Did Jeremy have a reason to put the silencer back into the gun cupboard?

[Cambridgecutie]

Funny how AP said they looked new a few days before Jeremy shot and killed everyone,   like you said it was purchased some 9 months prior to the murders  in Nov 84 for shooting vermin.

Oh yes it was Nov 84!  I was thinking it was Nov 83 even though I typed Nov 84 hence I said some 20 months! 

But NB had been farming at WHF for some 40 years prior to the Nov 84 purchase so which firearm was used to control vermin prior to this purchase?

The rifle was used to wield blows against NB so that was hardly likely to look new since it wasn't designed for that purpose.  And someone deliberately scatched the silencer to implicate JB so that was hardly likely to look new either.

[Cambridgecutie]

So, if there was no oil or grease traces on the nightdress, it shows Sheila never wiped her hands on the night dress to remove the Greasy lubricants after handling the greasy cartridges, making it more likely her hands and fingerprints would be transferred to the rifle stock?

Handling greasy bullet cases makes the finger print more Patent, compared to a Latent fingerprint which is your normal hand sweat.  The patent fingerprint would have been visible on the rifle wood/stock and could last for six months.

May I suggest you go to a gun shop and check it out for yourself. 

Patent?  Do you mean latent?  I have already said fingerprints are difficult to recover from firearms hence only 1 from JB and 1 from SC was found.

[Hardy Boy]

May I suggest you go to a gun shop and check it out for yourself. 

Patent?  Do you mean latent?  I have already said fingerprints are difficult to recover from firearms hence only 1 from JB and 1 from SC was found.

Maybe you should clue yourself up on subjects before you try to preach to others.

A patent print is simply a visible print. Many of these types of prints are wholly visible to the unaided eye, and only some form of imaging is needed for preservation. A good example of a patent print would be a greasy impression left on a windowpane. Patent prints can also be left in blood, paint, ink, mud, or dust.

[Hardy Boy]

Oh yes it was Nov 84!  I was thinking it was Nov 83 even though I typed Nov 84 hence I said some 20 months! 

But NB had been farming at WHF for some 40 years prior to the Nov 84 purchase so which firearm was used to control vermin prior to this purchase?

The rifle was used to wield blows against NB so that was hardly likely to look new since it wasn't designed for that purpose.  And someone deliberately scatched the silencer to implicate JB so that was hardly likely to look new either.

Your arguments and accusations may wash on others Cutie, but may I add,  even if I was a neutral I would take you on on your lies. I don’t believe in making things up for the sake of it!

It’s obvious it’s a recent rifle/scope/silencer, it’s obvious from gun experts, NGB and a guy who is in his 80s and been shooting all his life, It’s obvious when it’s said in Court that the bullets were greasy, yet you want to argue they wasn’t.  All I want to know is why Sheila didn’t transfer this grease/lubricant onto the rifle, that’s all.  My suggestion the shooter must have been wearing gloves?

[Hardy Boy]

Patent prints can be found on a wide variety of surfaces: smooth or rough, porous (such as paper, cloth or wood)

[Cambridgecutie]

Your arguments and accusations may wash on others Cutie, but may I add,  even if I was a neutral I would take you on on your lies. I don’t believe in making things up for the sake of it!

It’s obvious it’s a recent rifle/scope/silencer, it’s obvious from gun experts, NGB and a guy who is in his 80s and been shooting all his life, It’s obvious when it’s said in Court that the bullets were greasy, yet you want to argue they wasn’t.  All I want to know is why Sheila didn’t transfer this grease/lubricant onto the rifle, that’s all.  My suggestion the shooter must have been wearing gloves?

Where have I made anything up?  I admitted I made a mistake in working out the number of months since the purchase of the rifle etc. 

I have no idea what you are talking about?  If its a subject that interests you why not go along to a gun shop and check them out for yourself.  All I can say is that having loaded the magazine to full capacity inside the gun shop I could not detect any residues on my hands my way of appearance, feel or odour.  In fact it was only when I picked at the cartridge with my nail I was able to remove the lubricant which I would describe as similar to candle wax. 

With regard to NGB you are overlooking the fact he is handling the cartridges outdoors where the humidity levels will be much higher than indoors.  Forensics need to be conducted on a like for like basis because any variation can alter the outcome.  Eg taking the jury to an outdoor shooting range to hear the difference in sound with the silencer on and off.  What was the point when the shootings took place indoors with a mountain of soft furnishings which would completely alter the sound. 

It was said in court the handling of the cartridges caused black residues which is complete BS.

[Cambridgecutie]

Patent prints can be found on a wide variety of surfaces: smooth or rough, porous (such as paper, cloth or wood)

Patent prints aka visible fingerprints are notoriously difficult to recover from firearms.

https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/factors-affecting-recovery-latent-prints-firearms

Fingerprint specialists have had some success in recovering latent prints from firearms, but it is a difficult process and very few latent prints are developed from firearms.

The fact the rifle was able to produce a fingerprint from each of JB and Sheila supports the idea both had handled it extensively.

[David1819]

Maybe you should clue yourself up on subjects before you try to preach to others.

