Author Topic: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?  (Read 14934 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44434
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #45 on: June 22, 2014, 10:17:PM »

If the silencer did not have blood & paint on, the relatives, in two days had to - 

1: Decide in unison to attempt to frame Jeremy. All be confident in each other that no one will crack under pressure. They all had to agree to commit a serious crime & risk criminal charges. 

2: Find out about back splatter. 

3: Find out if any shots were contact shots which would produce back splatter. 

4: Find out Sheila's blood type. 

5: Find out if the rifle end had blood on it. Meaning a silencer was not used & they could not frame Jeremy. 

6: Get blood which is very close to Sheilas. Assisting in getting a conviction.  

7: Find out how to effectivly & realistically put the correct blood into the silencer baffles. 

8: Get the right equipment to transfer the found blood into the silencer. 

9:  Go back to WHF and effectivly put paint onto the silencer. 
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44434
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #46 on: June 22, 2014, 10:23:PM »
Or the police asked the lab technicians to expertly put incriminating blood into the silencer.

However Jeremy has never accused the police of doing this. Only the relatives of framing him.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #47 on: June 22, 2014, 10:30:PM »
Who 'gave' the relatives the keys ? Jeremy was probably abroad or in London.

Do you agree with Jeremy that the relatives framed him with the silencer.

Jeremy gave AE the keys.

I don´t know. They all have differing versions of how it was found. That is a bit odd. I do think Ann Eton comes across as truthful though.

Online nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17252
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #48 on: June 22, 2014, 10:34:PM »
the relatives had possion of shielas blood stained  clothesthey could of easly put her blood on it.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2014, 12:05:AM by nugnug »

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44434
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #49 on: June 22, 2014, 10:35:PM »
Jeremy gave AE the keys.

I don´t know. They all have differing versions of how it was found. That is a bit odd. I do think Ann Eton comes across as truthful though.

Wilkes's book says it was Stan Jones.

The police probably took charge of WHF after the massacre. Jeremy said he did not want to go inside & was probably not around.

It sounds right that Jones would have the keys on the 11th August. It also sounds right that the police would have finished their work at WHF by the the 11th. It was murder/suicide.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44434
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #50 on: June 22, 2014, 10:38:PM »
the relatives had possion of shielas blood stained they could of easly put her blood on it.

I am afraid you are totally wrong again. The clothes were in a bucket of water. So any alledged blood would probably be useless to them.

They would also have to do the other 8 things. In two days.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44434
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #51 on: June 22, 2014, 10:40:PM »
Jeremy gave AE the keys.

I don´t know. They all have differing versions of how it was found. That is a bit odd. I do think Ann Eton comes across as truthful though.

Ann Eaton truthful. Her WS highlights how & why she believes Jeremy is guilty several times.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2014, 10:41:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Online nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17252
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #52 on: June 22, 2014, 10:41:PM »
no all they had to do was smear blood on it they admited they took it to bits so that explains how they got it deep inside.

ever wonder why they took it to bits.

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #53 on: June 22, 2014, 10:46:PM »
Ann Eaton truthful. Her WS highlights how & why she believes Jeremy is guilty several times.

Then read it again and see that she says that Jeremy wanted her to have the keys. He couldn´t face going into the farm at that stage. Ann Eaton states this.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44434
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #54 on: June 22, 2014, 10:46:PM »
no all they had to do was smear blood on it they admited they took it to bits so that explains how they got it deep inside.

ever wonder why they took it to bits.

I am afraid you are wrong again Numug.

They had to know how blood would correctly enter a silencer due to the result of back splatter. And have the equipment to do this.

Read the 9 points.

Look, this discussion forum have established it must have been the police who framed Jeremy. Telling the lab experts to put incriminating blood into the silencer.

The thread is whether there was enough evidence to get a conviction without the silencer.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44434
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #55 on: June 22, 2014, 10:54:PM »
If there was enough evidence to get a conviction without the silencer then why would the police create false silencer evidence ?

I have just realised this thread may rule out the police.

So if the relatives or the police did not frame Jeremy. How did human/Sheila's/June's/ Neville's blood/DNA get on it ?
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Online nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17252
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #56 on: June 22, 2014, 11:05:PM »
I am afraid you are wrong again Numug.

They had to know how blood would correctly enter a silencer due to the result of back splatter. And have the equipment to do this.

Read the 9 points.

Look, this discussion forum have established it must have been the police who framed Jeremy. Telling the lab experts to put incriminating blood into the silencer.

The thread is whether there was enough evidence to get a conviction without the silencer.

as shooting people they would allready know about that

remember these are peoplw who use guns and silencers all the time.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2014, 11:10:PM by nugnug »

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44434
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #57 on: June 22, 2014, 11:22:PM »
More evidence:

1. Uncontaminated hands and nightdress completely free of any gunfire residue or gun oil.  In fact no contaminants of any sort indicated that Sheila never handled the rifle let alone fired it 25 times in quick succession and reloaded its magazine at least twice.

2. Uncontaminated feet.  Sheila's feet were completely clean and free of blood or any other contaminants evidencing the fact that she had been in bed when the attack took place and thereafter only walked on carpet. She could never have been downstairs in the kitchen that morning.

3. Uncut feet. Nevill Bamber was brutally attacked in the kitchen after having been shot several times in the upstairs bedroom.  During the assault in the kitchen a glass lampshade was smashed leaving glass fragments all over the floor. Had Sheila taken part in that attack the soles of her feet or the soles of her slippers would have been pock marked with glass fragments.  Sheila's feet were unmarked as were the soles of her slippers.

4. Only one fingerprint on the rifle evidencing the fact that Sheila did not wield it or fire it.  Had she shot herself twice as alleged by some her thumbprint would have been on the trigger since she would have to had pushed it.  It wasn't.

5. It is almost certain that blood and DNA belonging to Sheila was found in the sound moderator.  Group 'A' human blood matching Sheila was recovered from the sound moderator in 1985.  Later, advances in forensic science methods led to the recovery of DNA from inside the sound moderator which returned 17 markers out of 20 as a match to Sheila which was substantially better than the maximum coincidence rate of thirteen.  Sheila could not have shot herself with the sound moderator attached nor could she have returned it to the gun cupboard after shooting herself twice in the throat.

6. Sheila was in good spirits, looking forward to the future as a family again. Her doctor and her ex husband stated that she was not capable of hurting her father or her children.

7. Two gunshots to her neck.  Hardly indicative of a suicide especially when the first one would have incapacitated her. It is also noticeable that the gun and magazine were empty when found. Was that another coincidence that Sheila just happened to use the last bullet and had no others on her person?

8. No marks or injuries following a fight.  Sheila was tiny compared to the 6' 2" Nevill.  She could not have fought with him without sustaining some sort of injury or damage to her clothing.

9. Sheila had traces of cannabis in her system rendering her calm and docile, not violent or murderous.

10. Sheila had run out of her procyclidine which counteracts the effects of her medication haloperidol. Without this she would have been very shaky and uncoordinated (as described by various witnesses) and would not have had the control needed to get off 25 shots without missing one never mind trying to reload an awkward magazine in between time.  

11. Sheila was unfamiliar with the rifle or any firearm for that matter and would have been unable to make 25 target shots.

12. If Sheila had shot herself in the throat and had remained conscious, there would have been blood in her mouth and throat with resultant blood spatter everywhere as she struggled to breathe. Her fingers would have touched the burning wound and ended up covered in blood as would have her face and neck.  The blood trails running from this wound would have been smudged yet it was not. There was no secondary blood staining to her face or neck when the police initially found her.  The inside of her hands and her finger tips did not have any blood staining.  Sheila therefore was not conscious after the first shot and most certainly did not fire the second one.

13. Sheila's body was found on the far side of the master bedroom away from everyone. Had she committed suicide as some allege it is more than likely that she would have done so beside her children and not remote from them.

14. Perfectly manicured nails and all intact and unbroken.  If Sheila had used the rifle and loaded it at least once she would have ended up with some nail damage.  There was none.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44434
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #58 on: June 22, 2014, 11:25:PM »
Jeremy has never claimed the police framed him via the silencer.

The relatives couldn't. As this board has shown.

Perhaps the silencer was on the rifle during the massacre. It would make sense for Jeremy.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #59 on: June 23, 2014, 12:06:AM »
the relatives had possion of shielas blood stained they could of easly put her blood on it.

They didn't have wet blood of Sheila's to plant.  Water that had bloody clothes soaking doesn't produce blood to plant in the suppressor.  Even if they somehow obtained a vile of blood they woudl likely simply pour it in or use a dropper neither of which woudl account for the distribution of blood found in the suppressor.  The first 8 baffles had blood land on and dry on those baffles including microscopic drops consistent with high velocity spatter.  Only the lab woudl have the know how to potentially plant blood found in such manner. 
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry