Guns from whf handed in by Bunting who refuses to name persons to police

[Roch]

I think I remember reading that both shots to Sheila were contact shots? A contact shot with a .38 would surely had gone straight through her head at contact range?

----------------

A .38 weapon was not used to shoot Sheila either in the neck, or under the chin...

She was shot twice by a .22 caliber weapon, or weapons...

Non fatal shot was close contact, possibly up to three inches or so away from surface of skin, and the shot under the chin was contact in nature...

I find that slightly odd.  I cant imagine a person holding a weapon up to three inches away from their neck for a suicide shot.  Would it not feel more 'reassuring' (for want of a better word in these dreadful circumstances) for the person to push the muzzle of the weapon against their skin?  Try imagining it your self.

--------------

This was one of the points which former DCI "Taff" Jones and other senior officers discussed at the scene whilst Sheila's body was still in situ according to one version of events that have been given - DCI Jones believed that Sheila shot herself under the chin and that the second shot came about when the barrel of the rifle fell away from its original contact position under the chin, and by these means it became excepted that the second shot was inflicted by the process of recoil where the end of the guns barrel, was falling away from its original contact position...

I am not saying that I agree with this scenario, I am only pointing out what conclusions the police claim to have arrived at during the early stages of the investigation into Sheila's death?

An involuntary second shot after the first fatal shot?  That's swapping the shots around so that the the 2nd shot is non-fatal due to the first shot having been fatal already.

[Roch]

I think I remember reading that both shots to Sheila were contact shots? A contact shot with a .38 would surely had gone straight through her head at contact range?

----------------

A .38 weapon was not used to shoot Sheila either in the neck, or under the chin...

She was shot twice by a .22 caliber weapon, or weapons...

Non fatal shot was close contact, possibly up to three inches or so away from surface of skin, and the shot under the chin was contact in nature...

I find that slightly odd.  I cant imagine a person holding a weapon up to three inches away from their neck for a suicide shot.  Would it not feel more 'reassuring' (for want of a better word in these dreadful circumstances) for the person to push the muzzle of the weapon against their skin?  Try imagining it your self.

Sheila might have been having a psychotic episode, but she was a still  a female. Could fear have caused Sheila to jerk her head back, otherwise move her head or to move the rifle, say, just before the shot was fired? Might this also explain why the first shot lodged in the neck and failed to kill her?

Like flinching?

[mike tesko]

I think I remember reading that both shots to Sheila were contact shots? A contact shot with a .38 would surely had gone straight through her head at contact range?

----------------

A .38 weapon was not used to shoot Sheila either in the neck, or under the chin...

She was shot twice by a .22 caliber weapon, or weapons...

Non fatal shot was close contact, possibly up to three inches or so away from surface of skin, and the shot under the chin was contact in nature...

I find that slightly odd.  I cant imagine a person holding a weapon up to three inches away from their neck for a suicide shot.  Would it not feel more 'reassuring' (for want of a better word in these dreadful circumstances) for the person to push the muzzle of the weapon against their skin?  Try imagining it your self.

--------------

This was one of the points which former DCI "Taff" Jones and other senior officers discussed at the scene whilst Sheila's body was still in situ according to one version of events that have been given - DCI Jones believed that Sheila shot herself under the chin and that the second shot came about when the barrel of the rifle fell away from its original contact position under the chin, and by these means it became excepted that the second shot was inflicted by the process of recoil where the end of the guns barrel, was falling away from its original contact position...

I am not saying that I agree with this scenario, I am only pointing out what conclusions the police claim to have arrived at during the early stages of the investigation into Sheila's death?

An involuntary second shot after the first fatal shot?  That's swapping the shots around so that the the 2nd shot is non-fatal due to the first shot having been fatal already.

----------------------

Stop and think for a moment...

Why do you think the fatal bullet was given the exhibit reference PV/19 and the non fatal bullet PV/20?

