The magic bullets

[Bubo bubo]

I thought it my be useful to examine another aspect relating to June being shot in bed. June had three exit wounds. One to the knee which had an upward trajectory which entered below the knee and exited above. Bullet 2 entered and exited her right forearm which hit the ulna fracturing it and exited. Bullet three entered the lower neck and exited just above the scapula. This was on a downward trajectory.

The question is this. Two bullets were retrieved from the lower pillow (DRH35) and were numbered DRH35a and DRH35b. Can anyone explain how it was possible for sub sonic bullets to travel though June and the upper pillow and still have sufficient force to enter the lower pillow? Further which wounds were involved that facilitated such a result?

[Roch]

I thought it my be useful to examine another aspect relating to June being shot in bed. June had three exit wounds. One to the knee which had an upward trajectory which entered below the knee and exited above. Bullet 2 entered and exited her right forearm which hit the ulna fracturing it and exited. Bullet three entered the lower neck and exited just above the scapula. This was on a downward trajectory.

The question is this. Two bullets were retrieved from the lower pillow (DRH35) and were numbered DRH35a and DRH35b. Can anyone explain how it was possible for sub sonic bullets to travel though June and the upper pillow and still have sufficient force to enter the lower pillow? Further which wounds were involved that facilitated such a result?

Bubo, may I remind you that you are neither ballistics expert nor pathologist. Therefore, such exploration is a complete irrelevance. How would it undermine Miss Mugford's sworn testimony or the sound moderator evidence of ballistics expert Malcolm Fletcher or the evidence of his scientific colleagues Glynis Hayward et al?  Let alone that of Dr Vanezis' or Professor Knight.

[Bubo bubo]

Bubo, may I remind you that you are neither ballistics expert nor pathologist. Therefore, such exploration is a complete irrelevance. How would it undermine Miss Mugford's sworn testimony or the sound moderator evidence of ballistics expert Malcolm Fletcher or the evidence of his scientific colleagues Glynis Hayward et al?  Let alone that of Dr Vanezis' or Professor Knight.

You have not taken into account my qualification from the Trump university.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,11600.msg535381.html#msg535381

I actually worked as a systems analyst in its widest sense for 30 years. I like to examine issues and to see if they stand up to scrutiny. Try as I may I cannot make this situation work and am seeking help from members to put my mind at rest.

[killingeve]

I thought it my be useful to examine another aspect relating to June being shot in bed. June had three exit wounds. One to the knee which had an upward trajectory which entered below the knee and exited above. Bullet 2 entered and exited her right forearm which hit the ulna fracturing it and exited. Bullet three entered the lower neck and exited just above the scapula. This was on a downward trajectory.

The question is this. Two bullets were retrieved from the lower pillow (DRH35) and were numbered DRH35a and DRH35b. Can anyone explain how it was possible for sub sonic bullets to travel though June and the upper pillow and still have sufficient force to enter the lower pillow? Further which wounds were involved that facilitated such a result?

I am not aware that exited bullets DRH/35 x 2 were ever identified as DRH35a and DRH35b?

The bullets have a muzzle velocity of 1040ft/s so hardly surprising some bullets entered and exited the victim and embeded in the pillow especially when you consider the shots were sustained at close range and in an enclosed environment ie no elements to contend with by way of drag.

https://eley.co.uk/eley-subsonic-hollow/

Bullets DRH/35 pertain to the neck wound and one of the other exit wounds (arm/leg) or possibly the non-penetrating graze only wound to the chest. 

[Bubo bubo]

I am not aware that exited bullets DRH/35 x 2 were ever identified as DRH35a and DRH35b?

The bullets have a muzzle velocity of 1040ft/s so hardly surprising some bullets entered and exited the victim and embeded in the pillow especially when you consider the shots were sustained at close range and in an enclosed environment ie no elements to contend with by way of drag.

https://eley.co.uk/eley-subsonic-hollow/

Bullets DRH/35 pertain to the neck wound and one of the other exit wounds (arm/leg) or possibly the non-penetrating graze only wound to the chest.

WRONG. Try the below post from Bridget an ex police person and guilt supporter.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2991.msg109715.html#msg109715

If there was a non penetrating wound to June (PV disagrees with you on this), how did it pass magically through June and the top pillow to enter the below pillow. By the way he also disagrees with you about the marks on NB's back. He calls them burns.

You say my theories are ludicrous. It would appear you come from cloud cuckoo land. How could the knee wound figure in this. It seems to me that the trajectory would have seen it hit the wall above the bed.

