Whose Bloodied right hand palm print was left on pages of bible?

[maggie]

Hello Caroline   very well done you clever girl the things you turn up are amazing and you are a tremendous asset to this forum xx

I agree Susie.  The times I've looked at that blood stain and have never had the slightest idea it may have been a palm print.  Great piece of deduction Caroline,  think we will have to name you star of the week yet again. ...

[Caroline R]

I agree Susie.  The times I've looked at that blood stain and have never had the slightest idea it may have been a palm print.  Great piece of deduction Caroline,  think we will have to name you star of the week yet again. ...

Thanks Maggie but ever the pessimist I'm waiting for the spanner!! 

[maggie]

Thanks Maggie but ever the pessimist I'm waiting for the spanner!! 

I do understand Caroline, there always seems to be one of those in this case.  Fingers crossed, for once there's no brick wall. 

[susan]

Caroline  you are far too kind but I like you

[lookout]

Thanks Maggie but ever the pessimist I'm waiting for the spanner!! 

No spanner coming forthwith with this little gem,Caroline.
Saying that,,someone's bound to mention it not being DNA tested----------------well neither was the blood in the silencer. Yes,,the same grouping,,but not peculiar to one person.

[susan]

Hello lookout  well said.  We shall await and see what is thrown at the posts

[Roch]

hi Caroline
How can it be established that its Sheila's bloody palm print ?
Jim

If it is a palm print and it's shown to be June of Neville's, it means nothing.

Just my take on things... but I cant envisage grabbing hold of a bible in such a manner with a bloodied palm, as being consistent with Nevill's suspected actions, regardless of which side of the fence we're on.  I can envisage the possibility of June clutching a bible with a bloodied palm, if at some point she was left wounded before being killed. 

However, I cannot see why a palm print from June would not be mentioned as part of the case? Surely it would inevitably form part of the police investigation?  That is, if they genuinely attempted to reconstruct what had taken place during the incident. 

[curiousessex]

Here is what I'm thinking..

If it is a palm print and it could be shown to be Sheila's, it damages the police evidence with regards the cleanliness of her hands and as a knock on effect, the hand swab evidence.

If it is a palm print and it's shown to be JBs, he's toast.

If it is a palm print and it's shown to be June of Neville's, it means nothing.

If it is a palm print you'd better hope its Sheila's!

If an alleged right hand palm print is to be found on an overturned bible and alleged bloodied finger marks from a right hand are to be found on Sheila's nightdress......

The murder weapon was allegedly reloaded from bullets that had been spilled out from a box of ammunition. The box of ammunition was in the kitchen by the telephone. Jeremy admits to being responsible for the box of ammunition being in the kitchen. Mike has previously identified three bloodied finger marks located on the edge of the kitchen surfaces which are close to the spilled bullets and telephone.

Why are there no bloodied right hand palm or finger marks to be found on the spent cartridges or a murder weapon which Sheila had allegedly used to shoot five members of her own family?

[Caroline R]

If an alleged right hand palm print is to be found on an overturned bible and alleged bloodied finger marks from a right hand are to be found on Sheila's nightdress......

The murder weapon was allegedly reloaded from bullets that had been spilled out from a box of ammunition. The box of ammunition was in the kitchen by the telephone. Jeremy admits to being responsible for the box of ammunition being in the kitchen. Mike has previously identified three bloodied finger marks located on the edge of the kitchen surfaces which are close to the spilled bullets and telephone.

Why are there no bloodied right hand palm or finger marks to be found on the spent cartridges or a murder weapon which Sheila had allegedly used to shoot five members of her own family?

If her fingers were bloodied we don't know at what point they became that way!!

[Roch]

If an alleged right hand palm print is to be found on an overturned bible and alleged bloodied finger marks from a right hand are to be found on Sheila's nightdress......

The murder weapon was allegedly reloaded from bullets that had been spilled out from a box of ammunition. The box of ammunition was in the kitchen by the telephone. Jeremy admits to being responsible for the box of ammunition being in the kitchen. Mike has previously identified three bloodied finger marks located on the edge of the kitchen surfaces which are close to the spilled bullets and telephone.

Why are there no bloodied right hand palm or finger marks to be found on the spent cartridges or a murder weapon which Sheila had allegedly used to shoot five members of her own family?

Re cartidges...  There probably was.  And they were subsequently substituted, as part of the ballistics work carried out behind the scenes.  Hunter's manuscript goes in to great detail about the ballistics, worth a read.  As for the weapon, don't know.  I've seen arguments that it's the wrong weapon but legally both sides have previously agreed it was the actual weapon that carried out the shootings.

[maggie]

If her fingers were bloodied we don't know at what point they became that way!!

Which is exactly what I was going to say before I saw your post Caroline.  There is no reason to believe that the fingerprints on the worktop belonged to the same hand which caused the bloody palm print on the bible or on Sheila's nightdress.  We are told by the police etc. that Sheila's hands were clean butthis surely raises a question mark over that assertion?

[Caroline R]

Which is exactly what I was going to say before I saw your post Caroline.  There is no reason to believe that the fingerprints on the worktop belonged to the same hand which caused the bloody palm print on the bible or on Sheila's nightdress.  We are told by the police etc. that Sheila's hands were clean butthis surely raises a question mark over that assertion?

I agree 100% Maggie. The finger prints on the nightdress alone must be Sheila's and as such, she must have had blood on at least one of her hands!!

[lookout]

I agree 100% Maggie. The finger prints on the nightdress alone must be Sheila's and as such, she must have had blood on at least one of her hands!!

The coroner had pointed out that Sheila had blood on " one of her hands ". Didn't say which one though.

[Bridget]

The coroner had pointed out that Sheila had blood on " one of her hands ". Didn't say which one though.

If you mean Vanezis he didn't mention blood on either of her hands, in fact he says that neither the palms or the fingers were contaminated with blood. He stated that the blood on the nightie appeared to have transferred from her right wrist.

[lookout]

If you mean Vanezis he didn't mention blood on either of her hands, in fact he says that neither the palms or the fingers were contaminated with blood. He stated that the blood on the nightie appeared to have transferred from her right wrist.

In Scott Lomax's Trial and Error,,he states that Vanezis had said that there was blood on her hand/s,,to which the defence had only recently discovered,,so such information wasn't presented at the trial.
Therefore the blood on Sheilas' hand/s explains the finger-marks on the bible.