The last ultimate test of gun, to prove sound moderator was not used in shooting

[scipio_usmc]

Special branch have yet to officially deny that the Bamber clan were not subject of one of thier protection programs. They are in the business of protecting people, groups of people, and families like the Bambers. They have yet to deny that the family were being monitored at the time of the shootings, or to say yeh or no that Ralph made communications to the protection officers as the tragedy was unfolding, or that someone at the scene activated the attack alarm at around 3.29am that was fitted at the farmhouse as part of the package that came with the measures applied by Soecial Branch...

You seem to be engaging again in your specialty which is to say he other side has to disprove your allegations as opposed to you proving them.

At any rate, the phone company says the only call that was made from the house the night of the murders was to Goldhanger so I fail to see how Nevill could possibly have called anyone else. 

[buddy]

well the phone company must be wrong, because June phoned her sister that night.

[Jane]

well the phone company must be wrong, because June phoned her sister that night.

Buddy, I could be wrong, but it's my understanding that Pam phoned June. It was a late call, POSSIBLY because Pam knew what time June usually got back from her church meeting. I don't recall that I ever knew the reason the call was made but during it June conveyed that she was concerned about Sheila and I think a meeting was arranged.

[wilf]

You seem to be engaging again in your specialty which is to say he other side has to disprove your allegations as opposed to you proving them.

At any rate, the phone company says the only call that was made from the house the night of the murders was to Goldhanger so I fail to see how Nevill could possibly have called anyone else.

BT didnt have itemised bills so how do they know? the call counter was electro mechanical. I forgot the senior officers name but I'm sure he is on record as saying this fact made checking impossible.
someone help me out here sure I've read it but cant think where
the callers line would remain open untill the handset was replaced. the receivers line would be blocked untill their handset was replaced and two units had been used. dont know the exact time period at that time of night. I presume that the poilce switchboard equpment being commercial and mulit line that took the call from WHF would not be subject to this working and would automatically reconnect to a free line when they ended the call thus freeing an essential line. the exchange operator could switch into the open WHF line because the  line was open the call counter would not be running after the two units as the receiver was disconnected
I recall there was some arguement over the details between telecom experts as it appeared to be a mix and match between exchanges system X and such (remember the hype about system X?)
I doubt that after thirty years we will ever know the fine details unless a line engineer can recall. digital quickly changed all this and dont forget GPO had become BT and deregulation had thrown all manner of dodgy gismos onto the market red triangle green circle remember?

[buddy]

Yes you could be right April. Pam said that Sheila seemed detached. Fact is that a call from Goldhanger was made supporting the account made by Jerremy

[lookout]

 When I can get hold of my bro.,he worked on System X and would know all the answers.

[scipio_usmc]

Ok then chummy, but at least give me the opportunity to point out what needs to be done with the rifle. As I say, the test being proposed will establush beyond doubt that there was no sound moderator fitted to the barrell of the anshuzt rifle that fired the fatal shot under the chin which sent the fatal bullet up through the voud of her mouth into her brain. After which you can have your say based on the information which I have not yet provided. What is now known, is that the rifle in question only fired one of tge two bullets shot into her neck region. The one that was fired sideways across her throat was fired by a different gun...

Sorry but you have a poor track record with respect to understanding the mechanics of firearms and markings left on bullets/shell casings. 

The way to determine whether bullets were fired from a gun or not is to match the lands and grooves.  Some bullets expand or are damaged too great for there to be enough lands and grooves to try to match up. 

There is no marking left on a bullet by a suppressor such as the one in question.  Thus there is no way to determine whether a suppressor was used in the firing of any particular bullet by inspecting it.

If a bullet has sufficient numbers of lands and grooves it can be matched to a particular gun model.  If not then it can neither be matched nor ruled out as having been fired from a particular gun.  These are called the class characteristics.  In addition there are imperfections unique to a singular weapon that can leave marks unique only to that weapon.  These are called accidental or individual characteristics. 

A bullet where the class characteristics of the weapon that fired it are unable to be discerned can neither matched nor ruled out as having been fired by a particular model of weapon that uses such caliber of ammunition.  A bullet that fails to exhibit individual characterists can neither be matched to a specific gun nor rulled out as having been fired by that specific gun. If matched to a specific gun through individual characteristics then it is ruled out as having been fired by any other gun.

The spent shell casings can also be tied to having been fired by a specific gun. The firing pin impression, extraction marks, and breech marks will be peculiar to a specific weapon. Thus they can often be matched as having been fired by a particular weapon. 

Unless the bullets and casings are still in existence or blowups made by examining them under a microscope still exist there is little hope of even attempting to prove a different gun was used.

The only way to prove a different gun was used would be to look at the bullet, find striae (lands and grooves), measure the striae and determine that such doesn't match the class characteristics of the murder weapon. 

This would not reveal whether a suppressor were attached or not to the weapon that fired it, it merely would speak to whether the gun itself (with or without the sound suppressor) could have fired the bullet in question.

PV/19 and PV/20 were the bullets removed from Sheila.  They were .22 rounds.  They were intact enough to determine this for certain.  The 25 shell casings were all .22 Eley.

