Superglue problems when Silencer examined on 23rd August 1985

[mike tesko]

Superglue problems when Silencer examined on 23rd August 1985

One thing is absolutely certain - the silencer which was in EP's possession as of 23rd August 1985, was exposed to super glue treatment, and thus it was coated with "cynoacrylate fumes", from that point, onwards...

To be pondered - was the silencer (DB/1) which was sent to the lab' on 30th August 1985, coated in super glue residue?

More significantly - was the Bamber silencer (DRB/1) which was sent to the Lab' on 20th / 26th September 1985, coated in super glue residue?

Additionally, was the silencer which was examined and checked for DNA as part of the failed 2002 appeal bid, also coated in  super glue residue?

Furthermore - was one of the two silencers that was handed back to the relatives, after JB was convicted, covered in super glue residue?

[mike tesko]

Third Paragraph:-

"However, before undertaking such examination it is the usual practice, as in this case, to submit the items to the forensic Science laboratory, to make an initial examination as chemicals involved in any fingerprint treatment may have an adverse effect on Laboratory examination i.e. blood grouping etc"...

Lets get the facts right:-

Silencer (SBJ/1) sent to the lab' to be provisionally examined on 13th August 1985, under Lab' item number 22

A silencer (as per aforementioned report) exposed to super-glue treatment, on 23rd August 1985...

Silencer (DB/1) sent to the Lab' on 30th August 1985, under Lab' item number 23, inside which was found crucial flake of blood that produced blood group activity, A, EAP BA, AK1 and HP 2-1...

Silencer (DRB/1) sent to the Lab' on 20 / 26th September 1985...

Not to be overlooked, is that any blood group evidence, (A, EAP BA, AK1 and HP 2-1) was not obtained, until after the super-glue treatment (23rd August 1985) had been carried out on the silencer, not beforehand...

[mike tesko]

The fact that the silencer was exposed to super-treatment on 23rd August 1985, and the crucial blood was not found in the silencer until after 30th August 1985, appears to have been completely overlooked or not taken into consideration, at all...


"as chemicals involved in any fingerprint treatment may have an adverse effect on Laboratory examination i.e. blood grouping etc"...

Exposure of the silencer to super-glue treatment, on 23rd August 1985, serves to seriously undermine the blood group evidence that was obtained from the silencer, on a much later occasion...

in my opinion...

[mike tesko]

There does not appear to have been any notification, from EP to the scientists at the Lab' that the silencer had been exposed to super-glue treatment on 23rd August 1985, or any mention that such an exposure may have adverse effects upon scientific tests, such as blood grouping...

[mike tesko]

If, DI Cook (SOC) and DCS "Mick" Ainsley, knew that exposure of the silencer to super-glue treatment on 23rd August 1985, may have adverse effects upon scientific tests such as blood grouping, etc, why didn't either of them bring this to the attention of the scientists at the lab, once the silencer (DB/1) was submitted to the lab' on 30th August 1985?

How come there is absolutely no mention at all, on any Lab' document, that the silencer they had in their possession, at any stage after 23rd August 1985, was coated in super-glue treatment, as a result of it being exposed to super-glue treatment by DI Cook (SOC)?

Could it mean that it was a different silencer?

[mike tesko]

Which silencer, was coated in super-glue treatment?

The one at the Lab' (DB/1) from 30th August 1985, or the one (DRB/1) which EP still had possession of, between 11th and 20th / 26th September 1985?

[Roch]

Think you would need to register high on the autism spectrum to fully comprehend all this silencer stuff.  I get the gist of it but I'm no good at multiple tracking of several items, dates etc.  Maybe a flow chart / diagram might help illustrate it?  Is this a key part of the case put to CCRC?

[mike tesko]

Think you would need to register high on the autism spectrum to fully comprehend all this silencer stuff.  I get the gist of it but I'm no good at multiple tracking of several items, dates etc.  Maybe a flow chart / diagram might help illustrate it?  Is this a key part of the case put to CCRC?

--------------------

Not yet...

Here, have a look at this - where on this Lab' general examination record, does it mention that the silencer in question, was / is coated in super-glue residue?

It mentions blood, and paint, but no super-glue...

