Sheila not fighting back. Why ?

[guest154]

Cheers scip.

[lookout]

Read the COLP interview from Vanezis where he said that he had no concerns with Sheila being able to use and re-load a rifle. He also went on to criticise Stan Jones for implicating Jeremy.

[scipio_usmc]

Read the COLP interview from Vanezis where he said that he had no concerns with Sheila being able to use and re-load a rifle. He also went on to criticise Stan Jones for implicating Jeremy.

Vanezis is not a gun user let alone expert.  His opinion is worthless.  The only opinion of his that matters is medically related- specifically the medical evaluations of the wounds. 

Upon all the evidence coming out he decided Sheila could not have killed herself.

[David1819]

Vanezis is not a gun user let alone expert. 

Why does Vanezis have to be an expert in this matter?   Expert's who needs them! they are always wrong and their peer reviews are corrupted by financial gain! just a bunch of cowboy laurel and hardies right scipio? 

Its much more reliable to consult a complete stranger and novice on the internet.

\sarcasm

[Alias]

Why does Vanezis have to be an expert in this matter?   Expert's who needs them! they are always wrong and their peer reviews are corrupted by financial gain! just a bunch of cowboy laurel and hardies right scipio? 

Its much more reliable to consult a complete stranger and novice on the internet.

\sarcasm

 

[scipio_usmc]

Why does Vanezis have to be an expert in this matter?   Expert's who needs them! they are always wrong and their peer reviews are corrupted by financial gain! just a bunch of cowboy laurel and hardies right scipio? 

Its much more reliable to consult a complete stranger and novice on the internet.

\sarcasm

The uninformed opinion of someone who knows nothing about a subject is worthless.

Someone from the internet who actually knows about guns and can prove his point about guns is worth far more.  I have proved my points regarding the need to chamber a round many times and it is blatantly obvious that unless people have experience in semi-autos they don't know they need to chamber a round hence find themselves in situations such as Lynette Fromme. 

Laurel and Hardy made up nonsense of being able to assess time of death from photos. If you are an expert assessing some fact and don't have recognized science on your side then you can't even get your evidence admitted before a court.  It doesn't matter if you are an expert in the field or not. I am a legal expert qualified to practice law.  If I make some off the wall legal claim such as that it is unconstitutional for the government to tax us that doesn't mean my opinion is worth anything.  I need to actually produce provisions of the Constitution that support my position for such a claim to be worth something. Opinions mean nothing unless they are logical and substantiated by evidence.

[nugnug]

youve proved on other threads that you know abslutly sod all about them.

[scipio_usmc]

youve proved on other threads that you know abslutly sod all about them.

Post such threads, highlight what I wrote that was wrong and post evidence I was wrong and explain how it demonstrates I know sod about guns.  If you are unable to do so then this is a perfect example of how you just make crap up.

It is also a good exercise to illustrate my point of how biased opinions like yours mean nothing.  What matters is what people can prove.

[nugnug]

ok then.

[scipio_usmc]

ok then.

Maybe that is why I am like the Terminator to some people.  When challenged I actually posted the evidence that proved Lookout was wrong in her claims about Sheila being taught how to use a gun. 

It seem other people love to make claims then run away when challenged for proof.

[Alias]

Sheila was probably good at using a gun! Know what? If I wanted to shoot you, I´d find out quickly how to do it!

[Adam]

Sheila was probably good at using a gun! Know what? If I wanted to shoot you, I´d find out quickly how to do it!

'Sheila was probably good at using a gun'. Was that in the 2012 CCRC submission ?

[Adam]

The uninformed opinion of someone who knows nothing about a subject is worthless.

Someone from the internet who actually knows about guns and can prove his point about guns is worth far more.  I have proved my points regarding the need to chamber a round many times and it is blatantly obvious that unless people have experience in semi-autos they don't know they need to chamber a round hence find themselves in situations such as Lynette Fromme. 

Laurel and Hardy made up nonsense of being able to assess time of death from photos. If you are an expert assessing some fact and don't have recognized science on your side then you can't even get your evidence admitted before a court.  It doesn't matter if you are an expert in the field or not. I am a legal expert qualified to practice law.  If I make some off the wall legal claim such as that it is unconstitutional for the government to tax us that doesn't mean my opinion is worth anything.  I need to actually produce provisions of the Constitution that support my position for such a claim to be worth something. Opinions mean nothing unless they are logical and substantiated by evidence.

Laurel and Hardy ? I must have missed that film.

[Adam]

ok then.

Should be interesting.

Scipio made a good point about having to chamber the rifle when reloading.

I wouldn't know how to do this. Perhaps if given half an hour to work it out. Or if someone showed me. Sheila did not have either option on the night.

Supporters cling to the possibility that she may have gone on a shooting party years earlier. If so she would need to have been taught how to chamber a rifle, and then remember years later what she had been taught.

But why would anyone bother showing her how to chamber a rifle, if she had no interest in guns ?

The murder weapon was recently purchased so would not be at the shooting party. Unless the same make of rifle was in existence then.

The guns at the shooting party may not have had to have been reloaded at all. It was a shooting party, not 'Escape to Athena'. If they did need to be reloaded then it may not be necessary to chamber those guns.

[Jane]

Post such threads, highlight what I wrote that was wrong and post evidence I was wrong and explain how it demonstrates I know sod about guns.  If you are unable to do so then this is a perfect example of how you just make crap up.

It is also a good exercise to illustrate my point of how biased opinions like yours mean nothing.  What matters is what people can prove.

I noticed, in one post in particular, that you said there was no proof that Jeremy had ever shot rabbits. That MAY be so but I find it strange that ANY farming son -having the ability to shoot- would NEVER have shot rabbits. I believe it to have been alleged that Jeremy did rather well in the school gun club. I can't imaging that he wouldn't have wanted to show off this skill, at home, to his father.

I find curious the juxtaposition of NEVER shooting rabbits, because there is no proof, other than his word, that he ever did, with the acceptance, also without proof, other than his word, that he strangled rats with his bare hands.

It appears that you can confidently say that there's no proof he'd never shot rabbits because no one is said to have seen him. That such may be questionable appears not to matter.

Maybe that is why I am like the Terminator to some people.  When challenged I actually posted the evidence that proved Lookout was wrong in her claims about Sheila being taught how to use a gun. 

It seem other people love to make claims then run away when challenged for proof.

In this I have to agree with you. I have farming friends who were contemporaries of June and Nevill. Their son and daughter being roughly the same ages as Sheila and Jeremy. The son and his boys now run the farm. The daughter and her family still live there. I made a point of asking my friend and to her certain knowledge her daughter has NEVER touched a gun, has never shown ANY interest in so doing. Other than still living at the farm, there is NOTHING about her to suggest she has anything to do with farming life but is a highly successful business woman in her own right. I think it highly probable, given Sheila's chosen lifestyle, that, like my friend's daughter, she'd never, other than perhaps using one as a prop when posing for a picture, touched a gun.