The beauty of THREE marks for supporters

[snow66!]

Yes,i am referring to the 'Aga' marks again,and what I mean is, that the fact that there are three of them makes it easier to match them to the source.I will also try and point out again why I believe the marks are very important.I am aware that most members see the marks as irrelevent,even supporters,nevertheless I will have another go at trying to point out why I think they would have been a game changer if they had been presented at trial and how they could be now.

Anyway,as I see it,proving that the Aga made the marks shouldn't cause much problem,as I said the fact that there are three marks limits the available sources of heat at WHF capable of causing the marks that night.One mark,yes,quite impossible to tie to any specific object,even two would be tricky.But three burns,which match the shape and spacing within millimetres of an image taken on pig skin from the Aga handles? The chances that another source of heat could have made similar marks must surely be astronomical!
As I say,that is the beauty of THREE marks,and not just marks,BURN MARKS.Think about it,Yvonne Hartley quite rightly pointed out that there were very few, if any,other sources of heat anywhere else in the WHF.And even if there were,just how would they manage to make contact with Nevills neck? Either Nevill lay against a heat source or someone held a hot object against him,he definately didn't take something and brand himself.
And even if someone did heat an object and burn Nevill,why would the burns be the same spacings as the image taken from the Aga on the pig skin?
Also,it has been proven by Boyce that if you place someone on their side in front of an Aga their neck is in line with the hot Aga knobs.
So,sorry to be so boring,but I believe that most reasonable people will conclude that the Aga cooker was indeed the cause of the marks on Nevills back.

Yet the likes of Jane continues to reject the Aga evidence by putting her fingers in her ears and uttering La,La,La,rather than facing the truth. [Sorry Jane,but tit for tat  ].

Now,for those of you who may have accepted that the Aga made the marks,let us look at what this could mean.What if the jury had known that the Aga made the marks,and that they took several minutes or maybe even hours to form,surely this would have had a profound effect on whether it was safe to convict Bamber?

And just how could Justice Drake have dismissed the burns to Nevill? He couldn't!
Just think it through and you may see the significance that the three little marks may have had at JBs trial.
Nevill lying against the Aga for any length of time doesn't fit well with a JB scenario,and we all know it.
The police scenario sent to the DPP has JB chasing Nevill to the kitchen then shooting him while slumped over the scuttle,if the Aga burns are accepted how are they going to fit in with Nevill lying against the Aga for some time? Not easy,just doesn't work,does it?
No,what the CCRC must,and have to do,is realise that the Aga burns is new evidence and decide the impact they would have had on the jury in 1986.They will also have to supply a new credible JB scenario around the marks,and if they continue to claim that the police did not move Nevill upon entry then for me a credible scenario is nigh on impossible.

So,to round things up,the police will either have to produce a credible scenario to the CCRC regarding the marks or admit they lied at trial by the fact that they moved Nevill upon entry.

As for this trumping the silencer evidence or Sheila's hands being clean,well it has to,the blood was inconclusive and Sheila washing her hands is no big deal whatsoever.The bottom line is,if the Aga burns prove that JB could not have been present at WHF when the  shootings occurred then the silencer evidence is erroneous,simple as that!

[Jane]

When you manage to get yourself up close and intimate enough with an AGA to use it daily and to lay down in front of it, in the position in which you believe Nevill to have been placed, wearing PJs exactly like his, and remaining in that position until the requisite marks occur, then have someone take a picture so you can show us, you might give Boyce's theory some credence. I emphatically do NOT believe that there are three hot places on an AGA, close enough together, which will burn someone's neck. Of course, the real point is that such proves little. It certainly doesn't make JB innocent. It was Nevill's blood in the coal scuttle.

Contrary to your demands of them, the CCRC doesn't HAVE to do anything.

[snow66!]

When you manage to get yourself up close and intimate enough with an AGA to use it daily and to lay down in front of it, in the position in which you believe Nevill to have been placed, wearing PJs exactly like his, and remaining in that position until the requisite marks occur, then have someone take a picture so you can show us, you might give Boyce's theory some credence. I emphatically do NOT believe that there are three hot places on an AGA, close enough together, which will burn someone's neck. Of course, the real point is that such proves little. It certainly doesn't make JB innocent. It was Nevill's blood in the coal scuttle.

Contrary to your demands of them, the CCRC doesn't HAVE to do anything.

Thanks Jane,you have made your views on the 'alleged' Aga burns  clear.

[Roch]

Contrary to your demands of them, the CCRC doesn't HAVE to do anything.

The CCRC are in crisis.  Precisely because there are too many occasions were they don't do anything.. just as you suggest.

[Rob_]

When you manage to get yourself up close and intimate enough with an AGA to use it daily and to lay down in front of it, in the position in which you believe Nevill to have been placed, wearing PJs exactly like his, and remaining in that position until the requisite marks occur, then have someone take a picture so you can show us, you might give Boyce's theory some credence. I emphatically do NOT believe that there are three hot places on an AGA, close enough together, which will burn someone's neck. Of course, the real point is that such proves little. It certainly doesn't make JB innocent. It was Nevill's blood in the coal scuttle.

Contrary to your demands of them, the CCRC doesn't HAVE to do anything.

Aga's can get hot in places they shouldn't Jane, as I have posted before two people with Aga's I know confirm this.

I found this:

Is your Aga range cooker too hot on the outside but too cold on the inside? It's probably the insulation...

[ILB]

The question is ultimately is this evidence strong enough to get a ccrc referral.

I don't think it is. In trying to overturn the original verdict

[snow66!]

The question is ultimately is this evidence strong enough to get a ccrc referral.

I don't think it is. In trying to overturn the original verdict

It is only one part of the referral remember ILB,and it definately wont hurt anyway.

