Jeremy Bamber Forum

JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: nugnug on July 25, 2019, 04:35:PM

Title: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on July 25, 2019, 04:35:PM
were is it.

I haven't heard anything more about it.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on July 26, 2019, 08:59:AM
would you care to adress this david.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9933.0.html
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on July 27, 2019, 11:11:AM
was this a load of bullshit.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on July 27, 2019, 12:33:PM
would you care to adress this david.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9933.0.html

Since its rather apparent to me you are being salty due to my recent conclusions on Luke Mitchell. I don't see why I should dignify the question with an response.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on July 27, 2019, 12:41:PM
Since its rather apparent to me you are being salty due to my recent conclusions on Luke Mitchell. I don't see why I should dignify the question with an response.

in other words you cant answer the qustion.

you have a chance to totally humliate me if it turns out there is a forensic breakthrough why not take it.

there isnt one is there.

well your right aboyt it being about lukes thread becouse after that i came the conclusion raher daft or rather untill then i had given you the benfit of the doubt.

but as the cliams you made were patenly untue i thought it was time to call you out.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on July 28, 2019, 12:36:AM
in other you cant answer the qustion.

you have a chance to totally humliate me if it turns out there is a forensic breakthrough why not take it.
 I have asked Daid to ask Jermy
there isnt one is there.

I did tell you it was about the palm print - old news - but you didn't believe me. I don't know what David has done with it but even if it can be proven that the 'palm print; is from Sheila, if wouldn't prove Bamber innocent. In fact I have asked David to ask Jeremy about the bible pages, but I don't think he has.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on July 28, 2019, 10:48:AM
I'd like to add that the palm print was smaller than Sheila's whose hand and fingers were long and slender.
Because June had the most bloodstained body I'd have said it was her hand and not Sheila's who, you remember, had perfectly clean hands.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on July 28, 2019, 05:26:PM
I'd like to add that the palm print was smaller than Sheila's whose hand and fingers were long and slender.
Because June had the most bloodstained body I'd have said it was her hand and not Sheila's who, you remember, had perfectly clean hands.

It's only a partial print.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on July 28, 2019, 08:57:PM
No blood on Sheila's hand/palm to prove it was hers ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on July 29, 2019, 12:07:AM
No blood on Sheila's hand/palm to prove it was hers ?

Read the autopsy report.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on July 29, 2019, 09:32:AM
Vanezis said her hands were clean ? Even Hammersley had said that only the back of her hand was bloodstained and not her open hands which he'd said were clean ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on July 29, 2019, 09:40:AM
I think Fletcher described her hands as being clean and free from oil/residue/blood.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on July 29, 2019, 12:35:PM
I think Fletcher described her hands as being clean and free from oil/residue/blood.

We have been through this many. Vanezis was contradictory in respect to Sheila's hands.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on July 29, 2019, 02:02:PM
Yes indeed, a lot of contradictions considering the enormity of the case. Too many.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on August 11, 2019, 11:59:AM
I did tell you it was about the palm print - old news - but you didn't believe me. I don't know what David has done with it but even if it can be proven that the 'palm print; is from Sheila, if wouldn't prove Bamber innocent. In fact I have asked David to ask Jeremy about the bible pages, but I don't think he has.

id rather here it from him not that his going to answer
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 11, 2019, 02:01:PM
Bamber's defence have 5 experts reports (based on 3 different subjects). Thanks primarily to the money raised in late 2016.

I know that a preliminary CCRC submission has being drafted up. That was over a year ago now. Whether its now actually been submitted or not I do not know. But if it has, knowing the relationship between Bamber and the CCRC it would be at the back of the queue.

I have been intending to visit his legal team again. Not being a solicitor its not as easy as it sounds. I find the clerks at the chambers rather elitist and rude towards me. It doesn't encourage me to make the effort to return put it that way.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on August 11, 2019, 02:04:PM
id rather here it from him not that his gin to answer


How does "gin" come into the equation? Are you suggesting David has a drink problem?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 11, 2019, 02:07:PM
Bamber's defence have 5 experts reports (based on 3 different subjects). Thanks primarily to the money raised in late 2016.

I know that a preliminary CCRC submission has being drafted up. That was over a year ago now. Whether its now actually been submitted or not I do not know. But if it has, knowing the relationship between Bamber and the CCRC it would be at the back of the queue.

I have been intending to visit his legal team again. Not being a solicitor its not as easy as it sounds. I find the clerks at the chambers rather elitist and rude towards me. It doesn't encourage me to make the effort to return put it that way.

You didn't mention any of that in previous boasts? Clearly, it wasn't the breakthrough you initially reported. You could have just said so at the time.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 11, 2019, 02:23:PM

How does "gin" come into the equation? Are you suggesting David has a drink problem?

That's in nuggish.

Translated from nuggish to English he is saying - "I would rather hear it from him, not that he is going to answer".

 ;D
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on August 11, 2019, 02:26:PM
so why have I never heard anything about it outside this forum.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 11, 2019, 02:40:PM
so why have I never heard anything about it outside this forum.

Heard what?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 11, 2019, 02:42:PM
so why have I never heard anything about it outside this forum.

Andrew Hunter and NGB persuaded me to leave it with Jeremys QC and let him decide what's to be done about it.

I have already uploaded the email Andrew Hunter send me telling me not to reveal it. I don't need to justify myself more than I already have.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on August 11, 2019, 03:09:PM
Heard what?

I have heard abslutly nothing about this outside this forum the official campaign never mentions it.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on August 11, 2019, 03:15:PM
I have heard abslutly nothing about this outside this forum the official campaign never mentions it.


Well, unless you're number 1 on their "First to be informed of new information" list, that's hardly surprising.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on August 11, 2019, 03:18:PM

Well, unless you're number 1 on their "First to be informed of new information" list, that's hardly surprising.

nothing in the press about it ether.

i would of thought after all this time somthing would of been mentined.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on August 11, 2019, 03:31:PM
nothing in the press about it ether.

i would of thought after all this time somthing would of been mentined.


The reasons for such may be varied but we have no entitlement to be informed of what's happening.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 11, 2019, 03:39:PM
I have heard abslutly nothing about this outside this forum the official campaign never mentions it.

Yes but about what? David’s report or CCRC submissions? David’s report isn’t part of the submissions.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on August 11, 2019, 04:22:PM
Yes but about what? David’s report or CCRC submissions? David’s report isn’t part of the submissions.

well why wuld it notbe if its a forensic breakthrough.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on August 11, 2019, 04:57:PM
Andrew Hunter and NGB persuaded me to leave it with Jeremys QC and let him decide what's to be done about it.

I have already uploaded the email Andrew Hunter send me telling me not to reveal it. I don't need to justify myself more than I already have.

so why isn't part of the ccrc submissions.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 11, 2019, 05:00:PM
well why wuld it notbe if its a forensic breakthrough.

As far as the break through is concerned and from what David has posted earlier - he was fobbed off.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 11, 2019, 05:27:PM
well why wuld it notbe if its a forensic breakthrough.

I am not an expert witness and I made that very clear in my work. My stuff has been brought to the attention of people who are and will present it in a way that is required for the CCRC and COA to take it seriously.

It would be extremely shocking if they cited me or called me to say anything. My background is computer networking, and e-commerce.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 11, 2019, 05:31:PM
I am not an expert witness and I made that very clear in my work. My stuff has been brought to the attention of people who are and will present it in a way that is required for the CCRC and COA to take it seriously.

It would be extremely shocking if they cited me or called me to say anything. My background is computer networking, and e-commerce.

Oh common David - you know fine well it isn't part of any CCRC submissions or are you claiming here and now that it is?  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on August 12, 2019, 05:25:PM
Oh common David - you know fine well it isn't part of any CCRC submissions or are you claiming here and now that it is?  ;D ;D ;D

can i ask how you know whats in the submissions are they public.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 12, 2019, 06:25:PM
can i ask how you know whats in the submissions are they public.

I don't know what's in the - just what's NOT in them.



Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on August 12, 2019, 06:29:PM
I don't know what's in the - just what's NOT in them.

well to know whats not in them dont hve to have seen them.

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 12, 2019, 06:39:PM
can i ask how you know whats in the submissions are they public.

She doesn't know whats in the submissions.  ::)

well to know whats not in them dont hve to have seen them.

See above.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on August 12, 2019, 06:53:PM
I am not an expert witness and I made that very clear in my work. My stuff has been brought to the attention of people who are and will present it in a way that is required for the CCRC and COA to take it seriously.

It would be extremely shocking if they cited me or called me to say anything. My background is computer networking, and e-commerce.

so you have abslutly no knowledge of forensics who could you have made a forensic break through.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on August 12, 2019, 06:54:PM
She doesn't know whats in the submissions.  ::)

See above.

well carline might be going on the fact that jeremys defence team havent mentioned it.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 12, 2019, 07:06:PM
She doesn't know whats in the submissions.  ::)

See above.

Your report isn't!
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 12, 2019, 07:07:PM
so you have abslutly no knowledge of forensics who could you have made a forensic break through.

He hasn't
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on August 12, 2019, 07:08:PM
I am not an expert witness and I made that very clear in my work. My stuff has been brought to the attention of people who are and will present it in a way that is required for the CCRC and COA to take it seriously.

It would be extremely shocking if they cited me or called me to say anything. My background is computer networking, and e-commerce.


Which is certainly ambiguous enough to suggest that it may NOT be used because it won't be possible to present it in a way which could be taken seriously. I agree with you that it would probably be "extremely shocking" if you were cited.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 12, 2019, 07:09:PM
so you have abslutly no knowledge of forensics who could you have made a forensic break through.

Where did I say I have no knowledge?  ???

Having no qualifications/degree or proffessional experience ect ect does not mean I have no knowledge on the subject.


Here is a card Jeremy sent me around October 2016 not long before the fund raising campaign. The money wasn't raised so he could buy chocolate bars in the prison cafeteria.

(https://i.ibb.co/7Nd7Vtg/card1.jpg)

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on August 12, 2019, 07:12:PM
Where did I say I have no knowledge  ???  ???   Having no qualifications/degree or proffessional experience  does not mean I have no knowledge on the subject.


Here is a card Jeremy sent me around October 2016 not long before the fund raising campaign. The money wasn't raised so he could buy chocolate bars in the prison cafeteria.

(https://i.ibb.co/7Nd7Vtg/card1.jpg)


What are your thoughts on the contents of that note? What do you think he's saying?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 12, 2019, 08:00:PM
Cut the crap for once David! Are you claiming that your report is one of the 5 submitted to the CCRC?

Before answering, take heed of what you said when you first made the forensic breakthrough claim

I understand why you wont be holding your breath. However I am not the CT or Mike so give me a chance. If this amounts to nothing and then I make a second bold claim you will have every reason to ridicule and criticize me but until then this is a first.

This will be the second!
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on August 12, 2019, 10:30:PM
so experts have been looking at those photos for years and not found anything and you just come along find one hmm.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 12, 2019, 11:56:PM
so experts have been looking at those photos for years and not found anything and you just come along find one hmm.

Not really, he took what had been written here about the palm print and has tried to further develop it. I promised not to reveal what his report actually is and have kept that promise. However, Bamber already knows the stain is a palm print and has done nothing with that information, plus, Sheila's print on the bible doesn't make Bamber innocent.

I've asked him out right if his report is one of the 5 being used in submissions, I doubt he'll answer because if he says yes, and it isn't then his own words will come back to bite him on the arse. If he says no, it mean no one is interested and boasting has all be for nothing.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 13, 2019, 01:06:AM
so experts have been looking at those photos for years and not found anything and you just come along find one hmm.

Who said "experts have been looking at those photos for years"   ???

I think you need to give the hyperbole and misstatements a break for a while don't you?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 13, 2019, 05:15:PM
Who said "experts have been looking at those photos for years"   ???

I think you need to give the hyperbole and misstatements a break for a while don't you?

 ::)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on August 13, 2019, 05:21:PM
Who said "experts have been looking at those photos for years"   ???

I think you need to give the hyperbole and misstatements a break for a while don't you?


Mmm. Closer to you you than Nugs, I feel. But perhaps the projection was intended as a diversion?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 13, 2019, 06:12:PM
What exactly has Nugnug achieved by starting this thread and implying that I'm lying about things?

This thread was created the very evening I came to my own conclusion/opinion that Luke Mitchell was guilty of killing Jodi.

If Nugnug has achieved anything here, its demonstrating an unhealthy emotional investment in the idea of Luke Mitchell's innocence.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 13, 2019, 06:43:PM
What exactly has Nugnug achieved by starting this thread and implying that I'm lying about things?

This thread was created the very evening I came to my own conclusion/opinion that Luke Mitchell was guilty of killing Jodi.

If Nugnug has achieved anything here, its demonstrating an unhealthy emotional investment in the idea of Luke Mitchell's innocence.
Rather than trying to turn the tables on Nugs, why don't you answer the question? Seems to me your report didn't get anywhere and your ego just won't let you come clean?

Remember you own words;

"If this amounts to nothing and then I make a second bold claim you will have every reason to ridicule and criticize me but until then this is a first."
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on August 18, 2019, 01:06:PM
Andrew Hunter and NGB persuaded me to leave it with Jeremys QC and let him decide what's to be done about it.

I have already uploaded the email Andrew Hunter send me telling me not to reveal it. I don't need to justify myself more than I already have.




Speaking of Andrew Hunter David, did you ever get around to reading the draft book of his on here in 2012 ? That throws up a few queries.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 19, 2019, 06:04:AM

Speaking of Andrew Hunter David, did you ever get around to reading the draft book of his on here in 2012 ? That throws up a few queries.

Yes, I did read it a while ago. It’s an interesting read thou it’s now outdated. I believe he wrote that around 2008.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on August 19, 2019, 09:53:AM
Yes, I did read it a while ago. It’s an interesting read thou it’s now outdated. I believe he wrote that around 2008.




Yes, being as it was just a draft it'll have been edited and generally re-written in places to form his new book-----which I hope won't be too long in coming as it does appear to be nearer the truth, especially as he'd have gleaned a few newer snippets from the later findings of the present team/s.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 19, 2019, 11:32:AM



Yes, being as it was just a draft it'll have been edited and generally re-written in places to form his new book-----which I hope won't be too long in coming as it does appear to be nearer the truth, especially as he'd have gleaned a few newer snippets from the later findings of the present team/s.

You mean it's from an innocent perspective?  ;D ;D
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on August 19, 2019, 02:03:PM
You mean it's from an innocent perspective?  ;D ;D




Why of course. ;D
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 19, 2019, 07:45:PM



Why of course. ;D

I'd give it a read but doubt it will throw anything new or compelling into the mix.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 19, 2019, 08:12:PM



Yes, being as it was just a draft it'll have been edited and generally re-written in places to form his new book-----which I hope won't be too long in coming as it does appear to be nearer the truth, especially as he'd have gleaned a few newer snippets from the later findings of the present team/s.

If it does ever make it to the bookshelf's I am sure you will give a read  :)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Steve_uk on August 19, 2019, 08:22:PM
Is there a link? I used to have it saved but it seems I must have deleted it.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 19, 2019, 08:26:PM
Is there a link? I used to have it saved but it seems I must have deleted it.

I doubt what he wrote in 2008. Has much resemblance to what he has put together a present.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Steve_uk on August 19, 2019, 08:49:PM
I doubt what he wrote in 2008. Has much resemblance to what he has put together a present.
It's full of inaccuracies anyway.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 19, 2019, 09:40:PM
It's full of inaccuracies anyway.

Outdated is a better word. Still interesting to read.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on August 27, 2019, 04:29:PM
What exactly has Nugnug achieved by starting this thread and implying that I'm lying about things?

This thread was created the very evening I came to my own conclusion/opinion that Luke Mitchell was guilty of killing Jodi.

If Nugnug has achieved anything here, its demonstrating an unhealthy emotional investment in the idea of Luke Mitchell's innocence.

do you think your word  isbehond qustion or somthing.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on August 27, 2019, 04:38:PM
What exactly has Nugnug achieved by starting this thread and implying that I'm lying about things?

This thread was created the very evening I came to my own conclusion/opinion that Luke Mitchell was guilty of killing Jodi.

If Nugnug has achieved anything here, its demonstrating an unhealthy emotional investment in the idea of Luke Mitchell's innocence.

Actually, it would have been entirely unnecessary for Nugs to start a thread to imply you were "lying about things" -by now, I imagine that most members are fairly certain of it- although it's always gratifying to know that one's own beliefs are supported. Surely though, this is more about Luke Mitchell than Jeremy Bamber so this isn't the thread for comments on it.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 27, 2019, 04:54:PM
do you think your word behond qustion or somthing.

If you don't want to take my word on something, that's fine. But just because I believe LM is guilty and point out the errors in your arguments for the contrary. Is no good reason for being salty with me on another case or subject ect.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on August 27, 2019, 05:11:PM
If you don't want to take my word on something, that's fine. But just because I believe LM is guilty and point out the errors in your arguments for the contrary. Is no good reason for being salty with me on another case or subject ect.

erm you make accusations that everybody else is lying you throw around the accusation all the time.

if you cant take it pal don't dish it out.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 27, 2019, 05:23:PM
erm you make accusations that everybody else is lying you throw around the accusation all the time.

if you cant take it pal don't dish it out.

In a post to Scipio when he is trying to sound like a Bamber authority David write the following;

 
The Series of issues you put forward are constructed with innumerable guesses and speculations on your part. Your portraying a prosecuting version of events rather than solid unbiased facts.

I appreciate the effort you make but at the end of the day not you or anyone else can solve the White House Farm murders I realised that myself a while ago having thoroughly read about the case being swayed one way or another by flimsy circumstantial evidence and opinion I soon realised you would have to have been there that night to be certain of what happened.