The police had no .22 rimfire weapons so they had no means to fire any of these rounds.  That alone means your suggestions are likely to go no where fast let alone more analysis of the lands and grooves to try to determine they were fired by a different make of .22 rifle than the murder weapon. 

[scipio_usmc]

BT didnt have itemised bills so how do they know? the call counter was electro mechanical. I forgot the senior officers name but I'm sure he is on record as saying this fact made checking impossible.
someone help me out here sure I've read it but cant think where
the callers line would remain open untill the handset was replaced. the receivers line would be blocked untill their handset was replaced and two units had been used. dont know the exact time period at that time of night. I presume that the poilce switchboard equpment being commercial and mulit line that took the call from WHF would not be subject to this working and would automatically reconnect to a free line when they ended the call thus freeing an essential line. the exchange operator could switch into the open WHF line because the  line was open the call counter would not be running after the two units as the receiver was disconnected
I recall there was some arguement over the details between telecom experts as it appeared to be a mix and match between exchanges system X and such (remember the hype about system X?)
I doubt that after thirty years we will ever know the fine details unless a line engineer can recall. digital quickly changed all this and dont forget GPO had become BT and deregulation had thrown all manner of dodgy gismos onto the market red triangle green circle remember?

They didn't issue itemized billing statements but still coudl ascertain calls being made. The testified that the only call made the morning of the murders which is August 7 (not August 6)- was a call to Goldhanger, that such call was ended by the pary at Goldhanger hanging up and that it was never hung up at WHF.

[wilf]

They didn't issue itemized billing statements but still coudl ascertain calls being made. The testified that the only call made the morning of the murders which is August 7 (not August 6)- was a call to Goldhanger, that such call was ended by the pary at Goldhanger hanging up and that it was never hung up at WHF.

where did this come from?

[scipio_usmc]

where did this come from?

Trial testimony from a phone telephone company agent.  In addiiton to testifying about the singular call made and the phone then remaining off the hook he discussed the implications such had on Goldhernger's phone.  It would take 1-2 minutes of being hung up continuously for the phone at Goldhanger to clear and be able to make a call from there.

This was used to demonstrate Jeremy could not have immeditely dialed anywhere after hanging up and would have to have waited 1-2 minutes to call WHF, Julie or even the police. 

 

[grahameb]

They didn't issue itemized billing statements but still coudl ascertain calls being made. The testified that the only call made the morning of the murders which is August 7 (not August 6)- was a call to Goldhanger, that such call was ended by the pary at Goldhanger hanging up and that it was never hung up at WHF.

So there was a call to Jeremy the morning of the murders then?

[lookout]

 Get out of that one,Scipio. Shot yourself in the foot.

[wilf]

Trial testimony from a phone telephone company agent.  In addiiton to testifying about the singular call made and the phone then remaining off the hook he discussed the implications such had on Goldhernger's phone.  It would take 1-2 minutes of being hung up continuously for the phone at Goldhanger to clear and be able to make a call from there.

This was used to demonstrate Jeremy could not have immeditely dialed anywhere after hanging up and would have to have waited 1-2 minutes to call WHF, Julie or even the police.

not if WHF phone had disconnected this would have cleared the line  if Ralph had called the police after calling Jeremy the Goldhanger line would be clear.
as I said there was some arguement over the technicalities. I also dont know how long the ringing tone would work WHF to Goldhanger without answer.(technical advice please anybody) you maintain the answer machine was not connected and I have heard no mention of neighbours asking about hearing a continuous phone ringing on a silent night with no doubt open windows. this would be a source of nusance to near neighbours (it has been to me) particularly if it was ringing all the time it took to cycle between the two locations.

[scipio_usmc]

not if WHF phone had disconnected this would have cleared the line  if Ralph had called the police after calling Jeremy the Goldhanger line would be clear.
as I said there was some arguement over the technicalities. I also dont know how long the ringing tone would work WHF to Goldhanger without answer.(technical advice please anybody) you maintain the answer machine was not connected and I have heard no mention of neighbours asking about hearing a continuous phone ringing on a silent night with no doubt open windows. this would be a source of nusance to near neighbours (it has been to me) particularly if it was ringing all the time it took to cycle between the two locations.

The phone at WHF was left off the hook and never hung up and therefore made no calls.

If the phone had been hung up at the same time that the phone at Goldhanger wa shung up then at that point both lines woudl have been clear and each could have mad e acall without having to wait 1-2 minutes for the line to clear.

The phone company would have had a record of the call just like a record of the call to Goldhanger if another call was made no call was made according to them after the call to Jeremy.

Nor do any police or civilians police personnel who answer phones claim to have received a call. 

If you have nobody to testify they received a call from Nevill and no evidence from the phone company to prove a call was made to the police then how do you prove it?

At least the telephone company saying there is a record would prove someone called police though not who dialed. But this is out the window and there are no police who say they received any call from anyone at WHF let alone Nevill.

The burden of proving the claim rests with the person making the claim.  There are no ways left to prove the claim. Both avenues of proof are closed.

[mike tesko]

We have got to the stage, where everyone is in agreement that there was a complete absence of any blood in at least 9 baffle plates of the silencer...

This "gap", is very important and no matter what anybody tries to say, or insinuate, no blood at all made it beyond the 6/8th internal baffle plate of the suppressor...