Philip Boyce's 2011 experiments with pig skin

[BarefootDanC]

Here is a documentary about Boyce's pig-skin experiment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeLsEeE0zTI


My questions for the group are: (1) was this ever actually submitted to the CCRC? (2) Did these two experiment fail because the rifle wouldn't have got hot enough?

TIA

Here is what the High Court said about it in 2012 in R (on the application of Bamber) v the CCRC


"24. It would, I think, be helpful to add one further matter. Prior to the Commission making its report, the Commissioners were aware from the screening of the television documentary of the evidence of Mr Boyce, to which I have already referred. His conclusion was a conclusion in support of Dr Caruso, but there was no evidence in that television documentary to show how the barrel of the rifle could have been heated sufficiently.

There is, however, a further report that was submitted, after the Commission's decision of 25 April 2012, in which Mr Boyce set out his view as to how the rifle end could have been heated to the necessary temperature. He accepts that multiple firing would not have had sufficient effect on the temperature of the rifle barrel or the silencer. He concludes that the rifle or the silencer had to be heated artificially in order to burn. It was possible to heat a barrel on a hot plate of a cooker to 200 degrees in less than five minutes.

This issue is not dealt with by the Commission, but I think it would be helpful to express a short view. There was in the kitchen an AGA. The mechanism that Mr Boyce suggests must imply the placing of the rifle barrel on a hot plate of the AGA, and by the hot plate of the AGA I mean that part that is normally used for cooking and which when it is not used for cooking can be covered by a lid. An AGA is not constructed so if a gun is leant against it, it will heat the barrel up. As Mr Boyce makes clear, it would have to be on the hot plate. It seems to me that if that further evidence had been before the Commission, although it would be a matter for them, it would seem very improbable that a barrel would have been heated in that way.

So in my judgment it is clear that the evidence of Dr Caruso, on the assumption that it is admissible, would not in the Commission's judgment have been sufficient to pass the test in Pendleton, and I can see no basis upon which their view could be challenged. "

[ILB]

The experiment done in 2011 and the other experiment has no bearing on the verdict.

It neither highlights the guilt of Jeremy, or Shelia. More importantly it doesnt cast doubt on the safety of Jeremy's convictions.

For me it was a fruitless excersise.

[BarefootDanC]

The experiment done in 2011 and the other experiment has no bearing on the verdict.

It neither highlights the guilt of Jeremy, or Shelia. More importantly it doesnt cast doubt on the safety of Jeremy's convictions.

For me it was a fruitless excersise.

Thank you for your reply. Wasn't Boyce trying to prove (through the pig skin) that the moderator wasn't on the rifle? That wouldn't prove Jeremy's innocence per se, but it removes one of the main, if not the main, piece of evidence against Jeremy.

[Steve_uk]

Thank you for your reply. Wasn't Boyce trying to prove (through the pig skin) that the moderator wasn't on the rifle? That wouldn't prove Jeremy's innocence per se, but it removes one of the main, if not the main, piece of evidence against Jeremy.

Sound moderators can be unscrewed. We just don't know what transpired. I recall a paragraph from the Andrew Hunter book draft where two gun enthusiasts were quite sure they had spotted a silencer mark on Sheila's neck.

[Rob_]

Sound moderators can be unscrewed. We just don't know what transpired. I recall a paragraph from the Andrew Hunter book draft where two gun enthusiasts were quite sure they had spotted a silencer mark on Sheila's neck.

You keep quoting this little porkie Steve but you know several independent experts have said there is no evidence that the silencer was on the rifle when Sheila was shot.

[Steve_uk]

You keep quoting this little porkie Steve but you know several independent experts have said there is no evidence that the silencer was on the rifle when Sheila was shot.

I don't know whether it's a porkie or not, but both Andrew Hunter and Ewen Smith seemed to take it seriously enough.

[BarefootDanC]

I don't know whether it's a porkie or not, but both Andrew Hunter and Ewen Smith seemed to take it seriously enough.

This is the standard approach these days.

"We have proof the sound moderator was not on the gun. There was no point to it because the gun is very quiet anyway."

So if I ask "How did Robert Boutflour plant his blood in the sound moderator" the answer will be "it is irrelevant that question because the sound moderator was never used, and the police examined two of them".

[Adam]

You keep quoting this little porkie Steve but you know several independent experts have said there is no evidence that the silencer was on the rifle when Sheila was shot.

Why was no blood on the rifle nozzle?