Colour of burns

[Hardy Boy]

On the contrary, HB, we were discussing the Aga height the other day and Jonathan doubted that the centre of Nevills back would reach the Aga parts even if the bottom of the Aga was level with the floor!
Boyce is actually at a disadvantage with the Aga raised up on the bricks!

Disadvantage” Boyce didn’t treat the raised Aga as a problem,   he relied on it. Your not telling me, a so called Expert didn’t study WHF Aga in photos and realise the height difference, If it were a disadvantage, he wouldn’t have done it.  Seriously,  what kind of expert would do a like for like construction with a prop that doesn’t match, if the prop doesn’t match, the reconstruction isn’t evidence.

[Jonathan]

On the contrary, HB, we were discussing the Aga height the other day and Jonathan doubted that the centre of Nevills back would reach the Aga parts even if the bottom of the Aga was level with the floor!
Boyce is actually at a disadvantage with the Aga raised up on the bricks!

Yes I'd say it's more likely that someone lying flat would receive the burn marks from the WHF Aga rather than the one in the video. Why didn't Boyce make an attempt to simulate WHF conditions (Aga flush to the floor) by making some kind of platform for the actor to lie on? Pretty basic really - amateur hour.

[snow66!]

Yes I'd say it's more likely that someone lying flat would receive the burn marks from the WHF Aga rather than the one in the video. Why didn't Boyce make an attempt to simulate WHF conditions (Aga flush to the floor) by making some kind of platform for the actor to lie on? Pretty basic really - amateur hour.

I'm pretty sure Boyce has allowed for this, Jonathan, as you say, pretty basic!

[Hardy Boy]

I'm pretty sure Boyce has allowed for this, Jonathan, as you say, pretty basic!

Pretty sure are we Snow, he’s openly showing you his reconstruction, there’s no mention of allowance, Allowed for needs to be shown, and not presumed.   In a physical reconstruction you either match the height or you don’t.  Your banking on a flimsy pretty basic reconstruction that’s going to free a murderer and excepting it as evidence!

[Jonathan]

Pretty sure are we Snow, he’s openly showing you his reconstruction, there’s no mention of allowance, Allowed for needs to be shown, and not presumed.   In a physical reconstruction you either match the height or you don’t.  Your banking on a flimsy pretty basic reconstruction that’s going to free a murderer and excepting it as evidence!

There's not a snow66! balls chance in hell this gets referred to the courts!

[snow66!]

There's not a snow66! balls chance in hell this gets referred to the courts!

Ha ha! very good Jonathan!
But!!! I still say it depends how the Aga evidence is presented to the CCRC or court of appeal!
Pairing the Aga evidence up with the integrity of the crime scene,[police moving Nevill] will go nowhere in my opinion!
But!! Just who the hell am I to say!!

[Hardy Boy]

Ha ha! very good Jonathan!
But!!! I still say it depends how the Aga evidence is presented to the CCRC or court of appeal!

The CCRC and Courts do not mark out of ten for presentation snow, it’s not like strictly come Dancing, they assess whether the evidence actually works.

[Cambridgecutie]

Ha ha! very good Jonathan!
But!!! I still say it depends how the Aga evidence is presented to the CCRC or court of appeal!
Pairing the Aga evidence up with the integrity of the crime scene,[police moving Nevill] will go nowhere in my opinion!
But!! Just who the hell am I to say!!

I am sorry to be so blunt but you are utterly deluded.  Even if we suppose you are right it does not in any way shape or form exonerate JB and/or implicate SC. 

[Hardy Boy]

I am sorry to be so blunt but you are utterly deluded.  Even if we suppose you are right it does not in any way shape or form exonerate JB and/or implicate SC.

In fairness Cutie, Rob and Snow think Sheila knocked Neville unconscious for hours and left him by the Aga, they don’t buy into this Police moving Neville’s body to burn evidence after shooting June stuff,

[snow66!]

The CCRC and Courts do not mark out of ten for presentation snow, it’s not like strictly come Dancing, they assess whether the evidence actually works.

Ha ha! Well hopefully a member of the CCRC or court of appeal will have the same mindset as me regarding the Aga evidence and give it a ten too, HB!

[Hardy Boy]

Ha ha! Well hopefully a member of the CCRC or court of appeal will have the same mindset as me regarding the Aga evidence and give it a ten too, HB!

Well, I have a mind set if it doesn’t fit then it doesn’t work Snow, It’s like asking someone who takes a size ten shoe to wear a size six and then saying you’ve allowed for the difference 😂😂

[snow66!]

I am sorry to be so blunt but you are utterly deluded.  Even if we suppose you are right it does not in any way shape or form exonerate JB and/or implicate SC.

Ha ha!, dont be sorry, Cutie, I am not easily offended!
Anyway, in my mind the Aga evidence does favour JB!

[Rob_]

You can’t allow for height, you either match it or you don’t, do you think a traffic accident or car crash at 20 mph and saying you allowed for the fact it was actually 40 would be allowed, or a high jump was done with the bar higher and claiming the same height would suffice,  sorry snow your allowing for “it” doesn’t mean reconstruction as in evidence,   the CCRC don’t work on hope that it fits, the CCRC work on it actually does fit!

All that matters is that the pattern of the burns on Nevil match the pattern obtained from the handles of the Aga.

Seeing as some members say the Aga handles are too high I am not sure what point you are trying to make?   

[snow66!]

All that matters is that the pattern of the burns on Nevil match the pattern obtained from the handles of the Aga.

Seeing as some members say the Aga handles are too high I am not sure what point you are trying to make?

Yes, the pattern of the marks is the main thing, Rob!
And the doc maker article points out that the angles of the top mark matches the end of the handle.
I dare say Philip Boyce has produced a convincing dossier of evidence to the CCRC.

[Adam]

Yes, the pattern of the marks is the main thing, Rob!
And the doc maker article points out that the angles of the top mark matches the end of the handle.
I dare say Philip Boyce has produced a convincing dossier of evidence to the CCRC.

They don't match and the door would be cold anyway.  it has been dismissed by the CCRC.

But similar to Nevill calling Chelmsford Police because two logs from two different people differ, it keeps him in the media.