Author Topic: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?  (Read 37319 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #75 on: January 03, 2015, 06:55:PM »

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #76 on: January 03, 2015, 06:58:PM »


Caroline, he'll be EFFUSIVE in his praise of you........................but PLEASE don't hold your breath in anticipation ;D ;D ;D

 :o :o - (ex-hails)  ;D
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #77 on: January 03, 2015, 07:00:PM »
I don´t know any youngsters saying that someone is "like John Wayne". There was something else where I went, WTF! Also a comparison to some old timer, don´t remember who it was.
Just sayin´  8)

He's always banging on about Bob De Niro  and he's never said "in'it" once!!  ;D
« Last Edit: January 03, 2015, 07:02:PM by Caroline »
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #78 on: January 03, 2015, 07:01:PM »
Oh,I've noticed. An old Lancashire saying he/she said the other night about " he couldn't knock the skin off a rice pudding ".No young person would use that phrase nowadays as" pot/tin-rice" doesn't have a skin for a start.  ;D ;D ;D ;D

" Adam " or " madam " is an old-timer.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #79 on: January 03, 2015, 07:01:PM »
:o :o - (ex-hails)  ;D



Thank GOD for that. I was about to call the paramedics ;D ;D ;D ;D

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #80 on: January 03, 2015, 07:02:PM »
He's always banning on about Bob De Niro  and he's never said "in'it" once!!  ;D

Waiting for his answer.  8) 8) 8) 8)

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #81 on: January 03, 2015, 07:02:PM »
I think that's probably 'in spite of' rather than 'because of'?  ;D ;D ;)

possibly .


Mr. Gee

  • Guest
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #82 on: January 03, 2015, 07:03:PM »
You don't say any bad points.

Or say any good points.

Or say any points at all.

Or create threads.

Or say why you changed from innocent to guilty after I joined.

You just post to or about me.

I hope when I become elderly there will be more in my life than just posting to or about someone I have never spoken to.
Just coincidence.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #83 on: January 03, 2015, 07:08:PM »
Waiting for his answer.  8) 8) 8) 8)

Think he must be taking a sherry or warm milk break!  ;D ;D ;D
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33771
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #84 on: January 03, 2015, 07:10:PM »
Quote from: Adam link=topic=6321.msg279350#msg279350 date=1420309764

Or say why you changed from innocent to guilty after I joined.

 
[/quote




Oh, but I HAVE, Adam. On two, possibly three, occasions -and I HAVE already told you this- although I haven't personally addressed you with the information. This just tells me that you're such an egotist that you don't bother to read others' posts when they don't involve YOU.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #85 on: January 03, 2015, 07:19:PM »
come on Adam try and stop distracting from the thread. Caroline has given you some help .So carry on the discussion.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #86 on: January 03, 2015, 07:28:PM »
April !! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #87 on: January 03, 2015, 09:08:PM »
Adam - back to the thread - I asked you some questions  . Are you going to continue?

Offline TheBrilliantMistake

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 720
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #88 on: February 04, 2020, 09:19:AM »
Regarding the two bodies in the kitchen. It seems to be that there are a few options:

Option 1 - Mistaken Identification
In this scenario, the same body was identified as a female in one instance and a male in the other, thus giving rise to the belief there were two bodies in the kitchen.
In an ideal world, Police would count '1 body, probably male' or '2 bodies, 1 male, 1 probably female' - as it adds more clarity, but on that particular night, it could very easy have been 'I can see a woman' followed by 'I can see a male' from multiple sources, and thus misidentified as 2 bodies, 1 male, 1 female.

I have mixed feelings about this option. I can completely understand the misidentification of gender from a fairly limited viewing angle, and quite probably only for brief glimpses (remember, whichever officer was attempting to see would be risking being shot at. This also leads me to believe the number of officers looking through the kitchen window would be minimal.
On the one hand, this is a tense situation at the farm, with scope for misinformation. On the other hand, it is a potential life threatening hostage situation and attended by professionals. Correct information is paramount, particularly with regard to counting bodies.

