I have posted many times on the silencer issue:several of them are on the thread started by nugnug "what actually convicted Jeremy Bamber". I'm afraid the Defence has to explain how June's DNA was found on the silencer with 17 of 20 markers of Sheila's also found there.The Defence is also going back to its default position of naming all Prosecution witnesses liars,instead of ever examining the possibility that is it Jeremy who is the serial liar in this case.
Hi Steve. 17 out of 20 markers is insufficient evidence and would not hold up in court, because it is only likely that it was hers and it could be that it was her sisters...Also the DNA tests can not say if the DNA was blood or not. See R v Bamber.
Back in 1985/6 we had not got the technology we have today. The way they did blood tests were based on groups. This is how it was...
In Britain the blood groups of population were as follows: O 46% A 42% B 9% AB 3% So baring this in mind, nearly half the population had were blood group A and O
The silencer its self was taken from a crime scene, therefore it was contaminated form the moment it was touched. Why the family took that evidence away is mystery to me. Because their DNA has bound to have been on it. Was it ever finger-printed? If this silencer was introduced in a court of law today, I feel sure that it would be admissible. Reason for that is because it would be likely that the evidence had been destroyed form the moment it was found.
