The blood group evidence(A, EAP BA, AK1 and Hp2-1) obtained from examination of blood on 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985, found inside one of the silencers (DB/1) 23 by the 12th September 1985, could not have been present in the second silencer DRB/1 (22), because the second silencer was not submitted to the Lab' at Huntingdon until the 20th September 1985, which becomes an impossibility. Similarly, the red paint from the scratched kitchen aga was present on the second silencer (DRB/1) 22, only received at the Lab' on that date, and therefore could not also have been present on the first silencer (DB/1) 23 recieved at the Lab, at Huntingdon on the 30th August 1985, otherwise there would have existed red paint from the kitchen mantelpiece on the two different silencers (DRB/1 (22), and (DB/1) 23 ) - how could two different silencers have been fitted to the same gun barrel which supposedly got scratched during an altercation between the shooter and Neville Bamber in the kitchen prior to Neville Bamber being killed off?
Furthermore, the claim that Sheila Caffell's unique blood was found inside the second silencer (DRB/1) 22, by default, and which 'was' found to be present inside the first silencer (DB/1) 23, produces a situation whereby on the face of it, Sheila Caffell's blood has been associated with being inside two different silencers, but if the shooting dead of Sheila Caffell was by way of a one gun crime with the anshuzt rifle being the gun in question that was used to shoot her dead, how did both silencers end up on the end of the same guns barrel when Sheila was shot? Why would the shooter have used two different silencers on the same gun to shoot Sheila dead?
Whoever shot and killed Sheila Caffell, could on the face of it have used one silencer when they shot Sheila on the first occasion, and that they either switched silencers so that by the time it came to the second occasion when Sheila got shot the second silencer was fitted to the same gun, or alternatively, the second silencer was fitted to the barrell of a second rifle which fired the second shot!
The only other explanation is that the blood group evidence, supposedly found to be present in one (DRB/1) 22 silencer, or the other (DB/1) 23, was a fabrication, and no matter but which way you choose to believe in, the evidence does not appear to sit well without some doubt or concern or other nagging in the back of the mind...