The breaking of the rifle stock

[lookout]

 Exactly,Alias. You wouldn't want to be reminded of anything if you'd committed those murders ,,let alone plead for tests to be done if you knew your blood,prints and everything else incriminating were to show up.

[scipio_usmc]

There had been a judicial review in 1996, which granted Jeremy and his team access to the physical evidence - then, POOF, OOPS, it was destroyed minus the silencer.....

Why would Jeremy wish the material examined if he had something to hide? He would never have even mentioned it!

He wanted it examined so he could try to twist any results found to make some bogus argument in his favor.  The only DNA test that coudl possibly matter involved blood the defense and proseuction experts identified as gorup A but that wa snot avialable to test even in 1996. That's what would make or break him.  He had nothing to worry about with respect to other DNA.   

[lookout]

 Because no hard evidence was found to nail Jeremy,,the case was built purely and simply on circumstantial evidence,only. Built on the lies and coroborration of others.

  It must have looked like a coven of witches when they were all making their deliberations !

[scipio_usmc]

Because no hard evidence was found to nail Jeremy,,the case was built purely and simply on circumstantial evidence,only. Built on the lies and coroborration of others.

  It must have looked like a coven of witches when they were all making their deliberations !

Circumstantial evidence can be as powerful as witness testimony if not moreso.

The evidence is that Sheila didn't kill herself so someone else had to have done so.  No evidence she beat anyone with the rifle (as this thread highlights) or shot and killed anyone so her killer had to have been th eone who beat Nevill and thus most likely killed everyone else as well.  Jeremy is the one who framed her so then he would be the actual killer.

Complaining this isn't enough to be reliable is nonsense which is why instead there are allegations that the evidence that proves Sheila couldn't have killed herself was planted but there is nothing at all to prove such claims and it requires someone other than Jeremy moving her body form a seate dposition to flat very soon after she was shot to try to pretend she could have killed herself but there is no evidence of that either.

[lookout]

 Circumstantial proves nothing,,and I'm no expert. A person can be all sorts of things,,but a murderer is stretching it a bit without any evidence at all.

Yes,,Sheila was shot-------the first time,,whether intentional or not, we'll never know,,but I think June delivered that one,,and it's quite possible that it was the second time too as it didn't happen long after that first shot. Both women were in the bedroom at the time,,both sitting,,with the door propping June up because there was blood where she'd leaned against.
Sheila would have slid from a sitting position to where and how she was found.

The rifle would have been on the floor as neither women would have had the strength to have " neatly " placed it on themselves after such a savage attack. You're forgetting that June had a " psychosis " of a religious nature,,but nevertheless it was still a fragile and unpredictable illness.

Jeremy didn't frame anyone,,as he knew nothing about his sisters' illness,,neither did anyone else !

[scipio_usmc]

Circumstantial proves nothing,,and I'm no expert. A person can be all sorts of things,,but a murderer is stretching it a bit without any evidence at all.

Yes,,Sheila was shot-------the first time,,whether intentional or not, we'll never know,,but I think June delivered that one,,and it's quite possible that it was the second time too as it didn't happen long after that first shot. Both women were in the bedroom at the time,,both sitting,,with the door propping June up because there was blood where she'd leaned against.
Sheila would have slid from a sitting position to where and how she was found.

The rifle would have been on the floor as neither women would have had the strength to have " neatly " placed it on themselves after such a savage attack. You're forgetting that June had a " psychosis " of a religious nature,,but nevertheless it was still a fragile and unpredictable illness.

Jeremy didn't frame anyone,,as he knew nothing about his sisters' illness,,neither did anyone else !

The one lacking in any evidence is you.  You have zero evidence that Sheial or June did anything.  You have zero evidence to back up any claims Jeremy made about receiving a phone call.

Worse though not only is there no evidence that Sheila fired a wepaon or beat anyone there is evidence she could not have killed herself.

You choose to believe that such evidence was faked but have no evidence to prove it.  You have valid basis to believe it was faked you simply choose to because you want to believe Jeremy is innocent.  You choosing to beleive such irrationally doesn't make the evidence go away no matter how bad you wish it would, nor does trying to pretend it is not evidence make it go away.

This thread is about the damage caused by the rifle stock to Nevill though.

It is about how the person wielding the rifle would have been splashed with Nevill's blood and also have damaged their hands unless wearing gloves.   No gloves were found at the scene that could have been worn by June or Sheila let alone would they have any reason to wear them.  Nor were their hands injured in any way.  While you want to change th esubject and ignore this rational peopel recognize the significance and your bogus claims that this is not evidence of anything doesn't stop it from being evidence anymore than your unsupported claims about the suppressor evidence being planted stops the suppressor evidence from being reliable.     

[lookout]

 Sod off with your insults. You're not even worth speaking to !

