The drop / pendant earring...

[lookout]

Now how can you be certain she wasn't in a struggle with JB? You claim there were no marks on him. He wasn't examined for such because he wasn't a suspect. So in a situation in which JB is in some form of protective clothing -NO! I'm not going down the wetsuit route!!- and Sheila was wearing a flimsy nightdress, it can be reasonably expected that JB wouldn't have been marked.

So do you think that Sheila wasn't marked while wearing " a flimsy nightdress " Jane ?

[Jane]

So do you think that Sheila wasn't marked while wearing " a flimsy nightdress " Jane ?

She'd have had a very torn ear if an earring had been ripped out, Lookout.

[lookout]

She'd have had a very torn ear if an earring had been ripped out, Lookout.

Just an ear ? 

[snow66!]

Well you can guarantee it wasn't JB...

Firstly, he had no marks on him (which Bill and I would argue completely distinguishes him from Sheila, June and Nevill).

Secondly, the prosecution had the option of choosing to use the earring to suggest a struggle with JB. Instead, they thought 'discretion was the better part of valour'; erased the earring from records; and ran with a 'Sheila struggled with nobody' scenario.

Hi Roch,hope your well today,very interesting topic that yourself and cutie have started.If i may give my opinion,it clearly looks like a shiny bell shaped earring or trinket of some sort to me.Now,yourself and AD seem to be wondering why the earring is visible in some photos in the Archive,but not in others.Surely that is because you are looking at two different sets of photos.One set before the rifle was removed from Sheilas body,and one set when the rifle was replaced on the body.Once you know where to look for the esrring ,you can see the white dot on all the photos with the barrel of the rifle in LINE with the neck key chain round Sheilas neck.Once the rifle is REPLACED and the barrel is about four inches up PAST the neck chain,the earring is gone.Either it must have been removed,fallen off ,or is hidden in the folds of the nightdress.Does this make sense to you Roch.

[Roch]

Hi Roch,hope your well today,very interesting topic that yourself and cutie have started.If i may give my opinion,it clearly looks like a shiny bell shaped earring or trinket of some sort to me.Now,yourself and AD seem to be wondering why the earring is visible in some photos in the Archive,but not in others.Surely that is because you are looking at two different sets of photos.One set before the rifle was removed from Sheilas body,and one set when the rifle was replaced on the body.Once you know where to look for the esrring ,you can see the white dot on all the photos with the barrel of the rifle in LINE with the neck key chain round Sheilas neck.Once the rifle is REPLACED and the barrel is about four inches up PAST the neck chain,the earring is gone.Either it must have been removed,fallen off ,or is hidden in the folds of the nightdress.Does this make sense to you Roch.

Snow - Thank you very much for scrutinising the relevant photos and advising us of this possibility. Glad you are around to delve further!

[Jane]

He could have been released on a legal technicality years ago. It is his choice to remain in prison until he is completely exonerated. I admire him for that, and that he will go for the whole lot that caused him to be falsely convicted.

Of course, the other side of the coin is that he's aware it won't happen. MUCH better to take the high moral ground..............especially if his ultimate intention is to bring down the government, the judiciary and the police, as well as bankrupting family members who had nothing to do with the incident he was convicted of.

[lookout]

What set JB with a further foot-hold on the case were notes that had inadvertently been sent to him when he was at Full Sutton and had made a request for documents. These " police notes " had been alongside those which he'd requested and which, besides others, were held under the PII instruction where, it had stated, were others. This, I believe was in 2017.

It's these " police notes " that held JB's interest as the information contained was what he'd wanted. This is with CCRC in the hope that an appeal will now follow, then exoneration of this dreadful crime.

[JackieD]

Of course, the other side of the coin is that he's aware it won't happen. MUCH better to take the high moral ground..............especially if his ultimate intention is to bring down the government, the judiciary and the police, as well as bankrupting family members who had nothing to do with the incident he was convicted of.

