Author Topic: Michael winner - True Crimes  (Read 611 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43421
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #15 on: February 09, 2020, 05:25:PM »
He had a gun.





Sheila wasn't marked as such---no defence marks which is what happens when someone is furiously defending themselves. Where are they on Sheila ? Why not ? Because she had the gun !

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12153
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #16 on: February 09, 2020, 05:38:PM »




Sheila wasn't marked as such---no defence marks which is what happens when someone is furiously defending themselves. Where are they on Sheila ? Why not ? Because she had the gun !
Because she was on Haloperidol and was as weak as a kitten those last few paces to her death.

Offline TheBrilliantMistake

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 720
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #17 on: February 09, 2020, 05:59:PM »
Brilliant Mistake how do you explain Jeremy not having a mark on him

His body wasn't examined at the time and he had time to change clothes.
He was physically stronger and had the gun, and we have no indication of what clothing he wore.

That isn't to say Sheila couldn't overpower him with a gun, simply that Jeremy stood the better chance.

However, the telephone call still remains a huge issue. Either Sheila had already started shooting people, or she hadn't:

- If she had already started shooting people, then the call makes less sense than ever as Jeremy would be a bad choice to call, might not answer, and even if he did, it would be odd not to actually mention she'd shot someone!

- If she had NOT already started shooting, then she's confronting a fit Nevill at that point, and thus if she shot and killed him in the kitchen, there is a huge discrepancy with expended cartridges in the bedroom and lack of them in the kitchen (not enough).

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43421
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #18 on: February 09, 2020, 06:05:PM »
Because she was on Haloperidol and was as weak as a kitten those last few paces to her death.





All the more reason why she'd have been marked, particularly bruised as Haldol can cause clotting.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12153
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #19 on: February 09, 2020, 06:10:PM »
His body wasn't examined at the time and he had time to change clothes.
He was physically stronger and had the gun, and we have no indication of what clothing he wore.

That isn't to say Sheila couldn't overpower him with a gun, simply that Jeremy stood the better chance.

However, the telephone call still remains a huge issue. Either Sheila had already started shooting people, or she hadn't:

- If she had already started shooting people, then the call makes less sense than ever as Jeremy would be a bad choice to call, might not answer, and even if he did, it would be odd not to actually mention she'd shot someone!

- If she had NOT already started shooting, then she's confronting a fit Nevill at that point, and thus if she shot and killed him in the kitchen, there is a huge discrepancy with expended cartridges in the bedroom and lack of them in the kitchen (not enough).
Another excellent post.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43421
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #20 on: February 09, 2020, 06:27:PM »
There's no harm in wanting your son to be present when there's an altercation, except that it had been worse than Nevill had anticipated and possibly the reason he phoned Jeremy is that Nevill would have known that Jeremy would get the blame if he hadn't been present. We don't know do we ??

Offline TheBrilliantMistake

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 720
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #21 on: February 09, 2020, 07:10:PM »
There's no harm in wanting your son to be present when there's an altercation, except that it had been worse than Nevill had anticipated and possibly the reason he phoned Jeremy is that Nevill would have known that Jeremy would get the blame if he hadn't been present. We don't know do we ??
A woman with a shotgun.
Either she had already shot and killed, or she'd not.
If she had, then it's gone way beyond an altercation, and Nevill is hardly likely to be thinking Jeremy will be blamed!
If she had not already shot and killed, then sure, he might phone Jeremy, but that would mean he was fully fit at that point - and the evidence doesn't stack up.

Seriously, if someone has let loose with a shotgun, I don't think anybody of sound mind is thinking anything other than to protect themselves - not how someone might end up being wrongly accused. Besides a 999 phone to say 'Sheila is shooting us' would remove all doubt wouldn't it?

He didn't call 999 did he?

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6946
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #22 on: February 09, 2020, 07:16:PM »
A woman with a shotgun.
Either she had already shot and killed, or she'd not.
If she had, then it's gone way beyond an altercation, and Nevill is hardly likely to be thinking Jeremy will be blamed!
If she had not already shot and killed, then sure, he might phone Jeremy, but that would mean he was fully fit at that point - and the evidence doesn't stack up.

Seriously, if someone has let loose with a shotgun, I don't think anybody of sound mind is thinking anything other than to protect themselves - not how someone might end up being wrongly accused. Besides a 999 phone to say 'Sheila is shooting us' would remove all doubt wouldn't it?

He didn't call 999 did he?

It was a rifle, not a shotgun - just saying.

Clearly, if Nevill did ring Jeremy, there had been no shooting at that point. However, Sheila could have locked herself in the shower room, or been pointing the gun at herself, giving Nevill no chance to take it off her.

Offline JackieD

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1812
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #23 on: February 09, 2020, 07:23:PM »
Excellent points
From Colin Caffells
His relationship with Sheila was one of brotherly love. He was very proud of having a beautiful sister who was a photographic model

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8197
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #24 on: February 09, 2020, 07:29:PM »
He had a gun.

You forgot the S at the beginning  :-\

Offline TheBrilliantMistake

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 720
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #25 on: February 09, 2020, 07:30:PM »
It was a rifle, not a shotgun - just saying.

Clearly, if Nevill did ring Jeremy, there had been no shooting at that point. However, Sheila could have locked herself in the shower room, or been pointing the gun at herself, giving Nevill no chance to take it off her.

Indeed, a rifle.
If JB is to be believed, the call was interrupted. The most logical conclusion to my mind is that either some event took place that was more important (Sheila started firing), or he himself was injured then killed before completing the call.

If it was the latter, then there are too many spent cartridges upstairs.
If it was the former, then she's headed upstairs and shot the entire family than Nevill's followed her and been shot in the bedroom (but in a very unlikely position) you might reasonably expect a confrontation on the landing or with Sheila inside a room, and Nevill at the door, not the other way around.

Neither fit very well.



Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12153
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #26 on: February 09, 2020, 07:31:PM »
It was a rifle, not a shotgun - just saying.

Clearly, if Nevill did ring Jeremy, there had been no shooting at that point. However, Sheila could have locked herself in the shower room, or been pointing the gun at herself, giving Nevill no chance to take it off her.
If Sheila had locked herself in the shower room how could she have prevented Nevill from making an outside call?

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6946
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #27 on: February 09, 2020, 07:32:PM »
Indeed, a rifle.
If JB is to be believed, the call was interrupted. The most logical conclusion to my mind is that either some event took place that was more important (Sheila started firing), or he himself was injured then killed before completing the call.

If it was the latter, then there are too many spent cartridges upstairs.
If it was the former, then she's headed upstairs and shot the entire family than Nevill's followed her and been shot in the bedroom (but in a very unlikely position) you might reasonably expect a confrontation on the landing or with Sheila inside a room, and Nevill at the door, not the other way around.

Neither fit very well.

Yes, it was interrupted, possibly by Sheila suddenly running up the stairs with the gun. I don't think that Nevill was shot in the kitchen until later. He could have followed Sheila upstairs, but by then she could have shot June.

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6946
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #28 on: February 09, 2020, 07:32:PM »
If Sheila had locked herself in the shower room how could she have prevented Nevill from making an outside call?

He did make an outside call - allegedly - to Jeremy.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12153
Re: Michael winner - True Crimes
« Reply #29 on: February 09, 2020, 07:39:PM »
He did make an outside call - allegedly - to Jeremy.
Yes but it was cut off quickly..