Post Mortem

[maggie]

Yes yes!. That's why they couldn't find any forensic evidence on him and nothing in his house or on his person. Nothing, nothing to connect him to the scene whatsoever...Now why didn't I think of that BRILLIANT scheme of his to avoid detection by the whole of the police force. Just wear gloves and several, maybe up to 20 layers of clothing....Wow! what creative thinking. Now let me see. How will I dispose of so much clothing? I suppose you have undeniable proof of this wild theory of yours do you subject sagar?

Youve both forgotten the wetsuit .

[Bridget]

Hi sagar  I was just wondering if you missed my earlier post wherein I asked why Jeremy had no marks on his body after it has been suggested he fought with Ralph you did say Sheila  had none.

Ralph had alread been shot when he was beaten so I doubt that he fought with him. Jeremy was never formally examined.

[bloggs and son]

Youve both forgotten the wetsuit .

Nah. He's restricted enough. I'll be surprised he will be able even to pick up the gun, let alone fire it.

[sagar]

Wild theories? Really?
The several layers is fact.

There was nothing to connect sheila to the murders either, fact.
If there had been jb wouldnt be in prison now would he?

Care to answer why there was no residue found on sheila? Why there is no blood down her front?
You talk of wild theories, i suggest you read through some of the older posts on here. There is NOTHING to connect sheila to the shootings, nothing. Apart fro
 The fact she was a victim of them herself.

So as for wild theories to blame jb i dont think so.

Must dash i have things to do, bye

[maggie]

Nah. He's restricted enough. I'll be surprised he will be able even to pick up the gun, let alone fire it.

But bloggs on that bike in August. a sudden heavy downpour would have finished him. He needed the wetsuit. imho

[bloggs and son]

Ralph had alread been shot when he was beaten so I doubt that he fought with him. Jeremy was never formally examined.

Aha! you've nailed it once again Bridget. Where are the marks on Sheila? It is obvious she never fought with Ralph.
But Jeremy probably had marks on him because he was never formally examined? Why didn't Sheila have any marks on her? Oh because she never fought Ralph so Jeremy must be guilty.
Why didn't Jeremy have any marks on him? Oh either because he never fought with him because he shot him first. Or he fought with him but was never formally examined.
So what are we left with? Sheila never fought with Ralph and Jeremy never fought with Ralph. From that deduction who was the murderer?

[susan]

Sagar  You are now saying Ralph had been shot when Jeremy fought with him so Jeremy would have no marks on him but the same rule must apply to poor Sheila.  Jeremy was examined by Julie who the police thought to be a very credible witness.  Sagar you cannot adopt the theory that if the cap fits I,ll wear it come now my friend.

[bloggs and son]

Wild theories? Really?
The several layers is fact.

There was nothing to connect sheila to the murders either, fact.
If there had been jb wouldnt be in prison now would he?

Care to answer why there was no residue found on sheila? Why there is no blood down her front?
You talk of wild theories, i suggest you read through some of the older posts on here. There is NOTHING to connect sheila to the shootings, nothing. Apart fro
 The fact she was a victim of them herself.

So as for wild theories to blame jb i dont think so.

Must dash i have things to do, bye

Ok why was there no residue on Jeremy either? I suppose you have proof of the several layers of clothing that you say are fact? First I've heard of it. Nothing! Nothing whatsoever connected Jeremy to the shootings. NO forensic evidence whatsoever. Show me documented facts of forensic evidence that connected JB with the crime.
FYI I have known the case from its roots and don't need to look at former posts as I know what they say. Simple prejudice keeps JB in gaol and nothing else. That prejudice that believes unfauteringly in a corrupt and imperfect law which has demonstrated though many MOJ's that it is so untrustworthy.

[Bridget]

Aha! you've nailed it once again Bridget. Where are the marks on Sheila? It is obvious she never fought with Ralph.
But Jeremy probably had marks on him because he was never formally examined? Why didn't Sheila have any marks on her? Oh because she never fought Ralph so Jeremy must be guilty.
Why didn't Jeremy have any marks on him? Oh either because he never fought with him because he shot him first. Or he fought with him but was never formally examined.
So what are we left with? Sheila never fought with Ralph and Jeremy never fought with Ralph. From that deduction why was the murderer?

Because blood of Sheila's type was found in the silencer in the cupboard. Because he confided in Julie. Because he made it either him or Sheila when he called the police. Because Sheila had no blood or other forensic evidence on her that indicates she did it, and unlike him, she had no opportunity to dispose of such evidence. That'll do for starters.

