Sheila being knocked out after the first shot.

[ngb1066]

No it’s in Wilkes book like I said, he interviewed him.  PACE wasn’t in force  at the time, NGB might confirm this?  Does that info need to be in a statement, the fact he was writing questions and answers down?

PACE was not in force at the time.

[Caroline]

No.  Semi automatic.

It would still make a mess. Five shot repeater?

[ngb1066]

It would still make a mess. Five shot repeater?

Yes, it would make a horrendous mess. 

[guest7363]

PACE was not in force at the time.

Thanks NGB, I can remember a discussion about this.

[David1819]

He did not want a fully automatic gun.  They are illegal in the UK.  He originally asked about a semi automatic shotgun, but ended up with the semi automatic rifle.

I thought you could only get double barrel and pump action shotguns here?

[ngb1066]

I thought you could only get double barrel and pump action shotguns here?

You can get semi automatic shotguns - up to three shots counts as a shotgun, more than three counts as a firearm and requires a Firearms Certificate like a rifle or pistol.

 

[David1819]

You can get semi automatic shotguns - up to three shots counts as a shotgun, more than three counts as a firearm and requires a Firearms Certificate like a rifle or pistol.

Ah OK.

[sami]

It was a hair trigger.  It is easy to fire by accident - even a slight twitch could do it.

yes my point was that the trigger would have to be fully released back to its starting point than pressed again

[sami]

PACE was not in force at the time.

was pace introduced in 1984

[Roch]

Here is the actual part of the questioning that Adam keeps twisting and distorting into his own false narrative. (Hence why he never actually posts it.)



"Q. Will you accept from me that she did not kill herself?

R. Not really.

Q. I will tell you she has two shots fired into her and I understand that either or both would have been fatal, now what do you have to say?

R. I can't really comment can I.

Q. You must agree that if the first bullet wound was fatal she could not have shot another one into herself. Is that right?
 
R. No. I don't believe that.

Q. What don't you believe?

R. Automatic gun, nerves, anything could have triggered the gun again. The dog, I think your right but you sound so 100%

Q. What do you mean 100%

R. You say its impossible.

Q. You are not saying the dog pulled the trigger for the second one are you?

R. I'm not saying anything, but nothing's impossible.

Q. You said anything could have triggered the second shot off and you mentioned the dog are you saying that after Shiela had been shot once the dog came along and pulled the trigger for the second shot?

R. No, it was only an idea, the dog was in the house.

Q. I suggest you knew where the dog was that night, that is why you mentioned the dog. It was found in the room that morning near the bodies. Did you know that?

R. You told me that.

Q. Do you accept that Shiela couldn't have shot herself two times?

R. No. 

Q. You don't accept. it?

R. No, but it is probably right.

Q. You know its right don't you?

R. No."

I think his answers are excellent.  The interviewer sounds like a dickhead.

[sami]

I think his answers are excellent.  The interviewer sounds like a dickhead.

except for answer 4

[Steve_uk]

I think his answers are excellent.  The interviewer sounds like a dickhead.

But if you were brought in for questioning on the matter of five murders do you not think you would try to cooperate a little more fully in an attempt at elucidation, instead of giving answers in a sing-song tone, pulling threads from a white Aran sweater and generally being as obstructive as one could possibly be?

[sami]

so jb says that crispy pulling the trigger is not impossible

[Jan]

Sorry had to laugh at the bit about knowing the dog was in the room . Yes you told me that .

 

[David1819]

Thank you David.

Can you post the section where he says Nevill may have said 'She'.

Everyone knows where the police interviews are.

Q. In view of this what you have told us about your father phoning you in the early hours of the 7th of August saying words to the effect, "Sheila has gone crazy she has got a gun" cannot be true can it?

R. He did phone me on that morning saying words to that effect.

Q. If she was murdered, which she was how could your father mention. Shiela?

R. As in my first statement and on talking to the police on the night, I was unsure whether he said, "Shiela or she has"

Q. You have told and put in writing to us that you said, "Shiela's gone crazy" you told Police officers who came to the scene with you it was Shiela and you have repeated to us and to your girlfriend, it was Shiela that had gone crazy are you now changing Shiela to "she has" for the first time.

R. No. I'm just saying (I've got to get my words right) - long pause. I'm just trying to remember the question.

Q. I will repeat the question (read over as above).

R. It is easy to make conclusions as to what was going on and at the time until now I have been told that Shiela did it.

Q. My question was have you changed "Shiela" to She has"?

R. No, but I did at the tint to the police on the phone, say something like Shiela's gone crazy she's got a gun, or she's got a gun she's gone crazy, and I'm sure the Police officer will back that up, but after being told that my sister had killed everybody it was a logical conclusion to say in my statement "Shiela instead of "she has".

Q. You see Mr Bamber you told the police officer on the phone, it was Shiela, mentioned it was your sister, the fact that she was suffering from mental illness so we are all told the phone call could not have been from Shiela because she was murdered,you have now changed today from "Shiela" to "she has". Why suddenly change from "Shiela" to "she has"?

R. This is not a sudden change all I am saying is what my father said to me on the phone call which I expressed to the policeman that morning, either Shiela has gone crazy, "She's got a gun or" she's got a gun" or gone crazy which is my fathers words, not mine, I at the time just concluded with no evidence that it must have been my sister who had a long history of mental illness. JB.

Q. I put it to you that the reason you have changed your story is because today I have told you that Shiela was murdered and in noway could your father have said it, "It was Shiela". Is that the reason?

R. No, but at the time, as I have expressed twice, that I was unsure of the message but when i die my statement I concluded as I have said that SHEILA was the name used and not "She has". They sound similarish when said fast and in a panicked voice.

Q. Are you now saying that a woman killed your family as you have changed "Shiela" to "she has"? JB.

R. No, I am not saying who killed my family, if it is proved that my sister did not, and I an not changing my original words.

Q. But you have told that night on the phone verbally and the next day in writing that your dad said "Shiela" what is the position?

R. On the morning when I rang the police as I have said three times before I expressed two versions of what he said, and when I made my statement, it did not seem important and I naturally made the conclusion that he used the word "Shiela"