I once was fairly sure of Jeremy's guilt until two lawyers told me on separate occasions that if he was on trial today he would be found not guilty. That got me thinking and the more I looked into things the more cracks and holes I found in the prosecution. At the end of the day only Jeremy knows. So if he is innocent there will always be guesses rumors and doubt. If he is guilty he is only one that can effectively solve the case by providing a detailed confession.



In a post replying to NGB 4 years LATER, David writes;


That article was one of the first things I ever read about the case after I watched a documentary on JB in late 2014. Still ignorant on the subject I just took it all at face value. I still remember joining this forum a few month later naively thinking you were Jeremy’s "protector". Looking back I cant help but laugh.


 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 27, 2019, 05:32:PM
If you don't want to take my word on something, that's fine. But just because I believe LM is guilty and point out the errors in your arguments for the contrary. Is no good reason for being salty with me on another case or subject ect.

Perhaps because you not only 'point out what you believe to be errors', but start getting personal - like you always do! Then you try and slime your way back to the good books when you can see yourself losing a foot hold!   ::) ::)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 30, 2019, 06:52:PM
Alias's turned the picture of the palm print to match the stain on Sheila's nightdress - interesting!  :)

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8611.0;attach=49638)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 30, 2019, 09:38:PM
Alias's turned the picture of the palm print to match the stain on Sheila's nightdress - interesting!  :)

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8611.0;attach=49638)

Perhaps this could even be described as a forensic breakthrough - maybe even used in the next submissions?  :o
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on August 31, 2019, 12:52:PM
Where's the thumb print with those fingers ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 31, 2019, 02:13:PM
Where's the thumb print with those fingers ?

On the left, were it usually is.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on August 31, 2019, 02:50:PM
On the left, were it usually is.




But the index finger is missing.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 31, 2019, 04:43:PM



But the index finger is missing.

The fingers are squashed together and the thickness of the bible prevents a perfect print. It also depends on the hand being covered in blood or only certain fingers.

I think that is the most likely scenario for both stains.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on August 31, 2019, 05:02:PM
The fingers are squashed together and the thickness of the bible prevents a perfect print. It also depends on the hand being covered in blood or only certain fingers.

I think that is the most likely scenario for both stains.




The partial hand/fingers could tell a lot from where/how her hand was placed  originally and by studying that pic, the placing of the rifle looks phoney as does her hand the way it's just resting on the rifle.

It's just not right.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 31, 2019, 05:24:PM



The partial hand/fingers could tell a lot from where/how her hand was placed  originally and by studying that pic, the placing of the rifle looks phoney as does her hand the way it's just resting on the rifle.

It's just not right.

They moved her arm to take that photo. You will also notice three streams of blood running down that arm. I actually believe that it could just be a transfer stain from those three streams on her arm rather than fingers.
Since in the photo you can tell there is no blood on her finger/tips. They could also have come from June or Nevill if they are indeed three fingers.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 31, 2019, 05:40:PM



The partial hand/fingers could tell a lot from where/how her hand was placed  originally and by studying that pic, the placing of the rifle looks phoney as does her hand the way it's just resting on the rifle.

It's just not right.

Exactly Lookout! The idea that the stain cam from the trails on her arm is ridiculous, the trails have lines across which coincide with those on fingers.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on August 31, 2019, 06:23:PM
It's marvellous revisiting some of these sites as it gives a whole new and different perspective on how you originally thought that things were. You notice things that you never saw before.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on August 31, 2019, 06:27:PM
They moved her arm to take that photo. You will also notice three streams of blood running down that arm. I actually believe that it could just be a transfer stain from those three streams on her arm rather than fingers.
Since in the photo you can tell there is no blood on her finger/tips. They could also have come from June or Nevill if they are indeed three fingers.




3 drips of blood in succession. They must have dripped from above to land as they did then run down a " still " arm. But how ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 31, 2019, 06:35:PM



3 drips of blood in succession. They must have dripped from above to land as they did then run down a " still " arm. But how ?

Again, exactly Lookout!
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 31, 2019, 06:42:PM
Again, exactly Lookout!

But I don't think the drip are running from the darker patches that you referred to as 'drops'. I think they have run from the hand and the darker patches are where the collected as it dried.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 31, 2019, 06:50:PM



3 drips of blood in succession. They must have dripped from above to land as they did then run down a " still " arm. But how ?

Unfortunately we have no photo showing how these trickles/streams went round her arm over the dress.

But the fact these lines of blood are literally over the exact area in question. Makes me doubt they are from fingers. They could just simply be smudges from those lineal streams of blood. I like this explanation because it requires the least assumptions.

(https://i.ibb.co/2PG2qQt/stains.png)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on August 31, 2019, 06:50:PM
But I don't think the drip are running from the darker patches that you referred to as 'drops'. I think they have run from the hand and the darker patches are where the collected as it dried.





How do you mean, run from the hand ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on August 31, 2019, 06:54:PM
Unfortunately we have no photo showing how these trickles/streams went round her arm over the dress.

But the fact these lines of blood where literally over the exact area in question. Makes me doubt they are from fingers. They could just simply be smudges from those lineal streams of blood. I like this explanation because it requires the least assumptions.

(https://i.ibb.co/2PG2qQt/stains.png)




They're drips which have literally landed on her arm from above, but from whom ? Were the drips definitely Sheila's blood ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 31, 2019, 07:16:PM




How do you mean, run from the hand ?

Trickled down.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on August 31, 2019, 07:59:PM
Trickled down.




Where did the blood come from to be on her hand to start with ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 31, 2019, 08:43:PM



Where did the blood come from to be on her hand to start with ?

I have my own views on that but you won't like it Lookout :)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on August 31, 2019, 09:10:PM
I have my own views on that but you won't like it Lookout :)




Oh right------but it could be wrong in my eyes ? No surprises there  :))
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on August 31, 2019, 10:18:PM



3 drips of blood in succession. They must have dripped from above to land as they did then run down a " still " arm. But how ?

How must she have placed her arm, in order for the drops to fall upon it as per this possibility?   Try moving your own arm, to simulate blood having dripped from Sheila's wound sites on to those specific areas on her arm.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 31, 2019, 10:30:PM
How must she have placed her arm, in order for the drops to fall upon it as per this possibility?   Try moving your own arm, to simulate blood having dripped from Sheila's wound sites on to those specific areas on her arm.

By pushing the trigger. That arm would be right under the neck wound while she was sitting in the upwards position.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on August 31, 2019, 10:32:PM
Trickled down.

If blood had trickled down from her hand (which is supposed to be bloodless?), should the streams not be at a different angle than they are?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on August 31, 2019, 10:34:PM
By pushing the trigger. That arm would be right under the neck wound while she was sitting in the upwards position.

What is her position in this scenario, i.e. angle of body / angle of arm?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 31, 2019, 10:45:PM
What is her position in this scenario, i.e. angle of body / angle of arm?

Either Something like this -

https://gfycat.com/GloriousHeavenlyBuck (https://gfycat.com/GloriousHeavenlyBuck)

Or this

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1294.0;attach=6573)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on August 31, 2019, 10:55:PM
Either Something like this -

https://gfycat.com/GloriousHeavenlyBuck (https://gfycat.com/GloriousHeavenlyBuck)

Or this

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1294.0;attach=6573)

The second one doesn't work, due to the angle.  The angle seems more plausible in the first example.  However, the trajectory of the streams is still difficult for me to work out?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on August 31, 2019, 11:05:PM
If blood had trickled down from her hand (which is supposed to be bloodless?), should the streams not be at a different angle than they are?

In a word 'no' - why would they be?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on August 31, 2019, 11:09:PM
In a word 'no' - why would they be?

Because if that was the case, the streams should be more linear (in terms of the length of her arm).  These streams seem to travel width-ways.  And not far.  If they were the result of a large amount of blood from a major wound (being transferred to hand / wrist / arm etc), then why do they stop so abruptly and congeal?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on August 31, 2019, 11:10:PM
The second one doesn't work, due to the angle.  The angle seems more plausible in the first example.  However, the trajectory of the streams is still difficult for me to work out?

The second one is very possible. We can see on the corner of her night dress that blood was spurting out.

Blood could have got on her arm then trickled downwards before she fell back. We can already see those streams change direction due to her falling.

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=699.0;attach=2929)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 01, 2019, 12:48:AM
Because if that was the case, the streams should be more linear (in terms of the length of her arm).  These streams seem to travel width-ways.  And not far.  If they were the result of a large amount of blood from a major wound (being transferred to hand / wrist / arm etc), then why do they stop so abruptly and congeal?

It all depends how the blood got there is the first place. I have my own idea about that
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 01, 2019, 11:08:AM
The second one is very possible. We can see on the corner of her night dress that blood was spurting out.

Blood could have got on her arm then trickled downwards before she fell back. We can already see those streams change direction due to her falling.

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=699.0;attach=2929)

Blood could have gotten onto her right arm? What? From all the way down the trigger? If the picture was anywhere near accurate, the blood would have been on her left hand/wrist/arm.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 11:09:AM
Because if that was the case, the streams should be more linear (in terms of the length of her arm).  These streams seem to travel width-ways.  And not far.  If they were the result of a large amount of blood from a major wound (being transferred to hand / wrist / arm etc), then why do they stop so abruptly and congeal?




Roch, those streaks would have been venous blood ( coming from a vein possibly after the first failed shot ) as opposed to arterial blood which would have spurted out everywhere. The reason why there wasn't the volume of blood from the second shot in the carotid artery was that she'd have died instantly which would have immediately stopped the heart and its pumping mechanism.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 11:35:AM
I can only assume that those blood stripes, caused by droplets landing on her arm, were from the first wound when she was in a semi-sitting position and because of it being from a vein and not an artery, and because of the time between shots when she held the rifle in readiness for the second shot it would have travelled in this way if her arm was across her body adjusting the rifle in place.

I can picture it in my mind but it's hard to try and describe when it comes to writing it down.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 01, 2019, 11:41:AM
I can only assume that those blood stripes, caused by droplets landing on her arm, were from the first wound when she was in a semi-sitting position and because of it being from a vein and not an artery, and because of the time between shots when she held the rifle in readiness for the second shot it would have travelled in this way if her arm was across her body adjusting the rifle in place.

I can picture it in my mind but it's hard to try and describe when it comes to writing it down.

How did droplets land n an arm that was next to the trigger and not on the arm close to the wound?? They aren't droplets, they are trails from blood on her hand.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 01, 2019, 11:53:AM
You can see that they are finger prints from this picture.

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=40868)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 11:58:AM
How did droplets land n an arm that was next to the trigger and not on the arm close to the wound?? They aren't droplets, they are trails from blood on her hand.




The pic is misleading as regards her arm being shown next to the trigger. It's not how it would have been as the gun has been carelessly placed. An afterthought by incompetents.

Picture the scenario without the gun being there. Before the second shot ( as the first won't have killed her outright ) that wound would have dripped blood and if she'd been in a semi-sitting position, the blood would have dropped onto her crooked arm across her body.


Which hand are you talking about ? How did blood get into her hand ?  It's impossible for blood from a hand to land where it did, unless she had long stripes of it going down her left arm and even then it would have to drop "to order" to  form the pattern of droplets on her arm.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 12:02:PM
Considering that Sheila's hands were as clean as a new pin--------------where's the blood ?
She could have rested her hand on the floor/carpet at some point then transferred her hand to her nightdress.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 01, 2019, 12:16:PM



The pic is misleading as regards her arm being shown next to the trigger. It's not how it would have been as the gun has been carelessly placed. An afterthought by incompetents.

Picture the scenario without the gun being there. Before the second shot ( as the first won't have killed her outright ) that wound would have dripped blood and if she'd been in a semi-sitting position, the blood would have dropped onto her crooked arm across her body.


Which hand are you talking about ? How did blood get into her hand ?  It's impossible for blood from a hand to land where it did, unless she had long stripes of it going down her left arm and even then it would have to drop "to order" to  form the pattern of droplets on her arm.

The scenario you depict doesn't hold any weight and the police only lifted her hand to reveal the stain, her hand was found on the trigger - they took a picture of this FIRST.

I don't believe the blood got onto her hand by accident, I believe it was part of the staging along with the palm print and finger marks. However, a change of heart led to the bible upturned on the floor and her hand on the trigger.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 12:48:PM
The scenario you depict doesn't hold any weight and the police only lifted her hand to reveal the stain, her hand was found on the trigger - they took a picture of this FIRST.

I don't believe the blood got onto her hand by accident, I believe it was part of the staging along with the palm print and finger marks. However, a change of heart led to the bible upturned on the floor and her hand on the trigger.




Okay, so how would your scenario pan out ?
We were originally led to believe that there was no blood on her hands, so where do you suppose the blood came from after this had been established ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 01, 2019, 01:36:PM



Okay, so how would your scenario pan out ?
We were originally led to believe that there was no blood on her hands, so where do you suppose the blood came from after this had been established ?

She was bleeding Lookout, I think Bamber used her own blood to make it look as though she was holding the bible when she died however, I think he probably realised it looked too staged so he tried to cover up by opening the bible on a different page and placing it over the stain. The police probably closed it and didn't take note of which page it had been opened and assumed it must have been on the stained page. He then placed the gun on her and made sure her arm covered the finger marks. But put them together and bingo!
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 02:07:PM
She was bleeding Lookout, I think Bamber used her own blood to make it look as though she was holding the bible when she died however, I think he probably realised it looked too staged so he tried to cover up by opening the bible on a different page and placing it over the stain. The police probably closed it and didn't take note of which page it had been opened and assumed it must have been on the stained page. He then placed the gun on her and made sure her arm covered the finger marks. But put them together and bingo!




Where was all the blood ? Considering it was a complete bloodbath in that bedroom considering the bullets that were used there was so little blood to be seen especially from arterial areas of both bodies ?

Well that would be a fine scenario except that one or two officers on entering didn't see the gun on her body but by her side, so did JB suddenly skoot along unseen and replace it on top of her body ? Then add a drop of blood here and there for effect ? Where are his prints ? It would have been all that was needed for an immediate arrest.


JB would have had to have physically pressed Sheila's palm onto the Bible to get such an impression, so did he wash her hand afterwards as she had been clear of any blood on her hands ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 01, 2019, 02:25:PM



Where was all the blood ? Considering it was a complete bloodbath in that bedroom considering the bullets that were used there was so little blood to be seen especially from arterial areas of both bodies ?

Well that would be a fine scenario except that one or two officers on entering didn't see the gun on her body but by her side, so did JB suddenly skoot along unseen and replace it on top of her body ? Then add a drop of blood here and there for effect ? Where are his prints ? It would have been all that was needed for an immediate arrest.


JB would have had to have physically pressed Sheila's palm onto the Bible to get such an impression, so did he wash her hand afterwards as she had been clear of any blood on her hands ?

There was enough blood pooled under her arm and I would think that Bamber wore gloves. There are smudges on her arm consistent with someone holding it.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 03:01:PM
There was enough blood pooled under her arm and I would think that Bamber wore gloves. There are smudges on her arm consistent with someone holding it.




Prints are still detectable through gloves as fibres are left which the naked eye can't see and I'm sure we'd have heard/seen results of such long before now.

Where is all the blood that should have surrounded June ? She'd been peppered with bullets ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 01, 2019, 03:13:PM



Prints are still detectable through gloves as fibres are left which the naked eye can't see and I'm sure we'd have heard/seen results of such long before now.

Where is all the blood that should have surrounded June ? She'd been peppered with bullets ?

Pints aren’t detectable through gloves as for fibres, I doubt they looked for any given they thought she killed herself but it would also depend on what they were made of.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on September 01, 2019, 03:22:PM



Prints are still detectable through gloves as fibres are left which the naked eye can't see and I'm sure we'd have heard/seen results of such long before now.

Where is all the blood that should have surrounded June ? She'd been peppered with bullets ?

I know there's been a thing about Marigolds but I very much doubt -other than wishful thinking- there'd be anything of the wearer detectable if they've worn industrial weight protective gloves which are lined. Their purpose being to keep harmful chemicals out, I can't see how they'd allow human secretions out.  Even my washing up gloves can remain perfectly dry on the outside whilst my fingers and hands are wet with perspiration.

It seems some members of the police saw things others didn't, but like the camera, their reports are simply a moment captured in time. My view is that the scene was 'dressed' to create an impression. What's dressed can be undressed and/or redressed.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 01, 2019, 03:31:PM
The second one is very possible. We can see on the corner of her night dress that blood was spurting out.

Blood could have got on her arm then trickled downwards before she fell back. We can already see those streams change direction due to her falling.

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=699.0;attach=2929)

Vanezis re-examination by Arlidge QC

Q. And then you have got this blood on the forearm, which has got spots and then trails either to or from the spots?

A. Yes.

Q. What can you say about those?

A. These trails of blood appear to have run vertically down the outer side of the arm.

Q. They look as if they are going sideways to start with and then they go down?

A. Yes.

Q. Can you tell how that had occurred? Was that from a wound or did it come from somewhere else?

A. In my view these trails of blood were associated with a substantial blood staining on the right side of the nightdress in the armpit area and below, as well as the blood from the neck region.

Q. When you say "associated", do you mean by that it had run directly from one of the other wounds or had it fallen on to it, or what do you say?

A. All I can say is blood had been transferred from that area on to the arm and, of course, trailed.

Q. There are obviously wounds in the neck?

A. Yes.

Q. Was there an indication that blood had run down from those wounds?

A. Yes.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 03:41:PM
Well there's your answer-----blood had run from one of the wounds in her neck on to her arm.
Elementary isn't it ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 03:57:PM
Blood from the second wound would only have spurted for as long as the heart pumped and that wouldn't have been long enough to have created the bloodbath that would have occurred in that smallish room with two bodies that had been shot at--------so where was all the blood surrounding the two women ? There's virtually no blood around June.

