Author Topic: Mail on Sunday article  (Read 2936 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online ILB

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13160
Re: Mail on Sunday article
« Reply #75 on: April 02, 2025, 10:58:AM »

I'm no mechanic but I know enough about cars as a driver to know that I am not going to burn up someone in a standard Ferrari with me in an unmodified Reliant Robin. 

I'm not wasting anymore time going round in circles with you.  You are incapable of thinking anything through!

I'm sorry I think you are talking bollocks, and it's a poor analogy you have just used. You also can't compare blood on clothing to ballistic expertise for a layperson. Opposite ends of the scale to where we are talking about.


I would put my house on Bamber having never even heard of the term backspatter in 1985. He was a farmer, not a firearm/ballistic expert.

We can as you wish part company on the subject!

Stick to your conspiracy theories.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2025, 10:59:AM by ILB »
If yesterday you hated me. Then today you can not stop the love that binds from me to you. And you to me

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: Mail on Sunday article
« Reply #76 on: April 02, 2025, 11:24:AM »
Bamber would know blood wouldn't hit him from his shots. He was standing too far away from people & the rifle was not powerful enough.

He was also not aware there could be back spatter into a nozzle/silencer from contact shots.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Online ILB

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13160
Re: Mail on Sunday article
« Reply #77 on: April 02, 2025, 09:00:PM »
Bamber would know blood wouldn't hit him from his shots. He was standing too far away from people & the rifle was not powerful enough.

He was also not aware there could be back spatter into a nozzle/silencer from contact shots.

I don't believe he was aware of backspatter.
If yesterday you hated me. Then today you can not stop the love that binds from me to you. And you to me

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: Mail on Sunday article
« Reply #78 on: April 03, 2025, 03:57:AM »
I don't believe he was aware of backspatter.

That is what I said.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Rob_

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4829
Re: Mail on Sunday article
« Reply #79 on: April 03, 2025, 09:18:PM »
The silencer would be used as it was a silent massacre attempt.

The other advantage is it made the rifle longer. Meaning the rifle reached across the bed to Nevill better & he could keep his distance from his targets.

A .22 rifle bullet can travel something like a mile, not sure I see what you are saying? would an extra 4" really help?

Offline Cambridgecutie

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6595
Re: Mail on Sunday article
« Reply #80 on: April 04, 2025, 10:10:PM »
I'm sorry I think you are talking bollocks, and it's a poor analogy you have just used. You also can't compare blood on clothing to ballistic expertise for a layperson. Opposite ends of the scale to where we are talking about.


I would put my house on Bamber having never even heard of the term backspatter in 1985. He was a farmer, not a firearm/ballistic expert.

We can as you wish part company on the subject!

Stick to your conspiracy theories.

I never said JB had heard of backspatter.  It is not necessary to know the terminology to appreciate that a .22 and subsonic ammo are a very low powered combi and not going to generate any sort of debris evidenced by the soc. 

« Last Edit: April 04, 2025, 10:11:PM by Cambridgecutie »
Patrick O'Connor, Barrister, Doughty Street Chambers: "It will have to be a slam dunk.  It will have to be something of a blockbuster piece of evidence to have a chance".

All goals from Lionesses Euro 2025:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DQq5gnwGjs