Evidence of a kitchen fight:

[Holly Goodhead]

Not to mention the small shards of glass all over the kitchen floor from the smashed overhead light fixture.  I wonder did the police check the soles of Jeremy Bamber's footwear that morning in the same way that Sheila's were examined?

The lampshade was described as "broken".  Where's the evidence of "small shards of glass all over the kitchen floor"?  A soc image exists of the broken stock.  Do soc images exist of the broken lampshade and/or "small shards of glass all over the kitchen floor"? 

[Holly Goodhead]

Not for one moment would they have considered it necessary. The thought simply wouldn't have occurred to them. Jeremy had total control of the investigation at that point. Initially, he'd passed control of it -and responsibility for it- to well known and highly respected Nevill. Having established that, he was free to take over without being challenged. He'd called them from Goldhanger. They'd seen him arrive from Goldhanger. He'd cemented his alibi. Police deferred to him. Nothing as scientific as forensics was involved. It was simple human psychology.

But why would the police photographer and soc officers photograph, collect and document everything of evidential value and yet overlook the spilled sugar and "shards of glass"?   

Other small items photographed and/or collected and documented:

- Blood stains to carpet, hall wallpaper and kitchen worktop
- Broken stock
- Casings
- Spent bullets

[Holly Goodhead]

I agree there was no fight, Bamber made it look as though there was and beat Nevill over the had with the rifle - maybe simply for effect?

The pathologist was unable to estimate the force used with NB's non-gsw injuries other than for one which he describes as "considerable force" albeit this only resulted in lacerations.  NB's non-gsw's are consistent with the strength of a female perp: bruising, lacerations and fractures to skull. 

Jane Andrews incapacitated her partner with a cricket bat before stabbing him to death.  NB was already incapacitated from the gsw's sustained upstairs:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/apr/24/stevenmorris

[APRIL]

But why would the police photographer and soc officers photograph, collect and document everything of evidential value and yet overlook the spilled sugar and "shards of glass"?   

Other small items photographed and/or collected and documented:

- Blood stains to carpet, hall wallpaper and kitchen worktop
- Broken stock
- Casings
- Spent bullets

 I can't give a definitive answer because maybe there isn't one. Sounds like a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is up to. All part of the general cock-up/human failing perhaps? I can't get away from the feeling that they MAY have been slapdash because they thought they had all the evidence they needed, thanks to Jeremy

[adam]

Supporters have claimed that people in a psychotic rage get super human strenght.This is physically impossible unless they turn into the hulk.

It is true that in hospitals, two or three members of staff will be assigned to restrain a patient that has become agressive. Whether a man or woman. This is protocol to ensure the smooth and safe resolving of the situation.

Sheila would have simply been aggressive but still physically weak. Her agressiveness would not have have taken Nevill by surprise, as he had already rang Jeremy & been shot 4 times before entering the kitchen.

[adam]

There was a lot on the kitchen floor. Blood, broken crockery, upturned furniture, a smashed ceiling lightshade, sugar, dirt. So it is surprising that her feet were so clean and not injured. 

Jeremy would have been wearing shoes. A bit advantage over a bare footed Nevill.

[Alice]

What type of sugar was it?   Do soc images exist of its found location on the kitchen floor?  Did soc officers take sweepings from the kitchen, hall, landing and bedrooms? 

   

Why would it make any difference? Sugar is all chemically the same and the only real difference is that some is a bit coarser than others. My job is working with feet and experience shows me that small particles work their way everywhere. Looking at the photos it also occurs to me that cleanliness may not have been close to Godliness as far as poor old June was concerned - the house was not exactly tidy or sparkling. Sheila tripping around on a kitchen floor would have in my opinion, left significant dark marking on the sole. Her feet look clean to me.

[Caroline]

Why would it make any difference? Sugar is all chemically the same and the only real difference is that some is a bit coarser than others. My job is working with feet and experience shows me that small particles work their way everywhere. Looking at the photos it also occurs to me that cleanliness may not have been close to Godliness as far as poor old June was concerned - the house was not exactly tidy or sparkling. Sheila tripping around on a kitchen floor would have in my opinion, left significant dark marking on the sole. Her feet look clean to me.

