Sheila's feet

[Kaldin]

Be gentle with me i'm new to this 
I would be inclined to believe that the dark marks on the socks are shadows due to the the dark spots being different in each picture. I may be wrong, where these socks not taken by police and analyse?

Morning.

I agree with you. I don't think you can tell from a photo if the socks have blood or marks on them. I don't know if they were analysed properly.

[karma]

If the marks where in the same place on each picture i'd be inclined to say they where stained by something (blood being one possibility) but thats not to say there isn't blood on the socks its just that i don't think we can tell by the picture. Access to the original police documents might clear this up, does anyone know if the details of all of the police anaylisis reports have been release to the defence or are all or some of these held under PII?

[chelmsey]

Socks aside for a moment.........What I am having trouble with is could someone carry out such a violent bloodbath,shooting people at close range etc and appear not to be covered in the victims blood? Sheilas nightdress seems to me to look a little too clean.(just an observation).

[Kaldin]

Socks aside for a moment.........What I am having trouble with is could someone carry out such a violent bloodbath,shooting people at close range etc and appear not to be covered in the victims blood? Sheilas nightdress seems to me to look a little too clean.(just an observation).

Well yes. I'm sure the prosecution pointed that out as well.

[chelmsey]

Dont get me wrong,I think it is perfectly plausible that Sheila could have been responsible.Especially considering how mentally ill she had become.Its just that since digesting all the information on this forum,IMO there doesnt seem to be alot of evidence pointing that way.I am still going with the "third party" is responsible scenario   

[Paul]

How does the third party being responsible fit with the alleged call that Neville makes to tell Jeremy that Sheila has the gun?

Either that call doesn't happen or the third party manages to get in the house without Neville knowing that he or she is there and then that third party manages to get the gun off Sheila and proceed with the murders AND escape from the house despite the house being covered by police from around 3.50am.

[Kaldin]

How does the third party being responsible fit with the alleged call that Neville makes to tell Jeremy that Sheila has the gun?

Either that call doesn't happen or the third party manages to get in the house without Neville knowing that he or she is there and then that third party manages to get the gun off Sheila and proceed with the murders AND escape from the house despite the house being covered by police from around 3.50am.

And they managed to get Nevill to phone Jeremy and try to get him over to the house by telling him that his sister has gone mad with a gun.

Doesn't make much sense does it?

First of all, they wouldn't say that because anyone with any sense would not go over there if they thought they might get shot. Secondly, Nevill wouldn't get his son over there knowing that he might be shot as well.

[chelmsey]

I have considered all of this. Ralph could of have been made to make the call to Jeremy in order to get him to come to the house.If someone was after JB he could have been suspicious,hence his worried call to JM and the reason he took so long to get to whf,allowing the police to arrive before him.Sounds far feched I know,but entirely possible.

[Kaldin]

I have considered all of this. Ralph could of have been made to make the call to Jeremy in order to get him to come to the house.If someone was after JB he could have been suspicious,hence his worried call to JM and the reason he took so long to get to whf,allowing the police to arrive before him.Sounds far feched I know,but entirely possible.

Why would Nevill want Jeremy to come to the house knowing that someone wanted to kill him?

[chelmsey]

He may have had a gun pointed to the back of his neck and had no choice in making the call.Its possible that he put up a struggle in order not to have to do it but in the end had no choice.

[Kaldin]

He may have had a gun pointed to the back of his neck and had no choice in making the call.Its possible that he put up a struggle in order not to have to do it but in the end had no choice.

Well the theoretical assassin didn't bother to wait for Jeremy did he? Not only did he not wait, he also killed two small boys in their beds.

[Paul]

And managed to escape despite the police being outside and the speculation that there was someone alive and seen in the window & someone that the police were in conversation with inside the farm at 5.25. The assassin also didn't make a good job of killing Sheila as she walked upstairs afterwards (when I assume that the assassin was gone)

[chelmsey]

Whoever we think may have been responsible - there are always flaws in the theory!

[Paul]

The trouble with the third party is that although it would suggest that Jeremy didn't do it, all his focus and evidence points us to Sheila and eliminates a third party therefore.

[Kaldin]

The trouble with the third party is that although it would suggest that Jeremy didn't do it, all his focus and evidence points us to Sheila and eliminates a third party therefore.

Correct. Would an assassin bother making it look as if Sheila killed herself?