Author Topic: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005  (Read 2904 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Caroline R

  • Guest
Makes for interesting reading (hope the attachment works!!)
« Last Edit: August 21, 2013, 08:03:PM by Caroline »

Caroline R

  • Guest
Re: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005
« Reply #1 on: August 21, 2013, 07:58:PM »
Makes for interesting reading (downloadable)
« Last Edit: August 21, 2013, 08:03:PM by Caroline »

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005
« Reply #2 on: August 21, 2013, 08:10:PM »
Caroline thanks for that I found the Commons Debate very interesting and now I am on broadband I can download it the same day ;D ;D ;D ;D

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33772
Re: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005
« Reply #3 on: August 21, 2013, 08:14:PM »
Fascinating stuff, Caroline.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005
« Reply #4 on: August 21, 2013, 08:39:PM »
Yes,,it was very good.I liked the bit where Essex police had inadvertantly slipped some paperwork in that wasn't requested by Jeremy,,but favoursome all the same.
How much can Jeremy actually do as regards putting in a complaint.? I know he's in a position to do so,,but are there any restrictions?

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005
« Reply #5 on: August 21, 2013, 08:47:PM »
lookout  EP could do with slipping a few more items Jeremy's way give him some help he has paid too much already for a crime he did not commit are they not satisfied with that. Certain people know what they have done time has come to put matters right.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005
« Reply #6 on: August 21, 2013, 09:00:PM »
lookout  EP could do with slipping a few more items Jeremy's way give him some help he has paid too much already for a crime he did not commit are they not satisfied with that. Certain people know what they have done time has come to put matters right.




Yes,,indeed Susan. I believe the PACE code of conduct was out during when the murders took place,,but I didn't see a mention of it,nor was it put into place at the time. Jeremy never stood a chance,,as there were no rights for him at his time of arrest and conviction.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21091
Re: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005
« Reply #7 on: August 31, 2013, 05:31:PM »
I don't think this thread got quite as much attention as it deserved so I'm resurrecting it in the hope of eliciting a few more responses rather than dwell on the "Sheila's nails and knickers thread"..

Here are some points worthy of discussion:

1) .22 ammunition produces bullet wounds of 1/4 inch diameter,yet two victims had additionally 1/2 inch bullet wounds(Nevill and June).

2)All the wounds inflicted on the five victims had been fired from the .22 anschutz lying on Sheila's body.

3)(Why did Jeremy rush to have his parents' bodies cremated?)

4)Who took the mysterious photograph showing fresh blood flowing from Sheila's neck? Andrew Hunter has an undisclosed source saying that photograph could have been taken at 8am,whereas the SOCOs did not start taking photographs until 10:00am.The photographs of Sheila at 10:00am onwards show a darker colour of blood.

5)It was impossible to tell whether any of the 25 bullets had been fired through a silencer.

6)Andrew Hunter mentions a silencer mark on Sheila identified from photographs by two gun enthusiasts in Jeremy Bamber's solicitor's office in 2003. He also puts forward the scenario that the scratch marks on the mantlepiece were made whilst Sheila and Nevill were struggling for control of he gun. What Andrew Hunter does not explain is why would Sheila bother to go to the gun cupboard in the first place and affix a silencer to the rifle if she is apparently in a state of psychosis.

7)The silencer cannot be matched to the one Nevill bought in 1984. That one was old stock of 15 baffles plates,whereas the silencer with the flake of Sheila's blood inside had 17.

8)There were no fingerprints on the silencer.[/i]

9)There were no deposits of lead on the hand swabs taken from Sheila's hands(DRH/44).The swabs were rejected the first time(DRH/33) because they had arrived with firearms from a different investigation,but in this case one might have expected to find lead deposits from contamination,yet none was found.[/i]

10)The rifle with the silencer attached could not have made the burn marks to Nevill's back,as the diameter of the Parker Hale silencer is 1 inch,whereas Ralph's marks were 1/2 inch,with a smaller mark inside of 1/4 inch.



« Last Edit: August 31, 2013, 05:40:PM by Steve_uk »

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33772
Re: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005
« Reply #8 on: August 31, 2013, 05:37:PM »
I don't think this thread got quite as much attention as it deserved so I'm resurrecting it in the hope of eliciting a few more responses rather than dwell on the "Sheila's nails and knickers thread"..

Here are some points worthy of discussion:

1) .22 ammunition produces bullet wounds of 1/4 inch diameter,yet two victims had additionally 1/2 inch bullet wounds(Nevill and June).

2)All the wounds inflicted on the five victims had been fired from the .22 anschutz lying on Sheila's body.

3)(Why did Jeremy rush to have his parents' bodies cremated?

