Paint sample Puzzle, and the mysterious second gun with paint on its barrel

[mike tesko]

They can't even make up their minds about a paint sample, they took from the mantelpiece in the Kitchen

[mike tesko]

The panel with the yellow sticky tape upon it, is the underside of the kitchen mantelpiece at whf, and the other panel with the "U" shaped mark, is the vertical panel of the aga surround...

The "U" shaped mark, on the vertical panel of the aga, was made by the barrel of the gun being thrust / pushed up against it..

The other marks on the underside of the mantelpiece, were made when the fore-site on the top of the guns barrel was brought / came into contact with it, during some kind of movement of the guns barrel in that location at one time or another...

None of these marks were made by a silencer having been brought into contact with the aga, either the vertical face, or the underside of the mantelpiece...

In my opinion...

[Kaldin]

The panel with the yellow sticky tape upon it, is the underside of the kitchen mantelpiece at whf, and the other panel with the "U" shaped mark, is the vertical panel of the aga surround...

The "U" shaped mark, on the vertical panel of the aga, was made by the barrel of the gun being thrust / pushed up against it..

The other marks on the underside of the mantelpiece, were made when the fore-site on the top of the guns barrel was brought / came into contact with it, during some kind of movement of the guns barrel in that location at one time or another...

None of these marks were made by a silencer having been brought into contact with the aga, either the vertical face, or the underside of the mantelpiece...

In my opinion...

I don't think that happened. The marks on the underneath are not aligned with the scratch on the vertical. I don't know what made those scratches but there's no reason why the same part of a gun or silencer didn't make them all.

[mike tesko]

The panel with the yellow sticky tape upon it, is the underside of the kitchen mantelpiece at whf, and the other panel with the "U" shaped mark, is the vertical panel of the aga surround...

The "U" shaped mark, on the vertical panel of the aga, was made by the barrel of the gun being thrust / pushed up against it..

The other marks on the underside of the mantelpiece, were made when the fore-site on the top of the guns barrel was brought / came into contact with it, during some kind of movement of the guns barrel in that location at one time or another...

None of these marks were made by a silencer having been brought into contact with the aga, either the vertical face, or the underside of the mantelpiece...

In my opinion...

I don't think that happened. The marks on the underneath are not aligned with the scratch on the vertical. I don't know what made those scratches but there's no reason why the same part of a gun or silencer didn't make them all.

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

Well, I disagree, I think that the marks on the vertical and the corresponding marks on the horizontal are inextricably linked together, and as we now know, DS Davidson (8th August 1985 - and 1st October 1985) refers to those marks as having been made by the barrel of the gun, not the silencer...

In my view, this is sufficient to warrant taking the view that the marks on the two planes of the aga surround, were made by the guns barrel coming into contact with the mantel-shelf, not the silencer...

[Kaldin]

The panel with the yellow sticky tape upon it, is the underside of the kitchen mantelpiece at whf, and the other panel with the "U" shaped mark, is the vertical panel of the aga surround...

The "U" shaped mark, on the vertical panel of the aga, was made by the barrel of the gun being thrust / pushed up against it..

The other marks on the underside of the mantelpiece, were made when the fore-site on the top of the guns barrel was brought / came into contact with it, during some kind of movement of the guns barrel in that location at one time or another...

None of these marks were made by a silencer having been brought into contact with the aga, either the vertical face, or the underside of the mantelpiece...

In my opinion...

I don't think that happened. The marks on the underneath are not aligned with the scratch on the vertical. I don't know what made those scratches but there's no reason why the same part of a gun or silencer didn't make them all.

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

Well, I disagree, I think that the marks on the vertical and the corresponding marks on the horizontal are inextricably linked together, and as we now know, DS Davidson (8th August 1985 - and 1st October 1985) refers to those marks as having been made by the barrel of the gun, not the silencer...

In my view, this is sufficient to warrant taking the view that the marks on the two planes of the aga surround, were made by the guns barrel coming into contact with the mantel-shelf, not the silencer...

They probably are linked together in that they were probably made by one object at the same time - not the barrel of a gun and the foresight at the same time. There's no way to tell what made them, other than the paint found on certain objects. It could have been a silencer, a barrel of a gun, or another object.

