The New Silencer Evidence...

[Cambridgecutie]

It was not actually rejected in 2012.  The CCRC response, based upon the reports of the experts, was that further tests were needed.  The CCRC refused additional time for this and then issued their final SOR.

Oh yes thank you for reminding me I remember now but wasn't this in connection with the so-called burn marks to NB?  Am I right in saying the bullet marks to SC in terms of abrasion rings and powder tattooing were rejected by the CCRC and then the subject of judicial review and the judges upheld based primarily on the blood?  The doc was available online but I can no longer find it. 

[Cambridgecutie]

This is not a ground with the CCRC - or not as far as we know. It seems to be a product of the Guardian commissioning
Professor Jason Payne-James since the CCRC application was made.

What we do know is that one of the grounds still being considered is that Sheila was shot from a distance so could not have done it herself.

What sort of distance?  Bearing in mind the room sizes!  This will probably be a lot of nonsense about the police shooting SC. 

[Cambridgecutie]

This is not a ground with the CCRC - or not as far as we know. It seems to be a product of the Guardian commissioning
Professor Jason Payne-James since the CCRC application was made.

What we do know is that one of the grounds still being considered is that Sheila was shot from a distance so could not have done it herself.

But doesn't this contradict the 'new silencer evidence' commissioned by the Guardian?