The drop / pendant earring...

[arthur]

Looking at the photos of the deceased Sheila, you might at first glance form the opinion that the rifle has been moved. But on closer inspection you would quickly become aware that you would need an experienced  opinion from an expert in photographic perspective.

Making a decision regarding the rifle without that opinion should not convince a serious student of this case. I am not a researcher or a student of this case but I would certainly reserve judgement on the rifle and would not jump to a conclusion after just a few on line viewings.

[David1819]

Looking at the photos of the deceased Sheila, you might at first glance form the opinion that the rifle has been moved. But on closer inspection you would quickly become aware that you would need an experienced  opinion from an expert in photographic perspective.

Making a decision regarding the rifle without that opinion should not convince a serious student of this case. I am not a researcher or a student of this case but I would certainly reserve judgement on the rifle and would not jump to a conclusion after just a few on line viewings.

I can assure you 100% there is no movement of the gun in those photos. I used photogrammetry software because I set out to try and prove it was moved, but the opposite turned out to be the case.

[Roch]

I can assure you 100% there is no movement of the gun in those photos. I used photogrammetry software because I set out to try and prove it was moved, but the opposite turned out to be the case.

I will be able to conclude this thread when I get a chance later.  Just out of interest though, if you are correct re parallax etc,  How do we ascertain the exact position of the rifle in real terms? I assume you would need to have a camera directly above SC, facing down.

[Roch]

It's funny how supporters can see Sheila's wet running blood and the rifle moving when so called experts are stumped.

If it's obvious the rifle has been moved, why would the police deny it yet release photographs that prove them wrong? And this despite them wickedly hiding that big box marked "top secret"!

Sorry folks, I'm with David on this.

On occasions, I don't think the police intentionally release evidence that is potentially harmful to the prosecution.  During the handover from Ewen Smith to GDS, Mike was given an opportunity to view photographs.  He used this opportunity to take his own photographs of the photographs in question.  Thus the crime scene images on the forum are photographs of photographs.  There is so much material in this case, it would be difficult for EP to ensure 100% that nothing was released which might aid the defence.  That is not to say they haven't tried mind, at various stages. 

[lookout]

There has been definite movement---look at Sheila's left arm and hand ! Did she do that on her own ? 

[arthur]

I can assure you 100% there is no movement of the gun in those photos. I used photogrammetry software because I set out to try and prove it was moved, but the opposite turned out to be the case.

I would broadly agree with that. Obviously if it was crucial and I was on the jury your credentials would need to be verified but on the whole I think your judgement on this point is correct.

[lookout]

I honestly give up.

[Roch]

I can assure you 100% there is no movement of the gun in those photos. I used photogrammetry software because I set out to try and prove it was moved, but the opposite turned out to be the case.

I'm prepared to consider your claim but could you also not have included the gun as a reference point in some way?

[David1819]

I'm prepared to consider your claim but could you also not have included the gun as a reference point in some way?

The gun cannot be a refence point, because its the item being scrutinize for movement against its surroundings.

[lookout]

Wasn't the rifle supposed to have initially been by Sheila's side, or what ? How many officers hadn't noticed that it was on top of her body ?

[Roch]

Wasn't the rifle supposed to have initially been by Sheila's side, or what ? How many officers hadn't noticed that it was on top of her body ?

This issue aside Lookout.. Not a single officer could view that scene without immediately realising it was staged.  Some pretty senior detectives went in to that farmhouse. Even a rooky with an ounce of common sense would be puzzled.  It is patently obvious that it is not how Sheila was originally discovered (even without the TFG comments). 

[David1819]

This issue aside Lookout.. Not a single officer could view that scene without immediately realising it was staged.  Some pretty senior detectives went in to that farmhouse. Even a rooky with an ounce of common sense would be puzzled.  It is patently obvious that it is not how Sheila was originally discovered (even without the TFG comments).

What evidence makes you believe this?

[lookout]

Sheila had slumped against the bedside locker with her head bent inwards which would account for the blood which had pooled within her right shoulder area. Photographs show her flat on her back---moved !

June was originally slumped behind the bedroom door, hence the brush-stroke of blood on it. She was found flat on the floor, splayed out----moved !

[David1819]

Sheila had slumped against the bedside locker with her head bent inwards which would account for the blood which had pooled within her right shoulder area. Photographs show her flat on her back---moved !

June was originally slumped behind the bedroom door, hence the brush-stroke of blood on it. She was found flat on the floor, splayed out----moved !

The blood from Sheila's mouth is running vertically down Sheila's cheeks to her ears. Gravity dictates she fell flat.

[lookout]

The blood from Sheila's mouth is running vertically down Sheila's cheeks to her ears. Gravity dictates she fell flat.

And her head was moved sideways---unless she did it herself. The blood from her mouth came out both sides of her mouth after she'd been moved.