Author Topic: Sheilas Two Shots  (Read 28824 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5934
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #270 on: March 16, 2022, 09:14:PM »
Mark Gatiss played Bamber Gascoigne in the film--Starter for 10

Offline snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5934
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #271 on: March 16, 2022, 09:20:PM »
Mark Gatiss played Bamber Gascoigne in the film--Starter for 10
Whats all this nonsense got to do with the Jeremy Bamber case Snow?

Offline snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5934
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #272 on: March 16, 2022, 09:23:PM »
Whats all this nonsense got to do with the Jeremy Bamber case Snow?
Nothing snow,its just the fact that a member is called =Gascoigne-so that brought to mind Bamber Gascoigne.

Offline snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5934
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #273 on: March 16, 2022, 09:26:PM »
Nothing snow,its just the fact that a member is called =Gascoigne-so that brought to mind Bamber Gascoigne.
Well,forget about Bamber Gascoigne and stick to the Jeremy Bamber case you childish moron.Or i will see that you are banned.

Offline snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5934
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #274 on: March 16, 2022, 09:27:PM »
Well,forget about Bamber Gascoigne and stick to the Jeremy Bamber case you childish moron.Or i will see that you are banned.
Ok snow,i will say no more about Bamber Gascoigne.

Offline snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5934
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #275 on: March 16, 2022, 10:36:PM »
But please dont call me a childish moron snow,or i will come over and give you a damned good thrashing!

Offline snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5934
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #276 on: March 16, 2022, 10:37:PM »
But please dont call me a childish moron snow,or i will come over and give you a damned good thrashing!
Well snow,you will have to grow a bit first sonny!

Offline snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5934
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #277 on: March 16, 2022, 10:40:PM »
Well snow,you will have to grow a bit first sonny!
Oh you think so do you snowman,i will come over and after one smack,your head will be where your heels are!

Offline snow66!

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5934
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #278 on: March 16, 2022, 10:43:PM »
Oh you think so do you snowman,i will come over and after one smack,your head will be where your heels are!
For heavens sake grow up snow! Go to bed!

guest29835

  • Guest
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #279 on: March 17, 2022, 05:15:AM »

I think you do. You can't just tell the forum that you've seen a report which claims X,Y, or Z. How does the forum know you're telling the truth? You may just be interpreting it to suit yourself.

I've literally just told you what my source is: the toxicology report and the surrounding facts.  I'm not making a point for or against Jeremy here.  I'm just providing a factual account of things.

Looking at this factually, you can't say she was sedated.  Nobody can say that.  She was on a tranquilising antipsychotic, not a sedative.  The drug did potentially have a sedative effect, among its adverse side-effects, and she was contraindicated, so it is possible she was sedated and therefore somnolent to some degree.  But we can't say that she was.  When Dr. Ferguson and the appeal court say that, they are just plain wrong.  It doesn't matter how many universities they have attended and how many letters they have after their names.  They're wrong.  If you're wrong, you're wrong.

One problem in this case is that assertions that are a load of rubbish have become treated as hard fact because people don't check things.

guest29835

  • Guest
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #280 on: March 17, 2022, 05:22:AM »
Ok snow,i will say no more about Bamber Gascoigne.

Jeremy's nickname at Gresham's was Gascoigne, for that very reason.  This was in the days before the Newcastle, Tottenham and Lazio footballer.

My selection of the name is due to an interest in history - a number of eminent men have held the name, and the Gascoignes were an important Yorkshire family.  I am thinking in particular of William Gascoigne, a descendent of the Yorkshire Gascoignes, and one of the great English lawyers of the Middle Ages.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33775
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #281 on: March 17, 2022, 07:44:AM »
I've literally just told you what my source is: the toxicology report and the surrounding facts.  I'm not making a point for or against Jeremy here.  I'm just providing a factual account of things.

Looking at this factually, you can't say she was sedated.  Nobody can say that.  She was on a tranquilising antipsychotic, not a sedative.  The drug did potentially have a sedative effect, among its adverse side-effects, and she was contraindicated, so it is possible she was sedated and therefore somnolent to some degree.  But we can't say that she was.  When Dr. Ferguson and the appeal court say that, they are just plain wrong.  It doesn't matter how many universities they have attended and how many letters they have after their names.  They're wrong.  If you're wrong, you're wrong.

One problem in this case is that assertions that are a load of rubbish have become treated as hard fact because people don't check things.

How do any of us know that you've taken your words from the toxicology report? Are they? Are you telling the truth? Are you lying? Are you simply giving your own interpretation? Is it YOUR interpretation that you're trying to force? -Hey!! Isn't that just what Putin is doing?- if you post the report, posters are more than capable of coming to their own conclusions.

As you say "One problem in this case is that assertions that are a load of rubbish have become treated as hard fact......" It's become something which may be relied on by those with their own agendas.

Offline killingeve

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 299
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #282 on: March 17, 2022, 08:40:AM »
How do any of us know that you've taken your words from the toxicology report? Are they? Are you telling the truth? Are you lying? Are you simply giving your own interpretation? Is it YOUR interpretation that you're trying to force? -Hey!! Isn't that just what Putin is doing?- if you post the report, posters are more than capable of coming to their own conclusions.

As you say "One problem in this case is that assertions that are a load of rubbish have become treated as hard fact......" It's become something which may be relied on by those with their own agendas.

Its obviously good practice to upload supporting docs when one wishes to make an assertion but in any event the CoA didn't assert Sheila was sedated:

148. Sheila Caffell, probably in a sedated state from her medication, was also shot in the bedroom.

http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33775
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #283 on: March 17, 2022, 08:52:AM »
Its obviously good practice to upload supporting docs when one wishes to make an assertion but in any event the CoA didn't assert Sheila was sedated:

148. Sheila Caffell, probably in a sedated state from her medication, was also shot in the bedroom.

http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html


Thank-you, Cami. Not "possibly", PROBABLY. A somewhat different take to her being "virtually unmedicated".

Offline Roch

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17586
Re: Sheilas Two Shots
« Reply #284 on: March 17, 2022, 08:58:AM »

Thank-you, Cami. Not "possibly", PROBABLY. A somewhat different take to her being "virtually unmedicated".

Where did the COA get their opinion from?