Author Topic: Sheila Bled Blood, in between photographs and Crime Scene Video was taken!  (Read 772 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49241
Note blood on face, neck and chin at time the crime scene photographs were captured
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49241
Much later on, police captured Sheila in a crime scene video with additional blood on her face, neck and chin.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2020, 07:13:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49241
Essex police version regarding exactly when the first crime Scene photographs were taken at the crime scene was at about 10.00 am (supposedly all taken by PC Bird, Witham police station SOCO)..

The crime scene video was taken after the last crime scene photographs which show Sheila's body on the bed, and subsequently when cops lifted her body onto the main bedroom floor were captured! Essex police, nor the CCRC have yet disclosed the exhibit reference, item number, of the video footage. The existence of the crime scene video(s) were kept secret up to, and beyond the start date of the trial, with good reason. Since, to have disclosed details of this would have led on to discovery of the police officer who took that video footage, and more importantly the the date and the time, that or those video recordings were recorded!

Documentary Evidence does exist to establish that such a crime scene video(s) were taken, but with no exhibit reference associated to them...
« Last Edit: December 14, 2020, 11:31:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8996
Much later on, police captured Sheila in a crime scene video with additional blood on her face, neck and chin.

I once thought that autopsy photo was a reconstruction from a documentary. But it is not. It does seem to further confirm sheila's blood was wet and running when found, otherwise it cannot have been smeared that way from being put in a body bag and carried away etc.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2020, 02:09:PM by David1819 »

Offline QCChevalier

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1592
I once thought that autopsy photo was a reconstruction from a documentary. But it is not. It does seem to further confirm sheila's blood was wet and running when found, otherwise it cannot have been smeared that way from being put in a body bag and carried away etc.

Can you confirm what you base this view on?  I just assumed it was a still from a documentary or drama.

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8996
Can you confirm what you base this view on?  I just assumed it was a still from a documentary or drama.

If you look closely and compare the details its a genuine photo.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49241
Can you confirm what you base this view on?  I just assumed it was a still from a documentary or drama.

The photograph is a genuine copy of a crime scene photograph taken by either 'headquarters SOCO' 9.00am - 10.00 am, or Witham SOCO (10.00am - 1.15pm)..

The crime scene video still image was taken after the photogràphs, with Sheila' s body still laid on the main bedroom floor, with the base of the bedside cabinet clearly visible in the background...

I personally believe that PC Bird did not take any of the crime scene photographs, but that rather he took the crime scene video footage..

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49241
The photograph is a genuine copy of a crime scene photograph taken by either 'headquarters SOCO' 9.00am - 10.00 am, or Witham SOCO (10.00am - 1.15pm)..

The crime scene video still image was taken after the photogràphs, with Sheila' s body still laid on the main bedroom floor, with the base of the bedside cabinet clearly visible in the background...

I personally believe that PC Bird did not take any of the crime scene photographs, but that rather he took the crime scene video footage..

The CCRC have known about the above mentioned crime scene video, and who was responsible for taking the footage which includes bodies of victims which had been disturbed by the police themselves. We are told that three separate police officers removed the rifle from Sheila's body (1) DI Cook,(2) PI Montgomery, and (3) PC Woodcock..
« Last Edit: December 15, 2020, 05:24:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49241
The CCRC have known about the above mentioned crime scene video, and who was responsible for taking the footage which includes bodies of victims which had been disturbed by the police themselves. We are told that three separate police officers removed the rifle from Sheila's body (1) DI Cook,(2) PI Montgomery, and (3) PC Woodcock..

Based on these police officers accounts, it becomes apparent that police were taking the rifle, or a rifle, from Sheila's body and putting 'it' in some other place and returning it to Sheila' body, time and time, again, and again...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49241
Based on these police officers accounts, it becomes apparent that police were taking the rifle, or a rifle, from Sheila's body and putting 'it' in some other place and returning it to Sheila' body, time and time, again, and again...

Why would three different police officers claim to have removed the/(a) rifle from the same body at different times during the same morning? Unless for one reason or another, the gun in question was repeatedly taken from the victims body, and replaced back on the body, on a number of occasions?   The gun should have been removed from Sheila's body on only one occasion, by one police officer, and the gun would have had an exhibit reference no. bearing the initials of the person who took possession of the rifle at the scene...

The .22 semi - automatic anshuzt rifle was given the exhibit reference 'DRH/15' item reference no. 18..
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49241

The .22 semi - automatic anshuzt rifle was given the exhibit reference 'DRH/15' item reference no. 18..

The exhibit reference no. and the item number ('DRH/15 -18'), tell us that the rifle (.22 semi-automatic Anshuzt rifle) was seized, found, or recovered by 'DC David Robert Hammersley' (Witham SOCO) and that it was the 15th item in sequence that he took possession of at the scene on the first morning of the police investigation into these five deaths. Other items that he seized, found or that he took possession of before he seized, found, or that he took possession of rifle 'DRH/15 - 18', for example, exhibits 'DRH/1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 , 11, 12 13 and 14', were all seized, found or taken possession of at the scene in sequential order, one after the other, up to and inclusive of exhibit reference 'DRH/15 - 18', and beyond, right up in sequence to exhibit reference 'DRH/53' (last exhibit ever attributed as having being seized, found or taken possession of at the scene, or elsewhere, for that matter, for example, at the mortuary during the autopsies performed by the pathologist, Peter Venezis, on 7th and 8th August 1985)..

