A significant common denominator - Shot into Sheila's neck, dodgy...

[mike tesko]

How strange that bullet PV/20, miraculously changes from a badly fragmented one (7th August 1985), into a whole one, by 20th September 1985...

Strange how one of the two bullet cases (DRH/1 and DRH/2) supposedly found next to Sheila's body in the main bedroom, turns out to be a replacement bullet case, placed amongst the batch of crime scene ammunition, after the original exhibits, (DRH/1, DRH/2, DRH/3 and DRH/4) were allocated alternative exhibit references, once the nature of the investigation changed from SC/688/85 into SC/786/85...

[mike tesko]

How strange that bullet PV/20, miraculously changes from a badly fragmented one (7th August 1985), into a whole one, by 20th September 1985...

Strange how one of the two bullet cases (DRH/1 and DRH/2) supposedly found next to Sheila's body in the main bedroom, turns out to be a replacement bullet case, placed amongst the batch of crime scene ammunition, after the original exhibits, (DRH/1, DRH/2, DRH/3 and DRH/4) were allocated alternative exhibit references, once the nature of the investigation changed from SC/688/85 into SC/786/85...

Linked to this matter, is the fact that police have tried to conceal for the fact that there was obviously a test fire of rifle (18), DRH/15, on or before 12th September 1985, which led to the substitution of the original badly fragmented bullet (PV/20) - which strongly suggests that there was a problem involving one of the two shots sustained by Sheila Caffell, necessitating the switch of bullets (PV/20 the original, with PV/20 the substituted one) in question...

[mike tesko]

If you accept the proposition that substitution of the original badly fragmented bullet (PV/20) occurred, then there has to be a reason why police felt it was necessary to swap it for a whole test fired round, in order to link it to a particular weapon, which in this case, becomes the rifle (18)? Why did substitution of this bullet (PV/20) have to be made? How do we know, how does anybody know that the original badly fragmented bullet PV/20 belonged to the same batch of Eley .22 LR subsonic hollow point ammunition owned by the family - it draws one to suspect that the original badly fragmented bullet (PV/20) may have been manufactured by a different ammunitions manufacturer...

More importantly...

What has happened to the original (PV/20) badly fragmented bullet?

Where is it?

[mike tesko]

What we also now know, is that once the pathologist, Peter Venezis, removed the badly fragmented bullet from Sheila's neck, he handed it (PV/20) to police - in particular, SOC took control and possession of it, together with all the other crime scene ammunition. Establishing at what stage the badly fragmented bullet was swapped over, must have involved co-operation of SOC, and the dodgy ballistic expert, Fletcher, with or without the knowledge of the pathologist (Venezis)...

If there was a conspiracy to tamper with the crime scene ammunition, it must have involved DI 'Ron' Cook (SOC), Malcolm Fletcher (ballistic expert), and Peter Venezis (pathologist)...

[mike tesko]

Part of the plan to substitute the original badly fragmented (PV/20) with a whole test fired bullet, designed to confirm that the same gun had fired both shots which had wounded and killed Sheila Caffell, became more realistic a proposition, once Fletcher introduced the false proposition that test firing of rifle (18) DRH/15, had not taken place until on and after 20th September 1985...

But...

this proposition was, is a significant (provable) lie...

[mike tesko]

Part of the plan to substitute the original badly fragmented (PV/20) with a whole test fired bullet, designed to confirm that the same gun had fired both shots which had wounded and killed Sheila Caffell, became more realistic a proposition, once Fletcher introduced the false proposition that test firing of rifle (18) DRH/15, had not taken place until on and after 20th September 1985...

But...

this proposition was, is a significant (provable) lie...

Linked to this matter, is the fact that 2 of the 29 control bullets are unaccounted for, since only 27 control bullets were test fired by Fletcher on and after 20th September 1985 - so what happened to the two missing control bullets?

[mike tesko]

Fletchers hand written lab' notes, and the contents of General Examination Records relating to individual components of the crime scene ammunition, confirm that there must have been (was) an earlier test fire of rifle (18), DRH/15, silencer and at least two control bullets - one fired through rifle fitted with a silencer, a second one fired through the rifle minus a silencer. What is more, the dates when Fletcher carried out comparison tests using test fired rounds is recorded as having occurred on many occasions at the lab' before 20th September 1985 - it was this discovery which led Ewen Smith to believe that the ballistic expert Fletcher was, is a dodgy character...

