Sheilas Two Shots

[Rob_]

But one shot with the barrel in her mouth, would have lessened the rifle's length, and would have ensured her death with ease. I've noted that NONE of Snow's numerous questions have related to what other methods Sheila might have employed to -allegedly- ease her exit. Shooting under one's neck is neither an accepted, nor convenient way of committing suicide -even with a handgun- but the next best thing if the potential suicide/victim refuses to open their mouth.
 Whilst Snow is busy working out logistics and angles, he seems to have forgotten that there was a woman in that room who, despite claims that she committed suicide, seems to have made her death as difficult as possible to accomplish, and a man who, despite her lack of cooperation, was determined she would die. Neither would have been concerned with logistics.

JB would have been concerned with logistics as he had to make the crime scene convincing to the police examining the crime scene.

So if JB is the perpetrator at what point does he realise the gun is too long? was he just lucky that he shot SC under the chin? if he had gone for a head shot then realised the gun was too long when placing the rifle he is done for.

[snow66!]

JB would have been concerned with logistics as he had to make the crime scene convincing to the police examining the crime scene.

So if JB is the perpetrator at what point does he realise the gun is too long? was he just lucky that he shot SC under the chin? if he had gone for a head shot then realised the gun was too long when placing the rifle he is done for.

Well,how about this Rob.I dont know if its regurgitating old posts or not.IF JB planned the massacre months in advance,he knew he was going to blame Sheila,and exactly how she was going to be dispatched.He knew if he used the rifle a head shot was the only option,a fatal shot to the heart could not be inflicted.So lets think about it,are we really expected to believe that his build up to the crime didnt involve a dry run.That is taking the rifle,with and without the moderator attatched,and placing it in his mouth and under his chin.If he could barely pull the trigger with the moderator on,he would have known it would be better to kill everyone else with the silencer on,then when it came to Sheila remove it and leave it beside her,before she was shot.Even if he didnt know about back spatter,common sense would have told him that blood would still get on to the outside of the moderator,if sheila was shot with it attatched.So those who say he put it back in the cupboard because he didnt know about back spatter are talking rubbish.By the time he had killed everyone else,their blood would have been all over the outside of it and he would have known that.And if he cleaned it,why was the silencer that was found in the gun cupboard STICKY,STICKY. Ok.lets say that JB didnt have a dry run,and had no idea the rifle was too long with the moderator attatched.How did he know it was too long after Sheila was shot? Did he lay the rifle on Sheila ,and when he tried to put her hand beside the trigger realize this.How far short of reaching the trigger was she.We now know through the tv programme -crimes that shook Britain-that Andrew Hunter proved the trigger could be pulled with the silencer on.Watch it and see.So from this we know her hand couldnt have been obviously short of the trigger by a great margin,if at all.Yet we are led to believe JB did no dry run to check if he could pull the trigger,and that the thought of doing so never entered his head.But after laying the rifle on Sheila,it was somehow SO OBVIOUS that Sheila could not have reached the trigger,even when she COULD,he panicked and removed the silencer.All he had to do was stretch Sheilas arm to check if she could reach the trigger,and he would have seen it was possible.This has been proven.There is NO WAY he would have removed the silencer when he saw this.But unless her hand was obviously many inches short of the trigger,i dont think it would have occurred to him it was anything to worry about anyway.It seems now the issue with the silencer making the rifle too long for Sheila to use is a bit of a red herring too.As far as i can see,if JB didnt think about the length of the rifle and moderator before hand,even if it was on when Sheila was shot,there was nothing to draw his attention to the fact it had to be removed.I think that has been proven,think it all through.Bye.

[killingeve]

Hi Cutie,nice to hear from you,hope your well.You have taken a while to think things through i see.Quite right,good idea.Now,if you have been following what i have been saying,the approximate angles of the shots determine to a great extent,if the victims were sitting,standing or lying dowm.For example ,the shot to Junes knee must have been done while she was lying down.because the shot went in below the knee and exited further up the leg.If she was standing up,the rifle was far too long for a bullet to enter under the knee.Clear? Same with Sheila,the angle of the two shots determine to a great degree ,if she was sitting or lying down at the time.And obviously Sheilas two shots were upwards,she was trying to commit suicide,or someone was attempting for her,so no surprise there.Now whether it makes any difference to guilt or innocence the angle the shots were fired at,i have no idea.But the approx angles are there in the Archives for all to study,so why not Cutie? But really the only shot i am interested in at the moment ,is the first shot to Sheila,and why,if guilty,JB made such a poor job of such an important shot.Adam  says it wasnt a mistake,and he hit the target,but wont explain what he was aiming at.Jane says Sheila may have struggled and ruined the shot[controversal though,no chipped nails] or that JB simply took his eye off the ball thinking he was so close to a fortune.So after all your thinking,whats your opinion on Sheilas two shots Cutie.What happened?

