Significance of the Aga burns theory

[snow66!]

D1 is that door shown in a fully open position, as on attached plan. I don't know if it was forced open later though.

Yes to your other two questions.

'D1 Door secured from Red side'
I take this to mean the opening was completely blocked off/partitioned from the bathroom side, and for all intents and purposes made into a cupboard in the toilet.
But!! I could be wrong!

[Curiosity]

'D1 Door secured from Red side'
I take this to mean the opening was completely blocked off/partitioned from the bathroom side , and for all intents and purposes made into a cupboard in the toilet.
But!! I could be wrong!

Perhaps the opening between Bathroom and store room was made when that part of the building was converted into office space. It seems odd for the Bathroom to have two doors from different areas - the  bedroom passageway and the store room.

[Cambridgecutie]

It appears that the only significance of the "Aga burns theory" is that the police corrupted the Crime Scene and lied at the trial, saying they did not!

This is totally wrong.  The prosecution never asserted at trial that JB caused the marks to NB's back. 

[snow66!]

Perhaps the opening between Bathroom and store room was made when that part of the building was converted into office space. It seems odd for the Bathroom to have two doors from different areas - the  bedroom passageway and the store room.

No! I would say the opening between Bathroom and store was 'blocked off' rather, when the house was altered, Curiosity! I dare say the 'Bathroom' was converted into such from another room [A bedroom maybe?] at the same time, hence the need to block off one of the doors! As you said, you dont generally have two doors into a bathroom, not in a dwelling house.

[Adam]

This is totally wrong.  The prosecution never asserted at trial that JB caused the marks to NB's back.

Emma Morris says the prosecution said Bamber caused the burn marks as a form of torture.

Have never seen a court transcript saying such. Doubt they would speculate.

[Cambridgecutie]

Emma Morris says the prosecution said Bamber caused the burn marks as a form of torture.

Have never seen a court transcript saying such. Doubt they would speculate.

Who?  Court or CT/Emma Morris?   

[Adam]

Who?  Court or CT/Emma Morris?   

The prosecution.

[Hardy Boy]

Cal has it in her book……On Monday the 13th, Rivlin elicited an agreement from Vanezis that there was nothing whatsoever on Sheila to suggest that she tried to fight anyone off?  Pressed as to whether her wounds were consistent with committing suicide,  he replied I cannot be certain one way or the other whether she had taken her own life or someone else had done.

Why would Rivlin get this agreement I wonder, surely it would have been best to try to show Sheila had been in some sort of fight with her father, most likely  he was trying to show that Bamber and Sheila never got into a struggle with each other and Sheila took her own life?  It was a hard call I would say, on one hand, Sheila had been in a fight with her father if she did commit the murders, yet at the same time there was no evidence which backs up this up?  How do you distinguish between the two?

[David1819]

Cal has it in her book……On Monday the 13th, Rivlin elicited an agreement from Vanezis that there was nothing whatsoever on Sheila to suggest that she tried to fight anyone off?  Pressed as to whether her wounds were consistent with committing suicide,  he replied I cannot be certain one way or the other whether she had taken her own life or someone else had done.

Why would Rivlin get this agreement I wonder, surely it would have been best to try to show Sheila had been in some sort of fight with her father, most likely  he was trying to show that Bamber and Sheila never got into a struggle with each other and Sheila took her own life?  It was a hard call I would say, on one hand, Sheila had been in a fight with her father if she did commit the murders, yet at the same time there was no evidence which backs up this up?  How do you distinguish between the two?

There was no fight, Nevil was struck after being shot and the raid team made a mess during entry. Hence there are no marks on either suspect.

[Steve_uk]

There was no fight, Nevil was struck after being shot and the raid team made a mess during entry. Hence there are no marks on either suspect.

Well, Jeremy had a rifle and the element of surprise, Nevill was an ageing man, weary from harvesting and clad in pyjamas.

[snow66!]

There was no fight, Nevil was struck after being shot and the raid team made a mess during entry. Hence there are no marks on either suspect.

Exactly, Dave.

[snow66!]

Well, Jeremy had a rifle and the element of surprise, Nevill was an ageing man, weary from harvesting and clad in pyjamas.

Not sure that i've ever heard your Bamber scenario, Steve?

[Hardy Boy]

Not sure that i've ever heard your Bamber scenario, Steve?

Easy, he climbed through the window, Shot everyone and staged the crime scene, Climbed out the window and went home and pretended his Father called him.

[snow66!]

Easy, he climbed through the window, Shot everyone and staged the crime scene, Climbed out the window and went home and pretended his Father called him.

I think Steve would call that a synopsis, HB!

[Hardy Boy]

I think Steve would call that a synopsis, HB!

HA HA Well it’s that easy Snow, brief and to the point,   it’s like describing Summer with one brief word…Summary.