Did JB also fold up the carpet that was heavily soiled thus lifting both bodies in the process ? All in the space of how long------------?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 01, 2019, 03:59:PM
Well there's your answer-----blood had run from one of the wounds in her neck on to her arm.
Elementary isn't it ?

You only need to look at the photos to work that out!

If the pathologist gave any other explanation he would be wrong.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 04:01:PM
You only need to look at the photos to work that out!

If the pathologist gave any other explanation he would be wrong.





I agree.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 01, 2019, 04:28:PM
Well there's your answer-----blood had run from one of the wounds in her neck on to her arm.
Elementary isn't it ?

What answer? I don’t agree, I think it was part of the staging which is why there is a partial palm print on the bible. The rest of the hand is on the nightdress.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 01, 2019, 04:47:PM


Where was all the blood ? Considering it was a complete bloodbath in that bedroom considering the bullets that were used there was so little blood to be seen especially from arterial areas of both bodies ?


I think like many people your expectations of blood at a crime scene have been somewhat warped by TV and films.

There was a lot of blood around June and Nevill. But not the bloodbaths you see on TV films that are exaderated simply for the audience consumption.

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 05:40:PM
What answer? I don’t agree, I think it was part of the staging which is why there is a partial palm print on the bible. The rest of the hand is on the nightdress.




I can see that the two prints together form practically a whole hand but unfortunately not from the perspective that you describe as being " part of the staging " . Both could easily have occurred at different intervals/stages of what Sheila was doing at the time, plus the palm part could well have been that of her mother's who was also bloodied before dying.

Because no names were attached to the evidence of the blood on the Bible anyway there's no way of knowing is there ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 01, 2019, 05:49:PM

Okay, so how would your scenario pan out ?
We were originally led to believe that there was no blood on her hands, so where do you suppose the blood came from after this had been established ?

How does Caroline's scenario pan out? Lets see..

Sheila being involved doesn't point to an innocent Jeremy.

Paul Harrison is a respected author, he isn't going to risk damaging his reputation by lying.

From "Mr Super Cop" himself

"Jeremy said he had been out shooting, he didn't say where, and that Sheila had gone with him.  He told her shooting was good for getting rid of tension and let her fire off some shots.  He said Sheila was a nut job and was always high as a kite, but he had the better of her and he wasn't worried about her having a rifle in her hands because he was controlling everything she did.  Sheila had really enjoyed it and laughed when Jeremy told her to think of Mum and Dad's face on the target she was firing at".

"About 10 minutes later, the two of them went upstairs to shoot and kill their parents when they were asleep.  Jeremy said this is where they would offer least resistance.  By this stage he said Sheila wasn't with it, she was hyped up, full of passion and hatred for their parents and was making ranting and snorting noises like a mad women out of control".

"He said Sheila she was screaming and crying so he went upstairs after her and the way she was acting frightened him, (This is after she had murdered June and Nevil) she was talking about the twins being little devils and evil, she was like something possessed".
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 05:52:PM
I think like many people your expectations of blood at a crime scene have been somewhat warped by TV and films.

There was a lot of blood around June and Nevill. But not the bloodbaths you see on TV films that are exaderated simply for the audience consumption.




My expectations were that I'd have expected more than just a few drips as shown on the carpet, wherever they came from ?

At what stage was the larger carpet moved ? It was clearly moved before those photographs were taken, which meant that the two bodies would have been moved------again, after the pics were taken, but there's no information that I know of as to who removed a carpet and left it folded/rolled-up in the bedroom.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 06:04:PM
How does Caroline's scenario pan out? Lets see..

From "Mr Super Cop" himself

"Jeremy said he had been out shooting, he didn't say where, and that Sheila had gone with him.  He told her shooting was good for getting rid of tension and let her fire off some shots.  He said Sheila was a nut job and was always high as a kite, but he had the better of her and he wasn't worried about her having a rifle in her hands because he was controlling everything she did.  Sheila had really enjoyed it and laughed when Jeremy told her to think of Mum and Dad's face on the target she was firing at".

"About 10 minutes later, the two of them went upstairs to shoot and kill their parents when they were asleep.  Jeremy said this is where they would offer least resistance.  By this stage he said Sheila wasn't with it, she was hyped up, full of passion and hatred for their parents and was making ranting and snorting noises like a mad women out of control".

"He said Sheila she was screaming and crying so he went upstairs after her and the way she was acting frightened him, (This is after she had murdered June and Nevil) she was talking about the twins being little devils and evil, she was like something possessed".






So that's his style ? Goodness me.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 01, 2019, 06:15:PM
Just three days after PH said this in the newspaper

"Mr Harrison said his book will "finally bring closure" and prove Bamber's guilt beyond doubt when it is published ahead of the 30th anniversary of the slayings next August."

Caroline wrote this in response to the article.

Paul Harrison is a respected author, he isn't going to risk damaging his reputation by lying.

I rest my case.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 01, 2019, 06:27:PM
How does Caroline's scenario pan out? Lets see..

From "Mr Super Cop" himself

"Jeremy said he had been out shooting, he didn't say where, and that Sheila had gone with him.  He told her shooting was good for getting rid of tension and let her fire off some shots.  He said Sheila was a nut job and was always high as a kite, but he had the better of her and he wasn't worried about her having a rifle in her hands because he was controlling everything she did.  Sheila had really enjoyed it and laughed when Jeremy told her to think of Mum and Dad's face on the target she was firing at".

"About 10 minutes later, the two of them went upstairs to shoot and kill their parents when they were asleep.  Jeremy said this is where they would offer least resistance.  By this stage he said Sheila wasn't with it, she was hyped up, full of passion and hatred for their parents and was making ranting and snorting noises like a mad women out of control".

"He said Sheila she was screaming and crying so he went upstairs after her and the way she was acting frightened him, (This is after she had murdered June and Nevil) she was talking about the twins being little devils and evil, she was like something possessed".


He did damage his reputation by lying and turned out to be a fraud - so what, like may here, I was taking in by him. However, your obsession with him is frankly weird - especially as you weren't even a member then. You're also a hypocrite given that you're also a proven liar - one by their own admission is not above mind games in order to extract information from someone. You tried to play that card with NGB - I am sure he saw through your pathetic grovelling tactics immediately.

Just so you know, I will be reporting your post - you're supposed to have me on ignore and yet you're still trolling. I'm surprised you don't agree that the palm and bloodied finger stain don't go together - the method used to match them is surely close to your heart.  8)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 01, 2019, 06:31:PM




So that's his style ? Goodness me.

Don't be taken in by David Lookout, he's using you to troll me. That isn't my scenario and you have never seen me post anything like that before. David is a proven liar via his own words - someone who thinks he needs to use mind games to seek information. Also, ask yourself why he's so interested in PH when he wasn't even a member here then?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 01, 2019, 06:32:PM



My expectations were that I'd have expected more than just a few drips as shown on the carpet, wherever they came from ?

At what stage was the larger carpet moved ? It was clearly moved before those photographs were taken, which meant that the two bodies would have been moved------again, after the pics were taken, but there's no information that I know of as to who removed a carpet and left it folded/rolled-up in the bedroom.

Don't take any notice of David, the patronising arsehole!
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 06:45:PM
Don't be taken in by David Lookout, he's using you to troll me. That isn't my scenario and you have never seen me post anything like that before. David is a proven liar via his own words - someone who thinks he needs to use mind games to seek information. Also, ask yourself why he's so interested in PH when he wasn't even a member here then?




Nobody uses me Caroline. I'm too long in the tooth to be taken in by anyone. I'm my own person. I'm not into mind games either, just an undercover cunning old bint, that's me !
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 01, 2019, 06:51:PM



Nobody uses me Caroline. I'm too long in the tooth to be taken in by anyone. I'm my own person. I'm not into mind games either, just an undercover cunning old bint, that's me !

Oh, I'm sure you're wise to him  ;D
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 01, 2019, 07:04:PM

So that's his style ? Goodness me.

Unless I am mistaken. I recall you saying you had a copy but didn't get past the first few pages?  :-\

Give it another try, Who knows what whoppers you might find inside.  :))
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 01, 2019, 07:05:PM
Unless I am mistaken. I recall you saying you had a copy but didn't get past the first few pages?  :-\

Give it another try, Who knows what whoppers you might find inside.  :))

Yeah, just like reading through your posts  ;D ::)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 07:58:PM
Unless I am mistaken. I recall you saying you had a copy but didn't get past the first few pages?  :-\

Give it another try, Who knows what whoppers you might find inside.  :))




Yes, I have got the book---unopened and gathering dust and fag ash.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 08:02:PM



Yes, I have got the book---unopened and gathering dust and fag ash.




I've not read a page of it.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 01, 2019, 08:08:PM



Yes, I have got the book---unopened and gathering dust and fag ash.

Fag ash? That is not good.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 01, 2019, 08:20:PM



My expectations were that I'd have expected more than just a few drips as shown on the carpet, wherever they came from ?

At what stage was the larger carpet moved ? It was clearly moved before those photographs were taken, which meant that the two bodies would have been moved------again, after the pics were taken, but there's no information that I know of as to who removed a carpet and left it folded/rolled-up in the bedroom.

What carpet are you talking about? The one underneath Sheila was not moved, because it has Nevils socks on it with droplets of Junes blood over those socks consistent with the rest of blood drops on the other carpet.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 08:21:PM
Fag ash? That is not good.




Not purposely you understand----just on reaching over to the ash-tray and sometimes missing it.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 01, 2019, 08:58:PM



Not purposely you understand----just on reaching over to the ash-tray and sometimes missing it.

I meant smoking is not good. Just sayin  :)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 09:17:PM
I meant smoking is not good. Just sayin  :)




I know it isn't good and I've tried stopping.  I'll have to get one of those dud ones from the joke shop. ;D
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 01, 2019, 09:29:PM

I know it isn't good and I've tried stopping.  I'll have to get one of those dud ones from the joke shop. ;D

Have you tried vaping?

I quit a long time ago before that became I thing. But I would suggest you try.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 01, 2019, 09:53:PM
Vanezis re-examination by Arlidge QC

Q. And then you have got this blood on the forearm, which has got spots and then trails either to or from the spots?

A. Yes.

Q. What can you say about those?

A. These trails of blood appear to have run vertically down the outer side of the arm.

Q. They look as if they are going sideways to start with and then they go down?

A. Yes.

Q. Can you tell how that had occurred? Was that from a wound or did it come from somewhere else?

A. In my view these trails of blood were associated with a substantial blood staining on the right side of the nightdress in the armpit area and below, as well as the blood from the neck region.

Q. When you say "associated", do you mean by that it had run directly from one of the other wounds or had it fallen on to it, or what do you say?

A. All I can say is blood had been transferred from that area on to the arm and, of course, trailed.

Q. There are obviously wounds in the neck?

A. Yes.

Q. Was there an indication that blood had run down from those wounds?

A. Yes.


How could blood either from the neck wound or the pooled armpit area, cause four equidistant, linear blood trails? (wrist).
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 01, 2019, 10:02:PM
How could blood either from the neck wound or the pooled armpit area, cause four equidistant, linear blood trails? (wrist).

Gravity.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 10:14:PM
Liquid of any kind finds its own level and blood is no different as once it landed on the arm it naturally ran down forming/leaving behind the striped effect.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 10:17:PM
Drop some water on your arm and it'll naturally run either side, it won't stay put.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 01, 2019, 10:21:PM
Sorry, I'm not getting it.  Blood spurting from a neck wound or seeping from armpit area causes four equidistant streaks.  I cant visualise it.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 01, 2019, 10:41:PM
Sorry, I'm not getting it.  Blood spurting from a neck wound or seeping from armpit area causes four equidistant streaks.  I cant visualise it.

This guy has just one cut under his eyebrow. How do you think those four streaks got from his eyebrow to his shoulder and chest? Once blood leaks its runs, you cannot control it.


(https://i.ibb.co/19bLFn9/charr1.png)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 10:52:PM
The first gunshot which didn't kill instantly would have made Sheila aware that there was an injury and if she was in a semi-sitting position leaning against the bedside cabinet with her head forward then droplets of blood would have landed on her arm which was across her waist.
It wouldn't have spurted because the first shot hit a vein and not an artery. The blood which landed from her neck onto her arm would naturally have ran down forming the stripes. If her arm hadn't have been there then it would have gathered on the front/waist position of her nightdress but there was no blood on the front of her nightdress.
The second shot which would have followed soon after would have thrown her back when it hit the main artery which is then why the blood had pooled at the back of her head/neck and shoulder.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 01, 2019, 10:54:PM
A nose bleed would have caused that on her arm.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Harry on September 02, 2019, 05:42:AM
She was bleeding Lookout, I think Bamber used her own blood to make it look as though she was holding the bible when she died however, I think he probably realised it looked too staged so he tried to cover up by opening the bible on a different page and placing it over the stain. The police probably closed it and didn't take note of which page it had been opened and assumed it must have been on the stained page. He then placed the gun on her and made sure her arm covered the finger marks. But put them together and bingo!

In that case there would be another stained page caused by the stain on the carpet after Bamber put it there. It's now recognised that the the bible is open at a different page in photographs of it on the carpet to the page where the alleged palm print was found.

(https://scenephotographs.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/whf-and-new-bibles-compared-3.jpg?w=450)

If the police had found two different places where the bible has stained pages, they would have thought that they had Bamber bang to rights, since Sheila could not have been opening and closing the bible after she was dead. Instead they have prevented the bible from being examined and the issues clarified.

You seem to be saying that the bible has been opened at three different places in the relevant period.

1 The place where the alleged palm print is seen. Bamber in your scenario  pressed Sheila's blood stained palm on it after she was dead.

2 The place where it was open when Bamber allegedly put it on the stain on the carpet after closing it and opening it at a different page.

3 The place it was open at when the police put it down again after closing it and opening it again.

The main objection is that there would be a stain from the carpet where (2) is concerned. There just can't have been, or the prosecution would have used it as proof of guilt.

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 02, 2019, 05:49:AM
In that case there would be another stained page caused by the stain on the carpet after Bamber put it there. It's now recognised that the the bible is open at a different page in photographs of it on the carpet to the page where the alleged palm print was found.

(https://scenephotographs.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/whf-and-new-bibles-compared-3.jpg?w=450)

If the police had found two different places where the bible has stained pages, they would have thought that they had Bamber bang to rights, since Sheila could not have been opening and closing the bible after she was dead. Instead they have prevented the bible from being examined and the issues clarified.

You seem to be saying that the bible has been opened at three different places in the relevant period.

1 The place where the alleged palm print is seen. Bamber in your "scenario"  pressed Sheila's blood stained palm on it after she was dead.

2 The place where it was open when Bamber allegedly put it on the stain on the carpet after closing it and opening it at different page.

3 The place it was open at when the police put it down again after closing it and opening it again.

The main objection is that there would be a stain from the carpet where (2) is concerned. There just can't have been, or the prosecution would have used it as proof of guilt.

Not if the stain on the carpet was semi dry however, according to Bamber himself, there are other stains on the bible so ...... Also, the pictures you have posted show that the page at which the bible was open on the carpet, cannot be the one named in the evidence (or the one with the palm stain) because of the page distribution. The page with the palm stain, is almost right in the center of bible - but from the crime scene picture the open page is around two thirds towards the end. From your own words, Sheila can't have been opening and closing the bible ...... but someone did.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 02, 2019, 06:50:AM
Surely June's bible next to Sheila was not a plant.

Sheila had a read prior to shooting herself twice.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 02, 2019, 07:00:AM
Surely June's bible next to Sheila was not a plant.

Sheila had a read prior to shooting herself twice.

Adam  ;D
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 02, 2019, 07:25:AM
In that case there would be another stained page caused by the stain on the carpet after Bamber put it there. It's now recognised that the the bible is open at a different page in photographs of it on the carpet to the page where the alleged palm print was found.

(https://scenephotographs.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/whf-and-new-bibles-compared-3.jpg?w=450)

If the police had found two different places where the bible has stained pages, they would have thought that they had Bamber bang to rights, since Sheila could not have been opening and closing the bible after she was dead. Instead they have prevented the bible from being examined and the issues clarified.

You seem to be saying that the bible has been opened at three different places in the relevant period.

1 The place where the alleged palm print is seen. Bamber in your scenario  pressed Sheila's blood stained palm on it after she was dead.

2 The place where it was open when Bamber allegedly put it on the stain on the carpet after closing it and opening it at a different page.

3 The place it was open at when the police put it down again after closing it and opening it again.

The main objection is that there would be a stain from the carpet where (2) is concerned. There just can't have been, or the prosecution would have used it as proof of guilt.

Indeed the prosecution would have used it. It was examined yet never even appeared as a trial exhibit.

Ed Lawson did make enquires about the bible before the trial but got nowhere. I will read over his appeal hearing testimony again later.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Harry on September 02, 2019, 08:11:AM
Not if the stain on the carpet was semi dry however, according to Bamber himself, there are other stains on the bible so ...... Also, the pictures you have posted show that the page at which the bible was open on the carpet, cannot be the one named in the evidence (or the one with the palm stain) because of the page distribution. The page with the palm stain, is almost right in the center of bible - but from the crime scene picture the open page is around two thirds towards the end. From your own words, Sheila can't have been opening and closing the bible ...... but someone did.