[mike tesko]

The panel with the yellow sticky tape upon it, is the underside of the kitchen mantelpiece at whf, and the other panel with the "U" shaped mark, is the vertical panel of the aga surround...

The "U" shaped mark, on the vertical panel of the aga, was made by the barrel of the gun being thrust / pushed up against it..

The other marks on the underside of the mantelpiece, were made when the fore-site on the top of the guns barrel was brought / came into contact with it, during some kind of movement of the guns barrel in that location at one time or another...

None of these marks were made by a silencer having been brought into contact with the aga, either the vertical face, or the underside of the mantelpiece...

In my opinion...

I don't think that happened. The marks on the underneath are not aligned with the scratch on the vertical. I don't know what made those scratches but there's no reason why the same part of a gun or silencer didn't make them all.

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

Well, I disagree, I think that the marks on the vertical and the corresponding marks on the horizontal are inextricably linked together, and as we now know, DS Davidson (8th August 1985 - and 1st October 1985) refers to those marks as having been made by the barrel of the gun, not the silencer...

In my view, this is sufficient to warrant taking the view that the marks on the two planes of the aga surround, were made by the guns barrel coming into contact with the mantel-shelf, not the silencer...

They probably are linked together in that they were probably made by one object at the same time - not the barrel of a gun and the foresight at the same time. There's no way to tell what made them, other than the paint found on certain objects. It could have been a silencer, a barrel of a gun, or another object.

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

Well, I disagree - if the end of the guns barrel was forced or pressed up against the vertical panel of the mantelpiece, and the barrel was moved so that it went upwards until the fore-site on the guns barrel came into contact with the underside of the mantelpiece, you could get the marks that have been photographed there, on the underside of the shelf...

What would be relevant in such circumstances, in my opinion, would be the mark on the vertical panel and its characteristics and dimensions, and the gap between the corner of the aga (vertical /horizontal angle) on the underside of the mantelpiece to where the marks commence. This gap is or could be the same as the distance between the end of the guns barrel, and the position on the barrel where the front part of the fore-site is situated...

I think it is ore than a coincidence that the horseshoe mark on the vertical panel is very similar or identical to the dimensions of the guns barrel (end), and that the gap from the corner to the position of the marks on the underside of the mantelpiece are similar if not identical to the gap, between the end of the guns barrel and the commencement of the fore-site on that guns barrel, for it not to have been the guns barrel which made those marks...

If the silencer made these marks, the characteristics and dimension of the "U" shaped mark on the vertical panel would be considerably different, and there might not be / would not be the gap from the corner to the commencement of the marks on the underside panel...

What seems to be important to me, is the presence of the yellow sticky tape on the underside of the mantelpiece in the attached photograph...

[ngb1066]

The panel with the yellow sticky tape upon it, is the underside of the kitchen mantelpiece at whf, and the other panel with the "U" shaped mark, is the vertical panel of the aga surround...

The "U" shaped mark, on the vertical panel of the aga, was made by the barrel of the gun being thrust / pushed up against it..

The other marks on the underside of the mantelpiece, were made when the fore-site on the top of the guns barrel was brought / came into contact with it, during some kind of movement of the guns barrel in that location at one time or another...

None of these marks were made by a silencer having been brought into contact with the aga, either the vertical face, or the underside of the mantelpiece...

In my opinion...

I don't think that happened. The marks on the underneath are not aligned with the scratch on the vertical. I don't know what made those scratches but there's no reason why the same part of a gun or silencer didn't make them all.

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

Well, I disagree, I think that the marks on the vertical and the corresponding marks on the horizontal are inextricably linked together, and as we now know, DS Davidson (8th August 1985 - and 1st October 1985) refers to those marks as having been made by the barrel of the gun, not the silencer...

In my view, this is sufficient to warrant taking the view that the marks on the two planes of the aga surround, were made by the guns barrel coming into contact with the mantel-shelf, not the silencer...

They probably are linked together in that they were probably made by one object at the same time - not the barrel of a gun and the foresight at the same time. There's no way to tell what made them, other than the paint found on certain objects. It could have been a silencer, a barrel of a gun, or another object.

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

Well, I disagree - if the end of the guns barrel was forced or pressed up against the vertical panel of the mantelpiece, and the barrel was moved so that it went upwards until the fore-site on the guns barrel came into contact with the underside of the mantelpiece, you could get the marks that have been photographed there, on the underside of the shelf...

