Jeremy Bamber: the Prelude, the Tragedy and the Aftermath

[JackiePreece]

Dr Craig did also say it would be extraordinary for someone to have murdered her

Was it Dr Craig who said that or Dr Vanezis?

[Caroline]

Dr Craig did also say it would be extraordinary for someone to have murdered her

He also described the blood from Sheila's mouth as 'dried' - this was at 08:44 so claims that the picture of Sheila showing the dried cracked blood - was taken later, are rubbish. This also means that blood could NOT have been flowing from her mouth.

[Harry]

Harry if I agree with you I have to ignore Dr Vanezis' pathological evidence and the evidence of police surgeon Dr Craig.

Dr Vanezis said the two gunshot wounds to Sheila were fired within seconds.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=156.0;attach=168

Dr Craig said all victims, including Sheila, could have died at anytime during the previous night.  (Point 38 from 2002 appeal).

I hope you will not be disappointed to learn  that unless experts provide new testimony I am happy to rely on the evidence of the two doctors.

So you believe Sheila shot herself twice at around 03.30 after killing the others?

In some cases experts disagree. The prosecution have an expert who says one thing and the defense have an expert who calls his opinion into question. Peter Vanezis changed his evidence to help the prosecution. The defence have never sought the opinion of another expert to challenge Vanezis opinions. With Vanezis it's not his competence, but his honesty which in in question. It's worth taking a look at this.

In his report of September 30 1985 page 06 Vanezis goes into some detail in describing how the fractures to Nevill's skull were caused by gunshots. Here is what he says:

Gunshot Wounds.
1 Entry wound on the right side side of the head just in front of the right ear measuring 3/16

2 Entry wound above previous wound also measuring 3/16

The track of the above two rounds was through the temporal bone
causing two punctured holes in the skull with associated linear
fractures radiating to the top ot the skull in the frontal bones
as far as thu saggital suture as well as across the right orbital
plate and frontal bone. The track of both wounds continued through
the brain causing disruptive injury principally to both temporal
lobes, right parietul lobe and midbrain structures. One of the
bullets then caused everted fractures to the left parietal bone
with the bullet embedded in the fracture site. The other bullet
 had exited just behind the left ear causing a fracture in the
temporal bone and a small exit laceration. The bullet was found
embedded in the laceration.

3 Entry wound in the right parietel region measuring 1/2 inch.

4 Entry wound 1/2 inch posterior to wound also measuring 1/2 inch

The track of the above two wounds was in a downward direction from the deceased's right
to left side. The bullets had initially caused two punctured fractures to the right parietal bone which merged into each other. These fractures were also associated with radiations in three directions.
The brain was severely disrupted and bullet fragments were also seen. The base of the skull was severely fractured.

But in his report of May 07 1986 page 03 he seems to contradict everything he said on the matter in September 30 1985.

In my view none of the fractures to the skull were associated with gunshot injuries. The bruising to both eyes in my view could not be associated solely with fractures to the skull but in my view could also have been caused by blows by a blunt object or objects in the vicinity.

The latter looks like a blatant lie.

On a different issue, has it not occurred to anyone that Vanezis could have chosen to ignore time of death issues realising that they are a weak point in the prosecution's case.

[Harry]

It is one of the prosecutions main arguments that Sheila could not have inflicted such damage to the skull, because being a mere woman she would not have had the strength to inflict such damage. But if the fractures were caused by gun shots it's a different matter, even allowing for sexism. It looks like Vanezis was trying to help.

[lookout]

That's interesting Harry. Two shots made in a " downward " position. Meaning : That Neville would have been on the floor ( on his knees ?) with the shooter standing over him-------so it had to be a pretty tall person ( Sheila ) to accommodate the length of the rifle as well. Nobody argues with a shooter.!

It wouldn't be the first time that a pathologist has been in cahoots with the police ! Ian Tomlinson's case was testament to that.

[JackiePreece]

So you believe Sheila shot herself twice at around 03.30 after killing the others?

In some cases experts disagree. The prosecution have an expert who says one thing and the defense have an expert who calls his opinion into question. Peter Vanezis changed his evidence to help the prosecution. The defence have never sought the opinion of another expert to challenge Vanezis opinions. With Vanezis it's not his competence, but his honesty which in in question. It's worth taking a look at this.

In his report of September 30 1985 page 06 Vanezis goes into some detail in describing how the fractures to Nevill's skull were caused by gunshots. Here is what he says:


But in his report of May 07 1986 page 03 he seems to contradict everything he said on the matter in September 30 1985.

The latter looks like a blatant lie.

On a different issue, has it not occurred to anyone that Vanezis could have chosen to ignore time of death issues realising that they are a weak point in the prosecution's case.

Yes I believe Sheila shot herself twice around 3.30 as that is what all the evidence suggests to me.

I see you've highlighted the words "radiating" and "radiations" and I think therein lies the answer.   

As I said yesterday the Dickinson report makes it clear a pathologist, biologist and ballistics expert should have been called to scene of crime to observe everything in-situ and work together as a team.  Unfortunately for Jeremy this didn't happen.  As a consequence the relatives and low ranking police officers were in a position to fill the knowledge gap and influence the direction and outcome.