4)Who took the mysterious photograph showing fresh blood flowing from Sheila's neck? Andrew Hunter has an undisclosed source saying that photograph could have been taken at 8am,whereas the SOCOs did not start taking photographs until 10:00am.The photographs of Sheila at 10:00am onwards show a darker colour of blood.

5)It was impossible to tell whether any of the 25 bullets had been fired through a silencer.

6)Andrew Hunter mentions a silencer mark on Sheila identified from photographs by two gun enthusiasts in Jeremy Bamber's solicitor's office in 2003. He also puts forward the scenario that the scratch marks on the mantlepiece were made whilst Sheila and Nevill were struggling for control of he gun. What Andrew Hunter does not explain is why would Sheila bother to go to the gun cupboard in the first place and affix a silencer to the rifle if she is apparently in a state of psychosis.

7)The silencer cannot be matched to the one Nevill bought in 1984. That one was old stock of 15 baffles plates,whereas the silencer with the flake of Sheila's blood inside had 17.

8)There were no fingerprints on the silencer.

9)There were no deposits of lead on the hand swabs taken from Sheila's hands(DRH/44).The swabs were rejected the first time(DRH/33) because they had arrived with firearms from a different investigation,but in this case one might have expected to find lead deposits from contamination,yet none was found.

10)The rifle with the silencer attached could not have made the burn marks to Nevill's back,as the diameter of the Parker Hale silencer is 1 inch,whereas Ralph's marks were 1/2 inch,with a smaller mark inside of 1/4 inch.

10)



AWWWW Steve, that sounds as if you're feeling all alone in the "House of Commons Debate." I'll join you when I've had a glass of wine :)

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005
« Reply #9 on: August 31, 2013, 05:39:PM »
steve would have thought AE's finger prints would be found on the silencer along with many others.  You appear to be very selective in what you believe broaden your horizons and look at both sides of the coin. Not Sheila's blood in the silencer scratch marks not found on mantel shelf until much later were not evident on the night of the murders.  The marks on Ralph Bamber's back were caused by a rifle without a silencer attached.  Keep up steve ;D Did Jeremy rush to have his parents bodies cremated why did EP destroy so much evidence if they had nothing to hide I could go on and on but I am busy just now ;D

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21091
Re: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005
« Reply #10 on: August 31, 2013, 05:42:PM »
steve would have thought AE's finger prints would be found on the silencer along with many others.  You appear to be very selective in what you believe broaden your horizons and look at both sides of the coin. Not Sheila's blood in the silencer scratch marks not found on mantel shelf until much later were not evident on the night of the murders.  The marks on Ralph Bamber's back were caused by a rifle without a silencer attached.  Keep up steve ;D Did Jeremy rush to have his parents bodies cremated why did EP destroy so much evidence if they had nothing to hide I could go on and on but I am busy just now ;D
That's okay susan. I'll continue with re-reading Andrew Hunter's statements and there may be more to discuss..

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005
« Reply #11 on: August 31, 2013, 05:44:PM »
steve look forward to that as I have not read the statements.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21091
Re: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005
« Reply #12 on: August 31, 2013, 05:54:PM »
11) There were five bullets in the murder weapon with double-line markings,which Jeremy(or Sheila if you insist) topped up with the Eley ammunition he had spilled out onto the kitchen worktop. This Eley ammunition had single markings. June had been shot five times in bed in rapid succession,which suggests either she was the original target of the killings or she just happened to be first in the line of fire. More interesting is what happened after the initial discharge of the five Eley ammunition,which though loaded last would have been discharged first:

Two of the double-lined bullets were fired in the master bedroom,with possibly Nevill as a target. Two were found in the twins room suggesting one each to the head of Nicholas and Daniel,and one found in the kitchen,suggesting to my mind that Jeremy shot Nevill for a third time in the kitchen area. He then reloaded from the kitchen area,finished off Nevill,proceeded back upstairs to exterminate June,then made it look as if the twins had been killed in a frenzy by pumping an additional six bullets into them,and doing the same with Nevill when he was already near death.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21091
Re: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005
« Reply #13 on: August 31, 2013, 06:06:PM »
12) Sheila's suicide note or Jeremy's tricks?

PLEASE 3
PLEASE 3
PLEASE 3
PLEASE 3
PLEASE 3

NMD
GD
BPLU
GJ
CF

Strange with Jeremy's penchant for capital letters. Andrew Hunter suggests Sheila checked the five bullets in the rifle and meant to use one further magazine,thus totalling 3x5 bullets.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21091
Re: House of Commons Debate - Andrew Hunter/Fiona Mactaggart 2005
« Reply #14 on: August 31, 2013, 06:10:PM »
13) Sheila's diaries have been withheld under Pii. Roger Wilkes suggests there's an entry made on the Tuesday night saying:"I didn't mean to be horrible to Jeremy".