What would be relevant in such circumstances, in my opinion, would be the mark on the vertical panel and its characteristics and dimensions, and the gap between the corner of the aga (vertical /horizontal angle) on the underside of the mantelpiece to where the marks commence. This gap is or could be the same as the distance between the end of the guns barrel, and the position on the barrel where the front part of the fore-site is situated...

I think it is ore than a coincidence that the horseshoe mark on the vertical panel is very similar or identical to the dimensions of the guns barrel (end), and that the gap from the corner to the position of the marks on the underside of the mantelpiece are similar if not identical to the gap, between the end of the guns barrel and the commencement of the fore-site on that guns barrel, for it not to have been the guns barrel which made those marks...

If the silencer made these marks, the characteristics and dimension of the "U" shaped mark on the vertical panel would be considerably different, and there might not be / would not be the gap from the corner to the commencement of the marks on the underside panel...

What seems to be important to me, is the presence of the yellow sticky tape on the underside of the mantelpiece in the attached photograph...

Mike

How does this tie in with Suthurst's evidence?  Are you suggesting that all these marks were made at the same time, and were present when the original photographs were taken at WHF?

In addition, what is the significance of the yellow tape?

[mike tesko]

The panel with the yellow sticky tape upon it, is the underside of the kitchen mantelpiece at whf, and the other panel with the "U" shaped mark, is the vertical panel of the aga surround...

The "U" shaped mark, on the vertical panel of the aga, was made by the barrel of the gun being thrust / pushed up against it..

The other marks on the underside of the mantelpiece, were made when the fore-site on the top of the guns barrel was brought / came into contact with it, during some kind of movement of the guns barrel in that location at one time or another...

None of these marks were made by a silencer having been brought into contact with the aga, either the vertical face, or the underside of the mantelpiece...

In my opinion...

I don't think that happened. The marks on the underneath are not aligned with the scratch on the vertical. I don't know what made those scratches but there's no reason why the same part of a gun or silencer didn't make them all.

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

Well, I disagree, I think that the marks on the vertical and the corresponding marks on the horizontal are inextricably linked together, and as we now know, DS Davidson (8th August 1985 - and 1st October 1985) refers to those marks as having been made by the barrel of the gun, not the silencer...

In my view, this is sufficient to warrant taking the view that the marks on the two planes of the aga surround, were made by the guns barrel coming into contact with the mantel-shelf, not the silencer...

They probably are linked together in that they were probably made by one object at the same time - not the barrel of a gun and the foresight at the same time. There's no way to tell what made them, other than the paint found on certain objects. It could have been a silencer, a barrel of a gun, or another object.

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

Well, I disagree - if the end of the guns barrel was forced or pressed up against the vertical panel of the mantelpiece, and the barrel was moved so that it went upwards until the fore-site on the guns barrel came into contact with the underside of the mantelpiece, you could get the marks that have been photographed there, on the underside of the shelf...

What would be relevant in such circumstances, in my opinion, would be the mark on the vertical panel and its characteristics and dimensions, and the gap between the corner of the aga (vertical /horizontal angle) on the underside of the mantelpiece to where the marks commence. This gap is or could be the same as the distance between the end of the guns barrel, and the position on the barrel where the front part of the fore-site is situated...

I think it is ore than a coincidence that the horseshoe mark on the vertical panel is very similar or identical to the dimensions of the guns barrel (end), and that the gap from the corner to the position of the marks on the underside of the mantelpiece are similar if not identical to the gap, between the end of the guns barrel and the commencement of the fore-site on that guns barrel, for it not to have been the guns barrel which made those marks...

If the silencer made these marks, the characteristics and dimension of the "U" shaped mark on the vertical panel would be considerably different, and there might not be / would not be the gap from the corner to the commencement of the marks on the underside panel...

What seems to be important to me, is the presence of the yellow sticky tape on the underside of the mantelpiece in the attached photograph...

Mike

How does this tie in with Suthurst's evidence?  Are you suggesting that all these marks were made at the same time, and were present when the original photographs were taken at WHF?

In addition, what is the significance of the yellow tape?

