Book Reviews - Murders/Suicide at WHF

[lookout]

You're dead right,April.

[Patti]

It just beggars belief that this has been allowed to go on for so long.  It is those who've put Jeremy where he is who seriously need questioning.
I wonder how many times he's asked himself " what am I doing here ?". I would hate to have to tell him the answer to that one.
Where are all these intellectual  boffins with degrees as long as your arm.? Are there any to actually read this case from start to finish,,,without bias,,,,to reach the logical conclusion that's staring them in the face.?

I'm finding it more and more difficult to find anything that hasn't already been posted,,,to avoid going over old ground,,,often stopping to think that this shouldn't be happening,,and my thoughts about there not being a case to answer to. I do find the whole thing,,,in Shakespeare's words " Much Ado About Nothing."

Except that in Jeremy's case,,it's different because he's actually being incarcerated For Nothing.
 The bigger the criminal you are,,,the better the options.! Justice.? Pah.!

Great post Lookout. 

[Patti]

Scott says photo's have been found with Sheila holding guns....Why aren't we seeing them? 

[bloggs and son]

was he not going to be down graded patti ? the relatives complained and restored to cat A ?off out now will be back 9 ish after a dallas

Strange move that? He's inside so why worry where he is in the prison?

[Patti]

Did anyone know that Sheila's fingerprints were found on a shotgun? She had only been there 3 days, so how come her prints were on the shotgun? This was never brought up at the trial...

[Patti]

The first swabs on Sheila's hands were rejected, because they had arrived with guns, therefore there it would have been pointless for the lab to have done forensic work on them.

It's important then that the swabs were done again....BUT the pathologist had already washed Sheila down....leaving no traces of blood or powder.

However, this was never discussed at the trial, therefore the jury were not aware that the 1st swabs had been rejected and the 2nd set had been done after washing....

[bloggs and son]

The first swabs on Sheila's hands were rejected, because they had arrived with guns, therefore there it would have been pointless for the lab to have done forensic work on them.

It's important then that the swabs were done again....BUT the pathologist had already washed Sheila down....leaving no traces of blood or powder.

However, this was never discussed at the trial, therefore the jury were not aware that the 1st swabs had been rejected and the 2nd set had been done after washing....

It seems that so much evidence that would have vindicated Jeremy was conveniently left out at the trial? Did I hear anyone mention a MOJ?

[lookout]

It seems that so much evidence that would have vindicated Jeremy was conveniently left out at the trial? Did I hear anyone mention a MOJ?

Definitely,,Grahame. A mega one.

[Bridget]

The first swabs on Sheila's hands were rejected, because they had arrived with guns, therefore there it would have been pointless for the lab to have done forensic work on them.

It's important then that the swabs were done again....BUT the pathologist had already washed Sheila down....leaving no traces of blood or powder.

However, this was never discussed at the trial, therefore the jury were not aware that the 1st swabs had been rejected and the 2nd set had been done after washing....

I don't think this is right. There was only ever one set of swabs,and you are correct that they were rejected because they arrived with some unconnected guns, so there was the possibility of contamination from those guns. They were then retested and found to be clear of gun shot residue anyway.

[campion]

  Greetings Harters, Nice to see you, to see you're back. Have you been on furlough?
  Can you kindly let me know who Nevill and June Bamber's solicitors were' in respect of the drawing up of their Wills?

[guest154]

I don't think this is right. There was only ever one set of swabs,and you are correct that they were rejected because they arrived with some unconnected guns, so there was the possibility of contamination from those guns. They were then retested and found to be clear of gun shot residue anyway.

Yeah, this is what I read on something Mike posted.

[Patti]

I don't think this is right. There was only ever one set of swabs,and you are correct that they were rejected because they arrived with some unconnected guns, so there was the possibility of contamination from those guns. They were then retested and found to be clear of gun shot residue anyway.

It is right Bridget........and by the time they took more swabs she had been washed down.   

[guest154]

Can you really say a wash down would remove the gun residue then? When I said that Jeremy could have showered people here were more than fast to reply that even if he had showered there would have been traces of gun residue on his hands.

[maggie]

Can you really say a wash down would remove the gun residue then? When I said that Jeremy could have showered people here were more than fast to reply that even if he had showered there would have been traces of gun residue on his hands.

There were traces of gun residue on sheilas hands mat.

[Patti]

It was the same when the CPS introduced someone who told the court that nothing was on her nightdress....This chap was no firearms expert and all he did was a visually look at the bottom of her nightdress.  But since that evidence has been destroyed, further tests can't be made. 

So the jury was mislead....into thinking there was no oil or residue on her nightdress.