Liklihood of Sheila resisting during the massacre:

[Jane]

What do you mean persuaded Jane,by whom?

 Those things you've read, possibly misinterpreted or placed in the wrong time-frame, or simply because, despite what you say, you lean more towards Sheila's guilt than JB's.

[Rob_]

I'm not quite clear what the prosecution scenario could be if she is not 'docile'.  Adam seems to be saying that Jeremy was pumped-up to do it and willing to risk it.  But Sheila could have hit him or scratched him or fled or hid or anything.  Surely Sheila would have heard and been woken by the commotion with Nevill?  What about the twins?  They could wake and hide somewhere.  Much the same applies to Nevill, actually, given the way Adam posits that aspect of the scenario.

Of course, we're back to basic questions that have been discussed here at length.  The central problem with this case is that the deeper you look into it, the less safe it seems.  When a conviction is safe, it's supposed to be the other way round: i.e. when you look into it, any doubts are assuaged.  It doesn't bode well, in my view.  It's not as if we're raising bizarre or outlandish points here.  Nobody has mentioned aliens or Freemasons yet.  These are just normal points we are raising that the prosecution side can't answer and seem to get themselves into a terrible muddle over.  It does seem much more simple and straight-forward to say that Sheila murdered the other five, washed herself and killed herself.

When I joined the forum I thought it was a MOJ but that I would soon find lots of information / evidence that would convince me otherwise. But the opposite happened the more I dug around the less and less safe the conviction appeared.

Then when you read Adams scenario in which there is absolutely nothing of any substance, he convinces me its a MOJ 

[Steve_uk]

I'm not quite clear what the prosecution scenario could be if she is not 'docile'.  Adam seems to be saying that Jeremy was pumped-up to do it and willing to risk it.  But Sheila could have hit him or scratched him or fled or hid or anything.  Surely Sheila would have heard and been woken by the commotion with Nevill?  What about the twins?  They could wake and hide somewhere.  Much the same applies to Nevill, actually, given the way Adam posits that aspect of the scenario.

Of course, we're back to basic questions that have been discussed here at length.  The central problem with this case is that the deeper you look into it, the less safe it seems.  When a conviction is safe, it's supposed to be the other way round: i.e. when you look into it, any doubts are assuaged.  It doesn't bode well, in my view.  It's not as if we're raising bizarre or outlandish points here.  Nobody has mentioned aliens or Freemasons yet.  These are just normal points we are raising that the prosecution side can't answer and seem to get themselves into a terrible muddle over.  It does seem much more simple and straight-forward to say that Sheila murdered the other five, washed herself and killed herself.

..and why would she wash herself when her normal state was body odour? The conviction is safe.

[Adam]

When I joined the forum I thought it was a MOJ but that I would soon find lots of information / evidence that would convince me otherwise. But the opposite happened the more I dug around the less and less safe the conviction appeared.

Then when you read Adams scenario in which there is absolutely nothing of any substance, he convinces me its a MOJ 

I posted the link to my scenario thread this week.

Each point matches the evidence.

I'll dig out your scenario.

[Rob_]

I posted the link to my scenario thread this week.

Each point matches the evidence.

I'll dig out your scenario.

Read your scenario Adam everywhere you say "evidence" there is nothing.

[guest29835]

..and why would she wash herself when her normal state was body odour? The conviction is safe.

She would wash herself because she was committing suicide and presumably wanted to look her best when found or something like that.  Bear in mind a washing theory was propounded at trial by Professor Bernard Knight, a very eminent pathologist.  It's not as if I've just thought it up.

As for 'body odour', what's that got to do with it?  It's just an anecdote from one of her previous employers.    If you're saying she was unkempt out of habit and wouldn't have cared, then why did she bother attending to her nails and hair?  The pro-guilt account of Sheila seems to be a bit muddled and lacking in overall inconsistency, as if intended to suit the answer needed at the moment.

[Steve_uk]

She would wash herself because she was committing suicide and presumably wanted to look her best when found or something like that.  Bear in mind a washing theory was propounded at trial by Professor Bernard Knight, a very eminent pathologist.  It's not as if I've just thought it up.