You have already managed to prove that it could not have been Bamber who put the bible on the stain
because at that stage the blood would have been still wet.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4616.msg191520.html#msg191520
"But think about this ..... The COA state categorically that the blood must have been 'wet' when the bible was closed and opened later by the 'killer' before being placed on the floor over the stain next to Sheila. So, IF it was placed there by Jeremy just after shooting Sheila the pool of blood would have to be wet at the time it was placed there  - so why is there no stain on the page that would have been face down on top of the blood? The stain MUST have been dry when the bible was placed there and such could not have been placed there by Jeremy Bamber. The COA were WRONG and as such, this point should still be valid in future submissions!!"

It also begs the question of who placed the bible on top of the blood stain (and why) - because it wasn't Jeremy and it wasn't Jeremy because it was placed there when the stain was dry. It proves that the scene was staged, but more importantly, that it was staged by someone OTHER  than Jeremy Bamber!!


You know that the police must have put it there when the blood was dry.

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 02, 2019, 08:56:AM
You have already managed to prove that it could not have been Bamber who put the bible on the stain
because at that stage the blood would have been still wet.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4616.msg191520.html#msg191520
"But think about this ..... The COA state categorically that the blood must have been 'wet' when the bible was closed and opened later by the 'killer' before being placed on the floor over the stain next to Sheila. So, IF it was placed there by Jeremy just after shooting Sheila the pool of blood would have to be wet at the time it was placed there  - so why is there no stain on the page that would have been face down on top of the blood? The stain MUST have been dry when the bible was placed there and such could not have been placed there by Jeremy Bamber. The COA were WRONG and as such, this point should still be valid in future submissions!!"

It also begs the question of who placed the bible on top of the blood stain (and why) - because it wasn't Jeremy and it wasn't Jeremy because it was placed there when the stain was dry. It proves that the scene was staged, but more importantly, that it was staged by someone OTHER  than Jeremy Bamber!!


You know that the police must have put it there when the blood was dry.

I haven't proved anything of the sort, no one knows how long Bamber was there staging the scene but more to the point, no one knows how big the stain is - I'll ponder you a question though, do you think it is possible to work out the EXACT page that the bible was open as is from the CS pictures?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 02, 2019, 09:22:AM
Sheila must have forgotten to bring her own bible to WHF.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 02, 2019, 09:36:AM
Blood is sticky and if pages had been pressed together and left for a time there'd have been difficulty opening them without tearing after the blood had dried. I wonder how many of those pages were stuck ! It's just coincidence that the Bible had been left open on that specific page and nothing indicates that it had been relevant reading to what had happened that night. It was all my eye.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 02, 2019, 09:42:AM
Blood is sticky and if pages had been pressed together and left for a time there'd have been difficulty opening them without tearing after the blood had dried. I wonder how many of those pages were stuck ! It's just coincidence that the Bible had been left open on that specific page and nothing indicates that it had been relevant reading to what had happened that night. It was all my eye.

It wasn't/couldn't have been laid open on that page Lookout because the distribution of the pages doesn't match!

Also, blood dries quickly and the blood was still a little tacky because there is a slight mirror image on the opposite page., there wouldn't be if the bible had been laid on the floor on that page!
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 02, 2019, 10:19:AM
Sheila must have forgotten to bring her own bible to WHF.

Well, you know how it is in the haste of packing  ;)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 02, 2019, 11:10:AM
Well, you know how it is in the haste of packing  ;)

Maybe she did bring her bible, but June's bible was nearer.

A pity for Jeremy. He could have said he didn't know what Sheila had brought with her to WHF. 
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 02, 2019, 11:18:AM
It wasn't/couldn't have been laid open on that page Lookout because the distribution of the pages doesn't match!

Also, blood dries quickly and the blood was still a little tacky because there is a slight mirror image on the opposite page., there wouldn't be if the bible had been laid on the floor on that page!




Yes I understand about the placement of the Bible and its faint image on the opposite page but why was there ever reference made to a particular passage in the Bible allegedly relevant in the way Sheila led her life then died when the book itself was just placed randomly on it's pages ? Because there happened to have been blood on that particular part/page doesn't mean to say that she was reading it.

What I'm saying is that somewhere among the accusations towards JB there was something that stated that he knew on what page to leave the Bible open at.
Would that have been the time when the Bible was found on her chest, or on the floor ? If found on her chest I'd assume it would have been closed, which could well have been the time when the image could have been impressed on the opposite side.

It's always been a mystery and will remain so until such time that the case can again be scrutinised.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 02, 2019, 11:19:AM
Sheila must have forgotten to bring her own bible to WHF.




There were 5 Bibles kept at WHF so no need to have brought an extra one. The same as there was more than one silencer in the place.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 02, 2019, 11:34:AM



There were 5 Bibles kept at WHF so no need to have brought an extra one. The same as there was more than one silencer in the place.

Five? Maybe June was hopeing Jeremy would take one home to read, then join her at bible classes.

So Sheila knew where to find one to read. After killing 4 people and prior to shooting herself twice.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 02, 2019, 11:36:AM
Five? Maybe June was hopeing Jeremy would take one home to read, then join her at bible classes.

So Sheila knew where to find one to read. After killing 4 people and prior to shooting herself twice.




Three must have been kept in the bedroom. I know one was read to the children before bed.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 02, 2019, 03:14:PM
Sheila must have forgotten to bring her own bible to WHF.

Do you still believe the house was too big for Sheila to have found the bible?   ;D
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 02, 2019, 03:34:PM
You have already managed to prove that it could not have been Bamber who put the bible on the stain
because at that stage the blood would have been still wet.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4616.msg191520.html#msg191520
"But think about this ..... The COA state categorically that the blood must have been 'wet' when the bible was closed and opened later by the 'killer' before being placed on the floor over the stain next to Sheila. So, IF it was placed there by Jeremy just after shooting Sheila the pool of blood would have to be wet at the time it was placed there  - so why is there no stain on the page that would have been face down on top of the blood? The stain MUST have been dry when the bible was placed there and such could not have been placed there by Jeremy Bamber. The COA were WRONG and as such, this point should still be valid in future submissions!!"

It also begs the question of who placed the bible on top of the blood stain (and why) - because it wasn't Jeremy and it wasn't Jeremy because it was placed there when the stain was dry. It proves that the scene was staged, but more importantly, that it was staged by someone OTHER  than Jeremy Bamber!!


You know that the police must have put it there when the blood was dry.

Well done Harry. It is no secret that Caroline once had a factually coherent view on this case. And all that changed when she got duped by Paul Harrison.

Paul Harrison 19/10/2014

"Mr Harrison said his book will "finally bring closure" and prove Bamber's guilt beyond doubt when it is published ahead of the 30th anniversary of the slayings next August."

Paul Harrison is a respected author, he isn't going to risk damaging his reputation by lying.

How much longer will the facade go on? Jane now has to put up with advocating the wrong side of the case until Caroline can swallow her pride. Seems this may go on for another five years.

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 02, 2019, 04:54:PM
Well done Harry. It is no secret that Caroline once had a factually coherent view on this case. And all that changed when she got duped by Paul Harrison.

Paul Harrison 19/10/2014

"Mr Harrison said his book will "finally bring closure" and prove Bamber's guilt beyond doubt when it is published ahead of the 30th anniversary of the slayings next August."

How much longer will the facade go on? Jane now has to put up with advocating the wrong side of the case until Caroline can swallow her pride. Seems this may go on for another five years.

I don't know how much longer you will go one David but once again, you posting about people who you have on ignore so I am reporting the post. Not only don't you have any concept of the truth, you now don't seem to understand the concept of ignore. The only person here banging on about PH is you - you moron!
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 03, 2019, 08:12:AM
I haven't proved anything of the sort, no one knows how long Bamber was there staging the scene but more to the point, no one knows how big the stain is - I'll ponder you a question though, do you think it is possible to work out the EXACT page that the bible was open as is from the CS pictures?

You didn't answer my question Harry.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Harry on September 03, 2019, 09:17:AM
I haven't proved anything of the sort, no one knows how long Bamber was there staging the scene but more to the point, no one knows how big the stain is - I'll ponder you a question though, do you think it is possible to work out the EXACT page that the bible was open as is from the CS pictures?

You didn't answer my question Harry.

I don't see the point of the question. Why do you need to tell the exact page the bible is open at on the floor to know it's not the same page as the one where the alleged palm print is found?

(https://scenephotographs.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/whf-and-new-bibles-compared-3.jpg?w=450)

If that page had also had a stain on it from the stain on the carpet it would have been used as evidence against Jeremy.

Similarly, you don't need to know how big the stain is to tell that the bible is covering part of it at (A)

(https://scenephotographs.files.wordpress.com/2017/09/bible-caroline-1.jpg?w=450)

(https://i0.wp.com/scenephotographs.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/bible6a-2.jpg?ssl=1&w=450)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 03, 2019, 09:39:AM
When, at long last, it will be now proven that Nevill rang EP after having rang JB first, it will no longer be a fact that bodies etc. were staged by JB, but by EP themselves.


In order for photo's to have been taken as we see them, a large square of carpet that had been covering the existing one had to have been removed by EP to save treading on a blood-drenched carpet which can be seen folded in one of the photo's. Therefore, to remove this carpet it had been up to EP to lift the bodies free from the carpet thus arranging them to their original positions in death.
It's not always possible to rearrange something such as the crime scene which was, into an exact position of how/where they perished as some things get forgotten----such as when the rifle was at the side of Sheila so was swiftly placed on top of her body for the authenticity of having shot herself.

The Bible would have been another forgotten object and just " dropped " at the side of the body landing randomly at no particular page/passage within the Bible.

The drips of blood seen on the light carpet could either have happened as the top carpet was being moved or from Sheila as she was lifted during its removal.

The more I've thought about this crime the far more I've known of the horrendous injustice that Jeremy has been served and I would hope that after all these years that the public recognises EP's deceit in sending an innocent man to prison.
 
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Harry on September 03, 2019, 09:49:AM
There is another possibility which deserves consideration. It is consistent with Mike Tesko's opinion that Sheila was shot a second time at some time later than 09:00am. 

If the stain on the carpet which the bible is partly covering was made by Sheila's blood it would, on this view, have been still wet when the police for some reason put the bible on it.

The campaign team apparently have proof that the photographs showing Sheila with the rifle on her were taken at around 10:20. If you relate this to the opinion given by professors Meloni and Cavalli that Sheila could not have been dead for more than than two hours when the well known police photograph showing wet blood was taken, the implication is that she could not have died at any time earlier than 08:20.

(http://i.imgur.com/nggFO.jpg)

You have to consider the possibility that there WAS a stain on the page of the bible resting on the stain on the carpet, if it is Sheila's blood.  That would explain why the defence were not allowed to have it examined.

It  might be suggested that the police could have used such a stain, caused by themselves, to frame Bamber, but Bamber was not a suspect at that stage.

If the police had, weeks later, tried to use such a stain as evidence against Bamber that would beg the question as to why they didn't figure out he was the culprit straight off. So, if there was a stain at the page in question, the chance to use it as false evidence had already passed.

I admit I favour the view that the stain on the carpet was from June's blood and that it was dry.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 03, 2019, 11:54:AM
I've thought too that it was June's blood.
 Even June's position in the bedroom had been tampered with as a brush of blood against the door indicates that she'd been propped up against it but when photographs were shown she was lying splayed out on her back on the floor. June would not have got herself in that final position after she'd been propped up against the door after having died that way, gravity would have made her slump sideways.

As Andrew Hunter had said, " dead bodies don't move ".
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 03, 2019, 12:56:PM
I don't see the point of the question. Why do you need to tell the exact page the bible is open at on the floor to know it's not the same page as the one where the alleged palm print is found?

(https://scenephotographs.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/whf-and-new-bibles-compared-3.jpg?w=450)

If that page had also had a stain on it from the stain on the carpet it would have been used as evidence against Jeremy.

Similarly, you don't need to know how big the stain is to tell that the bible is covering part of it at (A)

(https://scenephotographs.files.wordpress.com/2017/09/bible-caroline-1.jpg?w=450)

(https://i0.wp.com/scenephotographs.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/bible6a-2.jpg?ssl=1&w=450)

OK, I will ask again, are there any pictures that reveal the page at which the bible is open while placed face down on the floor? Also as previously stated, we have no idea how long Bamber was at WHF staging the scene - blood dries fairly quickly - I doubt the stain was completely wet when the bible was placed there.

The notion that the police framed Jeremy from day one is a non-starter.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 03, 2019, 01:06:PM
There is another possibility which deserves consideration. It is consistent with Mike Tesko's opinion that Sheila was shot a second time at some time later than 09:00am. 

If the stain on the carpet which the bible is partly covering was made by Sheila's blood it would, on this view, have been still wet when the police for some reason put the bible on it.

The campaign team apparently have proof that the photographs showing Sheila with the rifle on her were taken at around 10:20. If you relate this to the opinion given by professors Meloni and Cavalli that Sheila could not have been dead for more than than two hours when the well known police photograph showing wet blood was taken, the implication is that she could not have died at any time earlier than 08:20.

(http://i.imgur.com/nggFO.jpg)

You have to consider the possibility that there WAS a stain on the page of the bible resting on the stain on the carpet, if it is Sheila's blood.  That would explain why the defence were not allowed to have it examined.

It  might be suggested that the police could have used such a stain, caused by themselves, to frame Bamber, but Bamber was not a suspect at that stage.

If the police had, weeks later, tried to use such a stain as evidence against Bamber that would beg the question as to why they didn't figure out he was the culprit straight off. So, if there was a stain at the page in question, the chance to use it as false evidence had already passed.

I admit I favour the view that the stain on the carpet was from June's blood and that it was dry.

That picture is a fraud and is a version of the picture below. I would love to know how Shiela could still be breathing with a throat full of blood without any signs of spluttering around her mouth? The blood is dry and cracked, her face is discoloured and this is the reason why the photo you posted is only of her neck. Had they included her face, it would have been obvious that it has been tampered with.

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=39391)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 03, 2019, 01:14:PM
I've thought too that it was June's blood.
 Even June's position in the bedroom had been tampered with as a brush of blood against the door indicates that she'd been propped up against it but when photographs were shown she was lying splayed out on her back on the floor. June would not have got herself in that final position after she'd been propped up against the door after having died that way, gravity would have made her slump sideways.

As Andrew Hunter had said, " dead bodies don't move ".

She has slumped sideways (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=39401)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 03, 2019, 02:50:PM
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,887.msg26403.html#msg26403

This thread in the archives section asks how could the bible fall on top of Sheila's arm after she had been shot & killed?'.

Mike says the police shot Sheila but did not want to admit to this. So said Sheila shot herself. The police changed direction shortly afterwards & the industrial frame department was created to frame Bamber.

Seems the police wanted to make religion a reason for Sheila committing the massacre. After they luckily noticed June's bible.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 03, 2019, 03:14:PM
She has slumped sideways (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=39401)




And adjusted herself to being flat on the floor while dead ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 03, 2019, 03:19:PM
She's been made to look as you describe but a deceased person doesn't go from slumped to flat out without having been moved. EP had obviously staged her position to coincide with the blood brushed against the door but found that a dead person can't be manipulated in the same way a living person can be.
EP would have had to have moved her to lift up the blood-sodden carpet from underneath.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 03, 2019, 03:20:PM
The said carpet is in a pic folded/rolled up and was one of the items which was burned outside.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 03, 2019, 05:17:PM
She's been made to look as you describe but a deceased person doesn't go from slumped to flat out without having been moved. EP had obviously staged her position to coincide with the blood brushed against the door but found that a dead person can't be manipulated in the same way a living person can be.
EP would have had to have moved her to lift up the blood-sodden carpet from underneath.

Of course they can, they have no muscle power to keep them upright. A dead body is a dead weight. There was no reason for the officers to move her at all.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 03, 2019, 05:50:PM
Of course they can, they have no muscle power to keep them upright. A dead body is a dead weight. There was no reason for the officers to move her at all.



So EP literally pulled the rug from beneath her to have shifted her to that position ? How very respectful  :o
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 03, 2019, 05:54:PM
Come to think of it, this is probably why Sheila's nightdress originally rode upwards----by yanking the carpet from underneath her too until some kind soul made her look decent.

As a consequence like it or not, both bodies had shifted with the removal of the carpet.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 03, 2019, 06:48:PM
Come to think of it, this is probably why Sheila's nightdress originally rode upwards----by yanking the carpet from underneath her too until some kind soul made her look decent.

As a consequence like it or not, both bodies had shifted with the removal of the carpet.

This is all based on Martyn Ismaili claims. His observations contradict the basic laws of gravity. It’s not even worth considering.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 03, 2019, 07:15:PM
This is all based on Martyn Ismaili claims. His observations contradict the basic laws of gravity. It’s not even worth considering.




Who's Martyn Ismaili ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 03, 2019, 07:16:PM
Whoever he is we've got the same thoughts then.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 03, 2019, 07:27:PM


So EP literally pulled the rug from beneath her to have shifted her to that position ? How very respectful  :o

Sorry Lookout, not only did I not say that, I didn't even hint at it  ;D
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 03, 2019, 07:33:PM
Sorry Lookout, not only did I not say that, I didn't even hint at it  ;D



I'm well aware that those weren't your words.
But she didn't get in that position herself without assistance did she ? She'd have literally dropped sideways from a hunched sitting position.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 03, 2019, 08:09:PM



Who's Martyn Ismaili ?

Some guy who was asked to produce some junk science to appease the Judges at the last moment of the appeal.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 03, 2019, 08:16:PM
Some guy who was asked to produce some junk science to appease the Judges at the last moment of the appeal.




Doesn't sound too bad to me, especially as I have the same train of thought----so what's your problem ?
It's not junk science, it's common sense that doesn't need much thought.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 03, 2019, 08:21:PM



Doesn't sound too bad to me, especially as I have the same train of thought----so what's your problem ?
It's not junk science, it's common sense that doesn't need much thought.