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

The marks shown in the photograph were taken at the scene on 1st October 1985, when DI Cook (SOC), DS Davidson and scientist, Mr Elliot, attended the scene, and DI Cook was explaining how the marks on the other side of the mantelpiece (not shown) were made by the end of the guns barrel coming into contact with the underside of the mantelpiece. Those marks were made by the guns barrel on that morning (1st October 1985) whilst Cook was explaining what had happened and how the marks on the underside of the mantelpiece had been made by the guns barrel coming into contact with that place. The gun that was used to make the original marks, and the gun used to make the additional marks which were photographed and later attributed to the silencer, involved (I believe) the use of the .22 semi-automatic anshulz rifle...

Because these marks were not made on the underside of the mantelpiece on the right hand side of the mantelpiece as you look at it, the evidence of Mr Sutherst is not effected by it - his findings are consistent with there being no marks there ion the morning of the incident...

I will explain about the presence of the yellow sticky tape, shortly...

[ngb1066]

The panel with the yellow sticky tape upon it, is the underside of the kitchen mantelpiece at whf, and the other panel with the "U" shaped mark, is the vertical panel of the aga surround...

The "U" shaped mark, on the vertical panel of the aga, was made by the barrel of the gun being thrust / pushed up against it..

The other marks on the underside of the mantelpiece, were made when the fore-site on the top of the guns barrel was brought / came into contact with it, during some kind of movement of the guns barrel in that location at one time or another...

None of these marks were made by a silencer having been brought into contact with the aga, either the vertical face, or the underside of the mantelpiece...

In my opinion...

I don't think that happened. The marks on the underneath are not aligned with the scratch on the vertical. I don't know what made those scratches but there's no reason why the same part of a gun or silencer didn't make them all.

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

Well, I disagree, I think that the marks on the vertical and the corresponding marks on the horizontal are inextricably linked together, and as we now know, DS Davidson (8th August 1985 - and 1st October 1985) refers to those marks as having been made by the barrel of the gun, not the silencer...

In my view, this is sufficient to warrant taking the view that the marks on the two planes of the aga surround, were made by the guns barrel coming into contact with the mantel-shelf, not the silencer...

They probably are linked together in that they were probably made by one object at the same time - not the barrel of a gun and the foresight at the same time. There's no way to tell what made them, other than the paint found on certain objects. It could have been a silencer, a barrel of a gun, or another object.

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

Well, I disagree - if the end of the guns barrel was forced or pressed up against the vertical panel of the mantelpiece, and the barrel was moved so that it went upwards until the fore-site on the guns barrel came into contact with the underside of the mantelpiece, you could get the marks that have been photographed there, on the underside of the shelf...

What would be relevant in such circumstances, in my opinion, would be the mark on the vertical panel and its characteristics and dimensions, and the gap between the corner of the aga (vertical /horizontal angle) on the underside of the mantelpiece to where the marks commence. This gap is or could be the same as the distance between the end of the guns barrel, and the position on the barrel where the front part of the fore-site is situated...

I think it is ore than a coincidence that the horseshoe mark on the vertical panel is very similar or identical to the dimensions of the guns barrel (end), and that the gap from the corner to the position of the marks on the underside of the mantelpiece are similar if not identical to the gap, between the end of the guns barrel and the commencement of the fore-site on that guns barrel, for it not to have been the guns barrel which made those marks...

If the silencer made these marks, the characteristics and dimension of the "U" shaped mark on the vertical panel would be considerably different, and there might not be / would not be the gap from the corner to the commencement of the marks on the underside panel...

What seems to be important to me, is the presence of the yellow sticky tape on the underside of the mantelpiece in the attached photograph...

Mike

How does this tie in with Suthurst's evidence?  Are you suggesting that all these marks were made at the same time, and were present when the original photographs were taken at WHF?

In addition, what is the significance of the yellow tape?

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

The marks shown in the photograph were taken at the scene on 1st October 1985, when DI Cook (SOC), DS Davidson and scientist, Mr Elliot, attended the scene, and DI Cook was explaining how the marks on the other side of the mantelpiece (not shown) were made by the end of the guns barrel coming into contact with the underside of the mantelpiece. Those marks were made by the guns barrel on that morning (1st October 1985) whilst Cook was explaining what had happened and how the marks on the underside of the mantelpiece had been made by the guns barrel coming into contact with that place. The gun that was used to make the original marks, and the gun used to make the additional marks which were photographed and later attributed to the silencer, involved (I believe) the use of the .22 semi-automatic anshulz rifle...

