A Jeremy Scenario

[Roch]

I think I may. Jeremy had won prizes for shooting. Could mean he prided himself on being something of a marksman. Sheila wasn't, ergo, put a gun in Sheila's hands and her lack of competency would be shown by the results. JB really didn't want it to look like a competent marksman had carried out the murders. He wanted it to look like Sheila had.

Guilters want it all ways. One minute, accurate shots at virtually immobile targets are a sign of guilt. The next, 'making it look like a madwoman had gone berserk' is a sign of guilt.

[lookout]

What went on in those 2hrs difference ?

[lookout]

Were brother and sister having a heart to heart while the rest of the family had lain dead, or what ?

[Munksa]

Easy to handle lightweight weapon, fired at close range within rooms. Both adults less physically mobile with each shot. Possibly even stationary. Shooter not injured (other than fight wounds).

Some who have used this gun will not agree to the one I have in bold.

What fight wounds? Evidence of this please. Thanks

[lookout]

Compare pics of all 3. I can see the difference if no-one else can.

[lookout]

Sheila had been malleable but I can't say the same for either parent, which means that they had reached the stage of rigor mortis, Sheila was only at the beginning of livor mortis. A big difference, about 2 hours in fact.

[Munksa]

I don't understand what you are saying Munksa? virtually non moving targets at point blank range it would be harder to miss.

Thanks for this question actually...I repeat as I  said at face value it might look like a mad woman going crazy,  a lot of supporters I have come across believe with so many shots it was Sheila who did it. They say if it was Jeremy he would have killed them with a shot or two.

I hope it's clear

[Munksa]

Guilters want it all ways. One minute, accurate shots at virtually immobile targets are a sign of guilt. The next, 'making it look like a madwoman had gone berserk' is a sign of guilt.

Who said it's a sign of guilt? I havnt

[Rob_]

I think I may. Jeremy had won prizes for shooting. Could mean he prided himself on being something of a marksman. Sheila wasn't, ergo, put a gun in Sheila's hands and her lack of competency would be shown by the results. JB really didn't want it to look like a competent marksman had carried out the murders. He wanted it to look like Sheila had.

It was a low recoil gun Jane, anyone could use it, I have seen videos saying a child could use it. There is in my view nothing indicating that a crack shooter was needed to carry out the crime.

The only requirement was that whoever it was need to be completely deranged.

[Jane]

Guilters want it all ways. One minute, accurate shots at virtually immobile targets are a sign of guilt. The next, 'making it look like a madwoman had gone berserk' is a sign of guilt.

Clever, wasn't he? Haphazard shooting? Certainly. However, all bullets fired went 'home', didn't they? Four victims meant to look like it was the work of an incompetent, but every bullet found a place to go.

[Munksa]

Sheila had been malleable but I can't say the same for either parent, which means that they had reached the stage of rigor mortis, Sheila was only at the beginning of livor mortis. A big difference, about 2 hours in fact.

You can't know this unless you were present at the crime scene there. If it's your opinion that's fine but if you state this as a fact please provide source as I have never come across this.

[Munksa]

Not sure why my answer got inside the quote

[Rob_]

Thanks for this question actually...I repeat as I  said at face value it might look like a mad woman going crazy,  a lot of supporters I have come across believe with so many shots it was Sheila who did it. They say if it was Jeremy he would have killed them with a shot or two.

I hope it's clear

Sorry if I misunderstood you Munksa, but the way your phrased your post:

"At face value looked like a mad person gone crazy when in reality everytime it hit the targets!"

It looked like you were implying that skill was needed in handling the gun.

[Jane]

It was a low recoil gun Jane, anyone could use it, I have seen videos saying a child could use it. There is in my view nothing indicating that a crack shooter was needed to carry out the crime.

The only requirement was that whoever it was need to be completely deranged.

Whereas, in reality, they were in complete control and making it look "completely deranged".

[Rob_]

Clever, wasn't he? Haphazard shooting? Certainly. However, all bullets fired went 'home', didn't they? Four victims meant to look like it was the work of an incompetent, but every bullet found a place to go.

He could have missed if he wanted to Jane? I don't understand your line of logic?