I mustn't be seeing the same as you, I can see easily why she fell sideways and the carpets weren't removed until after the bodies were.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 03, 2019, 08:44:PM
I mustn't be seeing the same as you, I can see easily why she fell sideways and the carpets weren't removed until after the bodies were.




The carpet in question is folded in the bedroom by the side of a bed.
 Photo's were taken after it had been removed on account of it having been soaked in blood and there being so many officers who would have trodden everywhere with blood under their shoes/boots and trailing it throughout the farmhouse. So the top carpet/large rug was removed before the bodies were.
This is the carpet which was burned along with bedding.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 03, 2019, 09:15:PM



The carpet in question is folded in the bedroom by the side of a bed.
 Photo's were taken after it had been removed on account of it having been soaked in blood and there being so many officers who would have trodden everywhere with blood under their shoes/boots and trailing it throughout the farmhouse. So the top carpet/large rug was removed before the bodies were.
This is the carpet which was burned along with bedding.

Are you talking about this? (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=39405)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 03, 2019, 09:21:PM

Doesn't sound too bad to me, especially as I have the same train of thought----so what's your problem ?
It's not junk science, it's common sense that doesn't need much thought.

The blood running from Sheila's nose, mouth and neck is all running in the same downward direction (with no deviations) as it would have done in the position her head was found (lying flat). Thus her head was always in that position. With her head lying flat and her left shoulder right by the bedside table, it is simply not possible for her body to have been any further up than it already was. Thus she cannot have been pulled down with her head up against the bedside table.

Even a 10 year old can work this out. Even Martyn Ismail who concocted this junk would have known he was pulling this out his backside for whatever incentive/reason he had. The only person who cannot see through this is the one who has been bathing her brain in alcohol for too long.  ;D
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on September 03, 2019, 09:22:PM
Are you talking about this? (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=39405)

That looks a very small and soft bundle for carpet. It looks more like a blood splattered eiderdown.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 03, 2019, 09:24:PM
That looks a very small and soft bundle for carpet. It looks more like a blood splattered eiderdown.

It is.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 03, 2019, 10:01:PM
Are you talking about this? (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=39405)




No, that's not it.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 03, 2019, 10:05:PM
The blood running from Sheila's nose, mouth and neck is all running in the same downward direction (with no deviations) as it would have done in the position her head was found (lying flat). Thus her head was always in that position. With her head lying flat and her left shoulder right by the bedside table, it is simply not possible for her body to have been any further up than it already was. Thus she cannot have been pulled down with her head up against the bedside table.

Even a 10 year old can work this out. Even Martyn Ismail who concocted this junk would have known he was pulling this out his backside for whatever incentive/reason he had. The only person who cannot see through this is the one who has been bathing her brain in alcohol for too long.  ;D





I was talking about June and the way she was lying.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 03, 2019, 10:07:PM



No, that's not it.

There is no folded rug. Where in the bedroom are you suggesting?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 03, 2019, 10:36:PM




I was talking about June and the way she was lying.

What about it? There is blood smudged down the door where she lay. So she must have fallen there.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Harry on September 04, 2019, 03:19:AM
That picture is a fraud and is a version of the picture below. I would love to know how Shiela could still be breathing with a throat full of blood without any signs of spluttering around her mouth? The blood is dry and cracked, her face is discoloured and this is the reason why the photo you posted is only of her neck. Had they included her face, it would have been obvious that it has been tampered with.

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=39391)

I would like to hear the opinion of Nbg1066 on the high resolution photograph in question. From his knowledge of the history of the case, I would expect him to know whether or not Bamber's defence produced a fake photograph.

In fact, the idea of the photograph being enhanced was invented by a poster called Weety at the red forum and who has used the name Bridget at this forum. It's just complete bunkum, but there does seem to be some organisation behind it. It has become almost a mantra. "The photo has been enhanced."

Mike Tesko made some copies of photographs and some of the copies have what photographers call a blue cast. You are trying to kid people that the pictures with a blue cast show the true colours
and that the original unaltered image is a fake. But it's possible to prove that it's the blue pictures which are wrong.

I would also like to hear Mikes view on this issue. He has seen the photos in the album. For all I know, the photos he copied may already have been adjusted. The badly degraded image you keep posting must have already been distorted when Mike copied it. It has a lot of noise as well as a blue cast. It looks like it has been copied many times.

When images are copied by simply photographing a photograph, distortions tend to occur each time.

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Harry on September 04, 2019, 03:27:AM
(https://scenephotographs.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/murders_016a.jpg?w=450)

The above picture shows the image you have posted with the slip in leaf still visible. It should be white, but you can see it has a blue grey tone which is consistent with a blue cast. A blue cast will make a white surface appear  bluish.

You can't really reproduce the original image by warming up a picture with a blue cast, but you can at least produce a copy which corrects some of the distortion. I have adjusted the image just enough to make the slip in leaf neutral white again.

(https://scenephotographs.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/white-balance.jpg?w=450)

Even in this image, the blood trails are conspicuously wet. Indeed, as David1819 has pointed out, you can see that they are wet even in monochrome versions.

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Harry on September 04, 2019, 03:52:AM
OK, I will ask again, are there any pictures that reveal the page at which the bible is open while placed face down on the floor? Also as previously stated, we have no idea how long Bamber was at WHF staging the scene - blood dries fairly quickly - I doubt the stain was completely wet when the bible was placed there.

The notion that the police framed Jeremy from day one is a non-starter.

I can't make rational sense of the question.

How could there be a picture showing that? If the bible is face down, you can't see the page numbers.

The cover up started on the day of the killings, but it was to cover up a mishap concerning Sheila Caffell and had nothing to do with wanting to frame Bamber. That came later and basically started after ACC Peter Simpson replaced the head of the investigation  DCI Thomas Jones with DCS Mike Ainsley.

Contrary to popular belief, this took place before Julie Mugford came forward and followed from a complaint made by Robert Boutfour to DS Stan Jones who told Boutflour that he would need to speak to Peter Simpson.

Simpson gave Robert Boutflour what he wanted, namely a new investigation with Jeremy Bamber as the prime suspect. All of this happened before Julie Mugford said anything to the police.

 
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Steve_uk on September 04, 2019, 06:36:AM
I can't make rational sense of the question.

How could there be a picture showing that? If the bible is face down, you can't see the page numbers.

The cover up started on the day of the killings, but it was to cover up a mishap concerning Sheila Caffell and had nothing to do with wanting to frame Bamber. That came later and basically started after ACC Peter Simpson replaced the head of the investigation  DCI Thomas Jones with DCS Mike Ainsley.

Contrary to popular belief, this took place before Julie Mugford came forward and followed from a complaint made by Robert Boutfour to DS Stan Jones who told Boutflour that he would need to speak to Peter Simpson.

Simpson gave Robert Boutflour what he wanted, namely a new investigation with Jeremy Bamber as the prime suspect. All of this happened before Julie Mugford said anything to the police.
True but she had told several of her friends already, so the cat was out of the bag so to speak. What are you alleging is the mishap concerning Sheila?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on September 04, 2019, 09:48:AM
There is no folded rug. Where in the bedroom are you suggesting?


Are we to understand that both women conveniently died on rugs which we covering carpets and that those rugs were pulled from under them, OR the bodies were picked up, placed elsewhere and replaced in a semblance of their original positions after the rugs were retrieved? This has echo's of another poster's claim that both bodies were removed to another room to have pictures taken and then replaced in the master bedroom.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 04, 2019, 11:34:AM
I can't make rational sense of the question.

How could there be a picture showing that? If the bible is face down, you can't see the page numbers.


The cover up started on the day of the killings, but it was to cover up a mishap concerning Sheila Caffell and had nothing to do with wanting to frame Bamber. That came later and basically started after ACC Peter Simpson replaced the head of the investigation  DCI Thomas Jones with DCS Mike Ainsley.

Contrary to popular belief, this took place before Julie Mugford came forward and followed from a complaint made by Robert Boutfour to DS Stan Jones who told Boutflour that he would need to speak to Peter Simpson.

Simpson gave Robert Boutflour what he wanted, namely a new investigation with Jeremy Bamber as the prime suspect. All of this happened before Julie Mugford said anything to the police.

Thank you.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 12:01:PM
I've been looking through the archives for Alias's original thread warning us of the content, but to no avail. It was on one or two of the photo's that I saw the folded large carpet. This would have been the carpet, not rug, which was burned in the grounds of the farm along with bedding. No other carpet from any other room was ever mentioned.
The carpet would have been like the one shown in Sheila's bedroom which is a large square on top of the existing fitted carpet.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 04, 2019, 12:10:PM
Hopefully when Mike returns everything will become clear.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 04, 2019, 01:06:PM
(https://scenephotographs.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/murders_016a.jpg?w=450)

The above picture shows the image you have posted with the slip in leaf still visible. It should be white, but you can see it has a blue grey tone which is consistent with a blue cast. A blue cast will make a white surface appear  bluish.

You can't really reproduce the original image by warming up a picture with a blue cast, but you can at least produce a copy which corrects some of the distortion. I have adjusted the image just enough to make the slip in leaf neutral white again.

(https://scenephotographs.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/white-balance.jpg?w=450)

Even in this image, the blood trails are conspicuously wet. Indeed, as David1819 has pointed out, you can see that they are wet even in monochrome versions.

So you had to adjust the image to make the trails look wet! Look at Sheila’s face - you can see she has been dead for some time. The blood is dried and cracked around her mouth. Has she recently breathed blood built up in her throat and there would be blood splatters on her face as she tried to clear her throat. Someone was careful not to include her face in your picture because it is at odds with the cracked dried blood!
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 04, 2019, 01:16:PM
I would like to hear the opinion of Nbg1066 on the high resolution photograph in question. From his knowledge of the history of the case, I would expect him to know whether or not Bamber's defence produced a fake photograph.

In fact, the idea of the photograph being enhanced was invented by a poster called Weety at the red forum and who has used the name Bridget at this forum. It's just complete bunkum, but there does seem to be some organisation behind it. It has become almost a mantra. "The photo has been enhanced."

Mike Tesko made some copies of photographs and some of the copies have what photographers call a blue cast. You are trying to kid people that the pictures with a blue cast show the true colours
and that the original unaltered image is a fake. But it's possible to prove that it's the blue pictures which are wrong.

I would also like to hear Mikes view on this issue. He has seen the photos in the album. For all I know, the photos he copied may already have been adjusted. The badly degraded image you keep posting must have already been distorted when Mike copied it. It has a lot of noise as well as a blue cast. It looks like it has been copied many times.

When images are copied by simply photographing a photograph, distortions tend to occur each time.
It’s not me who is kidding myself. You just have to look at Sheila’s face to see she had been dead for quite sometime. However, I have been here long enough to realise that there are certain posters who will have an open view about Bamber and no matter what, they will argue against anything that lints to guilt. Now before you even suggest I have a closed mind, remember I fought long and hard for innocence. Most of the stuff you hold dear has been debunked but you hold onto it and that’s your  choice.

Bit confused as to why you think NGB would know if the picture was faked - that’s just paranoia.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 04, 2019, 01:18:PM
True but she had told several of her friends already, so the cat was out of the bag so to speak. What are you alleging is the mishap concerning Sheila?

The police shot her?  ::)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 01:36:PM
I'd like to add that the palm print was smaller than Sheila's whose hand and fingers were long and slender.
Because June had the most bloodstained body I'd have said it was her hand and not Sheila's who, you remember, had perfectly clean hands.




Just to reiterate on this " hand print ", it would have appeared that it was mentioned back in 2012 and police took photographs but that was all they did, nothing else, nor did forensics investigate it but it was allegedly a bigger hand than Sheila's ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 04, 2019, 01:57:PM



Just to reiterate on this " hand print ", it would have appeared that it was mentioned back in 2012 and police took photographs but that was all they did, nothing else, nor did forensics investigate it but it was allegedly a bigger hand than Sheila's ?

Where’s this from? Can’t be bigger than Sheila’s because if the bible dimensions.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 04, 2019, 02:04:PM
It’s not me who is kidding myself. You just have to look at Sheila’s face to see she had been dead for quite sometime. However, I have been here long enough to realise that there are certain posters who will have an open view about Bamber and no matter what, they will argue against anything that lints to guilt. Now before you even suggest I have a closed mind, remember I fought long and hard for innocence. Most of the stuff you hold dear has been debunked but you hold onto it and that’s your  choice.

Bit confused as to why you think NGB would know if the picture was faked - that’s just paranoia.

I have an open mind. Saying Bamber is guilty but being open to an industrial frame.

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 02:21:PM
Where’s this from? Can’t be bigger than Sheila’s because if the bible dimensions.




Because I'd picked up on it in 2012 my guess would be before I came onto the forum. It may have been the same year but I only joined in the May I think and I'd written this in the June.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 02:25:PM
I do remember first writing about it possibly belonging to Nevill ( thicker fingers ) if the garment had initially been draped over the back of a chair that he may have leaned on to steady himself.
I also believed that Sheila would have still been in her day clothes when she carried out the shootings as the nightdress would possibly have been where I first mentioned.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 04, 2019, 02:28:PM
I do remember first writing about it possibly belonging to Nevill ( thicker fingers ) if the garment had initially been draped over the back of a chair that he may have leaned on to steady himself.
I also believed that Sheila would have still been in her day clothes when she carried out the shootings as the nightdress would possibly have been where I first mentioned.

Sorry Lookout, which print are you talking about? The one in the kitchen?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 02:32:PM
Apparently it was alleged that it had also been a bigger hand than Sheila's. I don't know who'd supposedly said this but if it had anything to do with EP, most of them needed a visit to the opticians anyway.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 04, 2019, 03:04:PM
Apparently it was alleged that it had also been a bigger hand than Sheila's. I don't know who'd supposedly said this but if it had anything to do with EP, most of them needed a visit to the opticians anyway.

Which print? The one in  the kitchen?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 04:08:PM
Which print? The one in  the kitchen?




Possibly on a garment in the kitchen, which looked to have been on a nightdress which was later worn by Sheila.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 04:11:PM
It would have been in the kitchen area if it on the back of a chair as I don't think there was a chair in the bedroom, not that I could see anyway.
I'll go through the thread and see how it came about.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 04:56:PM
More confusion as autopsy notes from Vanezis mentions that 3 bullets were removed from Sheila's body.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 04, 2019, 05:22:PM
More confusion as autopsy notes from Vanezis mentions that 3 bullets were removed from Sheila's body.

He is refering to parts of the same bullet. The one in her neck fragmented.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 05:48:PM
He is refering to parts of the same bullet. The one in her neck fragmented.




Have you read the scrawling result ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 04, 2019, 05:52:PM



Have you read the scrawling result ?

His autopsy notes?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 05:56:PM
His autopsy notes?




Yes-----bullet recovered from L arm, under Sheila's notes near to where it states abdominal injury-iliac fossa ( this is where there's a dressing below Sheila's abdomen )
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 06:05:PM



Yes-----bullet recovered from L arm, under Sheila's notes near to where it states abdominal injury-iliac fossa ( this is where there's a dressing below Sheila's abdomen )



It says the above just a couple of lines down after a neck haemorrhage.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 04, 2019, 06:07:PM
It would have been in the kitchen area if it on the back of a chair as I don't think there was a chair in the bedroom, not that I could see anyway.
I'll go through the thread and see how it came about.

It's not on a chair or a nightdress, it's on the tiles near the aga.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 06:11:PM
It's not on a chair or a nightdress, it's on the tiles near the aga.




What was on the tiles ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 04, 2019, 06:11:PM



Yes-----bullet recovered from L arm, under Sheila's notes near to where it states abdominal injury-iliac fossa ( this is where there's a dressing below Sheila's abdomen )

That's a  reference to Neville Lookout nothing to do with Sheila.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 06:21:PM
That's a  reference to Neville Lookout nothing to do with Sheila.




It's with the notes on Sheila's injuries.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 04, 2019, 06:21:PM
I have an open mind. Saying Bamber is guilty but being open to an industrial frame.

Saying Bamber is guilty and framed is not being open minded. That line of thinking only shows you need to believe in guilt regardless.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 04, 2019, 06:30:PM
Saying Bamber is guilty and framed is not being open minded. That line of thinking only shows you need to believe in guilt regardless.

Sorry, the industrial frame would have been made on an innocent Bamber.

A guilty Bamber, the industrial frame is not needed.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 04, 2019, 06:33:PM



It's with the notes on Sheila's injuries.

Those notes are about all of the victims but the page you are referring to is about Neville.

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=988.0;attach=4958)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 04, 2019, 06:33:PM



What was on the tiles ?

There was a hand print - I believe CAL mentions it too.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 07:06:PM
Those notes are about all of the victims but the page you are referring to is about Neville.

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=988.0;attach=4958)



Well unless Nevill had an injury on the left side of his abdomen in the area known as the iliac fossa then Vanezis was drunk. These are notes written as the body first appeared and before they were re-typed or edited.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 07:08:PM
There was a hand print - I believe CAL mentions it too.




McDonnell reckoned it was Nevill's.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 04, 2019, 07:10:PM
Sorry, the industrial frame would have been made on an innocent Bamber.

A guilty Bamber, the industrial frame is not needed.

Relatives find the silencer. Realising that Sheila could not or would not have used it, they plant blood inside inside it to incriminate JB.

Relatives report silencer to the police.

Police give silencer to lab.

Lab look at silencer un-aware of the circumstances it came it into being and conclude Sheila was murdered.

Done. Nothing industrial about it.

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 04, 2019, 07:25:PM
I would like to hear the opinion of Nbg1066 on the high resolution photograph in question. From his knowledge of the history of the case, I would expect him to know whether or not Bamber's defence produced a fake photograph.

