Prof Knight on Nevill's back burns.

[Rob_]

Assume Vanezis would know burn marks when he sees them. If not he gets a burns expect in.

Neither Knight or Vanezis believe they were old 1940's war wounds.

Both believe they were from prodding.

To burn someone with a prod the implement would have to be very hot.

[ILB]

Definitely not a signs of life test anyway.

[Cambridgecutie]

Assume Vanezis would know burn marks when he sees them. If not he gets a burns expect in.

Neither Knight or Vanezis believe they were old 1940's war wounds.

Both believe they were from prodding.

But we have seen no evidence that anyone accessed NB's medi records to see if he sustained any recent or historic injury that could account for the marks. 

Why would he get a burns expert in?  He was concerned with cause of death not superficial marks.  Remember too the thinking was murder/suicide. 

[Cambridgecutie]

Definitely not a signs of life test anyway.

Wow we agree on something! 

A test for sign of life makes no sense from either a psychotic SC or JB.  Why would either single out NB?  Why not inflict such a test on the other victims?

[ILB]

Wow we agree on something! 

A test for sign of life makes no sense from either a psychotic SC or JB.  Why would either single out NB?  Why not inflict such a test on the other victims?

Totally agree.

A simple pulse check suffices.

[Adam]

Me, Jane, Steve, NGB, Hardyboy, Scipio, other former posters believe it was to test for signs of life.

Rage/spite is not a possibility as Bamber had just brutally beaten Nevill & shot him 4-8 times. He also needed to keep focused on the job.

[Adam]

Totally agree.

A simple pulse check suffices.

The burn mark evidence shows he burnt Nevill's back to check for signs of life.

A slim chance he did both.

[ILB]

The burn mark evidence shows he burnt Nevill's back to check for signs of life.

No it doesn't.

You know this.

[Adam]

But we have seen no evidence that anyone accessed NB's medi records to see if he sustained any recent or historic injury that could account for the marks. 

Why would he get a burns expert in?  He was concerned with cause of death not superficial marks.  Remember too the thinking was murder/suicide.

He was completing a report.

His '3 distinct burn marks' quote would be said if 100% sure himself or he had got a burns expert in.

[Cambridgecutie]

The burn mark evidence shows he burnt Nevill's back to check for signs of life.

A slim chance he did both.

Where does either pathologist, defence or prosecution make reference to anyone checking for life? 

[ILB]

Me, Jane, Steve, NGB, Hardyboy, Scipio, other former posters believe it was to test for signs of life.

You often do this a lot, list other people who believe what you do in order to bolster arguments. It's like a primary school playground argument.

[Adam]

No it doesn't.

You know this.

Me, Jane, Steve, NGB, Hardyboy, Scipio, other former posters believe it was to test for signs of life.

You know this.

[Rob_]

Me, Jane, Steve, NGB, Hardyboy, Scipio, other former posters believe it was to test for signs of life.

Rage/spite is not a possibility as Bamber had just brutally beaten Nevill & shot him 4-8 times. He also needed to keep focused on the job.

Test for signs of life after shooting Nevil four times in the head?

It was a .22 not a spud gun.

[Adam]

Bamber has been all over the place with the burns -

1986 - An expert was hired to claim it was from 'prodding' from a cold instrument.

2012 - Sheila inflicted the burns. But don't know why.

2021 - Nevill laid against a cold aga door. He was moved by the police & put onto a coal scuttle/chair & trousers pulled down.

[ILB]

Me, Jane, Steve, NGB, Hardyboy, Scipio, other former posters believe it was to test for signs of life.

You know this.

So that means it's gospel then?