Because these marks were not made on the underside of the mantelpiece on the right hand side of the mantelpiece as you look at it, the evidence of Mr Sutherst is not effected by it - his findings are consistent with there being no marks there ion the morning of the incident...

I will explain about the presence of the yellow sticky tape, shortly...

Mike - I would be interested to hear about the yellow sticky tape when you have time to post the relevant information.

[smiffy]

right here we go...NOT HAPPY AT ALL with the analysis of the scratches on the underside and vertical face that have been highted .

The vertical face U shape.....just because the U shape may be similar in shape and size to the foresight on the rifle does not mean it made that mark.
The foresight edge CANNOT have been pressed into the paintwork to create that U shape as the gun protudes forward of the foresight......So if any of the foresight hit the paintwork it would be at one of its extremes at an extreme  angle but not flush to the surface.

U Shape mark NOT CAUSED BY FORESIGHT.


Now to the horizontal undersurface marks.

Looking at  the barrel of the rifle shown...the tip..where the silence screws on..is not of the correct profile to be a credible cause of those scratchs..the thread ..interferes...and the item that made those marks had no external thread.

IE in my view the barrel of the .22 semi automatic anshulz rifle DID NOT cause any of the marks shown.

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

WHAT DID CAUSE THEM...? I have an item in mind....a Parker Hale silencer....This is a very credible item to have made the scratches involved...VERY CREDIBLE.

The problem that arises though is that...though the silencer is a very credible sources of those scratches...it would be almost impossible to envisage them being caused when it was attached to a rifle.
In my view the silencer was detached and only in the hand of the person that was making those scratches. They were deliberately made to put paint onto the silencer and scratches onto the surfaces of the aga surround.

The most telling scratch is the fairly straight one....between the two chips...though its alignment is not perfect it  lines up reasonably well for a freehand bit of work.

In my view the same item made the chips and the fairly straight scratch in between.



In the picture shown on this thread...consider that fairly straight scratch...and a clearly identifiable edge is seen on the yellow tape side of the scratch.  This is the deepest bit of the scratch..the cutting edge of the object being used.  The object is circular.  This edge on the straight scratch is clean compared to the other edge of the scratch.
Our object (the silencer) is being held in the hand and its length is more or less at right angles to the direction of the scratch . The silencer is tilted away from the paint surface to bring its edge (knurled end cap) into creating the scratch. The angle is not very steep.
Paint layers are not very thick at all....this scratch does not penetrate the red paint layer(layers) . The main cutting edge of the scratch is further away ..but on the wider parts of the scratch we have mininal changes of angle or pressure or paint thickness giving the width variation on the edge furthest from the cutting edge. This means that in the case of the silencer the knurling is slightly scraping into the paint.

The control shown in making this scratch indicate it was held in the hand...more on that maybe in another post.

Now the two associated chip marks. 

Our chips and scratches were made from the corner travelling towards the outer edge

The silencer (same way held as mentioned above)...

Initally the person doing this applies the silencer into the corner ...catching/striking the moulding at an outer radius...making a chip....the paint here is VERY vulnerable..due to the layers of paint and years of expansion and contraction (heat from aga makes it worse) making the sublayers of paint detach from the substrate..a simple knock causing this chip in a weak area.
The person making the scratch then draws the main scratch (hand most likely resting on the surface) before easing off...and then applying an excess of pressure which causes fractures through the paint layers for the larger chipped area. This cause major flaking... On finer detail pictures a red pink  re-deposit line can be seen in this chipped area..conversant with how I describe this scratch was formed.
The (silencer)object picking up paint as it made the mainly linear scratch ....depositing some of  it back in a thin line as it created the chipped area.


MORE TO COME IN FUTURE POSTS...

[wichfinder]

well Jeremy bamber probably painted it its well known that a lot of killers decorate the murder weapon.that's how the caught jack the ripper.

[andrea]

well Jeremy bamber probably painted it its well known that a lot of killers decorate the murder weapon.that's how the caught jack the ripper.

erm........?

[andrea]

they never caught jack the ripper!

[tonyb]

am i missing something, who wrote the above notes and when?

[tonyb]

well mike, Any Idea where the hand written notes originate, because without any provenance I don't see the point of the thread... or that must be why it's gone quiet... in my opinion.