In fact, the idea of the photograph being enhanced was invented by a poster called Weety at the red forum and who has used the name Bridget at this forum. It's just complete bunkum, but there does seem to be some organisation behind it. It has become almost a mantra. "The photo has been enhanced."

Mike Tesko made some copies of photographs and some of the copies have what photographers call a blue cast. You are trying to kid people that the pictures with a blue cast show the true colours
and that the original unaltered image is a fake. But it's possible to prove that it's the blue pictures which are wrong.

I would also like to hear Mikes view on this issue. He has seen the photos in the album. For all I know, the photos he copied may already have been adjusted. The badly degraded image you keep posting must have already been distorted when Mike copied it. It has a lot of noise as well as a blue cast. It looks like it has been copied many times.

When images are copied by simply photographing a photograph, distortions tend to occur each time.

The photo is genuine. I have seen it myself.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 07:27:PM
I often wonder if the relatives knew at the time that RWB's blood grouping was the same as Sheila's.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on September 04, 2019, 07:27:PM
Those notes are about all of the victims but the page you are referring to is about Neville.

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=988.0;attach=4958)


He seems to have given them -the deceased- numbers 1 to 5. Possibly it made the task more 'business-like? Despite the appalling writing some words are more decipherable than others and there's a point it looks as if Nevill has an ilium fosse injury and stretch marks and Sheila has a chest wound. He was, however, correct in saying that number 3 was menstruating and had a tampon and IUD in place.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 04, 2019, 07:35:PM
Relatives find the silencer. Realising that Sheila could not or would not have used it, they plant blood inside inside it to incriminate JB.

Relatives report silencer to the police.

Police give silencer to lab.

Lab look at silencer un-aware of the circumstances it came it into being and conclude Sheila was murdered.

Done. Nothing industrial about it.

The industrial frame would involve the relatives, police, Julie, & experts. The police would have had to create a vast industrial frame department, weeks after the massacre.

The only advantage the police would have is that Bamber was the only alive suspect due to Nevill's 'mysterious' call. Bamber having motives, opportunity and no alibi.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 04, 2019, 07:38:PM


Well unless Nevill had an injury on the left side of his abdomen in the area known as the iliac fossa then Vanezis was drunk. These are notes written as the body first appeared and before they were re-typed or edited.

It doesn't say injury, it says 'old' scar.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 04, 2019, 07:53:PM
In order of mysteriousness, I would rate the phone calls as -

Nevill's call to Bamber

Bamber's call to Chelmsford police.

Nevill's call to Chelmsford police (unproven)

Bamber's 3am call to Julie.

Bamber's call to Julie at 10pm.

--------------

There is a very slim chance Bamber would ring his girlfriend at 3am. However no chance he would ring the 5th furthest away police station. No one would.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 04, 2019, 08:00:PM
The industrial frame would involve the relatives, police, Julie, & experts. The police would have had to create a vast industrial frame department, weeks after the massacre.

The only advantage the police would have is that Bamber was the only alive suspect due to Nevill's 'mysterious' call. Bamber having motives, opportunity and no alibi.

I don't believe in the industrial frame. If an industrial frame took place, we would find other biological tissues inside the silencer such as skin, bone and brains from the twins. Fake muzzle imprints put on the photos ect ect.

PS: Why are you still misquoting the the judge on the 'mysterious' call when you know he never said such a thing?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 04, 2019, 08:08:PM
I don't believe in the industrial frame. If an industrial frame took place, we would find other biological tissues inside the silencer such as skin, bone and brains from the twins. Fake muzzle imprints put on the photos ect ect.

PS: Why are you still misquoting the the judge on the 'mysterious' call when you know he never said such a thing?

Going by Wilkes's book. The judges summing up. The judge generously used the word 'mysterious'.

The shots into the twins would not cause back splatter of skin, bone & brain. It was a rifle for shooting rabbits.

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 04, 2019, 08:26:PM
Going by Wilkes's book. The judges summing up. The judge generously used the word 'mysterious'.


Yet there is no mention of this in the Judges summing up. Haven't you learnt your lesson on going by books after the Paul Harrison fiasco?

The shots into the twins would not cause back splatter of skin, bone & brain. It was a rifle for shooting rabbits.

Three contact wounds to Nicholas Caffell's head. Back splatter is most commonly associated with shots to the head as there is nowhere for the gas to escape. So if you insist the gun is powerful enough to bring Sheila's blood back to eight baffles plates in the silencer. Where is all the other stuff?

Below is a silencer that has skin inside with powder residues in the skin. So yes it does happen.

(https://i.ibb.co/n6gW019/sil555.png)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 04, 2019, 08:40:PM
It doesn't say injury, it says 'old' scar.




Strange for an " old scar " to have a dressing on.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 04, 2019, 08:48:PM
Yet there is no mention of this in the Judges summing up. Haven't you learnt your lesson on going by books after the Paul Harrison fiasco?

Three contact wounds to Nicholas Caffell's head. Back splatter is most commonly associated with shots to the head as there is nowhere for the gas to escape. So if you insist the gun is powerful enough to bring Sheila's blood back to eight baffles plates in the silencer. Where is all the other stuff?

Below is a silencer that has skin inside with powder residues in the skin. So yes it does happen.

(https://i.ibb.co/n6gW019/sil555.png)

Back splatter is most likely from Sheila's two neck contact shots. That is wear there are veins & a high blood flow.

No one has ever suggested bits of brain, skin & bone should be in the silencer. Besides which there was none in the rifle end.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Steve_uk on September 04, 2019, 08:55:PM
Yet there is no mention of this in the Judges summing up. Haven't you learnt your lesson on going by books after the Paul Harrison fiasco?

Three contact wounds to Nicholas Caffell's head. Back splatter is most commonly associated with shots to the head as there is nowhere for the gas to escape. So if you insist the gun is powerful enough to bring Sheila's blood back to eight baffles plates in the silencer. Where is all the other stuff?

Below is a silencer that has skin inside with powder residues in the skin. So yes it does happen.

(https://i.ibb.co/n6gW019/sil555.png)
I think he was testing the rifle initially (remember it was stiff and his greatest fear was that it would jam). So one bullet each to Daniel and Nicholas, then returning when all was done, by which time the blood flow had stopped, so no backspatter caused by the head wound to Nicholas.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 04, 2019, 08:57:PM



Strange for an " old scar " to have a dressing on.

It didn't have a dressing on it - he's NOT talking about Sheila, he's talking about Neville!
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on September 04, 2019, 09:00:PM
It didn't have a dressing on it - he's NOT talking about Sheila, he's talking about Neville!

Which, if I've deciphered correctly, he refers to as a "graze"................could be interpreted as "scratch"?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 04, 2019, 09:07:PM
Which, if I've deciphered correctly, he refers to as a "graze"................could be interpreted as "scratch"?

He refers to the mark on Sheila as a graze but the one that Lookout is referring to isn't a graze, it's an old scar and is from Neville's autopsy report. not Sheila's.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 04, 2019, 09:12:PM
Back splatter is most likely from Sheila's two neck contact shots. That is wear there are veins & a high blood flow.

Then how do you explain the muzzle imprints showing no silencer was against the skin?


No one has ever suggested bits of brain, skin & bone should be in the silencer. Besides which there was none in the rifle end.

"The biological contents of backspatter include brain tissue, bone fragments, skin tissue, adipose tissues and blood." source - Understanding Backspatter due to Skull Fracture from a Ballistic Projectile



Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on September 04, 2019, 09:20:PM
He refers to the mark on Sheila as a graze but the one that Lookout is referring to isn't a graze, it's an old scar and is from Neville's autopsy report. not Sheila's.


Yes, I gathered Lookout was referring to the wrong one when I read it myself and picked up on the "old scar".
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 04, 2019, 09:21:PM
Then how do you explain the muzzle imprints showing no silencer was against the skin?


"The biological contents of backspatter include brain tissue, bone fragments, skin tissue, adipose tissues and blood." source - Understanding Backspatter due to Skull Fracture from a Ballistic Projectile

Ok, you believe the rifle nozzle would have brain, skin, tissue & Sheila's blood. It didn't.

However the silencer had Sheila's blood after neck contact shots.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Steve_uk on September 04, 2019, 09:29:PM
Then how do you explain the muzzle imprints showing no silencer was against the skin?


"The biological contents of backspatter include brain tissue, bone fragments, skin tissue, adipose tissues and blood." source - Understanding Backspatter due to Skull Fracture from a Ballistic Projectile
You should read your own supporter Andrew Hunter's book draft which mentions two gun enthusiasts' remarks on the subject. Ewen Smith the Birmingham solicitor also recognized there was a problem.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 04, 2019, 10:03:PM
You should read your own supporter Andrew Hunter's book draft which mentions two gun enthusiasts' remarks on the subject. Ewen Smith the Birmingham solicitor also recognized there was a problem.

Two "gun enthusiasts" are at odds with Two actual experts.  Who do you think I will listen to?

Mark Thomas: Now you've looked at the photograph's
Philip Boyce: I have.
Mark Thomas: These are of Sheila's Injuries.
Philip Boyce: I have.
Mark Thomas: Which would you say is the most likely to have occurred?
Philip Boyce: Based on my examination of the wounds in the photographs. And the tests that I have just done. I'm of the opinion that the contact wounds to Sheila's chin. Was contact without the silencer fitted.



"The evidence of Dr Fowler is set out in a more substantial report.  That report has been peer?reviewed by Dr Dragovich, who is Chief Medical Examiner in Oakland County, Michigan and Dr Marcella Fierro, who is the retired Chief Medical Examiner to the Commonwealth of Virginia.  Both have qualifications as forensic pathologists.  In his careful report, Dr Fowler makes clear that he has reviewed the evidence, which was available in relation to the wounds.  He concluded that the abrasions found were consistent with those of a rifle without a silencer, that there were no distinctive marks on the body which showed that a silencer had been attached, and the residue was consistent with contact wounds."
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 04, 2019, 10:07:PM
Ok, you believe the rifle nozzle would have brain, skin, tissue & Sheila's blood. It didn't.

However the silencer had Sheila's blood after neck contact shots.

No, I believe the rifle was not powerful enough to create such backspatter in the first place. Its those who insist that it does who have the dilemma of the absence of any brain, skin, tissue and twins blood.  8)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 04, 2019, 11:31:PM
No, I believe the rifle was not powerful enough to create such backspatter in the first place. Its those who insist that it does who have the dilemma of the absence of any brain, skin, tissue and twins blood.  8)

I agree that the rifle was not very powerful. Which is why Nevill as head of the family would have quickly disarmed Sheila, June, Daniel or Nicholas if any of them were holding it.

However there has never been any dispute that a contact shot where there are veins, arteries and bloodflow would produce back splatter.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 05, 2019, 12:03:AM
"Test shots on live pigs destined for slaughter showed that bone particles are a feature of backspatter from close-range shots to heads. Contamination of nearby surfaces by bone fragments and bone-plus-bullet fragments, as well as other organic debris, appears to be quite heavy."
"Detection of Bone and Bone-Plus-Bullet Particles in Backspatter from Close-Range Shots to Heads," Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 36, No. 6, 1991, pp. 1745-1752,

Adam were is all the biological material from Nicholas 3 contact head shots?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 05, 2019, 10:37:AM
I remember posing that question about bone and flesh etc after contact shots.There would have been visible matter with contact shots.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 05, 2019, 03:28:PM
I remember posing that question about bone and flesh etc after contact shots.There would have been visible matter with contact shots.

Unlikely with a low velocity weapon.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 05, 2019, 05:54:PM
Unlikely with a low velocity weapon.




Nothing to do with the velocity, it's actual contact with the wound itself.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on September 05, 2019, 06:02:PM



Nothing to do with the velocity, it's actual contact with the wound itself.


My knowledge of firearms can be written on the back of a postage stamp, but I'd imagine the "weak" type which Adam keeps banging on about will have rather less detrimental effect on tissue and bone, than will a 'strong' gun?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 05, 2019, 06:58:PM

My knowledge of firearms can be written on the back of a postage stamp, but I'd imagine the "weak" type which Adam keeps banging on about will have rather less detrimental effect on tissue and bone, than will a 'strong' gun?

Well it is a fact that it was a rifle for shooting rabbits.

Nevill as head of the family would instantly disarm Sheila, June, Daniel or Nicholas.  If they were for some reason misbehaving bare footed in nightclothes. Espescially at 3am as he needed his sleep and would not want anyone else to wake.

Ringing Bamber  :))
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 05, 2019, 07:35:PM



Nothing to do with the velocity, it's actual contact with the wound itself.

Lookout, Neville's head was smashed in with the rifle butt but I don't recall any tissue being found on that. It
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 05, 2019, 07:37:PM

My knowledge of firearms can be written on the back of a postage stamp, but I'd imagine the "weak" type which Adam keeps banging on about will have rather less detrimental effect on tissue and bone, than will a 'strong' gun?

If there was no tissue on the rifle butt which was used on Neville's head, then I doubt a small velocity rifle would send skin and bone flying into the air.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on September 05, 2019, 07:43:PM
Well it is a fact that it was a rifle for shooting rabbits.

Nevill as head of the family would instantly disarm Sheila, June, Daniel or Nicholas.  If they were for some reason misbehaving bare footed in nightclothes. Espescially at 3am as he needed his sleep and would not want anyone else to wake.

Ringing Bamber  :))


I think it's possible that everyone knows what the rifle was designed for, however, it rendered an entire family no LESS dead than if they'd been on the receiving end of something more powerful, and whilst I know what you're trying to imply by saying Nevill, as head of the family, wouldn't have stood for it and would have quickly disarmed Sheila, the fact does remain, that unless he could have talked her down, he'd have known that a bullet from it could have reached him faster than he could have reached her.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on September 05, 2019, 07:47:PM
If there was no tissue on the rifle butt which was used on Neville's head, then I doubt a small velocity rifle would send skin and bone flying into the air.


Well, I guess it's a fact that the butt end of a "weak" rifle is no less effective than the butt end of a "strong" one".
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 05, 2019, 07:52:PM

I think it's possible that everyone knows what the rifle was designed for, however, it rendered an entire family no LESS dead than if they'd been on the receiving end of something more powerful, and whilst I know what you're trying to imply by saying Nevill, as head of the family, wouldn't have stood for it and would have quickly disarmed Sheila, the fact does remain, that unless he could have talked her down, he'd have known that a bullet from it could have reached him faster than he could have reached her.

Yes but one bullett would not have killed him or stopped him disarming Sheila. That is if she fired one bullet & it was accurrate.

However if Sheila had a shot gun or powerful hand gun... 

Not sure Nevill would have tried to talk Sheila down. Maybe briefly. He would want her disarmed as soon as possible.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 05, 2019, 10:25:PM
Lookout, Neville's head was smashed in with the rifle butt but I don't recall any tissue being found on that. It




Because the piece of the butt that broke off was never examined-----come to think, it wasn't spoken of much at all.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 06, 2019, 12:47:AM



Because the piece of the butt that broke off was never examined-----come to think, it wasn't spoken of much at all.

So tissue and bone would only cling to that one piece of the rifle?  ???
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on September 06, 2019, 07:00:AM
So tissue and bone would only cling to that one piece of the rifle?  ???


I'd have thought that tissue and bone would have adhered more to, and been more visible on a broad wooden surface than a more smaller metal one.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on September 06, 2019, 07:08:AM
Yes but one bullett would not have killed him or stopped him disarming Sheila. That is if she fired one bullet & it was accurrate.

However if Sheila had a shot gun or powerful hand gun... 

Not sure Nevill would have tried to talk Sheila down. Maybe briefly. He would want her disarmed as soon as possible.

That "he would want her disarmed as soon as possible" very much suggests that Nevill did not, as you do, write the weapon off as being "weak". If it just so happened that the woman, whose knowledge of guns could be written on a postage stamp, pulled the trigger and accidentally aimed correctly, he'd be no less dead, mthan if he'd been shot by a marksman.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 06, 2019, 08:27:AM
That "he would want her disarmed as soon as possible" very much suggests that Nevill did not, as you do, write the weapon off as being "weak". If it just so happened that the woman, whose knowledge of guns could be written on a postage stamp, pulled the trigger and accidentally aimed correctly, he'd be no less dead, mthan if he'd been shot by a marksman.

It took 8 bullets (6 in the head) and a brutal beating by Bamber to kill Nevill.

If Sheila somehow fired one accurrate bullet into Nevill's torso when he took the rifle off her, that would not stop him. It would irritate him as he would not be able to go straight back to bed.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 06, 2019, 08:50:AM
It took 8 bullets (6 in the head) and a brutal beating by Bamber to kill Nevill.

If Sheila somehow fired one accurrate bullet into Nevill's torso when he took the rifle off her, that would not stop him. It would irritate him as he would not be able to go straight back to bed.

He was shot twice in the jaw/neck, once in the arm and one bullet grazed his torso. He was then shot another four times in the head later after he was already dead.

Get your facts right.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on September 06, 2019, 08:58:AM
He was shot twice in the jaw/neck, once in the arm and one bullet grazed his torso. He was then shot another four times in the head later after he was already dead.

Get your facts right.

Jaw, neck. Just as bad as a head shot.

Bamber shot him 4 times in the head after the brutal kitchen beating. Nevill would have been knocked out as Bamber hit him so hard the rifle stock broke. However Nevill would have still been breathing,  so Bamber shot him 4 times in the head.

The slim chance of Sheila hitting Nevill with a torso shot would not have deterred or stopped him.

Nevill ringing Bamber after Sheila started shooting the twins. Get real.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 06, 2019, 09:00:AM
So tissue and bone would only cling to that one piece of the rifle?  ???





