Essex Police's Credibility

[campion]

  At least you had the guts to say something, that says a lot, in my opinion.   

[campion]

  So now after over a week of being able to digest the Williams-Thomas documentary there hasn't been a single argument that can disprove the tests regarding the silencer evidence. It is nothing short of astonishing that a theory can be destroyed on a single point.   

[campion]

  How did Fletcher the firearms expert form his conclusions about the silencer, because if he had had little experience in determining deaths where silencers had been used in shootings his findings would be worthless. 

[jon]

  How did Fletcher the firearms expert form his conclusions about the silencer, because if he had had little experience in determining deaths where silencers had been used in shootings his findings would be worthless.

MT as stated before on here , Ewan Smith believed Fletcher was dodgy !!

[campion]

  Fletcher's report is going to be put under the microscope at the CCRC and McKay must know of it's weaknesses in light of his own discussions with the American Medical Examiners.   

[Roch]

I think that you have been taken in by some defence propaganda and that it will become apparent when the CCRC announce their decision.

Well Harters, our lot are used to being on the losing side and it sounds like your lot are pretty confident.  Our lot had hoped for a double six with Bamber's last throw of the dice.  But I'm not sure you would make the statement you have, without some kind of indication from elsewhere, having been intimated.

[mike tesko]

MT as stated before on here , Ewan Smith believed Fletcher was dodgy !!

Yes, Ewen confided in me that he suspected MDF was dodgy - I would take a lie detector test regarding this...

And anything else I have talked about...

Including my contact with my informant, and everything he has told me...

[campion]

  This is what a UK Forensic Science degree entails. It can be obtained from The University Of Kent.

    What work being a forensic scientist involves; Recording findings and collecting trace evidence from scenes of crime or accident.
     
  Analysing samples such as hair, body fluids, glass, paint and drugs in the laboratory
  Applying various techniques as appropriate; eg DNA profiling, mass spectrometry, chromatography.
  Giving evidence in Court but this would be at least several years after graduating.

                                 There are Three Main Areas

   Chemistry, Mainly crimes against property such as burglary, and arson. This includes the analysis of contact traces eg. Paint, Glass and Chemicals, also Fire investigation, Accident reconstruction and Serial numbers - However 80% of cases involves drugs analyses

  Biology,       Mainly crimes against the person. Violent crimes such as Murder, GBH and Rape makes up most of the case types encountered and the majority of examinations involve swabs of blood and other body fluids, hair and clothing fibres. Both traditional and serological and DNA testing is used. DNA work is increasing because of the Nation-Wide DNA database. Crimes from many years ago are now being re-examined because of new DNA evidence. ( nugnug )

  Drugs and Toxicology,  Testing for restricted drugs,examining tissue specimens, drink and drug driving samples, and the criminal and non-criminal investigation of deaths due to overdodoses, poisons and drugs.

                                   Skills and Qualities Required

  Great patience and concentration: Much work is monotonous, painstaking, detailed and routine. Nothing Like CSI !!!!!!!!

  High quality analytical work. Excellent attention to detail. Logical, unbiased and methodical in your approach to solving problems as you will have to give impartial evidence in Court. An inquisitive,open mind. Work well in a team and independently.
 
  Outgoing personality with strong verbal communication and presenting skills for reporting roles. Confidence as reporting officers having to present evidence in Court and be cross-examined by Barristers, this makes up a quarter  of the work.

 
  Present complex scientific information in a clear,simple way that a member of a Jury, with No Scientific Knowledge, can Understand.
  It helps if applicants have Business Skills as well as being technically capable.
  Crimes happen at any time, so you may need to be prepared for evening and weekend call outs. Also Court work may involve being on call and unsocial hours. You need a strong stomach, as some of the scenes of crime can be gruesome and upsetting.


  Forensic Scientists are Chemists, in particular Analytical Chemists and have no background with Firearms or Ballistics. The next post will detail how a Forensic Scientist can become a Forensic Ballistics Expert Witness. 

[Roch]

Yes, Ewen confided in me that he suspected MDF was dodgy - I would take a lie detector test regarding this...

And anything else I have talked about...

Including my contact with my informant, and everything he has told me...

Your informant might be approaching the hour of his calling.  Let's hope he adheres to 'cometh the hour, cometh the man'.

[mike tesko]

CCRC cannot ignore the evidence recently obtained from the US about the entry wound under the chin, since this was the wound at which the prosecution claimed blood from Sheila got into the silencer. You cannot have a current situation, whereby the original ballistic expert (MDF) claims Sheila's blood got into the silencer at the time she was shot under the chin, and the US findings that a silencer was not used to inflict that wound?

Seems to me, that CCRC either have to accept the original finding and ignore the latest findings, or get a second opinion, to try and resolve the matter, to see which expert is telling the truth?

[Roch]

CCRC cannot ignore the evidence recently obtained from the US about the entry wound under the chin, since this was the wound at which the prosecution claimed blood from Sheila got into the silencer. You cannot have a current situation, whereby the original ballistic expert (MDF) claims Sheila's blood got into the silencer at the time she was shot under the chin, and the US findings that a silencer was not used to inflict that wound?

Seems to me, that CCRC either have to accept the original finding and ignore the latest findings, or get a second opinion, to try and resolve the matter, to see which expert is telling the truth?

They can on occasion, weasil out by using due process red tape.  I do hope this is not one of those occasions.

[Buddy]

I just think it's nearly run it's course, I'm interested in the case but bored of the arguments (none case related).

My personal opinion is that your post above contains a whole host of sweeping unsubstantiated conclusions, however my opinion isn't really worth a damn and you are obviously more than entitled to form your own opinion.

I think that you have been taken in by some defence propaganda and that it will become apparent when the CCRC announce their decision. I understand that you have a different view, but I have no interest in trying to change yours or anybody Else's view.

It's not that I can't come up with a response, (I could probably come up with a compelling argument that black is actually blue), it's just simply that I don't feel that I need to respond, or even grunt.

The CCRC will respond (I don't think they grunt) and that's the only response that's going to count.

'In my humble opinion'

You haven't changed too much Hartley! You are still of the opinion that all others are beneath you.
The lie that the bout flours were rich has been exposed as a lie.
I tire of your bullish comments, which have no foundation. I n my opinion you are a stuck up snob, and I take your comments with a pinch of salt. When you leave again Steve, make it perminant

[mike tesko]

Your informant might be approaching the hour of his calling.  Let's hope he adheres to 'cometh the hour, cometh the man'.

I am hoping to be contacted by my informant in the coming weeks, we are all waiting...

[mike tesko]

I am hoping to be contacted by my informant in the coming weeks, we are all waiting...

I trust and believe in my informant, he has come forward and has a lot to lose by so doing...

[Roch]

I trust and believe in my informant, he has come forward and has a lot to lose by so doing...

Nevertheless Mike, unless the CCRC do a 'Man from Del Monte' next week, your informant will not have had any impact by handing stuff in to the reception.