[bloggs and son]

But bloggs on that bike in August. a sudden heavy downpour would have finished him. He needed the wetsuit. imho

I'm going to write a book. "Bamber guily camp wildest theories". An everyday story of simple country folk.

[lookout]

No marks,,,,no blood on Sheila.
Firstly,Sheila would have relied on the rifle butt in which to render her father incapable, after a good bashing.Don't forget,because of a person's " slight build ",especially in a female, doesn't always mean that they're physically unable to put up a fight with someone stronger providing that they've got some sort of a weapon in which to give a greater impact/injury. Sheila,in view of her unstable condition,would have had the strength of an ox enabling her to deliver the blows on her father that she did.
Nevill,being the gentleman that he was,and confronted by his daughter in her state of mind,was more than likely trying to release the rifle from her without hurting her ( which would account for a lack of marks/bruises,etc on Sheila ),but because Nevill was overpowered by her as she pumped shots into him,he would have finally died.

The blood would have been mopped up by Sheila,using her knickers ( because she was found dead,minus them ) and would have also used the same garment for mopping up any blood,or wiping it from her own body. The knickers were then put into a bucket of water,which by the way was never tested to find out whether it was menstrual blood or otherwise.An important issue that appeared to be overlooked and one which the police seemed dis-interested in. One person who was interested in it was AE,who took the bucket,complete with garment,back to her home. Why was that,I wonder.? It happened to be quite a vital piece of evidence to me. Think about it. By all accounts,it was quite " bloody ",which, could well have been venous blood as opposed to menstrual.
Another fine mess by the Clouseau gang.

[bloggs and son]

Because blood of Sheila's type was found in the silencer in the cupboard. Because he confided in Julie. Because he made it either him or Sheila when he called the police. Because Sheila had no blood or other forensic evidence on her that indicates she did it, and unlike him, she had no opportunity to dispose of such evidence. That'll do for starters.

Aha! the blood in the silencer. Now that cracks it surely. Wow! Sheila's blood found inside the silencer that was found by whom? The police? The forensics people?....Oh...of course, by the "family"...Who took it home with them and it was picked up later by a policeman, from their home. Yes that's it.
The trouble with that of course is that there was no one there to back up their claim? I will of course not have to mention that years afterwards that blood evidence was discounted. And the fact that Robert Boutflour had exactly the same blood group. Who was it who said they took the silencer to bits?
Oh I almost forgot about Julie Mugford. The girlfriend he "unwisely" ditched just a few days before she went to the police and of course who had made a deal with the papers for £25,ooo. Hmm a credible witness if ever I saw one. Nicely thought out Bridget. A lawyer could not have done better.......Oh! apparently they didn't. For poor Jeremy was convicted on such shaky evidence I hear?

[susan]

Bridget I an assuming the Aga was a solid fuel operated one looks like that from the pictures Sheila could have burnt blood stained clothes or it has been reported Ann took home (I might add in all innocence) dirty washing from the machine and buckets etc.,  Where did Jeremy dispose of his  blood stained clothes unless he buried them somewhere would he have had time I just don,t know.

[Bridget]

Aha! the blood in the silencer. Now that cracks it surely. Wow! Sheila's blood found inside the silencer that was found by whom? The police? The forensics people?....Oh...of course, by the "family"...Who took it home with them and it was picked up later by a policeman, from their home. Yes that's it.
The trouble with that of course is that there was no one there to back up their claim? I will of course not have to mention that years afterwards that blood evidence was discounted. And the fact that Robert Boutflour had exactly the same blood group. Who was it who said they took the silencer to bits?
Oh I almost forgot about Julie Mugford. The girlfriend he "unwisely" ditched just a few days before she went to the police and of course who had made a deal with the papers for £25,ooo. Hmm a credible witness if ever I saw one. Nicely thought out Bridget. A lawyer could not have done better.......Oh! apparently they didn't. For poor Jeremy was convicted on such shaky evidence I hear?

Can I suggest you go back and read all the old threads? It's tedious to have to keep going back over the same old ground.

[JackiePreece]

Ralph had alread been shot when he was beaten so I doubt that he fought with him. Jeremy was never formally examined.

Come on Bridget surely you can do better than that !! During Mugfords 30 police coaching sessions she never mentioned a single scratch on Jeremy and she would have known wouldn't she Bridget ?