The Silenced Rifle Did Not Fit Inside The Gun Cupboard

[lookout]

Could be Lookout, it’s rather strange, he keeps taking it off and someone keeps putting it on 😂😂😂. Yet he never fires a shot.  He seems to have gone on the defensive to me, justifying why he went out that evening to shoot rabbits without a silencer?

I think that there was a row as big as a fight that night before JB left for home and not wanting to miss anything he made the excuse that he'd heard rabbits so took the rifle with him. Also, it's quite embarrassing if there's a row going on between people that you're not part of so he probably used the rabbits as an excuse----because in my estimation you don't " hear " rabbits.
He'd then wait until the worst was over at the table, then as it quietened down, made his exit.

[lookout]

Because fostering had been mentioned gives you an idea how things would have gone. Sheila probably went apeshit with the mood continuing. Any mother would be frantic at the thought of her children being taken, it stands to reason.

[guest7363]

I think that there was a row as big as a fight that night before JB left for home and not wanting to miss anything he made the excuse that he'd heard rabbits so took the rifle with him. Also, it's quite embarrassing if there's a row going on between people that you're not part of so he probably used the rabbits as an excuse----because in my estimation you don't " hear " rabbits.
He'd then wait until the worst was over at the table, then as it quietened down, made his exit.

Yes, it could be his head is all over the place and he’s trying to make excuses for his actions.

[lookout]

Yes, it could be his head is all over the place and he’s trying to make excuses for his actions.

Not enough was made about Sheila's behaviour through her short life. It should have been looked into, as from the start, her mental health would have been fragile after having to abort at the age of 17. Even Colin had stated that he hadn't been happy about June's suggestion of abortion. Then there were the miscarriages, 3 in all before a difficult time having the twins. Did the court know about all this ? I doubt it because she wasn't there was she ? JB had little or nothing to say on the subject because he probably didn't know the half of it until her death.

It's only latterly that we've come to realise that mothers do kill their children, out of love and 9 times out of 10 after a marriage break-up !

[lookout]

Jeremy's been bashing his head against a brick wall because of all the useless idiots that are known as our justice system !

[lookout]

It comes to something when public support has to come in to dictate sentencing when it can't be given out properly in a court of law. I speak of the scum who murdered the police officer when courts parroted what THEY thought as the norm. They haven't got a clue ! The same when it comes to MOJ's.

[guest29835]

Can anybody here please answer these two questions:

1. Where exactly on the rifle were the smudged prints?  I can't see anything in the documents about it.

2. Where is Julie Mugford's claim that a glove came off during the struggle between Nevill and Matthew Macdonald (as she claims Jeremy told her)?  Again, I can't see mention of it in Julie's statements or her diary, but may have missed it.

[guest29835]

Wonder why he removes the silencer two or three times between the weekend before the shootings and the evening of the shootings, yet he never fires a shot?  It couldn’t  be to put the rifle back in the cupboard because he didn’t know if it fit with the silencer attached.  So HE’S taking it off, someone must be putting it on?

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1144.0;attach=5852;image

Because it is routine to screw/unscrew the silencer on/off the rifle. 

What do you mean he didn't know if the rifle would fit with the silencer attached?  Surely he must have known, and if he said it didn't, then that must be because he would have had difficulty fitting it in, not because it was impossible to fit it in.  The black and white photograph at the start of this thread shows it was possible, but also shows that Jeremy was telling the truth in this respect.

Turning to what you say in the thread about storing the rifle muzzle down, do you accept that if this was standard practice, then the police photograph at the beginning of this thread is further misleading?  Do you also accept that if the police stored the rifle this way with the silencer attached prior to examination of the silencer itself, then this could have contaminated the silencer?

Can you also explain why, if the silencer was used in the killings, there was no blood in the box in which the silencer was found and no blood in the rifle barrel?  Wouldn't blood in the silencer drip down into both under force of gravity?  If you disagree with either assertion and you have an explanation to the contrary, please go ahead and explain.

[guest7363]

Because it is routine to screw/unscrew the silencer on/off the rifle. 

What do you mean he didn't know if the rifle would fit with the silencer attached?  Surely he must have known, and if he said it didn't, then that must be because he would have had difficulty fitting it in, not because it was impossible to fit it in.  The black and white photograph at the start of this thread shows it was possible, but also shows that Jeremy was telling the truth in this respect.