Your explanation is at odds with the pathologist's trial testimony.  He suggested that the knee wound was a defensive wound inflicted when June pulled her leg up to cower away from the rifle.

Sheila's wounds are explained by pathologists for the HO and defence. 

[Rob_]

Thanks Snow, I will never believe that JB put the silencer in the cupboard nobody can be that stupid! It was obviously planted to beef up the evidence against him. Of course even though the silencer was planted he may still be guilty, though I believe thanks to Adam  it was four murders and a suicide.

Even if we believe the impossible that JB did in blind panic put the silencer in the cupboard then he would never have allowed all and sundry to have access to the house until he had tidied up a few loose ends.

Unfortunately the guilters expect me to believe the impossible over and over again in this case, everything you look at JB takes the worst possible course of action, sorry but I don't buy it.

[killingeve]

Thanks Snow, I will never believe that JB put the silencer in the cupboard nobody can be that stupid! It was obviously planted to beef up the evidence against him. Of course even though the silencer was planted he may still be guilty, though I believe thanks to Adam  it was four murders and a suicide.

Even if we believe the impossible that JB did in blind panic put the silencer in the cupboard then he would never have allowed all and sundry to have access to the house until he had tidied up a few loose ends.

Unfortunately the guilters expect me to believe the impossible over and over again in this case, everything you look at JB takes the worst possible course of action, sorry but I don't buy it.

Too late.  A jury bought it some 36 years ago.

[Rob_]

Too late.  A jury bought it some 36 years ago.

Only just! 10 to 2 remember.

[snow66!]

Your explanation is at odds with the pathologist's trial testimony.  He suggested that the knee wound was a defensive wound inflicted when June pulled her leg up to cower away from the rifle.

Sheila's wounds are explained by pathologists for the HO and defence.

Hi cutie,how are you doing tonight.Funnily enough i was just about to message you with a query.At the moment i am looking at the two other shots of uttmost importance in the case,Nevills two shots to the jaw,no 5 and 6.Where and when he received them determines if he made the phone call first.Now,you said the pathologist said the angles of these shots were only approximations,so can you tell me where you saw this information.I would really like to read it before i can come to a conclusion as to where Nevill was when he recieved them.Can you help me out Cutie? As for the shot to Junes knee.all i said was she could not have been standing up at the time.Surely this IS fact,so can you explain how that is at odds with the pathologists testimony? Hope to hear from you soon Cutes.

[snow66!]

Thanks Snow, I will never believe that JB put the silencer in the cupboard nobody can be that stupid! It was obviously planted to beef up the evidence against him. Of course even though the silencer was planted he may still be guilty, though I believe thanks to Adam  it was four murders and a suicide.

Even if we believe the impossible that JB did in blind panic put the silencer in the cupboard then he would never have allowed all and sundry to have access to the house until he had tidied up a few loose ends.

Unfortunately the guilters expect me to believe the impossible over and over again in this case, everything you look at JB takes the worst possible course of action, sorry but I don't buy it.

Hi Rob,thing is its been proven that Sheila could have shot herself with the silencer attatchd,so there was no need for JB to take it off.

[Rob_]

Hi Rob,thing is its been proven that Sheila could have shot herself with the silencer attatchd,so there was no need for JB to take it off.

Yes I have seen the video Snow, I don't think there was ever a silencer on the gun that night, though if there was I can understand JB thinking he needed to take it off when he laid the rifle on Sheila.

[snow66!]

Yes I have seen the video Snow, I don't think there was ever a silencer on the gun that night, though if there was I can understand JB thinking he needed to take it off when he laid the rifle on Sheila.
[/quoteYes,possibly Rob.

[killingeve]

Hi cutie,how are you doing tonight.Funnily enough i was just about to message you with a query.At the moment i am looking at the two other shots of uttmost importance in the case,Nevills two shots to the jaw,no 5 and 6.Where and when he received them determines if he made the phone call first.Now,you said the pathologist said the angles of these shots were only approximations,so can you tell me where you saw this information.I would really like to read it before i can come to a conclusion as to where Nevill was when he recieved them.Can you help me out Cutie? As for the shot to Junes knee.all i said was she could not have been standing up at the time.Surely this IS fact,so can you explain how that is at odds with the pathologists testimony?

Your explanation is at odds with the pathologist's trial testimony.  He suggested that the knee wound was a defensive wound inflicted when June pulled her leg up to cower away from the rifle.

Sheila's wounds are explained by pathologists for the HO and defence. 

