Shaw wasn't at the scene. If his theory is incorrect, his supposedly "evidence-based" analysis was severely flawed and hence needs to be redone... and all the rest of his arguments would need to be checked as well.
Hi Reader,
David Shaw never claimed to have been present at the scene (although it's possible he might have been). I was under the impression that Shaw was a close associate of the officers who did attend the incident at the material time, and that he visited the scene at some stage prior to his manuscript being written up, in the company of police officers who were involved in the actual operation on the day in question (7th August 1985). I can only speculate as to the identity of the police officer that Shaw attended the scene with, but at a guess I would say that it could have been former DCS 'Mick' Ainsley, who was head of the second part of the investigation (SC/786/85), when it changed into a full scale murder inquiry in September 1985 - Ainsley, upon retiring from police service was given a job as a security advisor at Osea Road caravan park by the relatives, and so this makes me think that Shaw was a close associate or friend of his, and that he got most of the information from him, as well as other officers, he had spoken to...
Because Shaw is adamant that police did not shoot anybody at all during the siege and afters, when entry was gained, or 'FAMILIARS' were undertaken, falls short of the truth, since I know with 100% certainty that the second shot under Sheila's chin, the one which effectively killed her, was inflicted after the police surgeon, Dr Craig pronounced her as being dead at the scene at 8.44am. I know this because I have seen the photographs of Sheila on the bed at the time she only has one bullet hole in her neck. I have seen what Dr Craig saw when he viewed her body on the far side of the bed, with (as he said) what appears to be a solitary bullet wound to her throat. Those photographs do not show any of the blood running or leaking or pouring from that solitary bullet wound in her throat at that stage, so I know without having to rely upon Shaw or anybody else for that matter, that police did shoot and kill Sheila in the bedroom after that photograph of her on the bed was taken. I also know without being prompted by anyone else that SOCO have lied about the timing when key photographs at the scene that morning were taken, I do not need to be told by anyone that SOC took control of the crime scene at 10 O'clock that morning, despite one or more SOCO being present at the scene from as early as 8.30am, with Cook and the others arriving at 9.20am - so, if you believe that SOCO stood around idly outside whf until 10 O'clock, whilst everybody and everyone entered the crime scene disturbing the bodies and the evidence, or whatever, surely that couldn't have happened, police are lying, and have lied about this / that...
Back to Shaws account, I think there are many truths in what he says, perhaps he even believes what he has written about, maybe not, but I for one value what he has had the courage to draw everyone's attention to. I do not think he needs to re-write any part of his manuscript, it is an historical account of the investigation, from his vantage point, based upon what he has been told by police officers, or a police officer who was in the know, which has helped to uncover further truths which perhaps Shaw had no knowledge of, or if he did, it begs the question, why has he deliberately chosen to mislead everybody into thinking police had not fired any shots after entering the premises, when they did or had done...
I agree with you that everything Shaw has written about needs to be rechecked, and for my part that is precisely what I have been trying to do, as I am sure others have been doing...
Blood which is shown to be leaking from the corners of Sheila's mouth, and nostrils, into her eye socket occurred once the fatal shot under the chin (PV/19) had been inflicted, she was not stood up or leaning backwards at the time that fatal shot was discharged under her chin into her brain, she was laid down, and after the police shot her, they moved her body, lifted and twisted it, causing the blood to flow in the directions it has done. If you look closely at the initial bullet wound (with the feint so called vertical dried bloodstain), the blood from that first wound does not flow in the same directions as the blood from the second wound. This indicates that there was a considerable delay, between the first and second shots having been discharged into her neck / throat / under her chin...
Police shot and killed Sheila, police stage managed her body in time for PC Bird to photograph her body on the bedroom floor with two bullet holes in her throat, and the rifle from the bedroom window atop her body, with her arms and hands arranged conveniently upon and around the gun, to promote the idea that she had taken her own life after whatever else she may have been responsible for doing beforehand...
One thing I know with 100% certainty, is that Sheila may have intended to take her own life, but she didn't actually do it, and Jeremy will find it difficult to persuade anybody that Sheila committed suicide, if she didn't. However, I do feel that it will be possible for him to discredit the silencer evidence, which was a key exhibit in the prosecutions case brought against him...
Hope this helps...