Turning to what you say in the thread about storing the rifle muzzle down, do you accept that if this was standard practice, then the police photograph at the beginning of this thread is further misleading?  Do you also accept that if the police stored the rifle this way with the silencer attached prior to examination of the silencer itself, then this could have contaminated the silencer?

Can you also explain why, if the silencer was used in the killings, there was no blood in the box in which the silencer was found and no blood in the rifle barrel?  Wouldn't blood in the silencer drip down into both under force of gravity?  If you disagree with either assertion and you have an explanation to the contrary, please go ahead and explain.

Because he said in his statement that he didn’t know if it did fit with the silencer attached, I put that up yesterday.  The blood on the silencer was off minimal size would it have run?  I honestly don’t know, I doubt any would run out the baffles and the piece on the thread was very small so that wouldn’t run?  I brought the idea up about storing the muzzle down with NGB purely because I didn’t know this or ever heard about this, then realised it was mainly used with shotguns because of the oil in the barrels.

I would say, with him not knowing if the rifle fit in the cupboard with the silencer attached, he’d either never tried it, it wasn’t always left in there or he wasn’t telling the truth.  I don’t think Bamber was careful with the rifle, he left that part to Neville.

[guest7363]

Because it is routine to screw/unscrew the silencer on/off the rifle. 

What do you mean he didn't know if the rifle would fit with the silencer attached?  Surely he must have known, and if he said it didn't, then that must be because he would have had difficulty fitting it in, not because it was impossible to fit it in.  The black and white photograph at the start of this thread shows it was possible, but also shows that Jeremy was telling the truth in this respect.

Turning to what you say in the thread about storing the rifle muzzle down, do you accept that if this was standard practice, then the police photograph at the beginning of this thread is further misleading?  Do you also accept that if the police stored the rifle this way with the silencer attached prior to examination of the silencer itself, then this could have contaminated the silencer?

Can you also explain why, if the silencer was used in the killings, there was no blood in the box in which the silencer was found and no blood in the rifle barrel?  Wouldn't blood in the silencer drip down into both under force of gravity?  If you disagree with either assertion and you have an explanation to the contrary, please go ahead and explain.

Yes I seen the photo of the shotgun and rifle stored, I think it applies to shotguns not rifles? My guess, I would think the photo of the rifle in the cupboard was taken at a much later date, probably to prove that it would fit in the cupboard after this line of questioning, because if they had known at this point they would have corrected him?  Especially after he had told them it didn’t fit in the case?

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1144.0;attach=5851

[guest29835]

Because he said in his statement that he didn’t know if it did fit with the silencer attached, I put that up yesterday.  The blood on the silencer was off minimal size would it have run?  I honestly don’t know, I doubt any would run out the baffles and the piece on the thread was very small so that wouldn’t run?  I brought the idea up about storing the muzzle down with NGB purely because I didn’t know this or ever heard about this, then realised it was mainly used with shotguns because of the oil in the barrels.

I would say, with him not knowing if the rifle fit in the cupboard with the silencer attached, he’d either never tried it, it wasn’t always left in there or he wasn’t telling the truth.  I don’t think Bamber was careful with the rifle, he left that part to Neville.

Personally I would say Jeremy just didn't know.  This is on the basis that it is common for silencers to be unscrewed from rifles after use and prior to stowage.  He probably never tried to store it with the silencer on, and he may have even just assumed it wouldn't fit and so didn't bother.  However, we are still left with the statement from Anthony Pargeter in which he claims he found the rifle with the silencer on in the gun cupboard.  Maybe, as you say, it was laid flat?

David Boutflour describes the cupboard as about four-and-a-half feet in length.  The rifle is 42.5" in length overall, plus maybe allow 7" for the silencer.  It's close.  It would just fit lengthways in theory, but this assumes the dimensions given are correct, and we have to remember there were other things stored in there.

I think Jeremy was telling the truth in this regard, at least the truth as he saw it, and it's likely Anthony Pargeter is just mistaken in his recollection.  I would not place so much stall in the literality of what Jeremy says in police interviews.  We must remember that the interviews were never recorded audially or visually and we are reliant on a write-up by the police.  I'm not saying that to favour Jeremy.  I would say it as a necessary caveat whatever point we were discussing and whether the point favours him or not.

[David1819]

Personally I would say Jeremy just didn't know.  This is on the basis that it is common for silencers to be unscrewed from rifles after use and prior to stowage.  He probably never tried to store it with the silencer on, and he may have even just assumed it wouldn't fit and so didn't bother.  However, we are still left with the statement from Anthony Pargeter in which he claims he found the rifle with the silencer on in the gun cupboard.  Maybe, as you say, it was laid flat?

David Boutflour describes the cupboard is about four-and-a-half feet in length.  The rifle is 42.5" in length overall, plus maybe allow 7" for the silencer.  It's close.  It would just fit lengthways in theory, but this assumes the dimensions given are correct, and we have to remember there were other things stored in there.

I think Jeremy was telling the truth in this regard, at least the truth as he saw it, and it's likely Anthony Pargeter is just mistaken in his recollection.  I would not place so much stall in the literality of what Jeremy says in police interviews.  We must remember that the interviews were never recorded audially or visually and we are reliant on a write-up by the police.  I'm not saying that to favour Jeremy.  I would say it as a necessary caveat whatever point we were discussing and whether the point favours him or not.

According to APs trial testimony. AP would shoot rabbits both with or without the silencer on his rifle, so whats the big deal anyway?

[guest29835]

According to APs trial testimony. AP would shoot rabbits both with or without the silencer on his rifle, so whats the big deal anyway?

If that is what he said, then I agree.  Moreover, for that calibre of rifle, I doubt the silencer made a lot of difference, to be frank.

Also, in Jeremy's case, we needn't assume he was intending to shoot rabbits when he went out on the evening of the 6th. around supper time.  It may be that he just wanted to shoot at them, i.e. to scare them away.  If that was his purpose, then he would need a full-ish magazine and he would use the rifle without the silencer.

I've seen that before on farms.  You go out and fire at the rabbits (or whatever vermin) as a way of shoo'ing them off, but without the intention of hitting them.  Not everybody wants to shoot them, but may still need to shoot at them - for which a rifle is ideal, and you would not have the silencer attached under those circumstances.

[guest7363]

If that is what he said, then I agree.  Moreover, for that calibre of rifle, I doubt the silencer made a lot of difference, to be frank.

Also, in Jeremy's case, we needn't assume he was intending to shoot rabbits when he went out on the evening of the 6th. around supper time.  It may be that he just wanted to shoot at them, i.e. to scare them away.  If that was his purpose, then he would need a full-ish magazine and he would use the rifle without the silencer.

I've seen that before on farms.  You go out and fire at the rabbits (or whatever vermin) as a way of shoo'ing them off, but without the intention of hitting them.  Not everybody wants to shoot them, but may still need to shoot at them - for which a rifle is ideal, and you would not have the silencer attached under those circumstances.

His intention was to kill the rabbits, he told his parents he was going to get them rabbits. He also told the police he wanted to get the rabbits. There wasn’t one rabbit but two, so after a hard days work on the farm and being in a hurry to fetch a trailer to the combine,  he takes the trouble to fetch the rifle, load a full magazine to kill two rabbits without a silencer or sights, probably halving his chance of success.  Of course this story isn’t traceable it’s if you find it believable, the only time it would have been traceable was if he had actually fired at the rabbits ( shell casings, bullet fragments ect)  which he told others he had.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=347.0;attach=836

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4226.0;attach=31214

[guest7363]

If that is what he said, then I agree.  Moreover, for that calibre of rifle, I doubt the silencer made a lot of difference, to be frank.

Also, in Jeremy's case, we needn't assume he was intending to shoot rabbits when he went out on the evening of the 6th. around supper time.  It may be that he just wanted to shoot at them, i.e. to scare them away.  If that was his purpose, then he would need a full-ish magazine and he would use the rifle without the silencer.

I've seen that before on farms.  You go out and fire at the rabbits (or whatever vermin) as a way of shoo'ing them off, but without the intention of hitting them.  Not everybody wants to shoot them, but may still need to shoot at them - for which a rifle is ideal, and you would not have the silencer attached under those circumstances.

So your saying farmers go out and fire at rabbits not wanting to hit them?   So a farmer goes out of his way to buy shotguns, rifles, bullets just to scare vermin away and with no intention of hitting them.  Yeah right pull the other one.