way eg lay witness testimony, whether or not NB called JB, JB's behaviour pre and post tragedy etc, etc. 

As far as forensics go the published 2002 appeal is rooted in the dark ages.  Also it  was drafted by 3 appeal court judges who probably don't know any more about the forensic aspects than contributors to this forum.  They are lawyers not forensic scientists.

SC's found in state is entirely consistent with her being the perp:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8100.msg409838#msg409838

The 20 pieces of undisputed forensic evidence show Sheila did not fire a rifle.

The judges published the undisputed forensic evidence they have been given to explain their decisions on Bamber's COA application. In a comprehensive 522 point report.

The three judges do not collect the evidence themselves 17 years after the event.

It was impossible for Sheila to have committed the massacre by not firing a rifle.

[Holly Goodhead]

47. The firearms officers who were the first to see her body noted that her feet and hands were "perfectly clean". Her fingernails were well manicured and not broken and there were no marks or indentations on any of her fingers. All her fingertips were clean and free from any blood, dirt or powder and there appeared to be no trace of any lead dust or coating which is usual when handling .22 ammunition.

If SC was the perp there's no reason blood, dirt or powder would be visible on her hands or that she would damage her fingernails/polish and sustain any marks/indentations to her fingers. 

The lubricant on the bullets used reduces residues:

http://www.eley.co.uk/eley-subsonic-hollow

Is there any evidence of 'Farm Girl' getting grubby hands and/or damaging her fingernails/polish when loading the mag, chambering a round and discharging the firearm numerous times?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdAI9j_lDbc

48. The act of loading the magazine of an automatic weapon (carried out at least twice in this case) would be expected to leave visible traces of the lubricant and the materials from the bullets on the hands.

See above.

49. DC Hammersley, the Scenes of Crimes Officer placed plastic bags over Sheila Caffell's hands and feet before her body was removed from the farmhouse. He saw some blood staining to the back of the right hand, but apart from that the hands, to his eye were clean and the nails intact. The deceased's feet were also free from blood staining and from any debris such as sugar.

The bags were not forensically examined.  Again see above.  Geoffrey Rivlin covered at trial the fact that any sugar on SC's feet would detach on the walk from the kitchen to the bedroom.  Sweepings were not taken.  Why would SC's feet be blood stained?  Crsipy had the free run of the house.  The GPO op said she thought Crispy was by the phone in the kitchen due to the barking she heard.  He was found under the bed in the master bedroom.  No bloody paw prints found anywhere.  No footprints in blood found from any other person(s).

50. Following removal of the bags at the mortuary, Sheila Caffell's hands and forehead were swabbed. Extremely low traces of lead were detected when the swabs were examined. Such levels being consistent with the levels found from the handling of every day things around the house. These results were compared to hand swabs taken from volunteers at the laboratory who were required to load the magazine with eighteen rounds of ammunition. Significantly higher traces of lead were found than those recorded on the hands of Mrs Caffell. The scientist Mr Elliott gave evidence that if Sheila Caffell had loaded eighteen cartridges into a magazine he would have expected the hand swabs to have revealed appreciably higher deposits of lead.

What exactly was the purpose of the swabbing?  To detect lead on hands from handling bullets or gsr from firearm discharge?  These sorts of tests are sensitive and there's much to suggest the investigating officers and scientists were not careful.  Eg swabbing needed to have taken place at soc before body was moved and placed in bags.  We don't know the level of lead on the sicentists' hands pre testing.  Can we rule out SC wiping or washing her hands?  As already pointed out the bullets used at WHF were coated in a lubricant to minimise residues.  The CoA doc refers to "similar" bullets used in tests.  How similar is similar?  Need to use the same bullets.  We don't even know the type of test used. 

51. Mrs Caffell's nightdress was bloodstained. When tested the blood was consistent with being her own blood. The garment was also examined for the presence of any firearm discharge residues or oil from the rifle. No such traces were found. The scientist gave evidence that there would be a strong chance of finding such residues or markings on the clothing of an individual who had fired a rifle.

No explanation for the holes found in SC's nightdress and the black particles surrounding them said to have been caused by a hot object.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8100.msg409838#msg409838

[adam]

Both hands and feet were covered with plastic bags at the crime scene.