[mike tesko]

Fletchers hand written lab' notes, and the contents of General Examination Records relating to individual components of the crime scene ammunition, confirm that there must have been (was) an earlier test fire of rifle (18), DRH/15, silencer and at least two control bullets - one fired through rifle fitted with a silencer, a second one fired through the rifle minus a silencer. What is more, the dates when Fletcher carried out comparison tests using test fired rounds is recorded as having occurred on many occasions at the lab' before 20th September 1985 - it was this discovery which led Ewen Smith to believe that the ballistic expert Fletcher was, is a dodgy character...

Everywhere you turn, in this investigation there are problems relating to the integrity of the crime scene ammunition, and other ballistic material - I will provide, examples:-

[mike tesko]

I have already drawn attention to the significant lie told regarding when the test fire of rifle (18), silencer and control ammunition took place - Fletcher states this did not occur until on and after 20th September 1985, yet information contained in Lab' General Examination Records show that Fletcher himself had carried out comparison tests involving crime scene ammunition, using control bullets on dates prior to 20th September 1985, namely, on the following dates, 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985...

Fletchers own signature appears on the aforementioned Lab' records, all entries dated on dates before 20th September 1985, indicate that the examination of the crime scene ammunition took place at two different times, involving so many bullets on the first unreported occasion, and others on the second reported occasion...

This is connected with the fact that the packaging of some of the crime scene ammunition had been cut open and resealed with cellophane, whilst other ammunition arrived at the lab' in its original packaging...

[mike tesko]

We then fall to consider the significance and relevance of Fletchers cloth pull through evidence (MDF/1), and the batch of 14 bullet cases (MDF/100) currently in storage at Huntingdon Laboratory...

I am informed that the 14 bullet cases (aforementioned) originally had the exhibit mark of MDF/1, but that this was altered and made into MDF/100, by simply adding two 0's, so as to free up the echibit reference MDF/1 to allow Fletcher to say that he conducted a cloth pull through test on 12th September 1985, before any test firing of rifle (18), silencer and control ammunition had taken place. The fact of the matter, is that Fletcher did not perform the cloth pull through test until 20th September 1985 (not a day sooner), but that at some stage he realized that an earlier test fire of rifle (18), silencer and control ammunition had occurred, and he needed to suggest that his cloth pull through test had taken place before that earlier test fire - hence, why the 14 bullet cases (now MDF/100) vacated the exhibit mark of MDF/1...

[mike tesko]

We then fall to consider the significance and relevance of Fletchers cloth pull through evidence (MDF/1), and the batch of 14 bullet cases (MDF/100) currently in storage at Huntingdon Laboratory...

I am informed that the 14 bullet cases (aforementioned) originally had the exhibit mark of MDF/1, but that this was altered and made into MDF/100, by simply adding two 0's, so as to free up the echibit reference MDF/1 to allow Fletcher to say that he conducted a cloth pull through test on 12th September 1985, before any test firing of rifle (18), silencer and control ammunition had taken place. The fact of the matter, is that Fletcher did not perform the cloth pull through test until 20th September 1985 (not a day sooner), but that at some stage he realized that an earlier test fire of rifle (18), silencer and control ammunition had occurred, and he needed to suggest that his cloth pull through test had taken place before that earlier test fire - hence, why the 14 bullet cases (now MDF/100) vacated the exhibit mark of MDF/1...

The fact that this is what took place, is supported by the non existence of any other exhibits MDF/2 to MDF/99, inclusive...

[mike tesko]

The purpose of the cloth pull through evidence (MDF/1) was designed to show that there was no blood present inside the barrel of rifle (18) DRH/15, which when considered against the discovery of blood in the silencer, tended to support the argument that a silencer had been fitted to the barrel of the rifle at the time Sheila was shot...

[mike tesko]

The purpose of the cloth pull through evidence (MDF/1) was designed to show that there was no blood present inside the barrel of rifle (18) DRH/15, which when considered against the discovery of blood in the silencer, tended to support the argument that a silencer had been fitted to the barrel of the rifle at the time Sheila was shot...

If it was her unique blood found inside the silencer...

[mike tesko]

The purpose of the cloth pull through evidence (MDF/1) was designed to show that there was no blood present inside the barrel of rifle (18) DRH/15, which when considered against the discovery of blood in the silencer, tended to support the argument that a silencer had been fitted to the barrel of the rifle at the time Sheila was shot...

However, the timing at which the cloth pull through test was conducted had to be changed from 20th September 1985, to 12th September 1985, otherwise, blood could have been blasted out of the rifles barrel into the silencer, during the earlier test fire...

[mike tesko]

It  has been said, at various times, that there was a large amount of blood found inside the silencer - although true, distinctions have to be made...