As many supporters believe she could have loaded the magazine without damaging her nails, I feel perfectly certain she could have managed to push the barrel aside without damaging them. It's quite possible she'd have used the heel of her hand. IF she'd tried to deflect it, that is!!

[/b] Hope to hear from you soon Cutes.

You said:

For example ,the shot to Junes knee must have been done while she was lying down.because the shot went in below the knee and exited further up the leg.If she was standing up,the rifle was far too long for a bullet to enter under the knee.

The pathologist provided an alternative explanation in that he suggested Mrs Bamber pulled her leg up in an attempt to defend herself from gunfire. 

[snow66!]

[/b] Hope to hear from you soon Cutes.


You said:

For example ,the shot to Junes knee must have been done while she was lying down.because the shot went in below the knee and exited further up the leg.If she was standing up,the rifle was far too long for a bullet to enter under the knee.

The pathologist provided an alternative explanation in that he suggested Mrs Bamber pulled her leg up in an attempt to defend herself from gunfire.

Hi Cutie,been out most of the day.Just found your post.Well,you just wont let Junes leg wound alone,you little minx.Well you will have to tell me exactly what the pathologist said.Did he mean she was lying or sitting in bed when she pulled her leg up,bending her knew for protection? Is that what you are saying?If so,why is this at odds with me saying she wasnt standing at the time? Or,are you saying she was standing and pulled her leg up off the floor,and was shot standing on one leg.? I am afraid you are going to have to explain exactly where the pathologist said June was when she received the leg wound,before i can answer further.As i said,i would be more than interested what the pathologist had to say about the two face shots to Nevill.Is it all in the court transcripts Cutie,and where abouts in the Archive can i find it?

[snow66!]

[/b] Hope to hear from you soon Cutes.


You said:

For example ,the shot to Junes knee must have been done while she was lying down.because the shot went in below the knee and exited further up the leg.If she was standing up,the rifle was far too long for a bullet to enter under the knee.

The pathologist provided an alternative explanation in that he suggested Mrs Bamber pulled her leg up in an attempt to defend herself from gunfire.

Ok Cutie,I have found the testimony by Peter Vanezis of which you are talking about.It is referring to June defending herself.Here it is---THE ONLY REACTION TO THE WEAPON WOULD BE PUTTING THE ARM UP,AND BEING SHOT THROUGH THE ARM,AND POSSIBLY PULLING THE LEG UP AS WELL AT SOME POINT TO COWER AWAY FROM THE WEAPON BUT THEY ARE THE ONLY ONES-----Ok,got it Cutie,but again i will ask,how does this contradict me saying she could not have been standing when she received the leg shot? Surely nothing in that statement indicates June was standing at the time of the leg shot.I think it is you who is pulling MY leg Cutes. Ha ha;

[mike tesko]

Too late.  A jury bought it some 36 years ago.

The jury were not given the true facts, hence why they came to the verdict they arrived at!

One more point, for you to consider and contemplate upon - 'Jeremy Bamber' was convicted on a 10/2 majoritary verdict. [OK]; but does it not concern you, that one of the 12 jurors kept falling asleep during important stages of trial evidence that was being given? The trial judge [ Mr Justice Drake] had to reprimand the juror in question]. Let me put this question to you, `do you not agree` that `every defendant is supposed to receive a fair trial` [are `they`, or `them`, 'are' or 'not']? Do you believe in 'the basic  principle that' everyone has to be treated' as though 'they', 'them', 'you', 'me' and 'us', or 'we' (for that, or any other matter) are 'innocent', until 'such a time' when 'they', 'them', 'you', 'me', and 'us' or 'we', are 'convicted by the verdict of '12 men' or and 'women', 'good' and 'true'? Now my point is this, 'the juror who fell asleep during trial testimony' [in the 'Bamber` pantomime] could `not possibly have enabled` or `allowed` for 'Jeremy Bamber' to have `received a fair trial`.

Since,   'no - one will ever know', whether or not, 'the juror' who '
slept through importanttestimony' or 'evidence' was 'one of the two jurors' [or 'one of the other 10 jurors' ] who played out 'their role in the accountability' and 'lawfulness', of 'that 10/2, Majoritary verdict'?

'A defendant' (or 'his legal representative') or for `that matter`, even 'a trial judge', has 'no authority' to 'listen to', 'know', or 'hear', 'why' and 'which juror(s)' if any,  'objected to a guilty'/ or 'a not guilty verdict'? How in 'hell', or 'upon God's green earth', can 'anyone arrive' or 'come to a reasonable conclusion', that 'a verdict' by a '10/2 majority' should have been 'accepted', or 'allowed', when 'one of the 12 original members of the jury' [in this/that case] 'fell asleep', and  'slept' through 'any evidence' that 'was' being 'relied upon' by 'prosecution' or 'defense' counsel' to either 'permit' or 'encourage a jury'  to 'convict', or 'acquit' a defendant?

