Marks on Nevils arm.

[Jane]

Shoes have insides as well as outsides so blood would have been visible/detected on the inside if EP had bothered to examine them----which they didn't as they weren't given an exhibit number for starters.
Why the need to " say nothing " when SJ took them away ?

I'm willing to bet the inner sole of flat, black canvas footwear would also be black. Blood can only be detected if there's blood there to detect. I can't say what was the need to "say nothing" but it crosses my mind that perhaps they should have been seen previously? I can see no valid reason why he should wish to draw AE's attention to them. However, what I AM willing to put money on is that IF those shoes were blood-soaked, the blood was dry, and if it was dry, it would have been flaking off in a fine dust, from the canvas. I doubt AE would have missed it.

[lookout]

I'm willing to bet the inner sole of flat, black canvas footwear would also be black. Blood can only be detected if there's blood there to detect. I can't say what was the need to "say nothing" but it crosses my mind that perhaps they should have been seen previously? I can see no valid reason why he should wish to draw AE's attention to them. However, what I AM willing to put money on is that IF those shoes were blood-soaked, the blood was dry, and if it was dry, it would have been flaking off in a fine dust, from the canvas. I doubt AE would have missed it.

I don't doubt that any blood on the soles would have been detected or even physically seen on being in the kitchen wearing them. It's only because they'd been large that AE hadn't bagged them. But why were they so sneakily taken without further examination ?

[Caroline]

The black canvas shoes that Sheila wore that day when her and her mother went shopping. Sheila would have worn them with her day clothes that night too. SJ took them away, unless you know/knew where they are/were when pics were taken.?

I know which shoes you're talking about and they weren't blood stained.

[Jane]

I don't doubt that any blood on the soles would have been detected or even physically seen on being in the kitchen wearing them. It's only because they'd been large that AE hadn't bagged them. But why were they so sneakily taken without further examination ?

Certainly blood would be seen on beige rope soles, but if the shoes were flat it's more than likely that the soles were black. You may be reading WAY too much into the "say nothing" aside. What do you think he was going to do with them, and why. You seem to be suggesting a huge secret that I can see no reason for.

[Jane]

I know which shoes you're talking about and they weren't blood stained.

It HAS to have been a guess, Caroline. I don't see how Lookout could possibly know.

[Caroline]

It was AE who'd mentioned the black canvas shoes initially saying that Sheila must have had big feet. Did AE not notice that either on someone she'd purported to have known well ?

She didn't say that Sheila 'must' have had big feet - she said Sheila DID have big feet! So yes, she did notice it!

[Caroline]

Shoes have insides as well as outsides so blood would have been visible/detected on the inside if EP had bothered to examine them----which they didn't as they weren't given an exhibit number for starters.
Why the need to " say nothing " when SJ took them away ?

So, you're claiming that a pair of shoes that weren't examined, were blood stained? That's called making it up Lookout!

[lookout]

So, you're claiming that a pair of shoes that weren't examined, were blood stained? That's called making it up Lookout!

I'm not making anything up. Why did SJ waltz off with them only letting on to AE ? Why aren't they included in the list of exhibits ?

[Jane]

I'm not making anything up. Why did SJ waltz off with them only letting on to AE ? Why aren't they included in the list of exhibits ?

How do you know he only let on to AE? You weren't privy to what he said to whom after her left the room.  Who's to say that there was anything useful on them. It's only you who are insisting that they were blood soaked because you want them to be. 

[Caroline]

I'm not making anything up. Why did SJ waltz off with them only letting on to AE ? Why aren't they included in the list of exhibits ?

You said there was blood on the canvas shoes - even though there is no evidence and no one else saying it. What else would you call that?

[lookout]

You said there was blood on the canvas shoes - even though there is no evidence and no one else saying it. What else would you call that?

Lack of thought.

[Caroline]

Lack of thought.

So you have a lack of thought? OK I'll go with that!

[Caroline]

I'm not making anything up. Why did SJ waltz off with them only letting on to AE ? Why aren't they included in the list of exhibits ?

Check out no. 54!

[Jane]

Lack of thought.

Well, that's a good place to start from. Who knows where thinking might lead you?

[lookout]

Well, that's a good place to start from. Who knows where thinking might lead you?

On behalf of others is where the" lack of thought "comes in and not referring to myself.

Then again you don't have to do much thinking do you ? It's already cut and dried and mapped out for you. Far easier to prosecute than to defend !