Theoretical conclusions over burn marks to Nevill

[Roch]

Yes I understand your view on that, and if you will allow me just a little bit of sarcasm without taking offence, then I would say it is hardly surprising that members of a pro-Bamber forum hold that view.

However, regardless of both of our views, rightly or wrongly, in the eyes of the law, your doubts are not mirrored at this time, therefore they could not be used to reinforce another argument, well they could, but only on this forum.

I'd go along with that.  My view is that the authenticity of the silencer will at some point in time be undermined beyond reasonable doubt.  I think it would be a travesty if that were to happen some way in to the future, with JB still in prison merely because the exhibit was not undermined within the time limit for these current submissions (and therefore not employed to 'reinforce another argument' within these submissions).  Personally, I cannot see how justice would be served by that occurrence.

I take it you are talking us through the likely reason for the CCRC to not refer the case? 

[jon]

If the silencer was not used in the killing's / suicide , the court was misled , very simple !!

[Hartley]

I'd go along with that.  My view is that the authenticity of the silencer will at some point in time be undermined beyond reasonable doubt.  I think it would be a travesty if that were to happen some way in to the future, with JB still in prison merely because the exhibit was not undermined within the time limit for these current submissions (and therefore not employed to 'reinforce another argument' within these submissions).  Personally, I cannot see how justice would be served by that occurrence.

I take it you are talking us through the likely reason for the CCRC to not refer the case?

No, I'm not intending to give any impression of a likely decision, if I have then I have done so subconsciously.
I'm just kicking around a few ideas to see what people think, my current view is that it won't be referred, but I thought Man City were going to win the title, my predictions and views are pretty meaningless except for the purposes of discussion taking place on this forum.

I'm not trying to be clever or calculated, so please don't be so paranoid.

[Hartley]

If the silencer was not used in the killing's / suicide , the court was misled , very simple !!

Well yes rocket scientist, thank you for stating the obvious. 

[Newbury1]

It might be my imagination working overtime, but I would hazard a guess that it is for exactly that reason that NGB has mentioned that experiments were carried out on a rifle being put in the oven. I can't imagine that they would have ignored the 'coke fired' Aga due to misinformation given by the likes of Hartley about the Aga being oil fired. 

But does any one know (ngb) if SMack has tested the original gun (if they are able) to see if any coal/coke/oil carbon residue exists. I am assuming the barrel would have to be put in the direct heat source (the flame), as opposed to an oven, in order for the tip to become hot enough to burn.

If the barrel end was left in an oven how long would that take to heat up enough to burn skin. I cannot see JB or Sheila hanging around to wait for the barrel to heat up in an oven to inflict three small burns (pre or post mortem).

In the tests shown on the Tonight docu they used a blow torch. In the Arizona tests which part of the Aga was used to heat the barrel?

[jon]

Well yes rocket scientist, thank you for stating the obvious. 

So do you accept the silencer was not used , or do you believe the independent expert's in AZ are wrong ? And you know better ?   

[Hartley]

So do you accept the silencer was not used , or do you believe the independent expert's in AZ are wrong ? And you know better ?

I think your very strange, if that counts? 

[campion]

 Before these silencer tests were submitted, McKay must have approached the CCRC with an outline of his proposals ? 

[ngb1066]

But does any one know (ngb) if SMack has tested the original gun (if they are able) to see if any coal/coke/oil carbon residue exists. I am assuming the barrel would have to be put in the direct heat source (the flame), as opposed to an oven, in order for the tip to become hot enough to burn.

If the barrel end was left in an oven how long would that take to heat up enough to burn skin. I cannot see JB or Sheila hanging around to wait for the barrel to heat up in an oven to inflict three small burns (pre or post mortem).

In the tests shown on the Tonight docu they used a blow torch. In the Arizona tests which part of the Aga was used to heat the barrel?

The original Anschutz rifle has not been tested.  It still exists, I believe in the Essex Police museum, so it would be possible for it to be examined.

The barrel does not have to be placed in the flame to reach the required temperature, although obviously that would be the quickest way to achieve the result.  Placing the end of the barrel in the oven or on a heated hob will do the job in around 5 minutes.

An Aga was not used in Arizona.  If the case is referred further tests are likely.

   

[ngb1066]

Before these silencer tests were submitted, McKay must have approached the CCRC with an outline of his proposals ?

No, he did not.  He arranged for the tests to be carried out then sent the reports with the final submissions to the CCRC on 31st January.

 

[Roch]

No, I'm not intending to give any impression of a likely decision, if I have then I have done so subconsciously.
I'm just kicking around a few ideas to see what people think, my current view is that it won't be referred, but I thought Man City were going to win the title, my predictions and views are pretty meaningless except for the purposes of discussion taking place on this forum.

I'm not trying to be clever or calculated, so please don't be so paranoid.

Hartley, I did not think you were being clever or calculating, merely stating an 'obstructive' view (mild sarcasm  )  Vic said as much a few weeks back, as has Weetabix on the other forum (i.e. re the blood DNA)

Also, in the wake of the experts findings, can I ask how you now view the trace materials found in the exhibit, linked specifically to Sheila?

[jon]

I think your very strange, if that counts? 

People who want to keep an innocent man in prison for a crime he never committed , are
sick in my opinion , even when money maybe their motivation !!

[Hartley]

Hartley, I did not think you were being clever or calculating , merely stating an 'obstructive' view (mild sarcasm  )  Vic said as much a few weeks back, as has Weetabix on the other forum (i.e. re the blood DNA)

Also, in the wake of the experts findings, can I ask how you now view the trace materials found in the exhibit, linked specifically to Sheila?

I'm not sure I understand you, can you rephrase?

Edit:
I mean which expert findings, which trace materials and which exhibit?

[ngb1066]

Okay, so where does the blood discovered in the sound moderator come into play, particularly since the DNA testing which is indicative of a number of the victims blood being found in the sound moderator?

Would the above be allegedly put down to either contamination, or foul play in the form of planted evidence?

The defence say that since the evidence now strongly suggests that a silencer was not used, any human blood inside the silencer must have been the result of contamination.  Whether that was accidental or deliberate they do not have to establish as a necessary part of the defence submissions.  However, other  evidence now available which cast doubt upon the evidence given at trial about the silencer will be relied upon in support of the proposition that the evidence relating to the silencer in its entirety should now be regarded as undermined.  Without this evidence the convictions could not be upheld.



 

[campion]

 Oh, so what happens if they decide that testing in another Country is inadmissible. Simon McKay didn't strike me as someone who wastes his own time and destroys his reputation.