That's brilliant - thanks Mike. You just answered my question about where Sheila's body was.
-----------------------------------------------------
Kaldin:- I believe that Sheila's body was originally seen through the kitchen window behind the internal kitchen door depicted by the path of yellow in the attached plan view...
I'm not so sure about that Mike. It could have happened, but I don't think she shot herself in the kitchen and then again upstairs because all the blood on her body is flowing in the same direction.
Please click on image to enlarge...
.........................................................
Wound to side of neck, became sealed with a clotted plug of dried blood after Sheila was shot downstairs, which became detached once she was shot upstairs, the plug of dried blood becoming displaced to a different part of her throat at the time of the second fatal shot, or soon afterwards - producing blood running from both wounds in the same general direction...
You mean the first wound didn't bleed at all at first? There's no sign of blood on the front of her nightdress. I suppose what you suggest is possible. It does seem odd that the police said there were two bodies downstairs.
----------------------------------------------
Kaldin:- Triangular blood stain on the top right hand side of her nightdress, could be linked to either wound, individually, but not collectively...
How would anyone go about trying to prove from which wound the blood that stained the nightdress so distinctively originated from? If you look very closely at the neck region of Sheila, you can see where a clot of plugged blood which could have sealed the original non fatal neck wound, could have been, or was displaced at some stage, to allow the initial wound to re-bleed at the time Sheila was shot for the second time, or shortly afterwards...
If both wounds were inflicted at the same Time, why does there only appear to be the displacement of one lot of dried (plug) blood displaced upon her throat, albeit, displaced in what appears to be two different positions upon her throat, which in my view is consistent with a degree of movement of Sheila's head, after she received the fatal shot under the chin? If blood on the nightdress originated from the original non fatal wound to the side of the neck, and the wound sealed itself with a plug of clotted blood, that later became detached at the time, or shortly after she was fatally shot upstairs, blood which had become trapped inside her neck behind the plug of clotted blood, would start to leak out and run out of both wounds from that point, onwards, and travel in the same sort of general direction...
That's the point I am trying to make...
I think, that the presence of what appears to be a plug of clotted blood, that became detached upon Sheila's neck, from the non fatal neck wound, and the presence of the triangular bloodstain on the top right hand side of Sheila's nightdress, to which it is not possible to determine which individual wound it originated from, could be vital clues in helping to prove that Sheila was shot once, somewhere else inside the farmhouse, and not necessarily that she was shot twice in quick succession in the bedroom - if she was shot twice in quick succession, why does there appear to be a trace of a plug of clotted blood on her throat, only from one of the wounds, not both?
The blood under her arm pit seems to me to be a bit strange anyway. If it came from either wound then I don't think it got there whilst she was in the position in the photo. It would have had to go uphill and down from her neck - and that defies logic. She obviously bled to the right, but I would expect that blood to pool nearer her neck.
Anyway, what are you suggesting? That Sheila killed her father in the kitchen, and then shot herself but didn't die? The police came in, saw them both and assumed they were both dead? After they leave the room she gets up and legs it upstairs to her mother's room, sits down on the floor on the other side of the bed and then shoots herself again?
If she did that, the gun would have been near her in the kitchen when the police broke in. Would the police really have not seen that, or if they did, would they have ignored it? They would surely have made sure she was dead and couldn't shoot them.
Besides, they would have heard the shot or seen her or something surely.
... enough is now known, to be absolutely sure, of the sequence with whìch the first ten bullets were discharged from the gun. Bullet 1 - was fired at june bamber, bullet 2 - was also fired at june, as were bullets, 3, 4, and 5. All of these bullets only had single magazine markings on them. The next five bullets which were fired, all had double magazine markings on them, which would be capable of identifying the route taken by the shooter, until the gun had no - more bullets left in it, to fire it, by which time, the shooter, would need to re -load the gun with more ammunition. Take my word for it, that the five double marked bullets got discharged in the childrens bedroom (two), a further two got discharged at the doorway of the main bedroom, and the last of the double marked bullets, (bullet case, DRH/19), was discharged in the kitchen. You do not have to be a ballistics expert, to work this out. This sequence of events tells us, that the shooter killed the children first, although, the intention appears to have been to kill june, first. The shooter then killed june, before the shooter ended up, downstairs, where Ralph Bamber was non fatally wounded, in the kitchen - thd gun being empty of bullets by this stage. What this means, is that before any more bullets were even loaded into the gun, Ralph Bamber, would be shot a further 8 times. Not only would he need to be shot a further 8 times, but if 13 bullet cases had been found in the region of the bedroom, it would mean that Ralph then returned upstairs, where he was shot a further four times, non fatally whilst he was present there. By that stage, Ralph would have already been shot five times - and should have been dead by, then, if we are to take any notice of the pathologists report, since, Ralph sustained four fatal wounds to the head, each one capable of killing him outright. In any event, Ralph would not only have to come back upstairs, to be shot 4 times in the bedroom, but he would have to return back downstairs, to be shot and killed in the kitchen, by way of another 3 shots. But in order for this to happen, there would have had to be a further reload of the gun. In the meantime, the shooter would need to find, additional bullets, with which to shoot them with, for example, another, 6 bullets. If you add these 6 bullets to the other 7 bullets needed to shoot Ralph, after the first reload of thd gun, it becomes clear that Ralph, and the children, could not all have been shot, from the bullets from the second reload of the gun with the second lot of 10 bullets.