In my opinion, it can't be the same silencer that was exposed to super-glue treatment on 23rd August 1985...

Please convince me that I am wriobng...

[Kaldin]

Think you would need to register high on the autism spectrum to fully comprehend all this silencer stuff.  I get the gist of it but I'm no good at multiple tracking of several items, dates etc.  Maybe a flow chart / diagram might help illustrate it?  Is this a key part of the case put to CCRC?

I think it's a question of being able to concentrate for long enough rather than anything else. I must admit I don't really have enough patience for the silencer thing. 

[ngb1066]

Think you would need to register high on the autism spectrum to fully comprehend all this silencer stuff.  I get the gist of it but I'm no good at multiple tracking of several items, dates etc.  Maybe a flow chart / diagram might help illustrate it?  Is this a key part of the case put to CCRC?

--------------------

Not yet...

Here, have a look at this - where on this Lab' general examination record, does it mention that the silencer in question, was / is coated in super-glue residue?

It mentions blood, and paint, but no super-glue...
In my opinion, it can't be the same silencer that was exposed to super-glue treatment on 23rd August 1985...

Please convince me that I am wriobng...

I can see paint mentioned but not blood. However there is a reference to superglue on the right hand side of the sheet, suggesting that the tape attached to the silencer was there for protection during the fingerprinting process using superglue.  Am I missing something here?  There appear to be two different handwriting styles on the sheet - I do not know whether there is any significance in this. 

[mike tesko]

Think you would need to register high on the autism spectrum to fully comprehend all this silencer stuff.  I get the gist of it but I'm no good at multiple tracking of several items, dates etc.  Maybe a flow chart / diagram might help illustrate it?  Is this a key part of the case put to CCRC?

--------------------

Not yet...

Here, have a look at this - where on this Lab' general examination record, does it mention that the silencer in question, was / is coated in super-glue residue?

It mentions blood, and paint, but no super-glue...
In my opinion, it can't be the same silencer that was exposed to super-glue treatment on 23rd August 1985...

Please convince me that I am wriobng...

I can see paint mentioned but not blood. However there is a reference to superglue on the right hand side of the sheet, suggesting that the tape attached to the silencer was there for protection during the fingerprinting process using superglue.  Am I missing something here?  There appear to be two different handwriting styles on the sheet - I do not know whether there is any significance in this.

--------------

Excuse me, good points, but adhesive tape refers to paint found upon it, not to Super-glue reside from the tests carried out on 23rd August 1985?

[mike tesko]

Think you would need to register high on the autism spectrum to fully comprehend all this silencer stuff.  I get the gist of it but I'm no good at multiple tracking of several items, dates etc.  Maybe a flow chart / diagram might help illustrate it?  Is this a key part of the case put to CCRC?

I think it's a question of being able to concentrate for long enough rather than anything else. I must admit I don't really have enough patience for the silencer thing. 

----------------------

Silencer evidence is key to these convictions, so perhaps you should try to pay more attention...

[mike tesko]

There is absolutely no mention of the silencer (DRB/1) which was examined and checked for DNA as part of the failed 2002 appeal, having super-glue residue upon it...


How can anybody be absolutely sure that this was the very same silencer (SBJ/1) - Lab' item, number 22() which was submitted to the Lab', on 213th August 1985, or the other silencer, DB/1 - Lab' item number 23, that was sent to the lab'; on 30th August 1985?

[Kaldin]

It doesn't say there was no superglue on it either. I don't really get the superglue thing. Would one expect such a thing to be visible? That document did say that the tape was there to protect the silencer when it was checked for fingerprints, so I don't see what the issue is.

[Kaldin]

Think you would need to register high on the autism spectrum to fully comprehend all this silencer stuff.  I get the gist of it but I'm no good at multiple tracking of several items, dates etc.  Maybe a flow chart / diagram might help illustrate it?  Is this a key part of the case put to CCRC?

I think it's a question of being able to concentrate for long enough rather than anything else. I must admit I don't really have enough patience for the silencer thing. 

----------------------

Silencer evidence is key to these convictions, so perhaps you should try to pay more attention...

I've tried, but all this speculation presented as facts is confusing the issue. You haven't even proved that a silencer was found on 11th September yet.