Hands

Perfectly clean.

One blood mark on back of hand.

Extremley low levels of lead found on hands.  Not consistent with handling a rifle. Significantly higher traces expected.


Finger nails

Well manicured.

Not broken.

Nails in tact.


Fingers

No marks or indentations.

No blood on finger tips.

No dirt on finger tips.

No powder on finger tips.

No trace of any lead dust coating.

No traces of the lubricant from handling a lot of bullets.


Feet

Perfectly clean.

Free from blood staining.

No debris such as sugar.

No mention of foot injuries after bare footed aggressive movement around big house & brutal fight.


Nightdress

Only Sheila Caffell's blood on it.

No presence of firearm residue.

No trace of rifle oil.

No mention of nightdress damage from agressive movement and brutal kitchen fight.


                                                                          --------------------------

I am not sure what Crispy's paws have got to do with the above. Mind you Bamber did suggest Crispy fired the second shot.

It was impossible for Sheila to have fired 26 bullets & reloaded twice, and then be free of the above 20 things.

Sheila was also not injured, unlike Nevill,  after a brutal kitchen fight.

[Holly Goodhead]

Both hands and feet were covered with plastic bags at the crime scene.

Hands

Perfectly clean.

One blood mark on back of hand.

Extremley low levels of lead found on hands.  Not consistent with handling a rifle. Significantly higher traces expected.


Finger nails

Well manicured.

Not broken.

Nails in tact.


Fingers

No marks or indentations.

No blood on finger tips.

No dirt on finger tips.

No powder on finger tips.

No trace of any lead dust coating.

No traces of the lubricant from handling a lot of bullets.


Feet

Perfectly clean.

Free from blood staining.

No debris such as sugar.

No mention of foot injuries after bare footed aggressive movement around big house & brutal fight.


Nightdress

Only Sheila Caffell's blood on it.

No presence of firearm residue.

No trace of rifle oil.

No mention of nightdress damage from agressive movement and brutal kitchen fight.


                                                                          --------------------------

I am not sure what Crispy's paws have got to do with the above. Mind you Bamber did suggest Crispy fired the second shot.

It was impossible for Sheila to have fired 26 bullets & reloaded twice, and then be free of the above 20 things.

Sheila was also not injured, unlike Nevill,  after a brutal kitchen fight.

All entirely consistent with overall soc and SC responsible hence the most senior officer at soc Chief Sup George Harris signed the scene off as murder/suicide. 

[John]

The court of appeal made 20 points of evidence showing that Sheila had not fired a rifle.

It was impossible for Sheila to put herself in this condition. Both while alive as it was not simply a case of having that 'mysterious' shower. And certainly she was not able to remove all evidence off her,  after killing herself.

A submitted counter argument today is that the Court of Appeal judgement was in 2002 !!!! ????

Having examined the evidence I totally agree, Sheila never fired any weapon.  By attempting to implicate her Jeremy Bamber shot himself in the foot.

[Holly Goodhead]

The rifle was discharged a total of 25 or 26 times (debatable whether June sustained an 8th graze only wound hence 25/26).  SC was found in a room where the rifle had been discharged numerous times.  Whether SC took her own life or JB murdered her the rifle was fired twice over her body.  The rifle was found resting over SC's nightdress/person with her hand and fingers in contact with the rifle.  Therefore if there was any gun oil or GSR present it begs the question why it wasn't found?
 
SC's forehead was swabbed to check for the presence of lead (I assume in GSR?).  When SC sustained her 2 gsw's The muzzle of the rifle (or silencer) was clearly far closer to her forehead than when the muzzle of the rifle (or silencer) was directed at victims and yet no lead (in GSR?) detected.   

If the tests results showed low levels of lead (in GSR) compatible with SC being in an environment where a firearm had been discharged numerous times and twice over her body then I could maybe understand the argument but as it stands I don't understand at all. 

Whether SC was perp or victim some lead in GSR should have been detected if the tests were carried out properly. 

These are complex issues and I don't believe EP and FSS had the wherewithal to deal with it.

I haven't seen anything from the manufacturers confirming the materials used.

