Crime scene video - taken as part of training exercise - bodies insitu...

[ngb1066]

Here is reference to video of crime scene that was taken:-

That seems very clear Mike.

[mike tesko]

Don't know if it's been brought up, but you would surely place body on floor and tilt head back to perform CPR.you would also have to "plug all the leaks in the neck" to efficently get air into the lungs. This would surely cause any blood trace on the neck area to show massive amounts of disturbance.... I'm not sure I see that in these photos.i think CPR should be discounted until someone sticks there hand up to doing it.

You were saying about additional blood to the entry wounds in the neck?

Take a closer look at how much more blood there is in those particular areas...

Or am I seeing things?

[tonyb]

Don't know if it's been brought up, but you would surely place body on floor and tilt head back to perform CPR.you would also have to "plug all the leaks in the neck" to efficently get air into the lungs. This would surely cause any blood trace on the neck area to show massive amounts of disturbance.... I'm not sure I see that in these photos.i think CPR should be discounted until someone sticks there hand up to doing it.

Looking at the two holes in the neck, if CPR had been attempted the fatal wound would of been more smeared IMO. I obviously agree there is more blood on the neck & right cheek but could be this more to do with the recovery position?

[mike tesko]

That seems very clear Mike.

Here is a clearer view of what is said about these videos:-

Looks like the video cassettes were held in storage at Braintree police station?

[tonyb]

Looking at the two holes in the neck, if CPR had been attempted the fatal wound would of been more smeared IMO. I obviously agree there is more blood on the neck & right cheek but could be this more to do with the recovery position?
[/quote
All the blood runs down that one side. As if the heads been laid over. And wasnt a patch of bloodied carpet cut out of that area?

[mike tesko]

Item 7(a) is of interest, because it appears to be the nut from the end of the rifles barrel, and no-one says where this was found, who found it, or when it was found?

I was just wondering if this was the end of the guns barrel which DS Davidson was talking to COLP about in his 1991 police interviews?

[mike tesko]

Did this nut have paint ingrained into/onto it, and was this the reason why 'Ron' Cook took paint sample RC/1 from the scene on 8th August 1985?

[mike tesko]

Did this nut have paint ingrained into/onto it, and was this the reason why 'Ron' Cook took paint sample RC/1 from the scene on 8th August 1985?

How did it end up as court exhibit 49, iof no-one referred to it in any way, either in statement, pocketbook or whilst testifying?

have I missed something altogether, here?

[guest29835]

Sorry to resurrect a vintage thread, but I'm absolutely fascinated by the photography aspects of the case, and especially by this idea that there is a crime scene video somewhere.  It's real dramatic conspiracy stuff, and best of all, there is serious evidence to support it.
 
In this thread, which I found having done a quick forum search, Mike seems to provide good evidence for it, if only in documentary form.  It is possible that the items in PC Whiddon's memo refer to video montage cassettes rather than moving image video, but we don't know.  Does anybody here know? 

The images Mike includes at the beginning of the thread need further explanation.  I suspect they come from a dramatisation or documentary about the shootings, but Mike thinks they're real and from the crime scene video.  It could be both.  Could Mike come back on the thread and elaborate, please?

And where is this video?  I think there is one.  Portable video recording technology was available and already mainstream back in 1985.  If the police really did turn the scene into a training op, you can't necessarily blame them.  This was a once-in-a-generation crime scene, and at least the more senior officers thought at this stage that the incident was immediately solved as an 'obvious' murder-suicide.

Mike comes in for some stick about his theories, which I think is unfair.  Whatever, I think there may be something in the theory of a training op scenario.  It's not far-fetched.

I think it's important because I'm fairly sure in my mind that Essex Police moved Sheila's body.  The evidence for it doesn't quite reach the legal standard of proof, perhaps, but it's compelling enough to warrant further inquiries.  There's the pocketbooks.  There's Ann Eaton's statements and even her evidence-in-chief at trial.  There's Julie Mugford's evidence, and while I'm not inclined to believe her on the kernel of it, she must have been reporting things from the crime scene from somebody else who knew.  There's the blood patterning on Sheila's lower arms, which is not mirrored on the carpet and is thus consistent with the body having been moved, yet there is no evidence for Jeremy having moved her, nor is it clear why he would do so, unless he shot her in the second bedroom - that is, assuming she didn't kill herself.

I think, along with the extent of Mrs Mugford's constabularian dealings, that are probably shrouded by PII, moving Sheila's body is one of the dirty secrets of the case.  If the suspicion is correct, then I think it was a terrible mistake on the part of Essex Police to conceal it at the time, they should have owned it and explained it to the jury - but the concealment reflected the culture at the time.

[guest29835]

Another thing:

Are there videos of the police and/or FSS disassembly and examination of exhibits?  The silencer?  The rifle?

I'd be very surprised if there aren't.

[mike tesko]

That seems very clear Mike.

Neil, the CCRC had the video of the crime scene and refused to let Jeremy have access to it because they ruled that footage of his deceased family were too distressing to allow him to see it...

The Witham SOCO (Cook, Davidson, Hammersley or Bird) didn't take video footage at the crime scene, it must have been taken by Headquarters SOCO (Oakey, Eastwood or Henderson) whilst senior officers conducted informative's around the bodies of the victims...

[guest29835]

Neil, the CCRC had the video of the crime scene and refused to let Jeremy have access to it because they ruled that footage of his deceased family were too distressing to allow him to see it...

The Witham SOCO (Cook, Davidson, Hammersley or Bird) didn't take video footage at the crime scene, it must have been taken by Headquarters SOCO (Oakey, Eastwood or Henderson) whilst senior officers conducted informative's around the bodies of the victims...

Moving images or just a montage of static images?

[ngb1066]

Moving images or just a montage of static images?

I do not have a conclusive answer to this.  There was certainly a video made and shown to police officers but I was told by someone likely to have correct information that the video was not of the crime scene itself but contained a review of the crime scene still photographs.  I found that a bit surprising because I know that at that time it was becoming increasingly common to video the scene of a serious crime as an addition to the normal crime scene photographs.

[Roch]

I do not have a conclusive answer to this.  There was certainly a video made and shown to police officers but I was told by someone likely to have correct information that the video was not of the crime scene itself but contained a review of the crime scene still photographs.  I found that a bit surprising because I know that at that time it was becoming increasingly common to video the scene of a serious crime as an addition to the normal crime scene photographs.

The TFG were shown a montage of crime scene images, which resulted in 'real concerns' being raised to their superiors, regarding the movement of gun / head / bible. One had no recollection of a rifle, which is extraordinary.  The defence didn't know about this until many years post conviction. 

[guest29835]

I do not have a conclusive answer to this.  There was certainly a video made and shown to police officers but I was told by someone likely to have correct information that the video was not of the crime scene itself but contained a review of the crime scene still photographs.  I found that a bit surprising because I know that at that time it was becoming increasingly common to video the scene of a serious crime as an addition to the normal crime scene photographs.

How would they have done that, do you think?  Would they have used a hi-res film scanner and then recorded the output?

I ask because there may be some forensic significance to it.  If you're scanning negatives, then you're creating an additional forensic trail with scans of each negative produced and presumably stored somewhere.