I used to have a considerable amount of respect for you in previous incarnations. Now you seem to be a game playing embittered malcontent, who has nothing positive to offer and nothing better to do or say except caustic repetitive put downs. What depths have you sunk to. All you can do is play guilter, regurgitating the same old lines and tropes of a born again guilter that we all know so well. Bit by bit the Crown case is being dismantled. It will only take one well crafted innocence/guilty video and together with latest submission the tectonic plates may shift. Some new hard evidence of guilt would be a start.

[Bubo bubo]

If June was shot in bed and bled on the top pillow i believe there should be drag mark blood staining and what we have is drip staining.

I see no drag stains.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=40856;image

What's more the 'below' pillow' is barely visible. I don't care what velocity or closeness the shots were supposedly fired from. I do not believe they could have had enough power to end up in the below pillow.
June would not have just lay there after the first shot or two but would, as a natural reaction, moved away from the shooter and the pillows.

We have all probably watched a crime scene drama when a victim is killed by a head shot. Blood slowly pours on and into the surrounding area. There is no pool of blood by Junes head. Like NB and SC her body and how she died has been staged.

[Adam]

If June was shot in bed and bled on the top pillow i believe there should be drag mark blood staining and what we have is drip staining.

I see no drag stains.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=40856;image

What's more the 'below' pillow' is barely visible. I don't care what velocity or closeness the shots were supposedly fired from. I do not believe they could have had enough power to end up in the below pillow.
June would not have just lay there after the first shot or two but would, as a natural reaction, moved away from the shooter and the pillows.

We have all probably watched a crime scene drama when a victim is killed by a head shot. Blood slowly pours on and into the surrounding area. There is no pool of blood by Junes head. Like NB and SC her body and how she died has been staged.

Agree that Bamber moved Sheila & Nevill after death.

Sheila's legs were pulled after the second shot & a bible/rifle put on her. Nevill was lifted onto the coal scuttle to have good access to his head and back.

But no reason to move June.

[killingeve]

WRONG. Try the below post from Bridget an ex police person and guilt supporter.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2991.msg109715.html#msg109715

If there was a non penetrating wound to June (PV disagrees with you on this), how did it pass magically through June and the top pillow to enter the below pillow. By the way he also disagrees with you about the marks on NB's back. He calls them burns.

You say my theories are ludicrous. It would appear you come from cloud cuckoo land. How could the knee wound figure in this. It seems to me that the trajectory would have seen it hit the wall above the bed.

I used to have a considerable amount of respect for you in previous incarnations. Now you seem to be a game playing embittered malcontent, who has nothing positive to offer and nothing better to do or say except caustic repetitive put downs. What depths have you sunk to. All you can do is play guilter, regurgitating the same old lines and tropes of a born again guilter that we all know so well. Bit by bit the Crown case is being dismantled. It will only take one well crafted innocence/guilty video and together with latest submission the tectonic plates may shift. Some new hard evidence of guilt would be a start.

Why on earth am I going to put weight on some random poster posting under the username 'Bridget'? What evidence do you have that 'Bridget' was an 'ex police person'?  And even if 'Bridget' was an 'ex police person' how does this make 'Bridget' right and/or make the post more credible? 

There's no evidence spent bullets DRH/35 were ever referred to as as DRH/35 a and DRH/35/ b.  Both referred to as item 46 at the lab.  At trial they were referred to as DRH/35 (trial testimony attached).

I am afraid it is you who is WRONG evidenced by the case material:

Burns - Dr Vanezis

"In your own mind there is an element of mystery about them" 

"Yes"

Bullet wound causing a graze wound to June unrelated to any other wound

"Do you accept, Dr Vanezis, that this could well be a bullet graze wound? 

"Yes"

"Not necessarily, I am sorry my lord, not necessarily associated with any other wound to June, but it could, by itself, be a bullet graze wound?

"Yes"

[killingeve]

If June was shot in bed and bled on the top pillow i believe there should be drag mark blood staining and what we have is drip staining.

I see no drag stains.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=40856;image

What's more the 'below' pillow' is barely visible. I don't care what velocity or closeness the shots were supposedly fired from. I do not believe they could have had enough power to end up in the below pillow.
June would not have just lay there after the first shot or two but would, as a natural reaction, moved away from the shooter and the pillows.

We have all probably watched a crime scene drama when a victim is killed by a head shot. Blood slowly pours on and into the surrounding area. There is no pool of blood by Junes head. Like NB and SC her body and how she died has been staged.