Always supposing that it was the rifle used----yes. As I said, it was more or less ignored so far as evidence was concerned.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 06, 2019, 09:13:AM
Where was the rear staircase off the kitchen ? Where did it lead to ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 06, 2019, 09:30:AM
Jaw, neck. Just as bad as a head shot.

Bamber shot him 4 times in the head after the brutal kitchen beating. Nevill would have been knocked out as Bamber hit him so hard the rifle stock broke. However Nevill would have still been breathing,  so Bamber shot him 4 times in the head.

The slim chance of Sheila hitting Nevill with a torso shot would not have deterred or stopped him.

Nevill ringing Bamber after Sheila started shooting the twins. Get real.

The pathologist testified that he only had a “little time” left to live after the initial four shots upstairs. The shots to the arm, jaw/neck and torso was all in quick succession.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 07, 2019, 09:48:PM
Regarding the posts the other day, this is the area where the trails go out of view.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 07, 2019, 09:59:PM
Regarding the posts the other day, this is the area where the trails go out of view.

What about them?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 07, 2019, 10:04:PM
What about them?

It's not a very good image but they appear to fade and taper.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 07, 2019, 10:14:PM
What about them?

What I am interested in trying to understand is the exact difference between yours and Caroline's opinion on these marks.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 07, 2019, 10:17:PM
It's not a very good image but they appear to fade and taper.

They seem to smudge yes. I believe this is what created what seems to be be fingers marks but are not.

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 07, 2019, 10:21:PM
What I am interested in trying to understand is the exact difference between yours and Caroline's opinion on these marks.

The marks on the arm or the marks on the dress?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 07, 2019, 10:24:PM
The marks on the arm or the marks on the dress?

Marks on the arm
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 07, 2019, 10:36:PM
Marks on the arm

As far as I know we both have the same view. They are trickles of blood drops from the gunshot wound to the neck.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 07, 2019, 10:42:PM
As far as I know we both have the same view. They are trickles of blood drops from the gunshot wound to the neck.

Blood drops on underside of wrist and then splits in to three or four separate streams that suddenly stop and congeal.  Is this what you mean?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 07, 2019, 11:30:PM
Blood drops on underside of wrist and then splits in to three or four separate streams that suddenly stop and congeal.  Is this what you mean?

Yes.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 07, 2019, 11:46:PM
Blood drops on underside of wrist and then splits in to three or four separate streams that suddenly stop and congeal.  Is this what you mean?

Or four five blobs that land on the forearm and start running with gravity. Does not need to be a big blob that split up.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 08, 2019, 08:53:AM
Or four five blobs that land on the forearm and start running with gravity. Does not need to be a big blob that split up.

Hang on though David.  We cant just have the flows running in either direction - like an and / or scenario. The dark spots cant be both the end of the trail were blood suddenly congeals and also the beginning of the trail were blood has initially dropped on to the arm.   
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 08, 2019, 10:10:AM
Hang on though David.  We cant just have the flows running in either direction - like an and / or scenario. The dark spots cant be both the end of the trail were blood suddenly congeals and also the beginning of the trail were blood has initially dropped on to the arm.   

Well, told you my own thoughts, like I said, it would be useful to have some pictures of the inside of her arm.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 08, 2019, 11:15:AM
I think those blood drops were from her nose, as they've landed in a complete line on top of her arm and because liquid runs downwards it's run down both sides of her arm------not a difficult thing to work out really being as her arms were slim. Maybe if she'd had a thicker arm the blood might have just run one way.

Blood coming from the nose is a continual drip-drip motion and landing on the top centre of her arm made the 7 streaks possible, running down either side.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 08, 2019, 03:19:PM
I think those blood drops were from her nose, as they've landed in a complete line on top of her arm and because liquid runs downwards it's run down both sides of her arm------not a difficult thing to work out really being as her arms were slim. Maybe if she'd had a thicker arm the blood might have just run one way.

Blood coming from the nose is a continual drip-drip motion and landing on the top centre of her arm made the 7 streaks possible, running down either side.

Hi Lookout, as per one of the photos above, do you think node bleed drops would congeal exactly where they fell, as well as running?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 08, 2019, 03:19:PM
Hang on though David.  We cant just have the flows running in either direction - like an and / or scenario. The dark spots cant be both the end of the trail were blood suddenly congeals and also the beginning of the trail were blood has initially dropped on to the arm.   

The dark spots is where the blood ended. Not where they began.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 08, 2019, 03:25:PM
The dark spots is where the blood ended. Not where they began.

From the faintness of the trails, they seem to have ended very thickly.  Contrast this theory with the neck wound flows.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: maggie on September 08, 2019, 03:27:PM
Hi Lookout, as per one of the photos above, do you think node bleed drops would congeal exactly where they fell, as well as running?
Hi Roch it is quite possible imo that the dark spots could be gouges.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 08, 2019, 03:29:PM
From the faintness of the trails, they seem to have ended very thickly.  Contrast this theory with the neck wound flows.

The neck wound flows have a much higher volume of blood behind them.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 08, 2019, 03:40:PM
I think those blood drops were from her nose, as they've landed in a complete line on top of her arm and because liquid runs downwards it's run down both sides of her arm------not a difficult thing to work out really being as her arms were slim. Maybe if she'd had a thicker arm the blood might have just run one way.

Blood coming from the nose is a continual drip-drip motion and landing on the top centre of her arm made the 7 streaks possible, running down either side.

Lookout, how can the blood be from her nose when it hasn’t trailed down her face?  The blood from her nose has travelled up to her eye.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 08, 2019, 03:47:PM
The neck wound flows have a much higher volume of blood behind them.

I mean, are the flows on her neck darker than the spots they stem from?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 08, 2019, 03:50:PM
I mean, are the flows on her neck darker than the spots they stem from?

In some areas
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 08, 2019, 04:43:PM
Hi Lookout, as per one of the photos above, do you think node bleed drops would congeal exactly where they fell, as well as running?




From the nose, yes Roch. The blood is usually darker at the onset of a severe nose bleed and because they are " drips " coming from smaller orifices they gel after a while after the initial flow.
I can say this in all honesty as I suffered nose-bleeds as a teen. Drips are pretty free-flowing when your head is in a forward position. 
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 08, 2019, 04:47:PM



From the nose, yes Roch. The blood is usually darker at the onset of a severe nose bleed and because they are " drips " coming from smaller orifices they gel after a while after the initial flow.
I can say this in all honesty as I suffered nose-bleeds as a teen. Drips are pretty free-flowing when your head is in a forward position.

How did blood from her nose materialise on her arm without running down the area above the lips?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 08, 2019, 04:51:PM
Lookout, how can the blood be from her nose when it hasn’t trailed down her face?  The blood from her nose has travelled up to her eye.




The blood came from her nose to her arm before she was lying down. Her head was initially resting against the bedside table meaning that her head would be forward.
Once Sheila was lying down, the blood from her nose would have collected at the back of her throat some trickling down inside her and some coming from her mouth.
When someone is dead they can sometimes have seepage escaping from their mouth.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 08, 2019, 04:58:PM
How did blood from her nose materialise on her arm without running down the area above the lips?




If her head was bent forward the blood from her nose would drop as opposed to running down her lips.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on September 08, 2019, 05:22:PM



If her head was bent forward the blood from her nose would drop as opposed to running down her lips.


That sort of instant reaction -if she'd never previously experienced a nosebleed- would have required her to be in control in a way it's being claimed she wasn't.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 08, 2019, 06:37:PM



If her head was bent forward the blood from her nose would drop as opposed to running down her lips.

Her head would have to return to a vertical position Lookout. It's not feasible.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 08, 2019, 06:42:PM
Her head would have to return to a vertical position Lookout. It's not feasible.
[/quote


This is what I'd already explained/said. That when she was propped against the bedside cabinet, her nose would have bled from the position she was in and with her arm across her middle the blood dripped on it.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 08, 2019, 06:44:PM
This is what I'd already explained/said. That when she was propped against the bedside cabinet, her nose would have bled from the position she was in and with her arm across her middle the blood dripped on it.

Propped up or not, she couldn't avoid getting blood above her top lip.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 08, 2019, 06:45:PM
Head bowed outwards, severe nose bleed dropping onto her arm. It drops out of the nose, not gushes.   
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 08, 2019, 06:55:PM
Going over this yet again, is not going to convince me those blood steaks are wounds.

They look nothing like the actual wounds on Nevils forearm because they are simply not wounds.

They look like runs of blood drops because they are runs of blood drops.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 08, 2019, 07:27:PM
Going over this yet again, is not going to convince me those blood steaks are wounds.

They look nothing like the actual wounds on Nevils forearm because they are simply not wounds.

They look like runs of blood drops because they are runs of blood drops.






He did have gouges though caused by fingernails, as did June as well as bloodied fingerprints around her neck.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 08, 2019, 07:35:PM


He did have gouges though caused by fingernails, as did June as well as bloodied fingerprints around her neck.

I did once believe they were caused by fingernails. However when I deciphered Vanezis hand writing I changed my mind. He claims they were caused by the end of the gun barrel

"There is a collection of bruises on right forearm
_____ of end of barrel of rifle
Area of bruising 2"x 4" Slight bruising around elbow"
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 09, 2019, 12:38:AM
I did once believe they were caused by fingernails. However when I deciphered Vanezis hand writing I changed my mind. He claims they were caused by the end of the gun barrel

"There is a collection of bruises on right forearm
_____ of end of barrel of rifle
Area of bruising 2"x 4" Slight bruising around elbow"


You once believed a lot of things - then the wind changes! Did you believe this in your keyed up stage or your naive stage? Hard to tell with you?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: maggie on September 09, 2019, 08:35:AM
Head bowed outwards, severe nose bleed dropping onto her arm. It drops out of the nose, not gushes.
Hi Lookout, good to see you posting again. Surely blood falling from the nose or any other facial wound would splatter where it lands. Can’t see how it would land in such clean perfect drops. 
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 09, 2019, 09:31:AM
Hi Lookout, good to see you posting again. Surely blood falling from the nose or any other facial wound would splatter where it lands. Can’t see how it would land in such clean perfect drops.





Hi Maggie, it's good to drop in.
Blood flowing from the nose drops rather than splatters----like those drops/spots we see on the carpet near Sheila, as those could also be from her nose as opposed to a wound which would splatter and leave larger patches. That first shot would have caused her nose to have bled which I think are the spots on the carpet. Because it's the nose and the narrower exits ( nostrils ) it won't cause the same splatter as a wider opening such as the mouth if you see what I mean.

Head bent slightly forward would account for the rows of drips on her arm which ran over her arm as liquid finds its own level wherever it lands. Arm movement would then cause it to run in another direction which is why we see odd lines of direction.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 09, 2019, 09:54:AM
Hi Lookout, good to see you posting again. Surely blood falling from the nose or any other facial wound would splatter where it lands. Can’t see how it would land in such clean perfect drops.

I agree.  David, bear with me - but do you agree that this rules out the blood having dipped on her arm?  If so, this leaves the theory that the blood was transferred from elsewhere, across the lower right of her wrist and on to the forearm, where it abruptly congeals.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 09, 2019, 10:52:AM
Any liquid inc. blood which is dropped from a height will splash---blood that falls/drops from a foot onto a warm surface of the skin tends not to splash and will gel, leaving the liquid part of the blood to run. The blood would have been a pretty dark colour from her nose as it's deoxygenated blood known as venous blood which is why it wouldn't have splashed/splattered everywhere as there's no pressure from a venous bleed as there is from an arterial one where it would splatter.


I think I've got this right, as it's an important part of any investigation as to which area the blood would have come from, though this is a forensic job and not that of a police officer's.   
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 09, 2019, 02:19:PM




Hi Maggie, it's good to drop in.
Blood flowing from the nose drops rather than splatters----like those drops/spots we see on the carpet near Sheila, as those could also be from her nose as opposed to a wound which would splatter and leave larger patches. That first shot would have caused her nose to have bled which I think are the spots on the carpet. Because it's the nose and the narrower exits ( nostrils ) it won't cause the same splatter as a wider opening such as the mouth if you see what I mean.

Head bent slightly forward would account for the rows of drips on her arm which ran over her arm as liquid finds its own level wherever it lands. Arm movement would then cause it to run in another direction which is why we see odd lines of direction.

In order to 'flow' it would have t leave a trail down the upper lip. What you are proposing goes against physics.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 09, 2019, 02:22:PM
I agree.  David, bear with me - but do you agree that this rules out the blood having dipped on her arm?  If so, this leaves the theory that the blood was transferred from elsewhere, across the lower right of her wrist and on to the forearm, where it abruptly congeals.

I believe it came from the pool of blood in her armpit, if we could see the other side of her arm, I think there will be trials and as her arm has been lifted, the trails have flowed back, causing those in the photograph.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 09, 2019, 02:23:PM
Any liquid inc. blood which is dropped from a height will splash---blood that falls/drops from a foot onto a warm surface of the skin tends not to splash and will gel, leaving the liquid part of the blood to run. The blood would have been a pretty dark colour from her nose as it's deoxygenated blood known as venous blood which is why it wouldn't have splashed/splattered everywhere as there's no pressure from a venous bleed as there is from an arterial one where it would splatter.


I think I've got this right, as it's an important part of any investigation as to which area the blood would have come from, though this is a forensic job and not that of a police officer's.

There is absolutely so sign of the blood coming from her nose Lookout.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 09, 2019, 03:15:PM
There is absolutely so sign of the blood coming from her nose Lookout.




Initially there would have been, to account for all the blood drops on the carpet surrounding her. The blood from her first neck injury would have gone down the front of her body inside her clothing when briefly standing as opposed to dripping freely on the floor.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 09, 2019, 03:25:PM



Initially there would have been, to account for all the blood drops on the carpet surrounding her. The blood from her first neck injury would have gone down the front of her body inside her clothing when briefly standing as opposed to dripping freely on the floor.

OK, Lookout, no point arguing. You have your own ideas - sorry, don't share them.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 09, 2019, 03:58:PM
OK, Lookout, no point arguing. You have your own ideas - sorry, don't share them.




That's fine, I don't expect you to at all.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on September 09, 2019, 04:16:PM



Initially there would have been, to account for all the blood drops on the carpet surrounding her. The blood from her first neck injury would have gone down the front of her body inside her clothing when briefly standing as opposed to dripping freely on the floor.


'Course, if the impact of the shot caused her head to loll in one direction it would alter the course of the blood flow...............rather like damming a river.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 09, 2019, 06:52:PM
I agree.  David, bear with me - but do you agree that this rules out the blood having dipped on her arm?  If so, this leaves the theory that the blood was transferred from elsewhere, across the lower right of her wrist and on to the forearm, where it abruptly congeals.

What happened is exactly what happened on this wall. The blood landed, it then ran down until the blob lost momentum leaving a trail behind it.

(https://i.ibb.co/VYBD579/blood.png)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 09, 2019, 08:18:PM
What happened is exactly what happened on this wall. The blood landed, it then ran down until the blob lost momentum leaving a trail behind it.

(https://i.ibb.co/VYBD579/blood.png)

Stop trying to play forensic expert - it's your OPINION of what happened. You're NOT qualified to make such definite claims - fool!
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 09, 2019, 08:58:PM
What happened is exactly what happened on this wall. The blood landed, it then ran down until the blob lost momentum leaving a trail behind it.



I would still like to know who told Roch in March of 2017 that these runs of blood are actually scratches and gouge marks caused by an altercation.

IMO its a ludicrous suggestion to make.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on September 09, 2019, 09:08:PM

I would still like to know who told Roch in March of 2017 that these runs of blood are actually scratches and gouge marks caused by an altercation.

IMO its a ludicrous suggestion to make.

It's a discussion forum where people have all kinds of opinions, it's NOT David's fiefdom where everyone has to share his thoughts (heaven forbid!).
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 10, 2019, 11:03:AM

I would still like to know who told Roch in March of 2017 that these runs of blood are actually scratches and gouge marks caused by an altercation.

IMO its a ludicrous suggestion to make.




I think I remember that I'd actually said that they looked like injuries because of the density of the blood colour, but this was only a suggestion and not a definite answer. I'll look for the said post/s.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 10, 2019, 11:09:AM



I think I remember that I'd actually said that they looked like injuries because of the density of the blood colour

On image 2, on page 20 above, there is a marked contrast in darkness between the streams and the visible spot.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 10, 2019, 11:21:AM

I would still like to know who told Roch in March of 2017 that these runs of blood are actually scratches and gouge marks caused by an altercation.

IMO its a ludicrous suggestion to make.

Somebody who attended a function for EP or ex EP.  They overheard some former colleagues laughing about how much of a stitch-up the Bamber case was.  Sickened by what they heard, they took the decision to study aspects of the case, particularly the very earliest events of 7/8/85.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 10, 2019, 11:21:AM
It was a post I made in 2016 that I'd said that the marks on Sheila's arm " looked like wounds ". It's on the thread called  "Sheila's Clean Hands".
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 10, 2019, 11:28:AM
On image 2, on page 20 above, there is a marked contrast in darkness between the streams and the visible spot.

That is because the stream is not as thick as the blob. Sheila's skin is showing underneath it.

Much like this blood stain.

(https://i.ibb.co/gmmQ53g/blood66.png)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 10, 2019, 11:30:AM
Somebody who attended a function for EP or ex EP.  They overheard some former colleagues laughing about how much of a stitch-up the Bamber case was.  Sickened by what they heard, they took the decision to study aspects of the case, particularly the very earliest events of 7/8/85.

Bill Robertson?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 10, 2019, 11:32:AM
That is because the stream is not as thick as the blob. Sheila's skin is showing underneath it.

