Sheila not fighting back. Why ?

[scipio_usmc]

I think the story of her lack of coordination is somewhere between an over exaggeration and a myth. AE seems to have been saying it since prior to Sheila's illness and with a little help from us it has taken wings.

Had Sheila been SO very uncoordinated, she certainly couldn't have done her own make up, ie applied eye liner, mascara, false eyelashes OR painted her nails with any degree of dexterity. I can say, with TOTAL certainty that she never achieved the status of those models who had their own make up artist and hairdresser. I'm fully aware of the mantra that "She couldn't put beans on toast" but am inclined to think selective some of her lack of aptitude towards things domestic.

That is not the argument Graham made.  Graham made the argument he didn't see her for several months and implied that things were different than when he last saw her.

The lack of coordination and involuntary movements that result from the medication she was on are relevant issues to her being able to fire 25 shots without missing just like her never using the gun before is relevant to that fact.  They are complementary to the prosecution's case but not the critical factors. you add everything that you can that complements your strongest points.

The strongest arguments of course are the evidence that establishes she can't have killed herself and didn't kill the others.   The unlikelihood of being able to fire 25 shots without a miss under the circumstances is complementary to that. Since it is complementary but not critical it doesn't matter that much the fight is over the critical evidence because that makes or breaks the case.

[Jane]

That is not the argument Graham made.  Graham made the argument he didn't see her for several months and implied that things were different than when he last saw her.

........................ you add everything that you can that complements your strongest points...............

The strongest arguments of course are the evidence that establishes she can't have killed herself and didn't kill the others.   The unlikelihood of being able to fire 25 shots without a miss under the circumstances is complementary to that. Since it is complementary but not critical it doesn't matter that much the fight is over the critical evidence because that makes or breaks the case.

Irrelevant of what argument Grahame made, it's the words which follow which interest me. It SOUNDS as if you're saying that "learned counsel" does EXACTLY what you have, on occasions, accused us of doing -picking and choosing what they use.

 From where I'm sitting, it doesn't appear to be BEYOND the realms of possibility, if she was dextrous enough to apply eye make expertly enough for close ups -WITHOUT pushing it up her nose or losing an eye, that PERHAPS she could fire a gun with reasonable accuracy. I appreciate that there are factors which say she didn't.

[scipio_usmc]

Irrelevant of what argument Grahame made, it's the words which follow which interest me. It SOUNDS as if you're saying that "learned counsel" does EXACTLY what you have, on occasions, accused us of doing -picking and choosing what they use.

 From where I'm sitting, it doesn't appear to be BEYOND the realms of possibility, if she was dextrous enough to apply eye make expertly enough for close ups -WITHOUT pushing it up her nose or losing an eye, that PERHAPS she could fire a gun with reasonable accuracy. I appreciate that there are factors which say she didn't.

Women make plenty of mistakes while applying makeup, those mistakes are repaired and then no one knows about them.  When you shoot and miss there is a shell casing left behind and also a bullet found that missed its mark.  You thus know about it unlike a makeup botch which can be fixed.

One time a friend's girlfriend went shooting with my friend and I and even though she fired guns a long time in the past she didn't even hit the target at first she missed entirely.  After 15 minutes she was missing only sporadically and usually hitting the fringes but still only the fringes and her shots were not grouped closely even then.  Other people I have seen shoot had the same problem of missing till they got into the groove and the targets were not moving targets. They were a lot better when they got into their groove than Lynn was though. The involuntary movements caused by her medication are very real and would inhibit accurate shooting.  Not knowing how to chamber a round or the need to chamber the first round manually are all relevant considerations. People who ignore these sorts of things do so either because they are ignorant of guns or biased in favor of Jeremy. 

[Alias]

Women make plenty of mistakes while applying makeup, those mistakes are repaired and then no one knows about them.  When you shoot and miss there is a shell casing left behind and also a bullet found that missed its mark.  You thus know about it unlike a makeup botch which can be fixed.

One time a friend's girlfriend went shooting with my friend and I and even though she fired guns a long time in the past she didn't even hit the target at first she missed entirely.  After 15 minutes she was missing only sporadically and usually hitting the fringes but still only the fringes and her shots were not grouped closely even then.  Other people I have seen shoot had the same problem of missing till they got into the groove and the targets were not moving targets. They were a lot better when they got into their groove than Lynn was though. The involuntary movements caused by her medication are very real and would inhibit accurate shooting.  Not knowing how to chamber a round or the need to chamber the first round manually are all relevant considerations. People who ignore these sorts of things do so either because they are ignorant of guns or biased in favor of Jeremy.