A patent print is simply a visible print. Many of these types of prints are wholly visible to the unaided eye, and only some form of imaging is needed for preservation. A good example of a patent print would be a greasy impression left on a windowpane. Patent prints can also be left in blood, paint, ink, mud, or dust.

What is Detective Special Brew rambling on about now?

[Hardy Boy]

Where have I made anything up?  I admitted I made a mistake in working out the number of months since the purchase of the rifle etc. 

I have no idea what you are talking about?  If its a subject that interests you why not go along to a gun shop and check them out for yourself.  All I can say is that having loaded the magazine to full capacity inside the gun shop I could not detect any residues on my hands my way of appearance, feel or odour.  In fact it was only when I picked at the cartridge with my nail I was able to remove the lubricant which I would describe as similar to candle wax. 

With regard to NGB you are overlooking the fact he is handling the cartridges outdoors where the humidity levels will be much higher than indoors.  Forensics need to be conducted on a like for like basis because any variation can alter the outcome.  Eg taking the jury to an outdoor shooting range to hear the difference in sound with the silencer on and off.  What was the point when the shootings took place indoors with a mountain of soft furnishings which would completely alter the sound. 

It was said in court the handling of the cartridges caused black residues which is complete BS.

Your a serial accuser without evidence, you accuse Stan of placing his own DNA on the silencer, you accuse Stan of scratching the AGA mantle, you accuse Stan of climbing through WHF window to do such nonsense, you accuse Stan of taking a bung from the relatives, you accuse Stan of drinking till the small hours with PE,  all without evidence and made up.

[Hardy Boy]

Patent prints aka visible fingerprints are notoriously difficult to recover from firearms.

https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/factors-affecting-recovery-latent-prints-firearms

Fingerprint specialists have had some success in recovering latent prints from firearms, but it is a difficult process and very few latent prints are developed from firearms.

The fact the rifle was able to produce a fingerprint from each of JB and Sheila supports the idea both had handled it extensively.

This article above is about Latent prints,  my argument,  not so much about identifying the print, it’s to support that the shooter did  wear gloves, I think there would be more transferable grease or  wax on the rifle if the shooter hadn’t got gloves on,  so to me it looks like the shooter had gloves on?  It’s about handling the bullets to load and not the discharge from the rifle, I would expect Sheila to wipe her hands possibly on her nighty,  if they were sticky like APs wife said she found them?

[Hardy Boy]

Oh yes it was Nov 84!  I was thinking it was Nov 83 even though I typed Nov 84 hence I said some 20 months! 

But NB had been farming at WHF for some 40 years prior to the Nov 84 purchase so which firearm was used to control vermin prior to this purchase?

The rifle was used to wield blows against NB so that was hardly likely to look new since it wasn't designed for that purpose.  And someone deliberately scatched the silencer to implicate JB so that was hardly likely to look new either.

I know what the rifle was used for thank you, I said AP said it looked new when he seen the rifle and scope and silencer all fitted a few days before the murders.   Why the  need to remove and clean them?  Again how do you know someone deliberately scratched them, you’re making things up again, maybe the scratch came from when Jeremy was hitting Neville and he smashed the lamp in the kitchen?  The rifle being long and raised to strike would hit higher objects?

[snow66!]

Would it be fair to say that loading the magazine would consist of holding it in one hand and loading the bullets with the finger tips of the other?

[Cambridgecutie]

This article above is about Latent prints,  my argument,  not so much about identifying the print, it’s to support that the shooter did  wear gloves, I think there would be more transferable grease or  wax on the rifle if the shooter hadn’t got gloves on,  so to me it looks like the shooter had gloves on?  It’s about handling the bullets to load and not the discharge from the rifle, I would expect Sheila to wipe her hands possibly on her nighty,  if they were sticky like APs wife said she found them?

The manufacturing technical data states "firm hydrocarbon lubricant to reduce residues".  The idea the cartridges are slathered in lubricant to the extent the user would transfer residues to the firearm and/or his/her person is wrong.  NGB has never suggested otherwise. 

At trial MF told the court "you get a black discolouration".  Absolute BS.  So we know for sure we have at least one forensic scientist who is either incompetent, corrupt or both.

[Cambridgecutie]

What is Detective Special Brew rambling on about now?

Hi Incel.  You are in no position to talk about others rambling after your long winded theory about lead tests when it is impossible for such a test to prove anything.  Hence none of the FSP's offer such a test.  You fail to recognise the FSS/80's featured quality failures:

3.3.1 Following some high profile quality failures in the 1980s the FSS implemented accreditation to quality standards from 1993 onwards, a world first for forensic science.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmsctech/writev/forensic/m61.htm

[Hardy Boy]

Would it be fair to say that loading the magazine would consist of holding it in one hand and loading the bullets with the finger tips of the other?

How would you expect someone not used to loading Bullets in a magazine, to load them?  APs wife found them slippery while trying to load them, and  at trial it was stated that the bullets left a VISIBLE residue on the hands while loading the bullets from the lubricant on the Bullet .  Cutie can argue all she wants, it doesn’t alter the fact that the bullets had a lubricant transferable substance to the hand.   If it leaves a residue I would expect this residue to be transferred to the murder weapon?