If you're unable to understand simple physics ie the velocity of a bullet leaving a rifle at 1040ft/s then I would suggest you get yourself another hobby.  Perhaps knitting 

You are utterly clueless.  How do you think the bullets ended up embedded in the pillow if not from gunfire?

[Bubo bubo]

If you're unable to understand simple physics ie the velocity of a bullet leaving a rifle at 1040ft/s then I would suggest you get yourself another hobby.  Perhaps knitting 

You are utterly clueless.  How do you think the bullets ended up embedded in the pillow if not from gunfire?

Of course they came from gunfire. The police fired into the pillow as part of the scene setting for the coverup.

I do understand physics but knowing the initial velocity does not account for the drag caused by passing through a number of materials including hitting a bone hard enough to fracture it.

[nugnug]

it would all depend on the range if the shooter fired at point blank range the bullets could of gone throuh her and into the pillow

[Bubo bubo]

Why on earth am I going to put weight on some random poster posting under the username 'Bridget'? What evidence do you have that 'Bridget' was an 'ex police person'?  And even if 'Bridget' was an 'ex police person' how does this make 'Bridget' right and/or make the post more credible? 

There's no evidence spent bullets DRH/35 were ever referred to as as DRH/35 a and DRH/35/ b.  Both referred to as item 46 at the lab.  At trial they were referred to as DRH/35 (trial testimony attached).

I am afraid it is you who is WRONG evidenced by the case material:

Burns - Dr Vanezis

"In your own mind there is an element of mystery about them" 

"Yes"

Bullet wound causing a graze wound to June unrelated to any other wound

"Do you accept, Dr Vanezis, that this could well be a bullet graze wound? 

"Yes"

"Not necessarily, I am sorry my lord, not necessarily associated with any other wound to June, but it could, by itself, be a bullet graze wound?

"Yes"

You are being disingenuous again. It is all to do with the questions asked and Rivlin should have complained about leading the witness.

You think people are idiots we all know how lawyers phrase questions to get the answer they want.

In the first instance he was fed.

“In your own mind there is an element (not totally) of mystery about them”

Of course there was a mystery. He knew they were from the AGA but could not say because NB had been moved and he may not have known who did it. Alternatively, he was at a loss to say what caused the burns. He called them burns at autopsy a year earlier.

In the second case he should have asked if he had any idea what had caused this mark. He could have been primed with the corner of a cupboard or the edge of a table and got a yes answer. At autopsy he made no suggestion as to the cause of the mark.

Stop playing games. Bridget was a veteran poster (5000+) and did not leave until 21/10/2013. She was often criticised for being involved with the police and I thought this was well known

[Bubo bubo]

it would all depend on the range if the shooter fired at point blank range the bullets could of gone throuh her and into the pillow

WE cannot know this but surely she would have moved?

[killingeve]

You are being disingenuous again. It is all to do with the questions asked and Rivlin should have complained about leading the witness.

FFS...it was Rivlin asking the questions.  Even when I go to the trouble of uploading the case material you're unable or unwilling to read/comprehend it.

You think people are idiots we all know how lawyers phrase questions to get the answer they want.

No I don't think people are idiots but I do know you are.

In the first instance he was fed.

“In your own mind there is an element (not totally) of mystery about them”

Well if he was fed it was by Bamber's own defence counsel.  You're so utterly clueless you're unable to determine what supports the defence/prosecution.

Of course there was a mystery. He knew they were from the AGA but could not say because NB had been moved and he may not have known who did it. Alternatively, he was at a loss to say what caused the burns. He called them burns at autopsy a year earlier.

In the second case he should have asked if he had any idea what had caused this mark. He could have been primed with the corner of a cupboard or the edge of a table and got a yes answer. At autopsy he made no suggestion as to the cause of the mark.

There's no expert evidence Nevill was moved.

The defence pathologist was adamant the marks on Nevill's back were not burns and the HO pathologist was unsure.

Stop playing games. Bridget was a veteran poster (5000+) and did not leave until 21/10/2013. She was often criticised for being involved with the police and I thought this was well known

I don't care if 'Bridget' made 5 trillion posts it doesn't make him/her right that the two bullets embedded in the pillow were ever formerly identified as DRH/35 a and b. 

[killingeve]

WE cannot know this but surely she would have moved?

Can you not understand basic maths?  1040ft/s.  You try moving at that speed!