Who Bled here?

[Bridget]

If we then look at this:

(12) The rifle found over Sheila Caffells body was placed in the position in which it was found. It has been reported that a rifle, found in another room in the house, had blood of the same group as Sheila Caffell in its sound moderator. The length of this rifle, from the end of the sound moderator to the trigger, is some thirty six inches. This distance is too great for Sheila Caffell to have self-inflicted her two neck wounds. Therefore, Sheila Caffell did not shoot herself. Like the other four victims, Sheila Caffell was murdered.

It is not surprising that Macdonell bases his conclusion without knowing that the police had removed the rifle and that the rifle had not got the silencer fixed to the rifle when she was found.  Surely, a man of his distinction, would have noted that the photograph in question that he was looking at, had a rifle without a moderator attached.  Yet he made a final analysis based believing that this was the case. 

Bridget the defence would have a field day with this report...To me it is inconclusive.   

It is strange that he didn't explore the possibility that the silencer was not attached when Sheila was shot, since even taking the arm length out of the equation Sheila could not have made the second shot and then replaced the silencer in the cupboard. I would think that had his initial report been more favourable then JB would have asked him to pursue that line.

There's not a lot of point of having a field day with the evidence of an expert you yourself have commissioned!

I think really this report supports the verdict as it was in 1985 but really adds nothing to it, and does nothing to assist either side with the position as later asserted by the defence. Which is not surprising really since that position has changed several times since the report was written.

[Patti]

Yes I agree, but JB was in control of the information given to him, so who's fault is that? If he wasn't in control of it he surely would have said so once the report was made public.

Hi Bridget I think JB being in full control might be an assumption 2 years after initial contact from Macdonell.  Plus if he was in control, then surely Macdonell would be in contact with Jeremy and not Robinson...I do agree that it might have been likely that Robinson could have acted on behalf of Jeremy and did not disclose all relevant details surrounding the entirety of the case.   

I doubt we can really conclude anything else on this to be honest, other that the report is an inadequate one....

[Patti]

It is strange that he didn't explore the possibility that the silencer was not attached when Sheila was shot, since even taking the arm length out of the equation Sheila could not have made the second shot and then replaced the silencer in the cupboard. I would think that had his initial report been more favourable then JB would have asked him to pursue that line.

There's not a lot of point of having a field day with the evidence of an expert you yourself have commissioned!

I think really this report supports the verdict as it was in 1985 but really adds nothing to it, and does nothing to assist either side with the position as later asserted by the defence. Which is not surprising really since that position has changed several times since the report was written.

I agree, it is more favorable to the defence as it outlines the fact that Shelia's arm was moved or the bible or both, plus the rifle....and the fact that the silencer could not have been used if Shelia had shot herself....but could have done without the silencer being attached..maybe....

Now do you want to go through the blood analysis lolol   

[Patti]

Wonder what Macdonell meant in his last paragraph: 

Unfortunately I cannot duplicate the photographs to which I have made reference to in this report because of an agreement.   Possibly permission may be obtained to do this at some later date if proper application is made.....??

Was the case that Robinson had asked for photographs which had been sent to him by Jeremy?

[Bridget]

Wonder what Macdonell meant in his last paragraph: 

Unfortunately I cannot duplicate the photographs to which I have made reference to in this report because of an agreement.   Possibly permission may be obtained to do this at some later date if proper application is made.....??

Was the case that Robinson had asked for photographs which had been sent to him by Jeremy?

Very much reading between the lines I'd say that whilst Robinson and co commissioned the report, Ewan smith provided the photos direct to Macdonnell with the proviso that they were not to be copied or disclosed to anyone else, which may indicate that that was the basis on which he had them in the first place. I think that fits in with what Mike has said in the past. I think it's unlikely that JB would have agreed to any assistance being given to Robinson in the form of the provision of documents and photos without ensuring that he was in full control of what was asked of the expert. The two year time gap is simply the period between JB deciding he wanted to use MacDonnell and him having the finances to do it. Wilkes wasn't around in 1990, he came along later and one or the other of them saw the potential for a bit if mutual backscratching.

[Patti]

Very much reading between the lines I'd say that whilst Robinson and co commissioned the report, Ewan smith provided the photos direct to Macdonnell with the proviso that they were not to be copied or disclosed to anyone else, which may indicate that that was the basis on which he had them in the first place. I think that fits in with what Mike has said in the past. I think it's unlikely that JB would have agreed to any assistance being given to Robinson in the form of the provision of documents and photos without ensuring that he was in full control of what was asked of the expert. The two year time gap is simply the period between JB deciding he wanted to use MacDonnell and him having the finances to do it. Wilkes wasn't around in 1990, he came along later and one or the other of them saw the potential for a bit if mutual backscratching.

