Sheila using a shot gun.

[Adam]

b)

Save for the appellant nobody had seen her use a gun and she had no interest in them.

Sheila Caffell also had very poor co-ordination and would not have been capable of loading and operating the rifle nor would she have had the required knowledge to do so;

c)

She would not have been able physically to have overcome her father (who was fit, strong and 6' 4" tall) during the struggle which undoubtedly took place before his death in the kitchen.

----------

These are reasons Nevill would instantly negate the situation. Together with the rifle for shooting rabbits Sheila was holding.

[Adam]

456.

Mr Hayward also gave evidence about examining a pull through used to examine the inside of the barrel of the rifle itself. He said that there was no blood at all on it. He expressed his conclusion as (Transcript PMS/2 page 18B):

"Since the blood from inside the sound moderator belonged to the same group as Sheila Caffell, and since there was no blood inside the barrel of the rifle, I was led to the conclusion that Sheila Caffell had been shot whilst the sound moderator was fitted to the rifle."

----------
This is what I meant by 'industrial frame'. The police, relatives and Julie needed help from lots of experts.

[Adam]

That he would have to lose concentration on her to find. There were chairs. He may not have been close enough to reach one. The table, perhaps? He'd have to move a chair. He could hurl something smaller. The shooter had their finger on the trigger. I don't somehow think that he's have risked grasping the barrel when the shooter was holding the business end

'May not be close enough to reach one'? It was the family kitchen.

A chair would be sufficient. Easy to carry and big enough to protect most of him.

[Adam]

124.

During this conversation the appellant said he saw rabbits outside the house so he took the .22 rifle from the office/den, loaded it with eight to ten rounds from a box of ammunition that he left in the kitchen and went outside.

In fact he fired no shots outside and he then left the gun in the kitchen having removed the magazine and the bullet which was in the breach.

----------

Does this mean Sheila would have had to load before firing her first shots?

This is another reason Nevill would disarm Sheila. He would assume the rifle was empty. Unless he also didn't notice Bamber unload it or the magazine in the kitchen.

[Jane]

'May not be close enough to reach one'? It was the family kitchen.

A chair would be sufficient. Easy to carry and big enough to protect most of him.

And a chair may need to be pulled out from under the table. I'm not saying you're entirely wrong, Adam. I'm pointing out that it's not as clear cut as you're implying it would/might have been. That every second concentration is lost would be in the shooter's favour. Who EVER was the shooter, clearly had more in their favour than did Nevill.

[Caroline]

'May not be close enough to reach one'? It was the family kitchen.

A chair would be sufficient. Easy to carry and big enough to protect most of him.

Not so easy to carry with an injured arm.

[Adam]

Not so easy to carry with an injured arm.

Injured arm?

[David1819]

b)

Save for the appellant nobody had seen her use a gun and she had no interest in them.

Sheila Caffell also had very poor co-ordination and would not have been capable of loading and operating the rifle nor would she have had the required knowledge to do so;

c)

She would not have been able physically to have overcome her father (who was fit, strong and 6' 4" tall) during the struggle which undoubtedly took place before his death in the kitchen.

----------

These are reasons Nevill would instantly negate the situation. Together with the rifle for shooting rabbits Sheila was holding.

The opinion of a judge is not evidence.

David Boutflour admitted to David James Smith in 2010 that Sheila had used his shotgun. Contradicting his 1986 testimony.

Their source for Sheila's "very poor co-ordination" is AE saying she could not put beans on toast.

They knew the police caused the mess in the kitchen, hence they didn't allow DI Cook to take the stand at the appeal hearing in the first place. If they were so confident it "undoubtedly took place" they would had no problem in letting him speak.

[Steve_uk]

The opinion of a judge is not evidence.

David Boutflour admitted to David James Smith in 2010 that Sheila had used his shotgun. Contradicting his 1986 testimony.

Their source for Sheila's "very poor co-ordination" is AE saying she could not put beans on toast.

They knew the police caused the mess in the kitchen, hence they didn't allow DI Cook to take the stand at the appeal hearing in the first place. If they were so confident it "undoubtedly took place" they would had no problem in letting him speak.

You're clutching at straws.

[David1819]

456.

Mr Hayward also gave evidence about examining a pull through used to examine the inside of the barrel of the rifle itself. He said that there was no blood at all on it. He expressed his conclusion as (Transcript PMS/2 page 18B):

"Since the blood from inside the sound moderator belonged to the same group as Sheila Caffell, and since there was no blood inside the barrel of the rifle, I was led to the conclusion that Sheila Caffell had been shot whilst the sound moderator was fitted to the rifle."

----------
This is what I meant by 'industrial frame'. The police, relatives and Julie needed help from lots of experts.

Is that the same Hayward that said the following - 

"The blood from the sound moderator (22) could have come from either Sheila Caffell or R W Boutflour"

?

[David1819]

You're clutching at straws.

Don't project yourself onto me.

[Adam]

You're clutching at straws.

There was a big life or death kitchen fight between Bamber and Nevill.

There would obviously be no fight between Sheila & Nevill. He would have disarmed her with no fuss. His only difficulty would have been if Sheila was holding a shot gun.

Ringing Jeremy 

[lookout]

A Steven Brian Smith had heard gunshots around midnight as he'd walked his dog in fields, coming from the direction of WHF. He did report the incident but his report is probably under the PII rules.
This could well have been used by the prosecution in saying that JB had killed his family between midnight and 3am !  Even though Sheila's prints were found on the shotgun and not Jeremy's.

 

[Steve_uk]

A Steven Brian Smith had heard gunshots around midnight as he'd walked his dog in fields, coming from the direction of WHF. He did report the incident but his report is probably under the PII rules.
This could well have been used by the prosecution in saying that JB had killed his family between midnight and 3am !  Even though Sheila's prints were found on the shotgun and not Jeremy's.

 

Yes that's interesting lookout. I had thought it was a little earlier from my recollection.

[Adam]

A Steven Brian Smith had heard gunshots around midnight as he'd walked his dog in fields, coming from the direction of WHF. He did report the incident but his report is probably under the PII rules.
This could well have been used by the prosecution in saying that JB had killed his family between midnight and 3am !  Even though Sheila's prints were found on the shotgun and not Jeremy's.

 

Bamber did not use a shot gun. The rifle made no noise.