Author Topic: ansering machines in the 80s  (Read 516 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43421
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #15 on: February 10, 2020, 07:34:PM »
If he planned it, then if course he would. His whole alibi rested on the phone call being the catalyst for what came after. In order to answer the call, an answering machine or accomplice would be necessary.
Now, I accept you dont think he did it, but if he did, its blindingly obvious some planning would be needed not least how to answer the call!





He didn't plan anything.

Offline TheBrilliantMistake

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 720
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #16 on: February 10, 2020, 07:39:PM »




He didn't plan anything.

Again you are failing to accept the proposition. The proposition is IF he planned it, then he would have to answer the phone call. The way in which that would done would be via answer machine.

I think he did, but that still requires me to consider how Sheila might have carried out the murders had she been guilty. I cant just say 'well she didnt'

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43421
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #17 on: February 10, 2020, 07:57:PM »
Jeremy obviously knew nothing about suicides using a firearm as most are in the mouth , chest or the temple, so why didn't he aim for those areas while she was on her feet ? Most suicides are carried out in this way with very few to the neck. 
In this particular scenario with a rifle it was easier for Sheila to guide the rifle and shoot upwards when lying down.

Sheila had looked quite peaceful but I bet her dad didn't !

Offline TheBrilliantMistake

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 720
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #18 on: February 10, 2020, 08:04:PM »
Jeremy obviously knew nothing about suicides using a firearm as most are in the mouth , chest or the temple, so why didn't he aim for those areas while she was on her feet ? Most suicides are carried out in this way with very few to the neck. 
In this particular scenario with a rifle it was easier for Sheila to guide the rifle and shoot upwards when lying down.

Sheila had looked quite peaceful but I bet her dad didn't !

If Jeremy didnt do it, then Sheila did indeed commit suicide this way, correct?
Ergo, if Jeremy did do it, his scenario was perfectly plausible by your own admission.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43421
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #19 on: February 10, 2020, 08:09:PM »
If Jeremy didnt do it, then Sheila did indeed commit suicide this way, correct?
Ergo, if Jeremy did do it, his scenario was perfectly plausible by your own admission.






No, not unless he'd known the correct suicide areas using a firearm----which he obviously didn't.

Offline TheBrilliantMistake

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 720
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #20 on: February 10, 2020, 08:18:PM »


Again, if sheila DID commit suicide, then her method of suicide was real right?
Ergo, if Jeremy staged it, it must also have been of legitimate appearance.
You cant say that folks do not commit suicide like that, when you are actually arguing that Sheila did precisely that.



No, not unless he'd known the correct suicide areas using a firearm----which he obviously didn't.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10312
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #21 on: February 10, 2020, 08:28:PM »
I think we all go round in circles.

Basically to prove jeremy did it you have to prove that Sheila could not mean have done it . This is because there is no forensic evidence to connect jeremy with the actual crime .

There are lots of theories about why she could not have committed the murders but then again they are theories , and for every expert who puts forward a theory there is another who dismisses it.

And a lot of these “assumptions “ have not actually been tested .

This is why the testimony from Julie was important as was the silencer evidence .

So how do we actually prove jeremy innocent ?

Discount the silencer evidence ( the jury were misled anyway )
Julie admits her evidence was not true
Prove there was movement in the house
Phone records are disclosed
A member of EP  admits that all the mistakes that are claimed  e.g  call timings / lights on and off / rifle in the window/ sounds and or movement in the house.  Etc etc are not mistakes but are actually factual
Missing photographs are released .

And something I never thought I would say until I watched the body in the pool , someone admits the pathology report was not detailed or thorough enough because of assumptions by the police .


There is still a chance .

Offline TheBrilliantMistake

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 720
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #22 on: February 10, 2020, 08:48:PM »
Always a chance but a slim one.
Equally, if someone were to unearth a magazine for the rifle enroute between WGF and Goldhanger,  it might prove to be the nail in the coffin for JB. But would that then entail questions about the validity of the find?


Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12153
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #23 on: February 10, 2020, 09:01:PM »
Always a chance but a slim one.
Equally, if someone were to unearth a magazine for the rifle enroute between WGF and Goldhanger,  it might prove to be the nail in the coffin for JB. But would that then entail questions about the validity of the find?
Why would he take the magazine home with him?

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8197
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #24 on: February 10, 2020, 09:18:PM »
Always a chance but a slim one.
Equally, if someone were to unearth a magazine for the rifle enroute between WGF and Goldhanger,  it might prove to be the nail in the coffin for JB. But would that then entail questions about the validity of the find?

Why leave the silencer behind?

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12153
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #25 on: February 10, 2020, 09:22:PM »
Why leave the silencer behind?
To cock a snook at the relatives or police, leaving it under their noses, or he might have thought Anthony Pargeter would have reported it missing.

Offline TheBrilliantMistake

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 720
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #26 on: February 10, 2020, 09:25:PM »
Because the silencer was a known item in the household manifest of munition. Had it been missing, that would give serious rise to suspicion as that would suggest somebody took it away... ergo the killer.
The silencer had to remain,  because if Sheila was to appear to have done it, the silencer could not be missing.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10312
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #27 on: February 10, 2020, 09:29:PM »
I agree if the silencer had been used he would have left it behind . But he would have made sure there was not a blob of blood  on it . If there was .

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8197
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #28 on: February 10, 2020, 09:31:PM »
Because the silencer was a known item in the household manifest of munition. Had it been missing, that would give serious rise to suspicion as that would suggest somebody took it away... ergo the killer.
The silencer had to remain,  because if Sheila was to appear to have done it, the silencer could not be missing.

No silencer to report = no conviction.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43421
Re: ansering machines in the 80s
« Reply #29 on: February 10, 2020, 09:58:PM »
I've said this before about the silencer that AP had been at WHF a week before the murders and it's claimed that he shot two rabbits. It's not impossible that he just put it in the cupboard as a matter of course for when he visited again. Hence the AK1 enzyme which rabbits have as well as humans. Because there were two silencers involved there's been nothing to differentiate which belonged to who----AP or JB.