The pathologist approached this matter that way because of what he was told by the police about recoil being responsible for one of the two shots, and he must have concluded that the fatal shot was the first shot, followed by the non fatal shot at a time when the end of the guns barrel was falling away from the surface of the skin as a consequence of recoil...

[Roch]

I think I remember reading that both shots to Sheila were contact shots? A contact shot with a .38 would surely had gone straight through her head at contact range?

----------------

A .38 weapon was not used to shoot Sheila either in the neck, or under the chin...

She was shot twice by a .22 caliber weapon, or weapons...

Non fatal shot was close contact, possibly up to three inches or so away from surface of skin, and the shot under the chin was contact in nature...

I find that slightly odd.  I cant imagine a person holding a weapon up to three inches away from their neck for a suicide shot.  Would it not feel more 'reassuring' (for want of a better word in these dreadful circumstances) for the person to push the muzzle of the weapon against their skin?  Try imagining it your self.

--------------

This was one of the points which former DCI "Taff" Jones and other senior officers discussed at the scene whilst Sheila's body was still in situ according to one version of events that have been given - DCI Jones believed that Sheila shot herself under the chin and that the second shot came about when the barrel of the rifle fell away from its original contact position under the chin, and by these means it became excepted that the second shot was inflicted by the process of recoil where the end of the guns barrel, was falling away from its original contact position...

I am not saying that I agree with this scenario, I am only pointing out what conclusions the police claim to have arrived at during the early stages of the investigation into Sheila's death?

An involuntary second shot after the first fatal shot?  That's swapping the shots around so that the the 2nd shot is non-fatal due to the first shot having been fatal already.

----------------------

Stop and think for a moment...

Why do you think the fatal bullet was given the exhibit reference PV/19 and the non fatal bullet PV/20?

The pathologist approached this matter that way because of what he was told by the police about recoil being responsible for one of the two shots, and he must have concluded that the fatal shot was the first shot, followed by the non fatal shot at a time when the end of the guns barrel was falling away from the surface of the skin as a consequence of recoil...

I assumed he numbered the bullets in the order of removal and not according to which shot was in which order?

[chochokeira]

I think I remember reading that both shots to Sheila were contact shots? A contact shot with a .38 would surely had gone straight through her head at contact range?

----------------

A .38 weapon was not used to shoot Sheila either in the neck, or under the chin...

She was shot twice by a .22 caliber weapon, or weapons...

Non fatal shot was close contact, possibly up to three inches or so away from surface of skin, and the shot under the chin was contact in nature...

I find that slightly odd.  I cant imagine a person holding a weapon up to three inches away from their neck for a suicide shot.  Would it not feel more 'reassuring' (for want of a better word in these dreadful circumstances) for the person to push the muzzle of the weapon against their skin?  Try imagining it your self.

Sheila might have been having a psychotic episode, but she was a still  a female. Could fear have caused Sheila to jerk her head back, otherwise move her head or to move the rifle, say, just before the shot was fired? Might this also explain why the first shot lodged in the neck and failed to kill her?

Like flinching?

Yes, sort of, would need to be a mighty big flinch though.

[ngb1066]

One of the family was a gun dealer [Can,t remember who] so would have access to all different kinds of guns.
Ngb may be able to back me on the following,[ or not].
There are in existance rifles that are a combination of 4 10,& 22.
Cartridges can be obtained with differing amount of shot, from several hundred pellets down to one ball.
I don't think they are that common, but a dealer would probably see these more often.
Is it possibly that a 4 10, 12 bore could exist. This might explain the varying size of gun shot wounds on the victims, as as these are cartridges it could explain the absence of lead on Sheilas hands.
Just a thought.

Cliff  - there are examples of a composite rifle/shotgun, with different permutations and combinations of calibre for the barrels.  These are unusual weapons and with some exceptions are normally quite old and are collectors' items rather than the type of weapon which would be used by a farmer.  It is perfectly possible that a gun dealer would have an example of this type of weapon as his licence would cover it.  However, anyone else would require both a firearm certificate and a shotgun certificate to hold the weapon and I suspect that unless the owner was a bona fide collector of unusual weapons it would be dificult to get the necessary firearm certificate coverage.