[snow66!]

Just one other thing,for those of you who vehemently disagree that the Aga made the marks to Nevills back on the night of the shooting,just what DO you think made them?
Or are you in denial that they were made that night at all?
Or worse,do you believe that no matter what made them that they are of no importance to the case and dont have to be included in any scenario.

[ILB]

It is only one part of the referral remember ILB,and it definately wont hurt anyway.

I agree snow it's a part of submission

I don't want to take your thread off topic but the key for me is Julie mugford.

[snow66!]

I agree snow it's a part of submission

I don't want to take your thread off topic but the key for me is Julie mugford.

Yes,you have pointed that out many times ILB.I think a lot about her evidence,maybe she just didn't know if JB did it or not.How could she,she wasn't with him that night.She may have simply been influenced by others,very tricky to judge.

[ILB]

Yes,you have pointed that out many times ILB.I think a lot about her evidence,maybe she just didn't know if JB did it or not.How could she,she wasn't with him that night.She may have simply been influenced by others,very tricky to judge.

The fact of the matter is she went to court and gave evidence against him that he had confessed to the murders.

Anthony Arlidge leading counsel at trial is on record stating this is the strongest piece of evidence the crown had

[snow66!]

The fact of the matter is she went to court and gave evidence against him that he had confessed to the murders.

Anthony Arlidge leading counsel at trial is on record stating this is the strongest piece of evidence the crown had

Yes,but she did say everything sort of indirectly ILB,like the alleged confession ,it was more like him saying 'there must be something wrong with me' apparently,rather than'ok,ok I confess,it was me,I killed my family'. Nothing like that is ever mentioned ANYWHERE,ANYTIME that I have seen,is it?

[Zoso]

Yes,i am referring to the 'Aga' marks again,and what I mean is, that the fact that there are three of them makes it easier to match them to the source.I will also try and point out again why I believe the marks are very important.I am aware that most members see the marks as irrelevent,even supporters,nevertheless I will have another go at trying to point out why I think they would have been a game changer if they had been presented at trial and how they could be now.

Anyway,as I see it,proving that the Aga made the marks shouldn't cause much problem,as I said the fact that there are three marks limits the available sources of heat at WHF capable of causing the marks that night.One mark,yes,quite impossible to tie to any specific object,even two would be tricky.But three burns,which match the shape and spacing within millimetres of an image taken on pig skin from the Aga handles? The chances that another source of heat could have made similar marks must surely be astronomical!
As I say,that is the beauty of THREE marks,and not just marks,BURN MARKS.Think about it,Yvonne Hartley quite rightly pointed out that there were very few, if any,other sources of heat anywhere else in the WHF.And even if there were,just how would they manage to make contact with Nevills neck? Either Nevill lay against a heat source or someone held a hot object against him,he definately didn't take something and brand himself.
And even if someone did heat an object and burn Nevill,why would the burns be the same spacings as the image taken from the Aga on the pig skin?
Also,it has been proven by Boyce that if you place someone on their side in front of an Aga their neck is in line with the hot Aga knobs.
So,sorry to be so boring,but I believe that most reasonable people will conclude that the Aga cooker was indeed the cause of the marks on Nevills back.

Yet the likes of Jane continues to reject the Aga evidence by putting her fingers in her ears and uttering La,La,La,rather than facing the truth. [Sorry Jane,but tit for tat  ].

Now,for those of you who may have accepted that the Aga made the marks,let us look at what this could mean.What if the jury had known that the Aga made the marks,and that they took several minutes or maybe even hours to form,surely this would have had a profound effect on whether it was safe to convict Bamber?

And just how could Justice Drake have dismissed the burns to Nevill? He couldn't!
Just think it through and you may see the significance that the three little marks may have had at JBs trial.
Nevill lying against the Aga for any length of time doesn't fit well with a JB scenario,and we all know it.
The police scenario sent to the DPP has JB chasing JB to the kitchen then shooting him while slumped over the scuttle,if the Aga burns are accepted how are they going to fit in Nevill lying against the Aga for some time? Not easy,just doesn't work,does it?
No,what the CCRC must,and have to do,is realise that the Aga burns is new evidence and decide the impact they would have had on the jury in 1986.They will also have to supply a new credible JB scenario around the marks,and if they continue to claim that the police did not move Nevill upon entry then for me a credible scenario is nigh on impossible.

So,to round things up,the police will either have to produce a credible scenario to the CCRC regarding the marks or admit they lied at trial by the fact that they moved Nevill upon entry.

As for this trumping the silencer evidence or Sheila's hands being clean,well it has to,the blood was inconclusive and Sheila washing her hands is no big deal whatsoever.The bottom line is,if the Aga burns prove that JB could not have been present at WHF when the  shootings occurred then the silencer evidence is erroneous,simple as that!

Heating the pig skin should have formed similar or identical marks - where's the pig skin?

[Adam]

It is good that Snow has found an angle in looking for a technicality for Bamber.

Just repeatedly saying the hundreds of pieces of forensic & circumstantial evidence is wrong and everyone lied will never work. 

However the aga burns theory is just properganda.

[Jane]

Aga's can get hot in places they shouldn't Jane, as I have posted before two people with Aga's I know confirm this.

I found this:

Is your Aga range cooker too hot on the outside but too cold on the inside? It's probably the insulation...

Isn't this just grabbing at straws? Our AGA is circa 1930, it's serviced yearly. The only times that there are blips is when the oil is low, thus it isn't as hot as it should be. I would assume that the Bambers. too, had theirs serviced regularly, and, as yet, no one has come forward to say their model was regularly troublesome, OR that the insulation wasn't sufficient, which points to IF there had been one of those one off blips to which you refer, it would have been extremely coincidental.