Prof Knight on Nevill's back burns.

[snow66!]

No, I'm afraid he's wrong, because Boyce's misleading composite photo doesn't tally with the real distance between the handle top and corner of the ball-catch housing, i.e. over 2 inches not 1.25. Jane already measured several months ago and affirmed it to be the former, at nearly twice the distance between the top two marks on Nevill's nape. Use the forensic ruler in the second photo to measure the distance in centimetres yourself, then convert to inches if necessary -

Bear in mind that the spine is curved and the neck steps in with most people, Curiosity!
Look at the shape of a human body side on!
You may find that the base of the neck stepping in accounts for the extra 0.75 inches you talk about!
The available photos only show the marks from behind remember which is misleading!
Experiment some more please!

[Curiosity]

Thanks for this but you need to allow for the shape of the body in contact with the handles of the Aga.

I need about 20 photos taken from all angles of that area of the Aga plus a ruler in the images would help.

The skin above the backbone on the nape is thin and won't stretch enough to cause an inch difference. I doubt that Jane has the equipment or even the inclination to make such a fuss, when it's obvious that Boyce's experiment is an abject failure.

[Rob_]

The skin above the backbone on the nape is thin and won't stretch enough to cause an inch difference. I doubt that Jane has the equipment or even the inclination to make such a fuss, when it's obvious that Boyce's experiment is an abject failure.

I will get them somehow, Boyce is a scientist he knows what he is doing. People should be more open minded the top of the back is very flexible.

I am more interested in the shape of the marks rather than the distance which depends on how someone is lying and how they were lying when the photo was taken.

[Curiosity]

I will get them somehow, Boyce is a scientist he knows what he is doing. People should be more open minded the top of the back is very flexible.

I am more interested in the shape of the marks rather than the distance which depends on how someone is lying and how they were lying when the photo was taken.

The handle's shape/impression on pigskin bears no resemblance whatsoever to the top mark/burn on the nape -

[Rob_]

The handle's shape/impression on pigskin bears no resemblance whatsoever to the top mark/burn on the nape -

I don't know what Boyce did in his tests?

To just say it's not the Aga is what the CCRC does, I will try and find out for myself.

[Adam]

I don't know why the defence hired Prof Knight.

He just gave an unconvincing testimony saying from the photos it looks like bruising from 'prodding'.

Maybe the defence thought the prosecution were going to make a big thing of the burns.

[Rob_]

I don't know why the defence hired Prof Knight.

He just gave an unconvincing testimony saying from the photos it looks like bruising from 'prodding'.

Maybe the defence thought the prosecution were going to make a big thing of the burns.

At the time of the trial they probably did not seem that important, but today if it can be shown the Aga caused them, to me it's massive.

[snow66!]

At the time of the trial they probably did not seem that important, but today if it can be shown the Aga caused them, to me it's massive.

Agree Rob!

[Adam]

At the time of the trial they probably did not seem that important, but today if it can be shown the Aga caused them, to me it's massive.

Agree they are burns. Not war wounds or bruising from prodding which CC/Curiosity supports.

[Rob_]

Agree they are burns. Not war wounds or bruising from prodding which CC/Curiosity supports.

I think they are burns, they also to me look fresh and PV initially at least thought they were burns.

Whatever they are it's what caused them I am interested in, though I know you like to show Bamber in a bad light and say he used the rifle.

[Adam]

I think they are burns, they also to me look fresh and PV initially at least thought they were burns.

Whatever they are it's what caused them I am interested in, though I know you like to show Bamber in a bad light and say he used the rifle.

Bamber believed they were caused by the rifle until 2 years ago.

[Zoso]

What with Zoso?
The rifle barrel or the Aga?

BOTH!

[Zoso]

Fowler said it would take 5 minutes to heat the rifle barrel to the required heat. Using an oven plate on the aga.

Which would be quicker than spending hours 'prodding' with a cold instrument until the marks appear.

Do you believe Vanezis was wrong when he said they were '3 distinct burn marks'.

A kick or a prod would have taken seconds.

Why would the killer want marks to appear? I don't believe the marks had anything to do with the murders and Venezis didn't really know either.

They may be burns - who knows - more to the point for the purpose of this case, it doesn't matter because it doesn't tell you who the killer is.

[Cambridgecutie]

A kick or a prod would have taken seconds.

Why would the killer want marks to appear? I don't believe the marks had anything to do with the murders and Venezis didn't really know either.

They may be burns - who knows - more to the point for the purpose of this case, it doesn't matter because it doesn't tell you who the killer is.

I agree. 

Still think the marks might be connected to NB's broken back.  Any plate and screws may have taken on the appearance of the marks especially given his resting position ie head towards floor, spine curved etc.

https://images.app.goo.gl/XzAUh4ScDNJ7EsLJ6

[Cambridgecutie]

Bamber believed they were caused by the rifle until 2 years ago.

2 years ago or 4 years ago?  I thought the Aga burns form part of the CCRC submission Mar 2021?