Much like this blood stain.

(https://i.ibb.co/gmmQ53g/blood66.png)

What is that stain and where's it from?  It looks like a paper background.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 10, 2019, 11:36:AM
I wonder how Bill Robertson is ? He used to PM me. He was a cop.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 10, 2019, 11:39:AM
What is that stain and where's it from?  It looks like a paper background.




It does depend on the type of surface where blood lands, the depth of the injury and whether the blood is from a vein or an artery.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 10, 2019, 11:40:AM
Bill Robertson?

Yes it was initially his argument. IMHO, images of her crime scene show that she had a lot of small nicks, cuts and grazes.  It's virtually the only aspect that I retain a slight interest in.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 10, 2019, 11:42:AM
What is that stain and where's it from?  It looks like a paper background.

Its from a book I have. "Forensic Science: From the Crime Scene to the Crime Lab, 3rd Edition"

Also in the book is this photo and this text that follows -

(https://i.ibb.co/Zh5sywg/blood667.png)

A bloodstain pattern formed by
the movement of small or large
amounts of blood as a result of
gravity’s pull.



Patterns made by drops or large amounts of blood flowing with the pull
of gravity are called flows . Flows may be formed by single drops or large
volumes of blood coming from an actively bleeding wound or blood deposited
on a surface, from an arterial spurt, for example.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 10, 2019, 11:48:AM
It's the deoxygenated blood which is very dark and where there are drops of blood, the darkest drops are from veins and distinguishes where injuries are in other areas of a body, i.e. arteries.
Put a blob of venous blood alongside a blob of arterial and you'd see the difference.

Those dark blobs on Sheila's arm are, as I say, from her nose ( venous blood ) the blood coming from her neck is arterial, which is a lighter ( oxygenated ) colour as shown on her neck injury. Comparing the two, you can tell.   
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 10, 2019, 11:59:AM
Somebody who attended a function for EP or ex EP.  They overheard some former colleagues laughing about how much of a stitch-up the Bamber case was.  Sickened by what they heard, they took the decision to study aspects of the case, particularly the very earliest events of 7/8/85.

Did he name anyone?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 10, 2019, 12:16:PM
Did he name anyone?

Not that I can recall.  He was not linked to the case but was around during the era of the case.  He gave me the impression that the police 'family' at that time was still quite an insular, almost parochial set-up, with some nepotism, and an expectation that you towed the line.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 10, 2019, 12:32:PM
" Some nepotism ??" Quite an understatement !
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 10, 2019, 12:44:PM
I wonder how Bill Robertson is ? He used to PM me. He was a cop.

If I remember correctly he was harassed into silence
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 10, 2019, 01:08:PM
If I remember correctly he was harassed into silence




Probably. I got the distinct impression that he wanted to say more and was holding back at the time. He was definitely involved somewhere but didn't want to give too much away. However that was his prerogative and I didn't force the issue.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 10, 2019, 01:20:PM
His message on the JB Campaign site is worth a read. It's headed : Supplement. Shock. Trauma. Response.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 10, 2019, 01:23:PM
His message on the JB Campaign site is worth a read. It's headed : Supplement. Shock. Trauma. Response.




Ending with :" Military assaults are often timed to take place around 3am because the body is at its lowest ebb ".
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 11, 2019, 08:07:PM
Yes it was initially his argument. IMHO, images of her crime scene show that she had a lot of small nicks, cuts and grazes.  It's virtually the only aspect that I retain a slight interest in.

I have spoken to Bill. I hope he wont mind me mentioning this.

He told me that in the autopsy photos, All these streaks of blood had been washed off. So that proves my point if I understand him correctly.

However he goes on to say that there are cuts and gouges visible on the back of the hand and arm once the arm had been washed. So that is very interesting.

So it sounds like you just misunderstood him. Nevertheless he could actually be onto something.

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Steve_uk on September 11, 2019, 08:34:PM
The Bamberettes have no concrete proof that there was any physical contact between Sheila and her parents.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 11, 2019, 08:42:PM
The Bamberettes have no concrete proof that there was any physical contact between Sheila and her parents.

Julie was a lying bitch Steve get over it  ::)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 11, 2019, 08:57:PM
The Bamberettes have no concrete proof that there was any physical contact between Sheila and her parents.

Depends on who / what you think is responsible for certain marks on all three adult victims.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 11, 2019, 09:12:PM
So it sounds like you just misunderstood him.

He's probably referring to the quality of autopsy photos, i.e. the photographer. You would have to take close-ups of the washed body in order to capture all the fingernail cuts and scrapes etc. I doubt there's any misunderstanding.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 11, 2019, 09:18:PM
He's probably referring to the quality of autopsy photos, i.e. the photographer. You would have to take close-ups of the washed body in order to capture all the fingernail cuts and scrapes etc. I doubt there's any misunderstanding.

I think you have misunderstood him. He told me the streaks/streams had been washed off. But there are cuts and marks visible elsewhere on the hand and arm after the washing.

The autopsy photos as far as I know are good quality. We have one of Neville’s arm.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 11, 2019, 09:23:PM
I think you have misunderstood him. He said the streaks/streams had been washed off. But there are cuts visible and marks visible elsewhere on the hand and arm.

The autopsy photos as far as I know are good quality. We have one of Neville’s arm.

Pretty certain I haven't misunderstood, as communicated for over a year.  Blood will wash off, so I don't fully understand your argument here.  Also, have you took in to account whether any autopsy negs have been cut?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 11, 2019, 09:32:PM
Pretty certain I haven't misunderstood, as communicated for over a year.  Blood will wash off, so I don't fully understand your argument here.  Also, have you took in to account whether any autopsy negs have been cut?

Blood streaks will wash off but cuts and gouges wont. He told me those streaks were washed off. If that is correct then they are just runs of blood drops like I have always said.

However what remains AFTER the wash is important. He told me that marks did remain on the back of hand and up her arm after the wash.

I am sure Bill will clarify if he is reading this.

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 11, 2019, 09:41:PM
Blood streaks will wash off but cuts and gouges wont. He told me those streaks were washed off. If that is correct then they are just runs of blood drops like I have always said.

However what remains AFTER the wash is important. He told me that marks did remain on the back of hand and up her arm after the wash.

I am sure Bill will clarify if he is reading this.

This is somewhat stating the obvious.  However, cuts can be fine and therefore not necessarily captured by photos that are not close-ups.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 11, 2019, 09:47:PM
This is somewhat stating the obvious.  However, cuts can be fine and therefore not necessarily captured by photos that are not close-ups.

I am making an illustration. Hang on  :)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 11, 2019, 10:01:PM
This is somewhat stating the obvious.  However, cuts can be fine and therefore not necessarily captured by photos that are not close-ups.

Lets pretend these two photos below are the autopsy before and after the wash. If I understand BR correctly, what he has seen is something like the one I have photoshoped at the bottom. The skin has been washed and thus any marks that remains is damaged skin and wounds ect ect. Probably like what I have circled in blue. There are some marks there that I have always suspected MIGHT be cuts and gouges. But I always thought they were most probably dried blood stains that Vanezis washed off (like the streaks) since he never mentioned such marks. However if these marks existed AFTER the body was washed like BR said then that would change my view completely.


(https://i.ibb.co/nBJPJWG/arms.jpg)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 12, 2019, 01:18:PM
Grab marks on all three adults. I think I heard quite some time ago about defence marks on Sheila's arm. It may have been from Bill in one of his pm's.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on September 12, 2019, 02:49:PM
I hope the CPS doesn't drag its feet over the latest info. re. the two silencers. It was at the beginning of July that they were handed documents relating to this.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Roch on September 16, 2019, 08:50:PM
Lets pretend these two photos below are the autopsy before and after the wash. If I understand BR correctly, what he has seen is something like the one I have photoshoped at the bottom. The skin has been washed and thus any marks that remains is damaged skin and wounds ect ect. Probably like what I have circled in blue. There are some marks there that I have always suspected MIGHT be cuts and gouges. But I always thought they were most probably dried blood stains that Vanezis washed off (like the streaks) since he never mentioned such marks. However if these marks existed AFTER the body was washed like BR said then that would change my view completely.


(https://i.ibb.co/nBJPJWG/arms.jpg)

The first thing I asked was whether wounds were visible after the body was washed.  I expect that if the wrist marks are not, it relates to the PM photos - did Bill say they were full body-length images -  or was that the crime scene images?  TBH I cant remember.   I dd previously tell you about upper arm wounds.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on September 16, 2019, 10:17:PM
The first thing I asked was whether wounds were visible after the body was washed.  I expect that if the wrist marks are not, it relates to the PM photos - did Bill say they were full body-length images -  or was that the crime scene images?  TBH I cant remember.   I dd previously tell you about upper arm wounds.

Bill said he wont divulge anymore as it could jeopardise a future appeal. So its really pointless us speculating.

Why he then divulged on the subject with you in the first place without clearly explaining it or showing you such photos that would prove the claims, I find rather odd.

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on September 22, 2019, 07:29:PM
so comit youeself david is it in the ccrc submissions or not.

bump
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on October 06, 2019, 06:23:PM
so comit youeself david is it in the ccrc submissions or not.

bump

so david are you going to comit yourelf.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: David1819 on October 06, 2019, 06:50:PM
Did the nugget get all salty again?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on October 06, 2019, 06:54:PM
Did the nugget get all salty again?

are you going to answr the qustion you keep aviding it.

i asked a qustion all you have to do is answer it.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 06, 2019, 08:07:PM
I don't know about a forensic breakthrough for the time being but the phone-calls feature quite prominently now and there's no doubt about who phoned who and when.   
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on October 07, 2019, 07:44:AM
I don't know about a forensic breakthrough for the time being but the phone-calls feature quite prominently now and there's no doubt about who phoned who and when.

well as david wont anser a simple qustion about it can only conclude there isnt one and its a pack of lies.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 07, 2019, 04:44:PM
well as david wont anser a simple ustion about it can only conclude there isnt one and its a pack of lies.




I would say that that particular " breakthrough " is past its sell-by date and one which I'd pointed out in 2012 so had been done to death since. 
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: nugnug on October 07, 2019, 06:12:PM



I would say that that particular " breakthrough " is past its sell-by date and one which I'd pointed out in 2012 so had been done to death since.

who was cliaming it in 2012 then lookout.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 07, 2019, 06:14:PM
who was cliaming it in 2012 then lookout.




I'll look back at it nugs.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 07, 2019, 06:28:PM
who was cliaming it in 2012 then lookout.




I'd seen a reference to it from a forum dated 2005 then the poster Reader showed me where I'd written about it in 2012, so it was covered then on the thread " Sheila on the bed, photo's withheld, blankets/ sheets destroyed, carpets burned "------June 11 2012.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 07, 2019, 06:34:PM
Vanezis had written a handwritten note " bloodstained palm-prints on nightdress matches bloodstains appeared to have transferred from R.hand ". McDonnell only mentions finger marks not palm print.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on October 07, 2019, 06:59:PM
Vanezis had written a handwritten note " bloodstained palm-prints on nightdress matches bloodstains appeared to have transferred from R.hand ". McDonnell only mentions finger marks not palm print.

This is pretty old news Lookout if you're referring to his written autopsy notes?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 07, 2019, 07:39:PM
This is pretty old news Lookout if you're referring to his written autopsy notes?




What if it is ? I was answering what nugs had asked. That the " palm print "  was old hat !
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 07, 2019, 07:41:PM
Blood on her hands one minute then in the next breath her hands were clean  ::)
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on October 07, 2019, 07:59:PM
Blood on her hands one minute then in the next breath her hands were clean  ::)

What? You've only just noticed that?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 07, 2019, 08:12:PM
What? You've only just noticed that?




Of course I haven't. I was reminding you of that 1 of many faux-pars that each and everyone concerned appeared to manage, with everything they did.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on October 07, 2019, 08:16:PM
Of course I haven't. I was reminding you of that 1 of many faux-pars that each and everyone concerned appeared to manage, with everything they did.

Well, this particular issue has been done to death. all comes down to if you believe Sheila's hands were clean or not. It still doesn't determine a killer though.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 07, 2019, 08:20:PM
Well, this particular issue has been done to death. all comes down to if you believe Sheila's hands were clean or not. It still doesn't determine a killer though.




That's not the point. There were downright lies told. I noticed this in 2012 even if you didn't.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on October 07, 2019, 08:29:PM



That's not the point. There were downright lies told. I noticed this in 2012 even if you didn't.


Well unless you're prepared to go with Adam's Mass conspiracy theory, frankly, I can't see how it's possible for every player in the act -especially the professionals with no reason- to want to put the knife in. It'll be said next that the plan was laid to convict him before the crime was committed.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 07, 2019, 08:47:PM

Well unless you're prepared to go with Adam's Mass conspiracy theory, frankly, I can't see how it's possible for every player in the act -especially the professionals with no reason- to want to put the knife in. It'll be said next that the plan was laid to convict him before the crime was committed.





I don't do conspiracy theories.
 Your last sentence could have been said by the relatives. They all but had him hung drawn and quartered before they drew breath.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on October 07, 2019, 08:53:PM




I don't do conspiracy theories.
 Your last sentence could have been said by the relatives. They all but had him hung drawn and quartered before they drew breath.

Well, Lookout. Don't you claim to have insight into peoples' characters? I don't suppose, for a moment, you're the only one. They may NOT have known him well, but they certainly knew him long before the murders, whereas you only 'know' the person he's presented himself as being since he's been in prison.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Adam on October 07, 2019, 08:58:PM
Obviously Lookout and all supporters believe there was an industrial frame.

Anyone who does not believe there was an industrial frame, believes Bamber is guilty.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on October 07, 2019, 09:10:PM



That's not the point. There were downright lies told. I noticed this in 2012 even if you didn't.

What did you notice in 2012 Lookout?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on October 07, 2019, 09:33:PM
What did you notice in 2012 Lookout?

Are you talking about this thread? The one in which everyone is confused about the hand print on the nightdress and there is talk of Sheila being put in a recovery position? There was only one pattern on the nightdress that resembled finger marks, there was no full handprint.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2845.msg97837.html#msg97837

Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 08, 2019, 10:19:AM
What did you notice in 2012 Lookout?




When disputes were cropping up for instance about the blood on the hands then the blatant way it was then stated that her hands were clean. Contradictions from start to finish.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 08, 2019, 10:21:AM
Are you talking about this thread? The one in which everyone is confused about the hand print on the nightdress and there is talk of Sheila being put in a recovery position? There was only one pattern on the nightdress that resembled finger marks, there was no full handprint.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2845.msg97837.html#msg97837




The " cobbled together" handprint was nothing new.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on October 08, 2019, 01:16:PM



When disputes were cropping up for instance about the blood on the hands then the blatant way it was then stated that her hands were clean. Contradictions from start to finish.

So ou're saying 'you' deciphered' Venezis's notes?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 08, 2019, 03:23:PM
So ou're saying 'you' deciphered' Venezis's notes?




I didn't have to decipher anything.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on October 08, 2019, 04:37:PM



I didn't have to decipher anything.

I'm really not sure what it is that you're claiming to have discovered Lookout?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 08, 2019, 08:31:PM
I'm really not sure what it is that you're claiming to have discovered Lookout?




As long as I understand that's all that matters .
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Jane on October 08, 2019, 08:39:PM



As long as I understand that's all that matters .


Well going by the writing it was very likely a case of deciphering every third word and making up the rest as you go. More or less what most of us did, I imagine.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 08, 2019, 08:45:PM

Well going by the writing it was very likely a case of deciphering every third word and making up the rest as you go. More or less what most of us did, I imagine.




Nope. Vanezis handwritten note stated blood, the typed up version stated clean.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on October 08, 2019, 09:01:PM



Nope. Vanezis handwritten note stated blood, the typed up version stated clean.

And you were the first person to notice this?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 08, 2019, 09:44:PM
And you were the first person to notice this?




No, why ? What are you getting at ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on October 08, 2019, 09:58:PM



No, why ? What are you getting at ?

I am trying to understand what it is that you discovered but you're now dancing around it. What;s the secret? You were keen to talk about it yesterday, now when I have asked you, you don't want to say. I even found the tread for you.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 08, 2019, 10:00:PM
I am trying to understand what it is that you discovered but you're now dancing around it. What;s the secret? You were keen to talk about it yesterday, now when I have asked you, you don't want to say. I even found the tread for you.





So ? You found the thread-----and ? I actually found what I wanted so why the interrogation ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on October 08, 2019, 10:12:PM




So ? You found the thread-----and ? I actually found what I wanted so why the interrogation ?

No interrogation Lookout but one min you're keen to tell how you discovered something first, then you don't want to say what it was.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 08, 2019, 10:13:PM
No interrogation Lookout but one min you're keen to tell how you discovered something first, then you don't want to say what it was.





Why should it bother you ?
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on October 08, 2019, 10:15:PM




Why should it bother you ?

I was initially interested but now I see it's an empty claim.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 08, 2019, 10:24:PM
I was initially interested but now I see it's an empty claim.





Interested ? Nah. Old news you said.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on October 08, 2019, 11:22:PM




Interested ? Nah. Old news you said.

The prints on the nightdress ARE old news, you can see them on the nightdress as they were photographed. There weren't any more hand prints on it.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: lookout on October 09, 2019, 10:54:AM
The prints on the nightdress ARE old news, you can see them on the nightdress as they were photographed. There weren't any more hand prints on it.




Perhaps I happen to be more ahead of the game than you give me credit for.
Title: Re: so wheres this forensic breakthrough then.
Post by: Caroline on October 09, 2019, 01:12:PM



Perhaps I happen to be more ahead of the game than you give me credit for.

Yeah, that must be it  ::)