Author Topic: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.  (Read 32205 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online ngb1066

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6671
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #180 on: August 10, 2013, 11:53:AM »
Mike, a simple but I feel a relevant question for yourself, or NGB. Are the magazines for the Bamber Anschulz automatic  and the Pargeter 'bolt action' rifles, interchangeable?

I thought they were likely to be interchangeable as magazines are often made to a standard design.  However, when some time ago I posted my opinion on this Hartley replied saying that he had made enquiries and they were not interchangeable.  I am therefore not sure.

 

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #181 on: August 10, 2013, 01:04:PM »
Mike, a simple but I feel a relevant question for yourself, or NGB. Are the magazines for the Bamber Anschulz automatic  and the Pargeter 'bolt action' rifles, interchangeable?

It turns out, that the ammunition magazine belonging to Anthony pargeters .22 bolt action rifle, when checked in 2002, did not fit, and was not interchangeable so that it fitted the other Bamber owned silencer...

However, no checks were conducted to exclude for the possibility that the ammunition magazine belonging to the Bamber owned anshulz rifle, did not fit Anthiny Pargeters .22 Bruno bolt action rifle...

Hope this helps...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Caroline R

  • Guest
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #182 on: August 10, 2013, 01:13:PM »
I thought they were likely to be interchangeable as magazines are often made to a standard design.  However, when some time ago I posted my opinion on this Hartley replied saying that he had made enquiries and they were not interchangeable.  I am therefore not sure.

Excuse my ignorance in these matters but how do these semi-automatic rifles work? If you keep your finger on the trigger, do they just keep firing?

Online ngb1066

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6671
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #183 on: August 10, 2013, 01:31:PM »
Excuse my ignorance in these matters but how do these semi-automatic rifles work? If you keep your finger on the trigger, do they just keep firing?

No, only a fully automatic rifle will do that.  With a semiautomatic each time the trigger is pulled (or more correctly squeezed) a shot is fired.  Each round is chambered and the spent case ejected automatically, using the recoil.


Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #184 on: August 10, 2013, 07:08:PM »
No, only a fully automatic rifle will do that.  With a semiautomatic each time the trigger is pulled (or more correctly squeezed) a shot is fired.  Each round is chambered and the spent case ejected automatically, using the recoil.

With a bolt action rifle, like the one owned by Anthony Pargeter, you have to manually work the bolt, and squeeze the trigger to fire each shot..
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline campion

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1967
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #185 on: August 10, 2013, 10:41:PM »
Mike, your post #181 - Would it be helpful to ascertain from armoury specialists(e.g. Ratcliffes of Colchester, from whom the Bamber weapon was purchased), what the interchangeable characteristics of the respective rifles and their magazines were in the early 1980's.
It does come to mind that the bullets were removed from the Bamber rifle, prior to the Special Forces informative 'training', -for safety reasons?, but unfortunately fate intervened.

Caroline R

  • Guest
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #186 on: August 10, 2013, 11:43:PM »
Mike, your post #181 - Would it be helpful to ascertain from armoury specialists(e.g. Ratcliffes of Colchester, from whom the Bamber weapon was purchased), what the interchangeable characteristics of the respective rifles and their magazines were in the early 1980's.
It does come to mind that the bullets were removed from the Bamber rifle, prior to the Special Forces informative 'training', -for safety reasons?, but unfortunately fate intervened.

Someone posted that info a while back. I think there's a statement from the guy that sold them the rifle because it was argued that the sights were zeroed in when it was sold. However, this turned out not to be true. I'll see if I can find it

Caroline R

  • Guest
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #187 on: August 10, 2013, 11:49:PM »
It was a post by Buddy (here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3927.0.html). He went to the shop and spoke to the guy who sold it to the Bambers. I thought there was a statement but apparently he wasn't asked to make one.

Offline campion

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1967
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #188 on: August 10, 2013, 11:57:PM »
Thank you for that Caroline. I must congratulate you and the other Forum ladies for digging the 'big hole' for poor ole Stevie. Wonderful how he surreptitiously put the backhanded culpability on Juicy Julie by misquoting Wilkes' Chapter 31 for the 'blood in the car' contretemps.

Caroline R

  • Guest
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #189 on: August 11, 2013, 12:01:AM »
Thank you for that Caroline. I must congratulate you and the other Forum ladies for digging the 'big hole' for poor ole Stevie. Wonderful how he surreptitiously put the backhanded culpability on Juicy Julie by misquoting Wilkes' Chapter 31 for the 'blood in the car' contretemps.

Ha, ha!! I think it was a Freudian slip - chapters 30 and 31 must be worn out on his copy!! :)

Offline Reader

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2456
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #190 on: August 11, 2013, 01:01:PM »
The socks in the bedroom appear fairly dark, but have been referred to as "actually light blue", despite the fact that other colours in the main bedroom photographs seem to be approximately correct. How is the true colour of the socks in the bedroom known?

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #191 on: August 11, 2013, 01:09:PM »
The socks in the bedroom appear fairly dark, but have been referred to as "actually light blue", despite the fact that other colours in the main bedroom photographs seem to be approximately correct. How is the true colour of the socks in the bedroom known?




Hi Reader,,in one or two pics that have appeared,I've actually seen those socks as a light blue colour. It depends which camera was used I think and whether there was a shutter which regulated light and dark pics. A good Minolta of its time would have showed the true colour.

Offline Reader

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2456
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #192 on: August 11, 2013, 01:17:PM »
I think it's mainly the lighting conditions that can selectively affect apparent colour sometimes. If anyone can link to a photograph that shows the socks as light blue, I'd like to see it.

Offline campion

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1967
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #193 on: August 12, 2013, 08:47:AM »
Good Morning Mr Reader,  Thankyou for your imput, from which it appears that you have capabilities in technical matters.  Is that from experience of working in a Police Socko capacity?
It surely is interesting to read that different cameras (and varying photographic film?)  produce different colour reproduction, as per your, and Lookout's comments about the shade of socks.
What is to the point, to my mind, can you identify that the strange 'bluey' objects near the red bin may be the bed socks which are later shown upstairs near Sheila's body depicted on the floor of the Master bedroom?

One further point whilst I am addressing your forgoing post :-  the picture which is the subject of this Topic, and otherwise referred to as 'the enigmatic picture',  - from the white border to that picture, and it's accepted inferior quality, could it be a copy from a print  made by means of a Kodak Instammatic camera with inbuilt flash facilities?

Offline campion

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1967
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #194 on: August 12, 2013, 02:23:PM »
Hello again Reader, If the picture of the interior of the 'back- kitchen' was from an Instammatic camera, would the white areas occurring on the 'body' likely to have been caused by reflection from the inbuilt flash facility?
The flash points seem to correspond to jewellery worn by Sheila' I.e. rings on each hand, a watch, earrings and possibly her necklace?