Adam the COA doc makes no reference to GSR?  There are various tests used to check for the presence of GSR are you able to identify which one was used? 

[Samson]

Having examined the evidence I totally agree, Sheila never fired any weapon.  By attempting to implicate her Jeremy Bamber shot himself in the foot.

Yet it has been repeatedly pointed out the only moving part was light footed Sheila as she went her executing way. 3 sleepers, one surprised as he came up the stairs.

[adam]

A supporter has continuously agreed that the mountain of forensic evidence that Sheila did not fire a rifle is correct. So much so that she gave a reason why the evidence says this - Sheila changed & had a shower.

When it was pointed out a shower/change would not remove evidence on Sheila & she could not do this after killing herself, the supporter refused to change stance or support Mike's or Sherlock's suggestions. Saying that "I will continue to say Sheila murdered her family and then killed herself".

Agreeing with the forensic evidence that Sheila did not fire a rifle, then saying "I will continue to say Sheila murdered her family and then killed herself" is an appalling contradiction & grossly unfair on an innocent Sheila.

[Holly Goodhead]

A supporter has continuously agreed that the mountain of forensic evidence that Sheila did not fire a rifle is correct. So much so that she gave a reason why the evidence says this - Sheila changed & had a shower.

When it was pointed out a shower/change would not remove evidence on Sheila & she could not do this after killing herself, the supporter refused to change stance or support Mike's or Sherlock's suggestions. Saying that "I will continue to say Sheila murdered her family and then killed herself".

Agreeing with the forensic evidence that Sheila did not fire a rifle, then saying "I will continue to say Sheila murdered her family and then killed herself" is an appalling contradiction & grossly unfair on an innocent Sheila.

Any sort of "ritual cleanse" and/or changing into a clean nightdress makes no sense in terms of an absence of gsr/gun oil as it doesn't account for the fact two shots were fired over SC's body whilst the rifle was in very close proximity to SC's body.  The rifle was found resting on SC's person/nightdress with her hand/fingers resting on the rifle.  According to FSS tests carried out concluded the following:

51. Mrs Caffell's nightdress was bloodstained. When tested the blood was consistent with being her own blood. The garment was also examined for the presence of any firearm discharge residues or oil from the rifle. No such traces were found. The scientist gave evidence that there would be a strong chance of finding such residues or markings on the clothing of an individual who had fired a rifle twenty-five times.

Adam I've uploaded a forensic textbook.  Chapter 12 deals with 'Detection of Gunshot Residues'.  By the mid-80' there were 3 generally accepted methods of analysing GSR:

- neutron activation
- flameless atomic absorption spectrometry (FAAS)
- scanning electon microscope energy dispersive x-ray spectrometry (SEM-EDX)

Have you any idea if the method used in the WHF case was one of the above?  If so which one?  If not one of the above do you know which method was used?

[Holly Goodhead]

Any sort of "ritual cleanse" and/or changing into a clean nightdress makes no sense in terms of an absence of gsr/gun oil as it doesn't account for the fact two shots were fired over SC's body whilst the rifle was in very close proximity to SC's body.  The rifle was found resting on SC's person/nightdress with her hand/fingers resting on the rifle.  According to FSS tests carried out concluded the following:

51. Mrs Caffell's nightdress was bloodstained. When tested the blood was consistent with being her own blood. The garment was also examined for the presence of any firearm discharge residues or oil from the rifle. No such traces were found. The scientist gave evidence that there would be a strong chance of finding such residues or markings on the clothing of an individual who had fired a rifle twenty-five times.

Adam I've uploaded a forensic textbook.  Chapter 12 deals with 'Detection of Gunshot Residues'.  By the mid-80' there were 3 generally accepted methods of analysing GSR:

- neutron activation
- flameless atomic absorption spectrometry (FAAS)
- scanning electon microscope energy dispersive x-ray spectrometry (SEM-EDX)

Have you any idea if the method used in the WHF case was one of the above?  If so which one?  If not one of the above do you know which method was used?

Adam I'm struggling to upload the forensic text book I mentioned above.  I will continue with my endeavours.  Otherwise you may need to pop round so we can go through it together.  I see from your forum profile you are 19 years of age.  I'm not sure if that's current or when you joined.  In any event I like young men very much