Lack of ammunition-handling evidence on Sheila's hands

[guest154]

A valued expert she seems to have been Mat.  I've never read those Scarpetta books... I wonder if she has?

she says that she likes to read thrillers, so I would think maybe she had done. They are great books, Roch. 

[lookout]

just so the facts are reported correctly, DS Davidson told the COLP interviewers that the reason the paint sample (RC/1) had been taken on 8th August 1985, was because some paint had been found on the end of a guns barrel. The gun in question was never identified at that stage...

Mike the police had denied for years that the exhibit RC1 existed,,,,but their own records proved otherwise.

[lookout]

Surprise,surprise,,,the said document inadvertantly came to light.

I reiterrate,,,why would Essex police want a paint sample from underneath the mantlepiece in the kitchen on August the 9th,to match to a recovered exhibit responsible for that very scratch mark,when the silencer was not even found until at least the 10th of August by the relatives,,,,and not handed to the police until the 12th of August.

[bloggs and son]

Surprise,surprise,,,the said document inadvertantly came to light.

I reiterrate,,,why would Essex police want a paint sample from underneath the mantlepiece in the kitchen on August the 9th,to match to a recovered exhibit responsible for that very scratch mark,when the silencer was not even found until at least the 10th of August by the relatives,,,,and not handed to the police until the 12th of August.

Interesting to say the least.

[Bridget]

Mike the police had denied for years that the exhibit RC1 existed,,,,but their own records proved otherwise.

RC1 was the paint sample, and it was discussed at length at the trial.

[lookout]

RC1 was the paint sample, and it was discussed at length at the trial.

I don't think there was any mention of " which rifle,,or which of the two silencers " was responsible though.

[mike tesko]

RC1 was the paint sample, and it was discussed at length at the trial.

RC/)1 existed and was taken on 8th August because paint had been found on the end of a guns barrel - nowdays of course neither the exhibit itself, or the gun with paint on its barrel exists at all...

[Bridget]

RC/)1 existed and was taken on 8th August because paint had been found on the end of a guns barrel - nowdays of course neither the exhibit itself, or the gun with paint on its barrel exists at all...

In saying that though, you rely purely on a date written on a form by Davison some time later. Davison clearly could not remember the circumstances surrounding his writing of the date when asked some 6 years later, but what is clear is that he wasn't there - so he was told what to write or he copied it from something else. The witness statements of Ron Cook and Ann Eaton both say that the sample was taken on the 14th, as does Stan Jones' trial evidence. Do we have Miller's statement? I couldn't find it.

[mike tesko]

In saying that though, you rely purely on a date written on a form by Davison some time later. Davison clearly could not remember the circumstances surrounding his writing of the date when asked some 6 years later, but what is clear is that he wasn't there - so he was told what to write or he copied it from something else. The witness statements of Ron Cook and Ann Eaton both say that the sample was taken on the 14th, as does Stan Jones' trial evidence. Do we have Miller's statement? I couldn't find it.

How did Davidson know about the gun with paint on the end of its barrel and that this was / is the reason why paint sample RC/1 was taken? Did he just copy that detail down as well? I do not believe that paint samples RC/1 and RWC/1 are a reference to the same sample, since one was taken in connection with paint found on a guns barrel, whilst the other was taken in connection with paint on a silencer...

[bloggs and son]

How did Davidson know about the gun with paint on the end of its barrel and that this was / us the reason why paint sample RC/1 was taken? Did he just copy that detail down as well? I do not believe that pnt samples RC/1 and RWC/1 arw a reference to the same sample, since one was taken in connection with paint found on a guns barrel, whilst the other was taken in connection with paint on a silencer. More significan

I thought in the interview they were referring to his "notebook" and it was his notes that they were referring to? In fact wasn't that the reason they were questioning him for among other things?
Supt McKay:

Right Neil. I want to go through chronological order of your pocket book. If you can turn please to Wed 7th Aug

To say he was just using his memory or that he just copied it from someone else is all speculation surely?

[Roch]

I do not believe that paint samples RC/1 and RWC/1 are a reference to the same sample, since one was taken in connection with paint found on a guns barrel, whilst the other was taken in connection with paint on a silencer...

As if Bamber would be involved in two struggles that scratched the mantle.  That's what we'll hear next, if the RC1 sample is substantiated as being linked to the barrel.  One struggle with the barrel and one with the silencer (just for good measure).

[mike tesko]

I thought in the interview they were referring to his "notebook" and it was his notes that they were referring to? In fact wasn't that the reason they were questioning him for among other things?

Correct...

Lets all get something straight, it was / is Essex police who have / arw trying to make these two  completely separate paint samples, RC/1 and RWC/1 into the same sample? It is the poli e themselvea who set out to prove that Cook only took one paint sample (RWC/1) which he took on 14th August, which is true he did not take paint sample RC/1 from the scene on 8th August, somebody else did. That somebody else was either DC Carr, or PC Robbie Carr?

[mike tesko]

RC1 was the paint sample, and it was discussed at length at the trial.

Any version discussed at trial or any subsequent appeal is / was nothing but a clever trick designed to fool people into thinking the issue was about the existence or not of one paint sample, not two separate ones.

[bloggs and son]

As if Bamber would be involved in two struggles that scratched the mantle.  That's what we'll hear next, if the RC1 sample is substantiated as being linked to the barrel.  One struggle with the barrel and one with the silencer (just for good measure).

Something is certainly not right here and deserves answers and the answer is not just to assume that he copied it from someone, or he lost his memory. This cannot be g;ossed over as this is taken from actual police notes. We must not think that this officers notes were wrong just because someone else's notes were different. There is too much of this "glossing over" of these things and not enough deep investigation.

[bloggs and son]

Any version discussed at trial or any subsequent appeal is / was nothing but a clever trick designed to fool people into thinking the issue was about the existence or not of one paint sample, not two separate ones.

In any case it was discussed in relation to the silencer and not to the gun barrel. Nicely ironed out at the trial wasn't it?