Due to meet informant in Glasgow tomorrow

[mike tesko]

Approximate time:-

10:00 -  training exercise being wound up inside premises, bodies have all been positioned in the locations that PC Bird (SOC) then proceeds to take photographs of. By this stage, Sheila's body is on the bedroom floor and she has got two wounds to her neck

[mike tesko]

Approximate time:-

11:15 -  PS Woodcock removes rifle from atop Sheila's body and he makes it safe

[mike tesko]

The photograph of Sheila on the bed which I first saw in Ewen Smiths office in Birmingham at the beginning of 2004, was taken to a very similar angle as the following crime scene image:-

[mike tesko]

Person who took picture was standing more to the left, and closure to the railings at the foot of the bed, providing a birds eye view of Sheila on the bed...

[tonyb]

Approximate time:-

08:44 - police surgeon, Dr Craig, is accompanied by PI Miller, at which point Dr Craig pronounces Sheila as being dead in the bedroom with only one shot to the neck, he and Miller describes Sheila's body as being on the far side of the bed, without actually saying her body was on the bedroom floor

This is actually correct?
On the far side of the bed?
Not on the bed?
Doesn't say it's on the bed then either...
When I'm standing by my wardrobe,my Radiator is on the far side of the bed,not my side of the bed,if you see what I mean.

[tonyb]

This is actually correct?
On the far side of the bed?
Not on the bed?
Doesn't say it's on the bed then either...
When I'm standing by my wardrobe,my Radiator is on the far side of the bed,not my side of the bed,if you see what I mean.

The only way to convince me and the rest ( I imagine ) of the forum is to post the photo you claim to have in your possession Mike.

[curiousessex]

The photograph of Sheila on the bed which I first saw in Ewen Smiths office in Birmingham at the beginning of 2004, was taken to a very similar angle as the following crime scene image:-

Mike

The image / photograph you have posted in #62 is appears to be a left to right reverse image of the bedroom with Sheila on the floor next to a blue bible which is on the floor.

If own look closely Sheila can be seen on the right hand side of the bed, on the floor, with an uptgurned blue bible positioned next to Sheila's body.

However, other photographs of Sheila that are available on the forum Sheila appears on the left hand side of the bed with a 'blue bioble' face down on the floor and next to her.

Also the image you have posted includes a view of the sole's of Sheila's feet. I thought there were not any photographs where the sole's of Sheila feet can be seen.

[ajross]

Do you know, I've looked at that photo lots of times and never noticed the feet!

[Patti]

Do you know, I've looked at that photo lots of times and never noticed the feet!

Hi ajross....I'd like to now what the long jaggered line is that appears to go across her foot?

[elphick]

Mike

The image / photograph you have posted in #62 is appears to be a left to right reverse image of the bedroom with Sheila on the floor next to a blue bible which is on the floor.

If own look closely Sheila can be seen on the right hand side of the bed, on the floor, with an uptgurned blue bible positioned next to Sheila's body.

However, other photographs of Sheila that are available on the forum Sheila appears on the left hand side of the bed with a 'blue bioble' face down on the floor and next to her.

Also the image you have posted includes a view of the sole's of Sheila's feet. I thought there were not any photographs where the sole's of Sheila feet can be seen.

Attached is the image 'flipped back'

[ajross]

Hi ajross....I'd like to now what the long jaggered line is that appears to go across her foot?

The one that stretches up the length of the photo? Yes, very interesting

[Nuala]

Aye 

Aye, just as I thought.

[tonyb]

Hero Member

Posts: 643










Re: Due to meet informant in Glasgow tomorrow

« Reply #64 on: May 16, 2012, 09:48:PM »

Quote
Modify
Remove




Quote from: mike tesko on May 16, 2012, 08:27:PM

Approximate time:-

08:44 - police surgeon, Dr Craig, is accompanied by PI Miller, at which point Dr Craig pronounces Sheila as being dead in the bedroom with only one shot to the neck, he and Miller describes Sheila's body as being on the far side of the bed, without actually saying her body was on the bedroom floor



This is actually correct?
On the far side of the bed?
Not on the bed?
Doesn't say it's on the bed then either...
When I'm standing by my wardrobe,my Radiator is on the far side of the bed,not my side of the bed,if you see what I mean.

The picture on the bed is now crucial to progress this forward.Neither Miller or Craig state SC was on the bed so there is absolutly no evidence available to show otherwise,only speculation, imo.

[curiousessex]

Attached is the image 'flipped back'

Given it appears there is an image available which displays the underside of Sheila's feet.

Given Peter Suthurst was the expert who was given the job, by the defence, of trying to identify minute / small flecks of paint on the carpet under the mantelpiece in the kitchen. As I understand it such evidence / reports were being commissioned in order to disprove the scratch marks were made / happened at the time of the murders in WHF. Such evidence would potentially undermine the case of the prosecution re the silencer. No felcks of paint on the carpet = no scratch marks at the time of the killings given it is accepted the photographs were taken before any clean up in the kitchen.

Given Peter Suthurst's evidence was not accepted by the CCRC because the methods that were used in order to find / report his expert conclusions. In justifying such a rejections of the expert evidence the CCRC, would presumably, have identified what methods are acceptable to them.

Is there not some logic in getting Peter Suthurst to examine the photographs which depict the undersides of Sheila's feet.

If it is the case Sheila's feet are soiled or there is evidence of blood staining on the undersides of Sheila's feet then the 'spotlessly' clean case of the prosecution would be undermined.

Surely Peter Suthurst, from the experience and feedback on the previous submission could adopt an approach in examining the photographs which would be acceptable to the CCRC. I also seem to recall Keira offered to pay for some things in the aftrmath of the CCRC.

Who thinks the above suggestion of Suthurst being commissioned to examine the photograph which displays the undersides of Sheila's feet would be a worthwhile punt?
 

[ajross]

Given it appears there is an image available which displays the underside of Sheila's feet.

Given Peter Suthurst was the expert who was given the job, by the defence, of trying to identify minute / small flecks of paint on the carpet under the mantelpiece in the kitchen. As I understand it such evidence / reports were being commissioned in order to disprove the scratch marks were made / happened at the time of the murders in WHF. Such evidence would potentially undermine the case of the prosecution re the silencer. No felcks of paint on the carpet = no scratch marks at the time of the killings given it is accepted the photographs were taken before any clean up in the kitchen.

Given Peter Suthurst's evidence was not accepted by the CCRC because the methods that were used in order to find / report his expert conclusions. In justifying such a rejections of the expert evidence the CCRC, would presumably, have identified what methods are acceptable to them.

Is there not some logic in getting Peter Suthurst to examine the photographs which depict the undersides of Sheila's feet.

If it is the case Sheila's feet are soiled or there is evidence of blood staining on the undersides of Sheila's feet then the 'spotlessly' clean case of the prosecution would be undermined.

Surely Peter Suthurst, from the experience and feedback on the previous submission could adopt an approach in examining the photographs which would be acceptable to the CCRC. I also seem to recall Keira offered to pay for some things in the aftrmath of the CCRC.

Who thinks the above suggestion of Suthurst being commissioned to examine the photograph which displays the undersides of Sheila's feet would be a worthwhile punt?
 

It's a shame the image is so bad as there is clearly dark staining of some description on the underside of her foot.

Mike - is this a photo of a photo? do you have the original?