I agree, there would have been dirt particles. There are spots on her feet BUT that isn't surprising as she walked over the bedroom carpet which was covered in blood spots from June. However, they may also be just discolouration given that the pictures of the bottom of her feet (if indeed they are Sheila's) were taken at the mortuary (apparently).

[Alice]

I've looked again at the photos that Bamber has said prove his innocence. I'm a qualified chiropodist and the red marks he has circled actually look like the pattern associated with moccasin tinea pedis - a type of athletes foot very common in the population. Think he may have scored an own goal there.

[Holly Goodhead]

I can't give a definitive answer because maybe there isn't one. Sounds like a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is up to. All part of the general cock-up/human failing perhaps? I can't get away from the feeling that they MAY have been slapdash because they thought they had all the evidence they needed, thanks to Jeremy

There's no evidence officers were slapdash.  The police photographer took hundreds of images including small objects eg casings and large seemingly unrelated areas eg outbuildings.  Why leave out "shards of glass" and spilled sugar?  Soc officers collected and documented small and large objects eg casings and the blood stained blue socks.  Why leave out "shards of glass" and spilled sugar?

[Holly Goodhead]

There was a lot on the kitchen floor. Blood, broken crockery, upturned furniture, a smashed ceiling lightshade, sugar, dirt. So it is surprising that her feet were so clean and not injured. 

Jeremy would have been wearing shoes. A bit advantage over a bare footed Nevill.

There's no evidence NB's soles were dirty or injured so would SC's be dirty and injured? 

[Holly Goodhead]

Why would it make any difference? Sugar is all chemically the same and the only real difference is that some is a bit coarser than others. My job is working with feet and experience shows me that small particles work their way everywhere. Looking at the photos it also occurs to me that cleanliness may not have been close to Godliness as far as poor old June was concerned - the house was not exactly tidy or sparkling. Sheila tripping around on a kitchen floor would have in my opinion, left significant dark marking on the sole. Her feet look clean to me.

I'm not sure it would make any difference, although they are different, but if spilled sugar was present I think it would be reasonable to expect police officers, especially soc and the police photographer to observe such, collect, document and photograph such?  Police officers are trained to observe small details?   

June was not soley responsible for the upkeep of WHF.  NB was the other adult permanently residing there and the Bambers employed a housekeeper. 

The pathologist did not observe any sugar that had worked it's way anywhere let alone everywhere.  Same applies to NB.

Why would you expect to find marks on SC's feet but not NB's? 

[Holly Goodhead]

I've looked again at the photos that Bamber has said prove his innocence. I'm a qualified chiropodist and the red marks he has circled actually look like the pattern associated with moccasin tinea pedis - a type of athletes foot very common in the population. Think he may have scored an own goal there.

Even if the image pertains to SC I've no idea how the red marks prove JB's innocence?

If SC was suffering mocassin tinea pedis then I think it's something the pathologist would have observed and noted in his autopsy.

If the foot pertains to SC then IMO the marks are simply marks connected to the biological changes post death. 

[Holly Goodhead]

I agree, there would have been dirt particles. There are spots on her feet BUT that isn't surprising as she walked over the bedroom carpet which was covered in blood spots from June. However, they may also be just discolouration given that the pictures of the bottom of her feet (if indeed they are Sheila's) were taken at the mortuary (apparently).

Where would any dirt particles originate from?  The pathologist didn't note any dirt articles to NB's feet.

If blood transferred from the main bedroom carpet to SC's feet then why was none found on the back of her nightdress? 

[APRIL]

There's no evidence officers were slapdash.  The police photographer took hundreds of images including small objects eg casings and large seemingly unrelated areas eg outbuildings.  Why leave out "shards of glass" and spilled sugar?  Soc officers collected and documented small and large objects eg casings and the blood stained blue socks.  Why leave out "shards of glass" and spilled sugar?

To be fair, perhaps it's only with our gift of hindsight that they were slapdash. I can go with that. For the rest, Holly, I fear it maybe nothing more than human fallibility. Even those trained in specific areas have their favourites within it -when I think about all the wonderful things I MIGHT have seen in the Hermitage, our guide must have had a degree in art history and I saw corridor after corridor of paintings- it MAY have been that both photographers chose to leave it to the other. I can't find any other middle way between them accidentally overlooking it and deliberately ignoring it.