Option 2 - Two Bodies Genuinely Seen Prior To Entry
In this scenario, both a male (Nevill) and female (presumably Sheila) are spotted through a window, both judged to be incapacitated. Somehow, between peering through the kitchen window and physically entering the building, Sheila recovers and moves upstairs, where she commits suicide.

At face value, this scenario seems plausible enough, but in a wider context it becomes less so.
If Sheila was indeed incapacitated for a period of time, she would be unlikely to recover in an instant. That isn't to say she was unconscious or anything, but if she was injured enough to appear to be motionless, then she has a very limited time to recover and make her way upstairs. Not only that, she had to avoid being seen and commit suicide without being heard. Finally, she would have to avoid leaving evidence of her presence in the kitchen.

Option 3 - Her Body Was Moved.
In this scenario, the police entered the building and identified her as one of two bodies in the kitchen. They then proceed to move the body to the bedroom and stage, or recreate the suicide position.
This is a particularly difficult to accept scenario, as at this point, the Police have no motive to move the body.


For me personally, Option 3 is discounted, and I'm more inclined to favour Option 1 than Option 2.
Option 1, in my opinion is down to human error, and it only takes one officer to make a mistake for it to be propagated up the reporting chain and repeated (erroneously) in multiple reports.
Option 2 needs some tangible evidence - traces of Sheila's blood downstairs, Nevill's blood on her gown etc.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13779
Re: Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?
« Reply #89 on: February 04, 2020, 09:30:AM »
Regarding the two bodies in the kitchen. It seems to be that there are a few options:

Option 1 - Mistaken Identification
In this scenario, the same body was identified as a female in one instance and a male in the other, thus giving rise to the belief there were two bodies in the kitchen.
In an ideal world, Police would count '1 body, probably male' or '2 bodies, 1 male, 1 probably female' - as it adds more clarity, but on that particular night, it could very easy have been 'I can see a woman' followed by 'I can see a male' from multiple sources, and thus misidentified as 2 bodies, 1 male, 1 female.

I have mixed feelings about this option. I can completely understand the misidentification of gender from a fairly limited viewing angle, and quite probably only for brief glimpses (remember, whichever officer was attempting to see would be risking being shot at. This also leads me to believe the number of officers looking through the kitchen window would be minimal.
On the one hand, this is a tense situation at the farm, with scope for misinformation. On the other hand, it is a potential life threatening hostage situation and attended by professionals. Correct information is paramount, particularly with regard to counting bodies.

Option 2 - Two Bodies Genuinely Seen Prior To Entry
In this scenario, both a male (Nevill) and female (presumably Sheila) are spotted through a window, both judged to be incapacitated. Somehow, between peering through the kitchen window and physically entering the building, Sheila recovers and moves upstairs, where she commits suicide.

At face value, this scenario seems plausible enough, but in a wider context it becomes less so.
If Sheila was indeed incapacitated for a period of time, she would be unlikely to recover in an instant. That isn't to say she was unconscious or anything, but if she was injured enough to appear to be motionless, then she has a very limited time to recover and make her way upstairs. Not only that, she had to avoid being seen and commit suicide without being heard. Finally, she would have to avoid leaving evidence of her presence in the kitchen.

Option 3 - Her Body Was Moved.
In this scenario, the police entered the building and identified her as one of two bodies in the kitchen. They then proceed to move the body to the bedroom and stage, or recreate the suicide position.
This is a particularly difficult to accept scenario, as at this point, the Police have no motive to move the body.


For me personally, Option 3 is discounted, and I'm more inclined to favour Option 1 than Option 2.
Option 1, in my opinion is down to human error, and it only takes one officer to make a mistake for it to be propagated up the reporting chain and repeated (erroneously) in multiple reports.
Option 2 needs some tangible evidence - traces of Sheila's blood downstairs, Nevill's blood on her gown etc.

Option one is the fact of the matter. The officer is on record saying he mistook Nevils body for a female.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2020, 09:30:AM by David1819 »