Nevill's Premonition?

[-Harters-]

Hi All

It's already proven that silencer was not on the rifle when Sheila was shot. So what does that tell us? Does it tell us that Sheila sat and waited for the killer to take the silencer off the rifle? There was no signs of a struggle was there!
t we see no ash tray in the kitchen...So where did he put his cigarettes and where did Sheila put hers??

Eh? 

[Patti]

Eh? 

Yes....The test shown was done with and without the silencer fitted and it was the experts opinion that the silencer was not fitted when Sheila was shot.  The only thing that tells the court is that it was likely that the killer took it off, knowing that she would not be able to reach with the silencer fitted.... So, this is why they the defence needs to prove that the silencer was not fitted when Nevill was shot and, this is why they are trying to prove that the burn marks on Nevill's back were made without the silencer on....Does that make sense, or shall i give up and concentrate on my day job lol   

[-Harters-]

Yes....The test shown was done with and without the silencer fitted and it was the experts opinion that the silencer was not fitted when Sheila was shot.  The only thing that tells the court is that it was likely that the killer took it off, knowing that she would not be able to reach with the silencer fitted.... So, this is why they the defence needs to prove that the silencer was not fitted when Nevill was shot and, this is why they are trying to prove that the burn marks on Nevill's back were made without the silencer on....Does that make sense, or shall i give up and concentrate on my day job lol   

I don't understand, are you referring to the recently dismissed evidence? 

[Patti]

I don't understand, are you referring to the recently dismissed evidence? 

No I am relating to the shots under the chin Hartley.  The other evidence relating to the burn marks was dismissed..for the muzzle of the rifle did not heat up enough to have caused the burn marks....

[Lugg]

Yes....The test shown was done with and without the silencer fitted and it was the experts opinion that the silencer was not fitted when Sheila was shot.  The only thing that tells the court is that it was likely that the killer took it off, knowing that she would not be able to reach with the silencer fitted.... So, this is why they the defence needs to prove that the silencer was not fitted when Nevill was shot and, this is why they are trying to prove that the burn marks on Nevill's back were made without the silencer on....Does that make sense, or shall i give up and concentrate on my day job lol   

I think that all they needed to prove was that the silencer was not fitted when Sheila was shot. But I can't remember why the CCRC dismissed the tests?

[-Harters-]

No I am relating to the shots under the chin Hartley.  The other evidence relating to the burn marks was dismissed..for the muzzle of the rifle did not heat up enough to have caused the burn marks....

I'm afraid that is not the case Patti, Sheilas blood was found in the silencer.

It most certainly has not been proven that the silencer was not present when she was shot. I think you are getting in a muddle on this. 

[lookout]

Hi All

It's already proven that silencer was not on the rifle when Sheila was shot.  So what does that tell us? Does it tell us that Sheila sat and waited for the killer to take the silencer off the rifle? There was no signs of a struggle was there!

I keep harping on about the cushions, but no one appears curious as to why they were there, or who put them there.  They are placed on the top of a pair of trousers and a white tea shirt.  They have blood transfer stains on them.  This means that someone had sat on them or laid on them in front of the Aga.  You normally place your head or your bum on cushions...yeah?

Behind those cushions is a door on the Aga a very hot door, which holds the ashes. Above that is a drum  which holds the coals.    Nevill smoked, yet we see no ash tray in the kitchen...So where did he put his cigarettes and where did Sheila put hers??

The rifle could have been placed on the top of the Aga which is very hot, or could have been used to poke something into the coals to burn.....Could Nevill have sat there? Could Sheila have sat on the cushions?  There were blood on the back of Sheila's nightdress at the bottom....it is said to have been June's....Did forensics ever take the cushions to tested? I guess not! So we will never know.  Just thinking out loud lol 

Hi Patti,,,the spent cigs and cigars would have been thrown into the fire,,,and the rifle,minus silencer,would have rested upon the aga. There would have been a " scrap " as to who picked the rifle up,,but poor Neville was beaten to it.
A cushion would have been on the chair,maybe both,,and were removed to the floor where I would have said,put there by Sheila who probably sat on them,or were used to stem blood from an injury.
Chances are,,,as usual,,,the cushions were never forensically tested for grouping/matching.