Some time ago Mike did post details of the two unusual weapons handed in.  I cannot locate the post now but from memory one was some form of single barreled shotgun and the other was a combination of a .22 rifle with I believe a 20 bore shotgun (which is smaller than a 12 bore but bigger than a .410). From the description I recall that there was an unusual arrangement for a single hammer to be adjustable to cover either barrel.  My guess is that this weapon will have been capable of firing only a single shot from each barrel before requiring reloading.  I must emphasise that the above is based only upon my memory of what Mike posted a while back and I may well be wrong.

As far as a shotgun cartridge is concerned it is correct that anything can be loaded from a large number of very small lead pellets or a smaller number of larger pellets or even a single large "slug".  Such a "slug" would require additional specific approval under the owner's firearm certificate to be legal, and approval would have been almost impossible to obtain.

These two weapons handed in by Bunting were clearly illegally held weapons.  What their connection is, if any, to the events at WHF remains a mystery.  I have to say I have not been able to think of any plausible theories but the whole business does sound very suspicious.

How old do you think this gun might be, ngb? A relic from the Siege of Colchester - that old? The Buntings appear to have been Colchester people before they moved out to the villages.

I would need to have more information to give a proper opinion, but I would guess a minimum of 40 years old and a maximum of 100 years old, as at 1985.



 

[mike tesko]

I think I remember reading that both shots to Sheila were contact shots? A contact shot with a .38 would surely had gone straight through her head at contact range?

----------------

A .38 weapon was not used to shoot Sheila either in the neck, or under the chin...

She was shot twice by a .22 caliber weapon, or weapons...

Non fatal shot was close contact, possibly up to three inches or so away from surface of skin, and the shot under the chin was contact in nature...

I find that slightly odd.  I cant imagine a person holding a weapon up to three inches away from their neck for a suicide shot.  Would it not feel more 'reassuring' (for want of a better word in these dreadful circumstances) for the person to push the muzzle of the weapon against their skin?  Try imagining it your self.

--------------

This was one of the points which former DCI "Taff" Jones and other senior officers discussed at the scene whilst Sheila's body was still in situ according to one version of events that have been given - DCI Jones believed that Sheila shot herself under the chin and that the second shot came about when the barrel of the rifle fell away from its original contact position under the chin, and by these means it became excepted that the second shot was inflicted by the process of recoil where the end of the guns barrel, was falling away from its original contact position...

I am not saying that I agree with this scenario, I am only pointing out what conclusions the police claim to have arrived at during the early stages of the investigation into Sheila's death?

An involuntary second shot after the first fatal shot?  That's swapping the shots around so that the the 2nd shot is non-fatal due to the first shot having been fatal already.

----------------------

Stop and think for a moment...

Why do you think the fatal bullet was given the exhibit reference PV/19 and the non fatal bullet PV/20?

The pathologist approached this matter that way because of what he was told by the police about recoil being responsible for one of the two shots, and he must have concluded that the fatal shot was the first shot, followed by the non fatal shot at a time when the end of the guns barrel was falling away from the surface of the skin as a consequence of recoil...

I assumed he numbered the bullets in the order of removal and not according to which shot was in which order?

... This is one of those occasions where no-one should assume anything...

[Roch]

I think I remember reading that both shots to Sheila were contact shots? A contact shot with a .38 would surely had gone straight through her head at contact range?

----------------

A .38 weapon was not used to shoot Sheila either in the neck, or under the chin...

She was shot twice by a .22 caliber weapon, or weapons...

Non fatal shot was close contact, possibly up to three inches or so away from surface of skin, and the shot under the chin was contact in nature...

I find that slightly odd.  I cant imagine a person holding a weapon up to three inches away from their neck for a suicide shot.  Would it not feel more 'reassuring' (for want of a better word in these dreadful circumstances) for the person to push the muzzle of the weapon against their skin?  Try imagining it your self.

