Post Mortem

[maggie]

Hi Susan, yes I think you're right, it was solid fuel, but there's no evidence she did that.

Bridget, there's no evidence she didn't, in fact there is little or no evidence that either Jeremy or Sheila did anything. However from photos it does appear sheila may have died much later than the rest of the family.

[bloggs and son]

As I've already said, Ralph was wounded and probably didn't put up much of a fight. His attacker just stood there and beat the crap out of him with the gun.

Maybe, maybe not. I'm sure Sheila was not in her right mind when she did that though?

[bloggs and son]

He seems to find plenty to do.

What would you do if it were you Bridget?

[bloggs and son]

Hi bloggs and son  any idea where sagar has gone whenever I reply to his posts he disappears it must be the way I tell um.

he/she went "shopping". I hope he/she remembered their Barclaycard?

[Bridget]

Bridget. I know all the old threads and arguments I am familiar with the case and have know it from its very beginnings.Is what you are really saying is that you cannot answer what I say? For I know the argument is extremely well. I suggest that it was you who introduced the subject of the blood in the silencer and JB's girlfriend? But as soon as you are picked up on it rather than answering it you suggest I go to old threads. I know the old threads. But I am interested in YOUR answer.

What I'm saying is that I have posted my thoughts re the silencer several times before, and I can't be bothered to do it all over again.

[susan]

Hi bloggs and son what a big sigh of relief thought it was something I had said.

[Bridget]

Bridget, there's no evidence she didn't, in fact there is little or no evidence that either Jeremy or Sheila did anything. However from photos it does appear sheila may have died much later than the rest of the family.

There's no evidence her clothes weren't stolen by aliens either

[bloggs and son]

What I'm saying is that I have posted my thoughts re the silencer several times before, and I can't be bothered to do it all over again.

Ok. I know what your thoughts on the silencer are. But you still haven't answered my question? You obviously aren't up to date with the forensic findings though? Did you know that Robert Boutflour had the same blood group as Sheila? Did you know that it was allegedly taken to bits by one of the family?

[susan]

Hi bloggs and son  just an after thought why do I always tend to think of people like sagar to be male could be a little gentle old lady for all I know.

[bloggs and son]

There's no evidence her clothes weren't stolen by aliens either

haha ho ho  Now your being silly. We all know aliens don't steal clothes.

[maggie]

No, I accept the fact that Ralph could have been sufficiently weakened so as to allow even someone as slight as Sheila to stand there and beat him. But she had none of his blood on her.

But Bridget no evidence was ever found of Ralph's blood on Jeremy or any of his posessions, the argument that sheila is innocent because there is no evidence to the contrary but Jeremy is guilty in spite of there being no evidence to prove it is an irrational argument built on dogma.

[maggie]

There's no evidence her clothes weren't stolen by aliens either

Bridget is there no room for doubt in your mind, how can anyone be absolutey 100% superpositive that they are right.  Is there not the slightest thought that JB may be innocent as he claims and if he is havent you any compassion for him?

[Bridget]

Ok. I know what your thoughts on the silencer are. But you still haven't answered my question? You obviously aren't up to date with the forensic findings though? Did you know that Robert Boutflour had the same blood group as Sheila? Did you know that it was allegedly taken to bits by one of the family?

Yes I know that RB had the same blood group. So do many people. I know it is alleged on this forum that DB took it to bits, but he himself says he didn't.

[Bridget]

But Bridget no evidence was ever found of Ralph's blood on Jeremy or any of his posessions, the argument that sheila is innocent because there is no evidence to the contrary but Jeremy is guilty in spite of there being no evidence to prove it is an irrational argument built on dogma.

Jeremy had ample opportunity to dispose of his clothes, Sheila didn't.

[bloggs and son]

But Bridget no evidence was ever found of Ralph's blood on Jeremy or any of his posessions, the argument that sheila is innocent because there is no evidence to the contrary but Jeremy is guilty in spite of there being no evidence to prove it is an irrational argument built on dogma.

Maggie, I think Bridgets problem is not that all the evidence points to Jeremy. Because none of it does. I think it is just that she thinks he's guilty and refuses to believe he isn't? It's as simple as that.