Vanezis didn't give any indication of time of death.  I understand this is always difficult and unreliable.

Craig certified the deaths around 8.30am.  He said the deaths could have happened any time the previous night.  The body goes through various stages after death.  If Sheila died significantly later than the other victims, say around 7.30am as opposed to 3.30am, then surely it would be obvious?  

It is clear Sheila didn't move after the first gunshot due to the lack of blood staining to her nightie.  Coupled with Vanezis' evidence regarding the haemorrhaging showing the two gunshot wounds happened within a few seconds.

[JackiePreece]

It is one of the prosecutions main arguments that Sheila could not have inflicted such damage to the skull, because being a mere woman she would not have had the strength to inflict such damage. But if the fractures were caused by gun shots it's a different matter, even allowing for sexism. It looks like Vanezis was trying to help.

The main argument is the blood flake and silencer which as it stands is very compelling against Jeremy.

Vanezis did not have difficulty with Sheila causing Nevill's injuries:

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1191.0;attach=6170

Cook said similar based on the fact Nevill lost the use of one of his arms. 

There are plenty of cases where women have murdered men.  One example that springs to mind is Tracie Andrews who stabbed her boyfriend Lee Harvey multiple times.

I'm only a dress size 10, sometimes edging nearer 12 in the winter when I'm off  the salads, but I often hump bales of hay about with the horses. 

But yes you will get all the sexist stuff amongst 1980's male dominated police and judiciary.  The only women around were typists and cleaners most of whom were mere objects for their sexual fantasies 

[David1819]

The main argument is the blood flake and silencer which as it stands is very compelling against Jeremy.

Vanezis did not have difficulty with Sheila causing Nevill's injuries:

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1191.0;attach=6170

Cook said similar based on the fact Nevill lost the use of one of his arms. 

There are plenty of cases where women have murdered men.  One example that springs to mind is Tracie Andrews who stabbed her boyfriend Lee Harvey multiple times.

I'm only a dress size 10, sometimes edging nearer 12 in the winter when I'm off  the salads, but I often hump bales of hay about with the horses. 

But yes you will get all the sexist stuff amongst 1980's male dominated police and judiciary.  The only women around were typists and cleaners most of whom were mere objects for their sexual fantasies 

During the exact same year as WHF murders a Schizophrenic women went on a gun rampage in a shopping centre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvia_Seegrist

[JackiePreece]

During the exact same year as WHF murders a Schizophrenic women went on a gun rampage in a shopping centre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvia_Seegrist

I just had a quick look at this case.  It seems Sylvia Seergrist was a bit of a tomboy and boyish in appearance.  The opposite of Sheila.  Peoples perceptions and prejudices count for a lot.  I think with Sheila people struggled to perceive a slim attractive woman who took care of her appearance, was on the shy side and from a middle class background wielding a rifle.  No such problem with the "cuckoo" son who was a bit flash and cocky.  I come back to the Dickinson report and the lack of experts at the scene.  Then you get prejudices and perceptions taking over.

[maggie]

During the exact same year as WHF murders a Schizophrenic women went on a gun rampage in a shopping centre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvia_Seegrist

Hi David  agree with the sentiment that mentally ill people should be treated in a secure mental hospital and not in prison.
I cannot understand the logic behind putting any kind of blame onto someone who has been diagnosed as mentally ill, it's like demanding that a prisoner with only one leg has to run a marathon every day and is inhumane imo.

[lookout]

I'm forever sending e-mails to the government regarding the appalling treatment,or non-treatment of the mentally ill. There have been some disgusting cases involving young people being sent miles away from their families,to some far-flung place where the youngsters are scared to death. Being apart from families is bad enough but added to their illnesses is the thought that their families can't always travel the distance to see them. 

[David1819]

Hi David  agree with the sentiment that mentally ill people should be treated in a secure mental hospital and not in prison.
I cannot understand the logic behind putting any kind of blame onto someone who has been diagnosed as mentally ill, it's like demanding that a prisoner with only one leg has to run a marathon every day and is inhumane imo.

Being mentally ill does not mean they are not responsible for their actions. Usually a mental illness will mean a lesser charge of manslaughter instead of murder.

[maggie]

Being mentally ill does not mean they are not responsible for their actions. Usually a mental illness will mean a lesser charge of manslaughter instead of murder.

It depends on the situation but I cannot see how a paranoid schizophrenic who kills in a psychotic state can be held responsible for their actions. 
I think attitudes to mental health in this country and most others are inhumane and appalling.

[David1819]

It depends on the situation but I cannot see how a paranoid schizophrenic who kills in a psychotic state can be held responsible for their actions. 
I think attitudes to mental health in this country and most others are inhumane and appalling.

It depends on the situation. If there is evidence of motive and pre mediation then schizophrenia is not much of a defence.

[maggie]

It depends on the situation. If there is evidence of motive and pre mediation then schizophrenia is not much of a defence.

Says the law but I believe the law is far too harsh when dealing with mental illness, which is a disease of the brain. 
Its no wonder the general public are so frightened of mental illness when the law treats such people so badly.