--------------

This was one of the points which former DCI "Taff" Jones and other senior officers discussed at the scene whilst Sheila's body was still in situ according to one version of events that have been given - DCI Jones believed that Sheila shot herself under the chin and that the second shot came about when the barrel of the rifle fell away from its original contact position under the chin, and by these means it became excepted that the second shot was inflicted by the process of recoil where the end of the guns barrel, was falling away from its original contact position...

I am not saying that I agree with this scenario, I am only pointing out what conclusions the police claim to have arrived at during the early stages of the investigation into Sheila's death?

An involuntary second shot after the first fatal shot?  That's swapping the shots around so that the the 2nd shot is non-fatal due to the first shot having been fatal already.

----------------------

Stop and think for a moment...

Why do you think the fatal bullet was given the exhibit reference PV/19 and the non fatal bullet PV/20?

The pathologist approached this matter that way because of what he was told by the police about recoil being responsible for one of the two shots, and he must have concluded that the fatal shot was the first shot, followed by the non fatal shot at a time when the end of the guns barrel was falling away from the surface of the skin as a consequence of recoil...

I assumed he numbered the bullets in the order of removal and not according to which shot was in which order?

... This is one of those occasions where no-one should assume anything...

Yes, I do wonder how everything ties up.  Weapons, ammo, shots, wounds, post-mortem, death certificate.  If people like your self and others know, I wish it could be published in a brochure explaining exactly how this has been done, with b&w / colour plates and diagrams.  I expect many things could be shown.  The official version vs the likely true version.  For instance, try comparing the grainy copies of crime scene photos allegedly used at trial with their science laboratory blown up equivalents.  I expect there are many things that could be done by using this comparison approach.  Many glaring inconsistencies exposed, step by step, to show in chronological order how and why this was done.

[clifford]

Moning, every one.
Some of the bullets were known to have exited the victims, it is possible the first shot to Sheila was a ricochet.

[ngb1066]

Moning, every one.
Some of the bullets were known to have exited the victims, it is possible the first shot to Sheila was a ricochet.

It is possible.  If Sheila was the person firing the shots obviously the bullet, having exited the person shot, would then have to have hit a solid surface in order to ricochet back and hit her. I am not sure how this ties in with the number of cartridge cases and spent bullets recovered however.

 

[clifford]

Moning, every one.
Some of the bullets were known to have exited the victims, it is possible the first shot to Sheila was a ricochet.

It is possible.  If Sheila was the person firing the shots obviously the bullet, having exited the person shot, would then have to have hit a solid surface in order to ricochet back and hit her. i am not sure how this ties in with the number of cartridge cases and spent bullets recovered however.

 

Thanks nbg,I only suggest this theory because the bullet recovered from Sheilas neck was rather distorted, and seems to have hit soft tissue only.

[mike tesko]

There may be many variations of the truth, each one capable of belief, and of being true...

[ngb1066]

Moning, every one.
Some of the bullets were known to have exited the victims, it is possible the first shot to Sheila was a ricochet.

It is possible.  If Sheila was the person firing the shots obviously the bullet, having exited the person shot, would then have to have hit a solid surface in order to ricochet back and hit her. i am not sure how this ties in with the number of cartridge cases and spent bullets recovered however.

 

Thanks nbg,I only suggest this theory because the bullet recovered from Sheilas neck was rather distorted, and seems to have hit soft tissue only.

Cliff  - that is a fair point.

[clifford]

There may be many variations of the truth, each one capable of belief, and of being true...

Yes Mike, but if true it would mean that Sheila did not have two attempts to take her life.

[mike tesko]

There may be many variations of the truth, each one capable of belief, and of being true...

Yes Mike, but if true it would mean that Sheila did not have two attempts to take her life.

... Was there a struggle with a .22 weapon, either when Shiela struggled with her father in the kitchen, before she killed him off, or was there some sort of a confrontation between Shiela and the police, after the police forced thier way into the kitchen - if so, which weapon was at the centre of such a struggle?