Two bodies in the kitchen. A time for closure ?

[TheBrilliantMistake]

It was rather fortunate that Jeremy was at home at all. He often wasn't.
And to remember he'd left a gun out on the kitchen table, with full magazine, plus reserve ammunition (knowing children were in the house too)? - that was a Godsend. Had he not remembered that detail, the police might have doubted the veracity of Nevill's fears.

[David1819]

It was rather fortunate that Jeremy was at home at all. He often wasn't.
And to remember he'd left a gun out on the kitchen table, with full magazine, plus reserve ammunition (knowing children were in the house too)? - that was a Godsend. Had he not remembered that detail, the police might have doubted the veracity of Nevill's fears.

He didn't say he left it on the kitchen table. He left it on a bench outside the downstairs office.

[lookout]

It was rather fortunate that Jeremy was at home at all. He often wasn't.
And to remember he'd left a gun out on the kitchen table, with full magazine, plus reserve ammunition (knowing children were in the house too)? - that was a Godsend. Had he not remembered that detail, the police might have doubted the veracity of Nevill's fears.

The gun was never on the table----apart from a toy one on the table in the lounge area ( which we've never seen a pic of )

[Kaldin]

He said he left the gun in the back hallway leaning on the wall near the wellies.

I wish people would understand that he didn't say he left it on the kitchen table.

[TheBrilliantMistake]

It doesn't matter what the logs say Lookout, the person writing the log isn't the person giving the account. The logs are NOT set in stone, that's why there is always a debrief to get the facts straight.

Indeed. