Author Topic: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?  (Read 14896 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #180 on: June 27, 2014, 01:54:AM »
So there are hypocrites all around. Guilters claim that Sheila would have slept through 23 shots inside the house, but the police would have heard two contact shots outside.

No guilters say she COULD have slept through the shots fired with a moderator because some people have in fact slept through shots fired in next door rooms even when fired without a moderator and that police would definitely hear 2 shots fired without a moderator when there is no background noise because it is early and they were all intently watching and listening to the house for movement and signs of life.  There is nothing hypocritical or contradictory at all. 
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #181 on: June 27, 2014, 10:51:AM »
 Silencer be buggered.It was a straightforward revenge attack between two women who hated each other like poison ! A very violent domestic. Things got slightly overheated.

Sheila was being forced into a situation by a strong suggestion of going away to convalesce in some place at the seaside. June was arrangeing foster care for the boys when they returned from their holiday with their father and his girlfriend ( another bone of contention with Sheila )

I can't see anything more simple and straightforward as this,,except that greed and jealousy happened to rear its ugly head to turn the case completely on its head and cause utter mayhem all round.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #182 on: June 27, 2014, 11:16:AM »
No guilters say she COULD have slept through the shots fired with a moderator because some people have in fact slept through shots fired in next door rooms even when fired without a moderator and that police would definitely hear 2 shots fired without a moderator when there is no background noise because it is early and they were all intently watching and listening to the house for movement and signs of life.  There is nothing hypocritical or contradictory at all.
A hypocrite is someone who is pretending to be something they are not.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #183 on: June 27, 2014, 11:48:AM »
A hypocrite is someone who is pretending to be something they are not.








Fits the bill nicely !!

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #184 on: June 27, 2014, 09:05:PM »
A hypocrite is someone who is pretending to be something they are not.

That depends on which dictionary you consult.  Some limit it to people who claim to have virtues they do not actually possess or not practicing what they preach.  Others are more expansive and define it as those who make hypocritical claims. I am using it in the latter sense.

Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #185 on: June 27, 2014, 11:11:PM »
That depends on which dictionary you consult.  Some limit it to people who claim to have virtues they do not actually possess or not practicing what they preach.  Others are more expansive and define it as those who make hypocritical claims. I am using it in the latter sense.
Master scipio I am a master of Greek. The word "hypocrite" comes from the Greek and applies to the mask used by the actors on stage. To depict different characters they used to change their mask that portrays that character.
No it doesn't depent upon which dictionary you use. It depends upon the etymology of the word, which I have just given. If you study the origin of words then you are more likely to be able to use them correctly.

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #186 on: June 28, 2014, 12:14:AM »
Master scipio I am a master of Greek. The word "hypocrite" comes from the Greek and applies to the mask used by the actors on stage. To depict different characters they used to change their mask that portrays that character.
No it doesn't depent upon which dictionary you use. It depends upon the etymology of the word, which I have just given. If you study the origin of words then you are more likely to be able to use them correctly.

Someone who acts in a hypocritcal fashion is to me a hypocrite.  They are a phony and full of crap.

Someone who claims gunshots fired inside a room cannot be heard outside where there is no background noise and cops are intently watching and listening is full of crap.  Such person is claiming such SOLELY because of an agenda.  The only people making that claim are those with the agenda of suggesting it is plausible Jeremy is innocent and that Sheila wasn't dead before police arrived.

Worse though there are phonies who are full of crap who contend gunshots would definitely be heard by Sheila and definitely wake her up but would not be heard by cops in the house. The walls are unable to be penetrated when cops are in the house an doutside but can be penetrated by sound when cops are not around and only Sheila is there.  Dogs barking outside would wake up all but shots fired inside could not penetrate woindows.

What is the common theme?  That when it suits Jeremy supporters sound travels through the windows and walls and doors like normal but when it doesn't suit them each room is soundproof.

It seems to me that hypocrite is a kind description and other indeed come to mind for those making such claims.

The same hypocrites also create straw men arguments and try to pretend their opponents are the ones doing this.  For instance trying to pretend their opponents suggest sound would not have penetrated Sheila's room.   But that is not the claim at all it is a strawman.  The actual claim is that some people sleep through loud noises without waking up so it is possible she slept through the noise possible she woke up, there is no way to know.  Moreover, some peopel wake up but go right back to sleep and don't bother to get out of bed to investigate.  Last it is ignored that it was suggested a moderator was used which contrary to claims reduces the sound of the shots to that made by a cap gun.  There is a difference between a cap gun and 22 regardless of claims otherwise.

Hypocrite or biased distorting clown?  In this case both refer to the same thing but the former sounds kinder. 


from windowsfrom outdoors is either deaf

Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #187 on: June 28, 2014, 09:02:AM »
 " They are a phoney and full of crap ".Mmmmm.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #188 on: June 28, 2014, 12:20:PM »
Someone who acts in a hypocritcal fashion is to me a hypocrite.  They are a phony and full of crap.

Someone who claims gunshots fired inside a room cannot be heard outside where there is no background noise and cops are intently watching and listening is full of crap.  Such person is claiming such SOLELY because of an agenda.  The only people making that claim are those with the agenda of suggesting it is plausible Jeremy is innocent and that Sheila wasn't dead before police arrived.

Worse though there are phonies who are full of crap who contend gunshots would definitely be heard by Sheila and definitely wake her up but would not be heard by cops in the house. The walls are unable to be penetrated when cops are in the house an doutside but can be penetrated by sound when cops are not around and only Sheila is there.  Dogs barking outside would wake up all but shots fired inside could not penetrate woindows.

What is the common theme?  That when it suits Jeremy supporters sound travels through the windows and walls and doors like normal but when it doesn't suit them each room is soundproof.

It seems to me that hypocrite is a kind description and other indeed come to mind for those making such claims.

The same hypocrites also create straw men arguments and try to pretend their opponents are the ones doing this.  For instance trying to pretend their opponents suggest sound would not have penetrated Sheila's room.   But that is not the claim at all it is a strawman.  The actual claim is that some people sleep through loud noises without waking up so it is possible she slept through the noise possible she woke up, there is no way to know.  Moreover, some peopel wake up but go right back to sleep and don't bother to get out of bed to investigate.  Last it is ignored that it was suggested a moderator was used which contrary to claims reduces the sound of the shots to that made by a cap gun.  There is a difference between a cap gun and 22 regardless of claims otherwise.

Hypocrite or biased distorting clown?  In this case both refer to the same thing but the former sounds kinder. 


from windowsfrom outdoors is either deaf
Scipio my dear friend. I will have more respect for your astronomical claims if you are able to prove those points. Personally I think in your heart of hearts you know that I am right but just bulk at the idea that I can personally testify that what I say is true. The noise from such a weapon sounds just like a cap gun and that the noise from other sounds, such as a yappy barking Shitzu could mask that cap gun sound. You surely must agree with me that attaching a silencer the sound would be reduced to a click sound. Come on master scipio, if you're honest and I believe you are, you must acknowledge that I'm right on that? ;)

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44433
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #189 on: June 28, 2014, 12:38:PM »
Lots of Youtube videos on a 22 rifle.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #190 on: June 28, 2014, 01:21:PM »
Hello Adam goody goody am looking forward to those ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #191 on: June 28, 2014, 02:26:PM »
Lots of Youtube videos on a 22 rifle.
I've done that Adam, but he still is unconvinced. The trouble with youtube videos and scipio is right about this, is that they can never duplicate the same environment. You see in WHF there was furniture and carpets and beds that would all help to muffle the sounds. I contend that the windows would make no difference in this case. Plus you have the business of the contact shots, which would in itself act as a silencer and deaden the sound of the shot.
What we need to do in order to judge this this rightly is to produce exactly the same environment. This was done by no one.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2014, 02:27:PM by Grahame »

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44433
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #192 on: June 28, 2014, 02:36:PM »
I've done that Adam, but he still is unconvinced. The trouble with youtube videos and scipio is right about this, is that they can never duplicate the same environment. You see in WHF there was furniture and carpets and beds that would all help to muffle the sounds. I contend that the windows would make no difference in this case. Plus you have the business of the contact shots, which would in itself act as a silencer and deaden the sound of the shot.
What we need to do in order to judge this this rightly is to produce exactly the same environment. This was done by no one.

Good point about the contact shots. Makes it even less likely Sheila would wake.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

No-Bits

  • Guest
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #193 on: June 28, 2014, 02:49:PM »
Scipio my dear friend. I will have more respect for your astronomical claims if you are able to prove those points. Personally I think in your heart of hearts you know that I am right but just bulk at the idea that I can personally testify that what I say is true. The noise from such a weapon sounds just like a cap gun and that the noise from other sounds, such as a yappy barking Shitzu could mask that cap gun sound. You surely must agree with me that attaching a silencer the sound would be reduced to a click sound. Come on master scipio, if you're honest and I believe you are, you must acknowledge that I'm right on that? ;)

Afternoon Grahame, I can't always tell when you are just on a wind up or whether you are offering genuinely held opinions.

For the benefit of others, having recently fired a .22 rimfire rifle with and without a P&H moderator. My experience was that without a SM attached, the sound was fairly loud, a bit louder than a cap gun I would say. With the SM attached, the sound was reduced a little bit, maybe by about 30% but was still quite audible.

It was also amazing (to me at least) how light the rifle was.

That was my experience anyway, you may have had a different one.




Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #194 on: June 28, 2014, 02:53:PM »
Afternoon Grahame, I can't always tell when you are just on a wind up or whether you are offering genuinely held opinions.

For the benefit of others, having recently fired a .22 rimfire rifle with and without a P&H moderator. My experience was that without a SM attached, the sound was fairly loud, a bit louder than a cap gun I would say. With the SM attached, the sound was reduced a little bit, maybe by about 30% but was still quite audible.

It was also amazing (to me at least) how light the rifle was.

That was my experience anyway, you may have had a different one.

Welcome back Harters  :)! I'd say that pretty much backs up what Grahame has maintained.
Few people have the imagination for reality