You still have to have a steady hand when fixing makeup which was wrongly applied!! Geez, what kind of reasoning is this!

[scipio_usmc]

You still have to have a steady hand when fixing makeup which was wrongly applied!! Geez, what kind of reasoning is this!

The issue is the difference is that even with involuntary movements happening you can have the opportunity to fix a mistake but a mistake with a gun can't be covered up. The only opportunity you have with a gun to try to rectify the error (miss) is to try another shot assuming you still have more ammo. Bu the missed shot won't be concealed like the makeup error can be - unless the makeup error is something severe like an injury to the eye. 

[Mr. Gee]

Women make plenty of mistakes while applying makeup, those mistakes are repaired and then no one knows about them.  When you shoot and miss there is a shell casing left behind and also a bullet found that missed its mark.  You thus know about it unlike a makeup botch which can be fixed.

One time a friend's girlfriend went shooting with my friend and I and even though she fired guns a long time in the past she didn't even hit the target at first she missed entirely.  After 15 minutes she was missing only sporadically and usually hitting the fringes but still only the fringes and her shots were not grouped closely even then.  Other people I have seen shoot had the same problem of missing till they got into the groove and the targets were not moving targets. They were a lot better when they got into their groove than Lynn was though. The involuntary movements caused by her medication are very real and would inhibit accurate shooting.  Not knowing how to chamber a round or the need to chamber the first round manually are all relevant considerations. People who ignore these sorts of things do so either because they are ignorant of guns or biased in favor of Jeremy.

Nah! I can' believe that?

[Alias]

The issue is the difference is that even with involuntary movements happening you can have the opportunity to fix a mistake but a mistake with a gun can't be covered up. The only opportunity you have with a gun to try to rectify the error (miss) is to try another shot assuming you still have more ammo. Bu the missed shot won't be concealed like the makeup error can be - unless the makeup error is something severe like an injury to the eye.

You can´t really fix botched nail varnish unless you remove it all and start over. You do need a steady hand - whether it is the first, second or third try.

[Mr. Gee]

That is not the argument Graham made.  Graham made the argument he didn't see her for several months and implied that things were different than when he last saw her.

The lack of coordination and involuntary movements that result from the medication she was on are relevant issues to her being able to fire 25 shots without missing just like her never using the gun before is relevant to that fact.  They are complementary to the prosecution's case but not the critical factors. you add everything that you can that complements your strongest points.

The strongest arguments of course are the evidence that establishes she can't have killed herself and didn't kill the others.  The unlikelihood of being able to fire 25 shots without a miss under the circumstances is complementary to that. Since it is complementary but not critical it doesn't matter that much the fight is over the critical evidence because that makes or breaks the case.

I thought you said that it is fatal to use the word "unlikely"?

[Jane]

Women make plenty of mistakes while applying makeup, those mistakes are repaired and then no one knows about them.  When you shoot and miss there is a shell casing left behind and also a bullet found that missed its mark.  You thus know about it unlike a makeup botch which can be fixed.

One time a friend's girlfriend went shooting with my friend and I and even though she fired guns a long time in the past she didn't even hit the target at first she missed entirely.  After 15 minutes she was missing only sporadically and usually hitting the fringes but still only the fringes and her shots were not grouped closely even then.  Other people I have seen shoot had the same problem of missing till they got into the groove and the targets were not moving targets. They were a lot better when they got into their groove than Lynn was though. The involuntary movements caused by her medication are very real and would inhibit accurate shooting.  Not knowing how to chamber a round or the need to chamber the first round manually are all relevant considerations. People who ignore these sorts of things do so either because they are ignorant of guns or biased in favor of Jeremy.

Well, perhaps that COULD be given as the reason for the numerous shots. I don't pretend to know enough about firearms to argue about it and have factored in other variables.

[Mr. Gee]

You can´t really fix botched nail varnish unless you remove it all and start over. You do need a steady hand - whether it is the first, second or third try.

As I watch my wife putting that crap on I must come to the conclusion that it takes a very steady hand to do so?

[scipio_usmc]

I thought you said that it is fatal to use the word "unlikely"?

A determination something is unlikely to have happened is fatal when you are trying to suggest something happened. 

