Sequence of events surrounding the silencer.

[Adam]

The muzzle imprints on Sheila's chin being contact wounds without the silencer fitted.

----------

Says who? Obviously not the trial experts.

[David1819]

Relatives visit WHF again and collected the silencer and also take back home Sheila's blood stained clothing. David Boutflour does not recall seeing any blood, paint or hair on the silencer while at WHF at this.

---------

I assume these are in AE's & DB's WS's.

Court testimony -

Q. When you took the box which contained the silencer out of the gun cupboard, whichever that box may have been, is it right you actually looked at the silencer then and there?
A. I looked at the silencer then and there, but did not come to any conclusion until a latter date, because I looked at the silencer at a latter date at my sister’s home.

Q. Where did you look at it when you were in White House Farm? In which room where you when you looked at it? 
 A. I looked at it in the confines of the office in the den.

Q. Is this right: Did you see anything of significance at the time in the den on the silencer?   
A. I cannot remember whether I noticed the fact it had the red paint on it and the undermentioned spot of blood at the time of inspecting it in the office, or on further investigation at my sister’s house. The notability of the damage to the silencer, i.e. the protective coating to the silencer.

Q. So you have no memory of noticing anything significant on the silencer at White House Farm?   
A. I have the memory of noticing the damage to the silencer, but not the spot of blood.

Q. Not blood and not red paint?   
A. I cannot recollect so far back now, sorry.

[Adam]

Test shots on live pigs destined for slaughter showed that bone particles are a feature of backspatter from close-range shots to the head.

----------

Did they use a rifle for shooting rabbits?

[JackieD]

Any reasonable questions about my scenario will be answered. Trolling will either be called out for what it is or ignored.

Your patience is off the scale

[Adam]

Your patience is off the scale

All David has to do is answer questions. To his own thread!
Preferably with sources.

[Adam]

Court testimony -

Q. When you took the box which contained the silencer out of the gun cupboard, whichever that box may have been, is it right you actually looked at the silencer then and there?
A. I looked at the silencer then and there, but did not come to any conclusion until a latter date, because I looked at the silencer at a latter date at my sister’s home.

Q. Where did you look at it when you were in White House Farm? In which room where you when you looked at it? 
 A. I looked at it in the confines of the office in the den.

Q. Is this right: Did you see anything of significance at the time in the den on the silencer?   
A. I cannot remember whether I noticed the fact it had the red paint on it and the undermentioned spot of blood at the time of inspecting it in the office, or on further investigation at my sister’s house. The notability of the damage to the silencer, i.e. the protective coating to the silencer.

Q. So you have no memory of noticing anything significant on the silencer at White House Farm?   
A. I have the memory of noticing the damage to the silencer, but not the spot of blood.

Q. Not blood and not red paint?   
A. I cannot recollect so far back now, sorry.

Thank you and well done.

[Rob_]

Thank you and well done.

Now read DB's statement dated 12-09-85 Adam

[killingeve]

The idea that you would need scientific knowledge to put something inside a silencer is laughable. Planting or manufacturing evidence is criminal and criminals take risks.

Planting blood on the outside is one thing but opening it up and putting it in as far as the 8th baffle quite something else!  If the scientists didn't even think to open it up on the first occasion (13th Aug) what on earth makes you think Mrs Eaton would have the wherewithal to do so in order to plant blood, diluted period blood at that, as far in as the 8th baffle!  And if she did don't you think she would be saying something like 'Oooo it seems to extend into that little hole I think you had better open it up and have a look inside'!!!!!!  But no it was another month before the scientists decided to open it up and look inside! 

Mrs Eaton has no history of criminality.

If the silencer was not used then the blood is a result of deliberate contamination. They are both fundamentally linked.

If being the operative word!

I am asking you to challenge it. 

I have.

That brings up another point as to why there is no bone fragments in the silencer also. Nicholas caffel suffered three contact wounds to the head.

"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,

It depends on many factors.  Wound site and muzzle velocity being two.  In this case the wound site was wrong for bone fragments and the muzzle velocity too low. 

[killingeve]

Now read DB's statement dated 12-09-85 Adam

What are you implying?

[Rob_]

What are you implying?

Well in his statement dated 12-09-85 DB says he saw blood and paint on the silencer at WHF???

[killingeve]

Well in his statement dated 12-09-85 DB says he saw blood and paint on the silencer at WHF???

Bamber was unable to recall whether he called the police before Julie or vice versa.  Its called forgetting or getting muddled!

[Rob_]

Bamber was unable to recall whether he called the police before Julie or vice versa.  Its called forgetting or getting muddled!

Sorry I don't accept this, you can believe what you want though that's up to you.

[David1819]

Sorry I don't accept this, you can believe what you want though that's up to you.

Neither do I. I wonder if QT thinks all this was a muddle up also

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10038.msg459000.html#msg459000

 

[David1819]

Planting blood on the outside is one thing but opening it up and putting it in as far as the 8th baffle quite something else!  If the scientists didn't even think to open it up on the first occasion (13th Aug) what on earth makes you think Mrs Eaton would have the wherewithal to do so in order to plant blood, diluted period blood at that, as far in as the 8th baffle!  And if she did don't you think she would be saying something like 'Oooo it seems to extend into that little hole I think you had better open it up and have a look inside'!!!!!!  But no it was another month before the scientists decided to open it up and look inside! 

Mrs Eaton has no history of criminality.

None of this precludes deliberate contamination.

I have.

Where?

It depends on many factors.  Wound site and muzzle velocity being two.  In this case the wound site was wrong for bone fragments and the muzzle velocity too low.

Source?

[Rob_]

Neither do I. I wonder if QT thinks all this was a muddle up also

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10038.msg459000.html#msg459000

 

Just goes to show how desperate the relatives were to get a conviction.