This tells me then that Robinson had acted alone in his request to see the document and ask for copies of the said photographs, otherwise if he was acting on behalf of Ewan and Jeremy, he would have asked them for copies of the photographs surely. 

Roger Wilkes must have been around at that time, otherwise why thank him in his book, which Robinson then published.  I think its unfair to say that they did not know each other in 1992 for 3 years later Wilkes book was published and here we have a clear example of Wilkes's publisher asking a famous forensic scientist to provide a copy of a report, or a new report along with photographs from a crime scene....I wonder if by this time, Wilkes and Bamber had fell out? 

I am not sure Bridget....something is not right here....I know there is proof that Macdonell had contacted Jeremy and there is proof that Jeremy had his report.....There was no scoop to be had in a newspaper was there, the only scoop was Wilkes'd book...

Anyway, it does not alter the fact that the report its self in inconclusive....and should not be used in a proper analysis....

 

[Bridget]

This tells me then that Robinson had acted alone in his request to see the document and ask for copies of the said photographs, otherwise if he was acting on behalf of Ewan and Jeremy, he would have asked them for copies of the photographs surely. 

Only Ewan Smith had the photos and documents so Robinson cannot possibly have acted without his assistance and JBs agreement.

Roger Wilkes must have been around at that time, otherwise why thank him in his book, which Robinson then published.  I think its unfair to say that they did not know each other in 1992 for 3 years later Wilkes book was published and here we have a clear example of Wilkes's publisher asking a famous forensic scientist to provide a copy of a report, or a new report along with photographs from a crime scene....I wonder if by this time, Wilkes and Bamber had fell out? 

Wilkes book was first published in 1994 by Robinson Publishing Ltd. I said they didn't know each other in 1990 when JB first approached Macdonnell (apparently via Boyd Stephens) not 1992. JB ran out of money and then later Wilkes came along wanting to do a book. The publisher agreed to commission the report in return for access to the files. That appears to be exactly what did indeed happen and JB has never denied it to my knowledge.

I am not sure Bridget....something is not right here....I know there is proof that Macdonell had contacted Jeremy and there is proof that Jeremy had his report.....There was no scoop to be had in a newspaper was there, the only scoop was Wilkes'd book...

I have no idea what the newspaper story was that JB sold to the Sunday Sport, the book just said it concerned 'new evidence'. We know that at the time JB had just received MacDonnells first letter in which he advised that his opinion was that some of the forensic evidence given at trial was suspect, perhaps it was something to do with that.

Anyway, it does not alter the fact that the report its self in inconclusive....and should not be used in a proper analysis....

I think we've already covered that

[Bridget]

Incorrect Bridget.  Macdonell also had photographs and, again I refer to the last paragraph in his report that was sent to Nick Robinson and that was, that he could not duplicate the photographs because of an agreement, was this agreement with Ewan and Jeremy? If so, why did Robinson ask for the photos from Macdonell? why would he ask for them if he was working hand in glove with Ewan and Jeremy, why did he not ask for photographs from them? 

In their reports experts will normally produce an annex of the items they refer to within the report, or refer to them by the references originally given. Either way, the norm is that both the provider and the recipient of the report will have access to the items being referred to. MacDonnell is in the rather unusual position of receiving information from one source but having to report to another party who does not have access to the items. He is simply explaining the reason why he hasn't done as he normally would.

1994 I was a year out    Bridget I understand where you are coming from.  It appears that it is likely that originally JB did give Macdonell some photographs etc.  There is no concrete evidence to suggest JB had run out of money between 1990 and 1992 though.  Whether Wilkes and Robinson knew one another in 1990/92 or not,  it suggests that in 1992 they did...for Wilkes thanks Robinson in his book in 1994....Did you also know that Wilkes is married to a Robinson. 

Again, I'm not talking about when Wilkes met Robinson. They could be life long bosom buddies for all I know or care. I'm talking about when Wilkes approached JB with his idea for a book, which is when they figured out that they both wanted something from each other and the deal was agreed. This was sometime after 1990 and explains the two year gap. I think it's probably inaccurate to say that JB ran out of money after the newspaper deal, I think it's more likely that JB realised that Macdonnell would require more money than he had to undertake the work he required.

Can prisoners sell stories to newspapers?

No I don't believe so, hence the need for the go between (we don't know who that was). It was probably a back door deal in which the go between received the whole of the payment, pocketed half and spent the other half on whatever it was JB was after.