[guest29835]

Hello everyone,hope your well. I would like to give my opinion on the death of sheila, in particular the angle of the two shots.

The official police scenario. or one of them at least, has Sheila RUSHING to the box room door to get to the twins,after she sees what has happened to June.

Once JB re-enters the bedroom,he shoots June and Sheils freezes.  JB forces Sheila down beside the bed and shoots her in the neck.  Thats the official scenario.  So lets take it from there.

What position was sheilas body in when the non fatal shot was fired.  I have determined that if Sheila was lying flat on the floor, the rifle was about 80 degrees in relation,or even vertical if Sheilas head was tilted back.  That surprised me.  How could JB hold Sheila dwwn with the rifle  straight up and down? With his foot i would imagine.  Any footprints found on her chest? Still we are told she was frozen stiff,so no need.

What if JB forced her to sit up with her body folded at 90 degrees, well the rifle would obviously be nearer horizontal. That is Sheilas upper body rotated by 90 degrees,give or take if her head is tilted forward or back. Hope you are following. Ok the question is why did JB shoot her at this angle if she was frozen stiff? Why didnt he lay her flat shove the rifle under her chin,and point it up into her head.

The angle of the rifle was off by almost 90 degrees for this to happen when the shot was fired.This shot was of the uttmost importace if his plan was to succeed,this was THE shot he HAD to get right.Why was he off by so much,the second went straight into her brain.Even if Sheila WAS struggling[no chipped nails mind] he knew the rifle had to be almost parrallel with Sheilas body for the shot to go up into her brain. Even if Sheila did try and push away the gun as he fired,it would be the barrel,not the stock of the rifle, which could change the angle of the shot.

The first shot just dosent make sense to me if JB is guilty. Did he think one shot to the throat would be enough after shooting everyone else several times in the skull. A bullet used for shooting VERMIN.

So let us see what would have happened if Sheila commited suictde. In my opinion Sheila HAD to be seated upright for the non fatal shot with her head slightly tucked in, probably with her knees up. It would be almost impossible lying on her back,as the rifle would be almost vertical,going by the angle of the wound. Check it out. Even sitting stock of the rifle would be 18-24 inches off the floor. So Sheila fires the first shot,and must have slipped down, possibly involuntarily through muscle spasms. As her body slips down, the weight of her body holds her night dress in place causing it to ruck up.

Anyway Sheila had to be fairly flat to fire the fatal shot, we know by the angle. Otherwise the rifle would have to be down through the floor boards. Check out the angle of the shots. Sheile almost certainly had to be sitting[or possibly lying on her side]for the non fatal shot, and had to be lying down for the fatal one. If JB shot Sheila, why on earth did he misjudge the non fatal wound by so much.

Also worth mentioning, both shots were fired from Sheilas right side, not straight on as it were. Does this suggest the rifle was angled over to Sheilas right hand? Do other suicides show the weapon angled to the dominant hand? Why would JB fire both shots at a slight angle, instead of straight on, running parallel to Sheilas body, looking from above as it were.Awkward standing?

Anyway hope you understand all this. Check out the angles of the two shots,with the illustrations in the crime scene photos for your self,and see what YOU conclude.You will need a protractor to measure the angles. Hope you understand all this, maybe Dave can help with some of his animated illustrations. Well i hope this has been of interest to you,all the best. Bye for now.

Is there any possibility you could break your posts up into paragraphs, as I have done above?  I don't mind long posts, but if you post without paragraphs it makes it very difficult to read, which is a shame.

Dr. Vanezis believed that the first shot to Sheila was when she was sitting up slightly.  It is entirely possible that Jeremy first shot her while forcing her on the floor - assuming he is guilty.  You mention Sheila being 'frozen'.  I assume this is metaphorical but I'm not sure what you mean exactly.  To position Sheila, she had to be moved, which means she had to move, which means she wasn't frozen in any sense.  If you mean what Ainsley said in the DPP Report, that she 'froze', well this was the Essex Police explanation for how Jeremy managed to manhandle Sheila, but if you think about it for five seconds, it doesn't make any sense unless we're saying that Sheila was already in the main bedroom and Jeremy quickly pinned her on the floor (perhaps shooting her too early in the process, hence Dr. Vanezis' evidence).

If you have not done so already, one thing I recommend you do is look at the analysis of the evidence of Martyn Ismail and Dr. Peter Vanezis in the 2002 appeal judgment.  I think the judges' analysis was mistaken and they were wrong to accept Mr Ismail's evidence, but it's still important to read it.