Whether a claim hurts or helps depends upon which site of the argument you are on.

If your goal is to say something happened then you need evidence to establish a reasonable likelihood it happened.  If the only evidence you find is demonstrates such was not likely then you are screwed.   

1) It is unlikely Sheila would ever miss because she was the best shooter in the family

2) It is unlikely Sheila would be able to fire 25 times without a miss because she never used a gun before and suffered from involuntary movements

If your goal is to suggest Sheila did not do the shooting because she would not have been able to fire without missing and sentence 1 were factually correct then it is fatal to your claim but it sentence 2 were factually correct it is supportive of your position.

Conversely, it your goal were to suggest Sheila were capable of the shootings if sentence 1 were factually correct it would support your claims whereas if sentence 2 were correct it would hurt your position.

[Alias]

As I watch my wife putting that crap on I must come to the conclusion that it takes a very steady hand to do so?

You have to have a steady hand not only on the hand you use dominantly, but also the other hand (left for most).

[Mr. Gee]

A determination something is unlikely to have happened is fatal when you are trying to suggest something happened. 

Whether a claim hurts or helps depends upon which site of the argument you are on.

If your goal is to say something happened then you need evidence to establish a reasonable likelihood it happened.  If the only evidence you find is demonstrates such was not likely then you are screwed.   

1) It is unlikely Sheila would ever miss because she was the best shooter in the family

2) It is unlikely Sheila would be able to fire 25 times without a miss because she never used a gun before and suffered from involuntary movements

If your goal is to suggest Sheila did not do the shooting because she would not have been able to fire without missing and sentence 1 were factually correct then it is fatal to your claim but it sentence 2 were factually correct it is supportive of your position.

Conversely, it your goal were to suggest Sheila were capable of the shootings if sentence 1 were factually correct it would support your claims whereas if sentence 2 were correct it would hurt your position.

[Steve_uk]

What were conspicuous by their absence--------were Sheila's diaries.

I believe I've read in one of the books(Roger Wilkes?) that Sheila kept a diary,and since this thread concerns Sheila you'll forgive me for dredging up an old thread: there's a reference to it here:http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3760.0.html

Did we ever get to the bottom of the letters written on a piece of paper and was this in Sheila's hand or Jeremy's?

[Steve_uk]

The above link isn't working so the thread is here:

    4976
        View Profile
        Email
        Personal Message (Online)

"I didn't mean to be horrible to Jeremy.."
« on: January 04, 2013, 12:37:AM »

    Quote
    Modify
    Remove

"I didn't mean to be horrible to Jeremy"-these words written by Sheila in her journal in her last hours on earth and which sealed her fate will be etched indelibly on any serious studier of the White House Murder crimes. They suggest that the siblings had had a row on that Tuesday night,possibly as an embittered Jeremy had reminded her where the money for the maintenance of her London Maida Vale was coming from and how hard it was earned by Jeremy tilling the soil,for which he seemed to receive little appreciation from the company gathered around him. Nevill would castigate his heir for not putting in sufficient hours or getting his hands dirty,herein a covert reference to the rumours of a sexual deviance which Nevill endured on the occasions he supped at the Red Lion public house. June had long since refrained from tackling her son on any public or private matter,their uneasy modus vivendi resulting in the merest of pleasantries being exchanged in any random encounter at the Farm.

Yet looking back from the grim realities of a grey prison cell it is Sheila whom Jeremy has talked about most in terms which could most be construed as any shred of regret or remorse. Sheila was of an age where she was likely to be believed,and though in reality immature and harmless her remarks cut an already emotionally-damaged Jeremy. If only he had understood his sister or attempted to understand her illness just that little bit more,he would have been able to realize why June acted as she did in providing a cushion of support,which in no way detracted from June's love for him,nor could Sheila be culpable for lashing out at times at the people most dear to her,this being inherent in the nature of her illness.In the over-competitive environment in which Nevill placed Jeremy at Gresham's whilst only eight years old his father was planning ahead and doing what he felt was in the long-term interests of his son. Yet this only caused bitterness and alienation from both parents as the years progressed and engendered a feeling of hopelessness as Jeremy was ever outwitted by his smarter peers. Only now has Jeremy begun to realize what he had and what he has thrown away,which must make the passage of every day even more unbearable as he reflects on the heartfelt remorse Sheila expressed as a new year of confinement starts.