You have said previously that the blood was only on baffles 1,2 and 6 how you claim it was all baffles 1 to 8!
Only on planet scippy could you can be correct about two conflicting claims!
Your record of always being wrong and misrepresenting is still intact. Post where I stated blood was only on baffles 1, 2 and 6. You won't be able to find any such quote because you made the claim up.
I have consistently stated that the crime lab personnel didn't record how deep they found the blood in any written record. The memory of one was that the blood extended to at least the 6th baffle and another to the 7th. Defense expert Lincoln found microscopic traces of group a blood on the first 8 baffles. Thus the blood was established to have been on the first 8 baffles. In addition I noted a flake of blood found in between baffles 1 and 2 was found to be a flake of group A blood which had an enzyme in Sheila's blood, her mother had a different enzyme so it could not have been her mother's blood.
My posts stress this information again and again including quotes from the 2002 COA decision I posted to you with this information. You clearly lack the ability to comprehend it and even after being corrected still keep saying the flake with Sheila's enzyme was on the 5th baffle which is factually wrong though it makes no real difference in the overall picture.
But more to the point the UK Forensic Science Service agreed they could not establish if the DNA was blood based. After DNA Low Copy Number (DNA LCN) The court heard in 2000 that the profile could not have come from Sheila Caffell and efforts to identify the source were attempted.
What does this have to do with the blood removed from the moderator in 1985 and 1986? Are you suggesting that the fact no blood remained in 200 means the blood removed in 1985 and 1986 wasn't actually blood? If so then you are more delusional than I thought.
The DNA tests of the moderator has no bearing at all on the evidence used at trial which is why the COA rejected the defense's claims.
The only DNA test that would matter would have been a DNA test of the blood removed by the lab and by defense expert Lincoln. DNA tests of such blood were not done though just serology tests. The blood was type A and a flake tested had an enzyme June lacked so it had to be Sheila's.
Sheila had a wound that was virtually certain to result in drawback- it happens to be her fatal wound. That means her blood would be found in the rifle if the rifle was used without a moderator and in the moderator if the moderator was used. It was not in the rifle but was in the moderator which proves the fatal shot was fired with the moderator attached. That in turn proves she was murdered because there is no way she could have shot herself with the moderator attached except by pulling the trigger with her toes (which would have resulted in her gown getting evidence on it from the vents and ejection port) and she would not have been able to remove it and put it away after her death.
The DNA tests done in 2000 don't impact this at all. What you cited is in part why the DNA tests are worthless there was no evidence there was any blood left inside to test for DNA. FURTHERMORE, even if there had been blood found, finding blood of someone else doesn't prove the blood removed wasn't Sheila's. Sheila had a wound that would result in drawback. If someone else had a wound resulting in drawback as well that doesn't negate the fact her blood would have to have been in the moderator or the rifle and wasn't in the rifle but there was evidence it was in the moderator.
The COA decision stressed this:
"The evidence of Mr Hayward was not to the effect that all the blood in the moderator had been tested but rather that some of that blood had been tested. Thus this was not a case where the scientist was saying that the only blood in the moderator came from Sheila Caffell. His evidence was that the blood tested came from Sheila Caffell although he acknowledged the remote possibility that even that blood was a mixture of blood from Nevill Bamber and June Bamber.
No questions were asked at trial of Mr Hayward to establish what part of the blood he had tested. The position was, however, known to the defence through their own expert Dr Lincoln. Dr Lincoln had seen the evidential material upon which the group testing results were based and agreed with the conclusions. He recorded that evidence in the course of his report of 19 September 1986. He said that Mr Hayward had "found a flake of blood trapped under the first or second baffle plate" and that it was this flake that was tested and produced the groupings A, EAP BA, AK1, Hp2.1 upon which reliance was placed by the prosecution. Dr Lincoln further recorded:
"Mr Hayward states that he could detect visible staining on the "upper baffle plates" and that he swabbed these plates so that the blood was taken onto cotton material which could subsequently be used in grouping tests. On this material Mr Hayward successfully determined the ABO and EAP groups and showed the blood to be groups A, EAP BA."
This finding from the swabbing of the upper baffle plates was thus consistent with blood from either June Bamber or Sheila Caffell or even a combination of blood from the two of them but not in any way from blood from Nevill Bamber or Nicholas Caffell.
Thus, even if one accepted that the DNA found on the baffle plates at a much later date came from blood from June Bamber deposited on the baffle plates during the shootings, it was not in any way inconsistent with the conclusions drawn from the testing of the flake which material that had been destroyed by the very nature of the examination process and hence could not be subjected to DNA testing. Thus the evidence did not as the Commission suggested "severely undermine" the prosecution case."
In laymen's terms:
1) The prosecution expert didn't claim that all the blood was Sheila's and only Sheila's. The prosecution expert noted that blood on the baffles was group A which was shared by June and Sheila and thus could belong to either or both. The flake of blood is what was determined to be Sheila's and only Sheila's because it had an enzyme Sheila possessed but that June didn't because June had a different enzyme.
2) Therefore even if it were proven that June's blood had been found all this would prove is that June's blood was still in the moderator and had failed to be removed by the lab and Lincoln during their testing. It would not be able to establish that the blood flake removed in 1985 which was determined to be Sheila's wasn't Sheilas. Only DNA testing of that flake could potentially establish the flake wasn't Sheila's.
This was the MAIN reason for the COA saying the evidence failed to undermine the prosecution case the COA went on to discuss other problems such as contamination which were simply additional reasons to dismiss the claims but even without contamination the evidence was worthless for the above reason.