Of some concern, as uncovered by me in my research into this part of the police investigation into these five deaths (Scenes of Crime reference no. 'SC/688/85' [ 7th August 1985 - 8th September 1985], and from then on 'SC/876/85' [8th September 1985, onward], and the curious fact that during the first part of the investigation ('SC/866/85') the first four exhibits, seized, found or taken possession of by 'DC David Robert Hammersley' at the scene on 7th August 1985 ('DRH/1, 2, 3 and 4' were not exhibit reference items, a .22 bullet case 'DRH/1', a .22 bullet case 'DRH/2', a bullet case 'DRH/3', and a bullet case 'DRH/4', but that rather 'other items of evidential value, which by the start of the second part of the police investigation 'SC/786/85' ( 8th September 1985,, and onward) became referred to as exhibit references, 'DRH/50', 'DRH/51', 'DRH/52' and 'DRH/53', which paved the way for the introduction of ' four .22 bullet cases' , into the case file 'SC/876/85', as though these four bullet cases had been the first exhibits seized, found or that 'DC Hammersley' had taken possession of at the scene on the first morning of the original police investigation (7th August 1985), yet a different set of evidential items (later altered and changed from 'DRH/1' to 'DRH/50', 'DRH/2' to 'DRH/51', ' DRH/3' to 'DRH/52', and 'DRH/4' - 'DRH/ 53' ( Scenes of Criime references 'SC/688/85' and 'SC/786/85')...

In a nutshell, a total of 8 exhibits which at one time or another, were allocated the exhibit references, 'DRH/1', 'DRH/2', 'DRH/3' and 'DRH/4'...
« Last Edit: December 16, 2020, 09:25:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49241

In a nutshell, a total of 8 exhibits which at one time or another, were allocated the exhibit references, 'DRH/1', 'DRH/2', 'DRH/3' and 'DRH/4'...

Exhibit reference items ('Scene of Crime case reference - 'SC/786/85' - '8th September 1985' and 'beyond', amounted to the introduction of 4 ( in total) spent .22 bullet cases as part of the batch of crime scene ammunition...

This had the effect of altering the total number of .22 bullet cases found or recovered in or around the main bedroom crime scene upstairs (from 12 to 14)and downstairs from 2 to 4). This exercise created a logistical problem because the recovered bullet cases found or recovered from the main bedroom upstairs totalled 18, but with a total of 6 bullets being fired inside the children's bedroom, meant that 26 shots must have been in the overall shooting of victims, and not 25 as claimed by the pathologist 'Peter Venezis' and the police!
« Last Edit: December 16, 2020, 12:39:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49241

This had the effect of altering the total number of .22 bullet cases found or recovered in or around the main bedroom crime scene upstairs (from 12 to 14)and downstairs from 2 to 4). This exercise created a logistical problem because the recovered bullet cases found or recovered from the main bedroom upstairs totalled 18, but with a total of 6 bullets being fired inside the children's bedroom, meant that 26 shots must have been in the overall shooting of victims, and not 25 as claimed by the pathologist 'Peter Venezis' and the police!

In the children's bedroom the killer fired 5 rounds of .22 ammunition into the skull of 'Daniel Caffell' and a further 3 rounds of .22 ammunition into the skull of 'Nicholas Caffell' (8 rounds in total)

This further complicated matters for the police, because only 7 bullets, or part bullets were recovered from the skull of the child victims, an 8th .22 bullet was left interned in the Skull of 'Nicholas Caffell' (Which still remains encapsulated in his remains in the grave of both children's).
« Last Edit: December 17, 2020, 01:24:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49241
Only 7 .22 spent bullet cases were found or recovered from inside the children's bedroom, and one too many other .22 spent bullet cases which had been included in and around the main bedroom crime scene had not automatically discharged from the rifle used to kill the two children. This suggests to me that the gun used to shoot dead the two children could have been a .22 bolt action rifle, which the killer manually extracted 7 of the 8 x .22 spent bullet cases institu inside the children's bedroom, but that the killer did not manually extract the corresponding 8th bullet case until she/he had left the children's bedroom and went along the upstairs landing where the corresponding .22 bullet case was eventually discarded manually from the .22 bolt action type rifle..
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 49241
Only 7 .22 spent bullet cases were found or recovered from inside the children's bedroom, and one too many other .22 spent bullet cases which had been included in and around the main bedroom crime scene had not automatically discharged from the rifle used to kill the two children. This suggests to me that the gun used to shoot dead the two children could have been a .22 bolt action rifle, which the killer manually extracted 7 of the 8 x .22 spent bullet cases institu inside the children's bedroom, but that the killer did not manually extract the corresponding 8th bullet case until she/he had left the children's bedroom and went along the upstairs landing where the corresponding .22 bullet case was eventually discarded manually from the .22 bolt action type rifle..

Hence, the very strong possibility that Anthony Pargeters .22 bolt action rifle, and his own .22 type ammunition, and his 17 baffle plated Parker Hale Silencer was used in the murders of all five victims, including the second fatal wound which included the second 'fatal shot into Sheila Caffells neck' at around 9.13am.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2020, 06:56:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...