As for 'body odour', what's that got to do with it?  It's just an anecdote from one of her previous employers.    If you're saying she was unkempt out of habit and wouldn't have cared, then why did she bother attending to her nails and hair?  The pro-guilt account of Sheila seems to be a bit muddled and lacking in overall inconsistency, as if intended to suit the answer needed at the moment.

She did when reminded to. To answer snow's point alongside we have shopkeeper Barry Parker's eyewitness evidence in Tiptree how her lipstick was smudged on her teeth. We also have Michael Horsnell's account of how ungainly Sheila walked at Vaulty Manor. This from a person who is supposed to have been mobile enough to ascend and descend the staircase with the purpose of reloading a rifle twice to annihilate her close family.

[snow66!]

Those things you've read, possibly misinterpreted or placed in the wrong time-frame, or simply because, despite what you say, you lean more towards Sheila's guilt than JB's.

I just need some substantial evidence against him Jane.Tell me what convinced you,and made you change your mind.Is it something simple that i am overlooking.

[guest29835]

She did when reminded to. To answer snow's point alongside we have shopkeeper Barry Parker's eyewitness evidence in Tiptree how her lipstick was smudged on her teeth. We also have Michael Horsnell's account of how ungainly Sheila walked at Vaulty Manor. This from a person who is supposed to have been mobile enough to ascend and descend the staircase with the purpose of reloading a rifle twice to annihilate her close family.

How do you know she was reminded to?  And what difference would that make anyway?

Also, how does the fact she was able to do her nails and hair, etc., square with the rest of what you say about her?  Her lack of co-ordination and so forth.  Did someone else do her nails, perhaps at a nail bar in Tiptree do you think?  Or do you acknowledge that if she did them herself, then she was not as lacking in motor co-ordination as is sometimes claimed?

Also, I assume you would say she was found clean (save for the spattered blood).  How and why did she clean herself, if she carried on like a dishevelled person?

[Adam]

Your average nail polish will last for two days without chipping.

The long-wearing formulas can go up to two weeks before they start to crack and flake! It depends on your polish's ingredients, as well as your daily activities.

----------

Sheila could have painted her nails days or weeks beforehand. When the side effects of Haloperiodal let her.

[Adam]

Or Sheila could have painted her nails earlier in the day. Then become docile later on.

Bamber's reconnaissance & PB's phone call were only around 4 hours before the massacre.

[guest29835]

Or Sheila could have painted her nails earlier in the day. Then become docile later on.

Bamber's reconnaissance & PB's phone call were only around 4 hours before the massacre.

But you've told me the prosecution case doesn't depend on Sheila being docile, so why engage in all this elaborate guesswork about circumstances you were not witness to?  She did this, she could have done that, Jeremy did this, Jeremy believed that, Sheila never did this.  How do you and Steve know all this?  Were you there?

You don't know when she did her nails or that she was sedated or docile.  Neither do I.  I merely ask how it can be that she could do her nails at all, ever, if she lacked basic motor co-ordination.  Did she just take her time?  Steve says she was dishevelled by habit.  Then why was she found clean?  Did she get herself ready specially for Jeremy, knowing he was coming? 

I think you dogmatic pro-guilt people need to get yourselves in a gridiron huddle and sort your story out.  You seem to be in a bit of muddle at the moment, changing what you say depending on the objections raised. 

[lookout]

I would have said that the false fingernail which AE found on the floor would have been that of her index finger-----which does the most work on the hand, like loading a rifle or just shoving the bullets in, individually.

[Roch]

I would have said that the false fingernail which AE found on the floor would have been that of her index finger-----which does the most work on the hand, like loading a rifle or just shoving the bullets in, individually.

Which false fingernail Lookout?

[Jane]

Or Sheila could have painted her nails earlier in the day. Then become docile later on.

Bamber's reconnaissance & PB's phone call were only around 4 hours before the massacre.

Or a friend could have done them to smarten her up for the party. She wasn't into domesticity in her well state, her behaviours over the last fortnight suggest she wouldn't have done anything which would have caused them to chip.