Author Topic: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.  (Read 32184 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #60 on: September 09, 2012, 05:32:PM »
DI Cook claims he moved Sheila's right hand to enable PC Bird to photograph bloodstaining on Sheila's nightdress - photographs confirm movement of hand and right arm. Therefore, no rigor mortis present...

Furthermore, non of the police mention that her body was stiff...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

guest154

  • Guest
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #61 on: September 09, 2012, 05:36:PM »
when I made the post in response to Roch I did not know it was you who referred to Campion as a nutter.

I didn't though.  ;D Hartley said that "Some people are eccentric, some people try to be eccentric and some people have eccentricity thrust upon them"

and I said

"and some people are nutters!"

I guess people thought I was talking about Campion because this is his topic, but I was being general.

Buddy

  • Guest
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #62 on: September 09, 2012, 05:37:PM »
Hi Mat  I have no idea whether Campion and Grahame are friends.  The only point I was making that any dealings I have had with Campion he has been so full of information and humourous and I would think the knowledge he has on the Jeremy Bamber case is extensive when I made the post in response to Roch I did not know it was you who referred to Campion as a nutter.
Campion is a friend of Grahame, and he certainly not a nutter. He offers a lot to the forum.

guest154

  • Guest
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #63 on: September 09, 2012, 05:38:PM »
I spend 50% of my time repeating myself on this forum.

I did not call Campion a nutter.


Offline HMEssex

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1501
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #64 on: September 09, 2012, 05:39:PM »
I used the word nutter in this topic, so I guess this post is meant to me. I wasn't calling Campion a nutter - I udnerstand how maybe it could have looked like I was but my respons was a continuation of Hartley's.

But as for campions 'digs' at members - not only have I seen this too but I came under fire of it yesterday. But three people have now told me that Campion is an offline friend of Grahame  ::) (apparently they spoke about this when Campion joined the forum. ) which now makes it clearer as to why Campion spoke to me as he did in the topic yesterday.




I think you may have missed the significance of Campion.  His friendship with Grahame is by the by.

Buddy

  • Guest
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #65 on: September 09, 2012, 05:41:PM »
DI Cook claims he moved Sheila's right hand to enable PC Bird to photograph bloodstaining on Sheila's nightdress - photographs confirm movement of hand and right arm. Therefore, no rigor mortis present...

Furthermore, non of the police mention that her body was stiff...
I know Mike. I was merely saying that the pathologist stated all bodies were in an advanced state of rigor.
I do find it strange that Cook never mentions moving the rifle, when it clearly was.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2012, 05:42:PM by Buddy »

Offline Bridget

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5065
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #66 on: September 09, 2012, 05:41:PM »
DI Cook claims he moved Sheila's right hand to enable PC Bird to photograph bloodstaining on Sheila's nightdress - photographs confirm movement of hand and right arm. Therefore, no rigor mortis present...

Furthermore, non of the police mention that her body was stiff...

No, it doesn't mean no rigor mortis was present, it means it wasn't fully 'set' yet. RM is a gradual process, and the time it takes to fully set in depends on many factors. It is not the case that a body is floppy one minute, and stiff as a board the next.
....just cos I eat worms...

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #67 on: September 09, 2012, 05:42:PM »
Hi Buddy  I did not know about the friendship of Campion and Grahame but this does not make him a nutter.  Grahame had so many friends on the forum.  I think Campion is an out and out gentleman I take as I find not read any of the posts being talked about.  Stay off the forum after 7.30 p.m. :) But I don't think Mat meant it in the way it came over :)

Offline Bridget

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5065
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #68 on: September 09, 2012, 05:43:PM »



I think you may have missed the significance of Campion.  His friendship with Grahame is by the by.

What is the significance of Campion?
....just cos I eat worms...

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #69 on: September 09, 2012, 05:46:PM »
Mat I have just read the post in question and you will see in my last post that I said you did not mean Campion was a nutter you were just using the term loosely and it was not directed at anyone in particular.

guest154

  • Guest
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #70 on: September 09, 2012, 05:46:PM »
Mat I have just read the post in question and you will see in my last post that I said you did not mean Campion was a nutter you were just using the term loosely and it was not directed at anyone in particular.


 :)

Buddy

  • Guest
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #71 on: September 09, 2012, 05:47:PM »
I spend 50% of my time repeating myself on this forum.

I did not call Campion a nutter.
I didn't accuse you of doing so Mat.Chill out mate.

Offline Roch

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17586
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #72 on: September 09, 2012, 05:49:PM »
What is the significance of Campion?

The significance of Campion is in inverse proportion to the significance of Bridget.  I've just made that up but it sounded good.

Offline tyler

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2395
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #73 on: September 09, 2012, 05:50:PM »
No, it doesn't mean no rigor mortis was present, it means it wasn't fully 'set' yet. RM is a gradual process, and the time it takes to fully set in depends on many factors. It is not the case that a body is floppy one minute, and stiff as a board the next.
Wasnt Neville said to be in an advanced state of rigor? I would have expected Sheila to have been if she had died between 3 and 4 am or even earlier.
However,I understand that once in a state of rigor,the person then comes out of it? I dont know how long that process takes?

Offline Bridget

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5065
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #74 on: September 09, 2012, 05:53:PM »
Wasnt Neville said to be in an advanced state of rigor? I would have expected Sheila to have been if she had died between 3 and 4 am or even earlier.
However,I understand that once in a state of rigor,the person then comes out of it? I dont know how long that process takes?

Neither do I off the top of my head but I think its more than 12 hours from onset. Re Ralph, it's entirely plausible that his RM could be more advanced because of differing factors like age, exertion etc. it's far from an exact science as Mertol will tell you.
....just cos I eat worms...