[/size][/color][/b]

Absolutely clueless Jane get a grip

[Jane]

[/size][/color][/b]

Absolutely clueless Jane get a grip

Whatever!!!

[Adam]

Hi Roch,hope your well today,very interesting topic that yourself and cutie have started.If i may give my opinion,it clearly looks like a shiny bell shaped earring or trinket of some sort to me.Now,yourself and AD seem to be wondering why the earring is visible in some photos in the Archive,but not in others.Surely that is because you are looking at two different sets of photos.One set before the rifle was removed from Sheilas body,and one set when the rifle was replaced on the body.Once you know where to look for the esrring ,you can see the white dot on all the photos with the barrel of the rifle in LINE with the neck key chain round Sheilas neck.Once the rifle is REPLACED and the barrel is about four inches up PAST the neck chain,the earring is gone.Either it must have been removed,fallen off ,or is hidden in the folds of the nightdress.Does this make sense to you Roch.

Doctored.

[Jane]

Doctored.

Given the vast array of such that we've had presented to us, as authentic, cynicism isn't surprising.

[Roch]

Given the vast array of such that we've had presented to us, as authentic, cynicism isn't surprising.

Jane, think about it.

Is Adam suggesting that an oval grey shape of poor definition was doctored on to Mike Tesko's photographs of photographs that he took circa 2004, or is Adam claiming that about twelve years later clearer images were doctored in the exact same area as Mike's photos, in order to show an earring?

What would be the point of doctoring images for which the negatives are held at Essex Police photography dept?

What we are witnessing from Adam, Cambridge and David can be described as 'sour grapes'.

[Jane]

Jane, think about it.

Is Adam suggesting that an oval grey shape of poor definition was doctored on to Mike Tesko's photographs of photographs that he took circa 2004, or is Adam claiming that about twelve years later clearer images were doctored in the exact same area as Mike's photos, in order to show an earring?

What would be the point of doctoring images for which the negatives are held at Essex Police photography dept?

What we are witnessing from Adam, Cambridge and David can be described as 'sour grapes'.

Roch, I was generalizing. I've been taken in by some. Others have quite clearly been fake. Given that I believe, emphatically, that Sheila wasn't the culprit, I'm certain you understand my caution.

[Roch]

Roch, I was generalizing. I've been taken in by some. Others have quite clearly been fake. Given that I believe, emphatically, that Sheila wasn't the culprit, I'm certain you understand my caution.

Yes of course. I think claims have been made that were supposition or arm chancing (quite literally on one occasion). For example, in the back kitchen area, Mike suggested a rifle butt had caused an imprint in something on the floor. Hartley claimed it was in fact merely the way sunlight fell on the floor. Mike wasn't being dishonest. He was being open minded and he was trying to cause trouble for those he sees as being responsible for telling lies to get somebody convicted.

Even the claim that Sheila's wet blood photo was doctored? Was it really? And was the flash photography the only reason it looked wet? Sometimes the truth is somewhere in the middle. So for example, she died much later than everyone else, but the flash photography also aided in making the blood look wet. This idea that JB's team actually doctor photos seems far fetched. As already explained, the cops have the negatives.

[Jane]

Yes of course. I think claims have been made that were supposition or arm chancing (quite literally on one occasion). For example, in the back kitchen area, Mike suggested a rifle butt had caused an imprint in something on the floor. Hartley claimed it was in fact merely the way sunlight fell on the floor. Mike wasn't being dishonest. He was being open minded and he was trying to cause trouble for those he sees as being responsible for telling lies to get somebody convicted.

Even the claim that Sheila's wet blood photo was doctored? Was it really? And was the flash photography the only reason it looked wet? Sometimes the truth is somewhere in the middle. So for example, she died much later than everyone else, but the flash photography also aided in making the blood look wet. This idea that JB's team actually doctor photos seems far fetched. As already explained, the cops have the negatives.