My thoughts are that one or two officers present, knew that Sheila was involved but because it was never accepted that women could,or were capable of such a massacre,,,that nobody said anything and instead,followed what others went along with. 

[Patti]

Am I missing something...Listen to Philip Boyce.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeLsEeE0zTI

Off swimming....I will be back lol 

[Patti]

Hi Patti,,,the spent cigs and cigars would have been thrown into the fire,,,and the rifle,minus silencer,would have rested upon the aga. There would have been a " scrap " as to who picked the rifle up,,but poor Neville was beaten to it.
A cushion would have been on the chair,maybe both,,and were removed to the floor where I would have said,put there by Sheila who probably sat on them,or were used to stem blood from an injury.
Chances are,,,as usual,,,the cushions were never forensically tested for grouping/matching.

My thoughts are that one or two officers present, knew that Sheila was involved but because it was never accepted that women could,or were capable of such a massacre,,,that nobody said anything and instead,followed what others went along with.

Just caught your post Lookout and Lugg, but have to out, will be back later...................I'm out of the door...lol

[curiousessex]

I'm afraid that is not the case Patti, Sheilas blood was found in the silencer.

It most certainly has not been proven that the silencer was not present when she was shot. I think you are getting in a muddle on this. 

The defence counter argument on this at the original trial was the blood in the silencer was a mixture of Nevill and June's blood as opposed to being exclusively Sheila's blood. As such the defence are accepting the silencer would have been on the gun when both Nevill and June had been shot.

How can the silencer be on the gun when Nevill is shot as a defence explanation for the blood as found in the silencer and then the silencer not be on the gun when Nevill is shot as a possible explanation for the presence of the unexplained burn marks on Nevill ?

[-Harters-]

Am I missing something...Listen to Philip Boyce.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeLsEeE0zTI

Off swimming....I will be back lol 

Yes, if it was accepted that the silencer was not fitted during either of sheilas two wounds, then we would be currently waiting to hear a date for the appeal.

[Lugg]

The defence counter argument on this at the original trial was the blood in the silencer was a mixture of Nevill and June's blood as opposed to being exclusively Sheila's blood. As such the defence are accepting the silencer would have been on the gun when both Nevill and June had been shot.

How can the silencer be on the gun when Nevill is shot as a defence explanation for the blood as found in the silencer and then the silencer not on the gun when Nevill is shot as a possible explanation for the presence of the unexplained burn marks on Nevill ?

As I understood it ngb explained at the time that all the defence had to prove by these tests was that the silencer was not fixed to the gun when Sheila was shot and that was sufficient for the CCRC to refer the case back to the court of appeal? This was done. But the CCRC still ruled against the new evidence because the tests were incomplete. A big cop our if you ask me. A judgment which they were not qualified to make. But two judges obviously ruled that they were qualified to make that judgment.

[susan]

Hi curiousessex  maybe two different rifles were used in the shootings.  One with silencer fitted one without.

[curiousessex]

As I understood it ngb explained at the time that all the defence had to prove by these tests was that the silencer was not fixed to the gun when Sheila was shot and that was sufficient for the CCRC to refer the case back to the court of appeal? This was done. But the CCRC still ruled against the new evidence because the tests were incomplete. A big cop our if you ask me. A judgment which they were not qualified to make. But two judges obviously ruled that they were qualified to make that judgment.

Well the defence has not proven the silencer was not fixed to the gun when Sheila was shot. All the defence has done is effectively paid for experts who have written reports / appeared on a broadcast documentary within which it has been stated in the opinion of the expert the images of Sheila's wounds do not, in the opinion of the expert, look like they have been caused by the end of a gun which has a silencer fitted. Nothing else

As such this could have been an argument to be presented at the original trial as opposed to the suggestion the blood in the silencer was a mixture of blood from Nevill and Sheila. The defence could have countered the prosecution's case that the silencer was fitted when Sheila's was shot by stating no silencer was fitted as is demonstrated by the images of the wounds to Sheila's neck. As it was the defence, at the time of the original trial, chose not to take this approach.

[lookout]

A lot of unnecessary feet-dragging if you ask me.