[Bambergate]

Nevill was struck by the butt of the rifle. This image shows how someone would hold a rifle to strike someone in the head with it.  One hand around the narrow part of the stock and the other hand around the foregrip.  If you don't hold it this way the gun is not only hard to control it will fall out of your hands as you hit someone.

As you strike someone what happens to the gun?  The wooden stock is pushed against the metal of the gun where the stock attaches to the rifle.



If the strikes are hard enough and the wood has flaws then the wood could split.

That is what happened a piece of wood split off as the wood was forced into the metal. 

Where would the hand have been of the person wielding the rifle?  Right where the break occurred so the hand would have been cut or damaged in some way unless gloves were being worn.

This shows the missing wood which happens to be right where the metal curves in so the wood in this area would have hit the metal while it was not hitting in the lower region which helps explain why it split and broke in this particualr area and manner. 

http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/_/rsrc/1332405668994/the-rifle/Rifle1.jpg

Yes the semi was in the kitchen when they went in and the piece was still on the floor later it got picked up as it gave away where the semi was found.
The semi was the only gun how Shelia shot herself twice with out raising suspicion something funny went on

[scipio_usmc]

Yes the semi was in the kitchen when they went in and the piece was still on the floor later it got picked up as it gave away where the semi was found.
The semi was the only gun how Shelia shot herself twice with out raising suspicion something funny went on

There is no evidence at all the the rifle was in the kitchen, no witnesses place it there, none saw it through the window or upon entering.  Had they seen the rifle there it would have been a giant red flag, only the piece of broken stock had been found in the kitchen.

If the gun had been found in the kitchen that would be extreme evidence that Sheila didn't kill herself.  There is no way she could have walked the gun downstairs after she was dead.  If this had been the case there would be no need at all for police to plany any evidence as many allege occurred.

But they didn't find it there, all police statements say it was found in the bedroom on top of Sheila.

 

[lookout]

 What about the rifle that's clearly seen behind the cupboard door ? Where did that come from,where did it end up,and whose was it ?

[scipio_usmc]

What about the rifle that's clearly seen behind the cupboard door ? Where did that come from,where did it end up,and whose was it ?

It was taken months later to prove it fit in the closet contrary to what Jeremy told a number of people including his relatives.

[lookout]

 Hearsay-----------again if it involves the relatives.

[scipio_usmc]

Hearsay-----------again if it involves the relatives.

Many of their claims are excluded from court rules as hearsay and we ar enot in court so hearsay rules don't apply at all in assessing his guilt.

While you have decided their claims are not reliable you do so only because you are biased beyond all reason which is the same reason you insist the blood evidence was planted without a shred of evidence at all.

I choose to evaluate evidence based on standard indices of liabilty not bias.  That disconnect is why you and so many here have a vastly different view of the case than the public and judges.



 

[grahameb]

He wanted it examined so he could try to twist any results found to make some bogus argument in his favor.  The only DNA test that coudl possibly matter involved blood the defense and proseuction experts identified as gorup A but that wa snot avialable to test even in 1996. That's what would make or break him.  He had nothing to worry about with respect to other DNA.

With all due respect what you said would have strengthened Jeremy's argument. It would make no sense whatsoever for a guilty man who was supposed to know he used the silencer and that there was blood inside it that could be tested to want any kind of investigation that would confirm his guilt. What you are saying is just more verbal diarrhea. You need to eat more charcoal.

[grahameb]

Circumstantial evidence can be as powerful as witness testimony if not moreso.

The evidence is that Sheila didn't kill herself so someone else had to have done so.  No evidence she beat anyone with the rifle (as this thread highlights) or shot and killed anyone so her killer had to have been th eone who beat Nevill and thus most likely killed everyone else as well.  Jeremy is the one who framed her so then he would be the actual killer.

Complaining this isn't enough to be reliable is nonsense which is why instead there are allegations that the evidence that proves Sheila couldn't have killed herself was planted but there is nothing at all to prove such claims and it requires someone other than Jeremy moving her body form a seate dposition to flat very soon after she was shot to try to pretend she could have killed herself but there is no evidence of that either.

Again with all due respect the problem with circumstantial evidence is that it can often be twisted. The problem of course with those prosecution witnesses was that most of them had an interest in seeing the accused convicted of the crime. They would naturally corroberate each others words. And I suggest that that is just what they did. JM had a bone to pick with Jeremy for his unfaithfulness and the extended family were in danger of losing everything if he was found not guilty. I wonder what David Boutflour meant when he said to his sister, "I have something up my sleeve"?
The whole family knew how to get in and out of WHF. They had plenty of opportunity (not saying they did of course) to get into the house the night before they were given the keys and to plants anything they wanted. Next day, "Ooh look. This MUST be the silencer?" You mean there were no ther silencers on the property? With blood conveniently dripping out of it like jam. Too convenient.