In rather astonishing circumstances, a document has been found, confirming that 'Essex police', and the 'CPS', were made fully aware (October, 1985), that blood found inside the silencer 'could have belonged' to 'Robert Woodwis Boutlour'!
The defence don't strictly need a document that explicitly states that the blood could have belonged to Robert Boutflour. That was already known at trial, as the family all gave blood samples prior to the trial for this very reason, it was known that Robert and Sheila had the same blood group, and the blood was never matched to Sheila - it was only a grouping. Furthermore, the DNA captured later (1990s) was not blood-based.
Given the circumstances in which the silencer was found and passed on, you would think all this is enough for reasonable doubt, but it appears 10 of the trial jury accepted a group match on the basis that:
(i). Robert Boutflour was the only other person with that group match; and,
(ii). while it could have been Robert's blood, they could not believe Robert (or any other relative) would frame Jeremy, which I suppose is the only obvious alternative if you don't accept that Jeremy did it.
I think a family framing is possible because the silencer evidence in regard to the blood and paint seems consistent with it.
Briefly:
1. The blood distribution in the silencer and the absence of blood in the rifle may be consistent with what you would expect if the blood was planted. (Expert opinion needed on this regarding blood spatter physics/forensics, with particular reference to tension dynamics).
2. No blood was found on the floor of the den, or in the back kitchen, or in the back corridor, or in the gun cupboard itself.
3. The silencer that was examined by the FSS for paint traces could not have made the scratches on the underside of the aga mantel while attached to the rifle and pivoted during a struggle. The scratches are more consistent with what you would find if somebody deliberately made the scratches while holding the silencer only.
I believe point 1 could, with expert evidence, prove a framing. You would need an expert report and maybe also somebody to dismantle the silencer and rifle, if they are still kept by Essex Police. Point 2 is indicative but not actual proof because the silencer could have been returned by Jeremy without leaving blood anywhere. It's not very likely, but it is possible due to the latitude in the timeframe that allows for blood to dry at room temperature over maybe an hour or so.
Point 3 is not definitive of a framing because the scratches could have been made by Sheila before the incident or even by Jeremy himself during the incident, but it does help Jeremy.
But would they really frame him? I think technically it is possible, but would they do it?
If Jeremy is innocent, I think it's more likely that the blood grouping was either simply wrong and/or the tests were compromised or contaminated and/or the jury were misdirected.
I need to adhere to my own resolution and stop commenting on the Forum.
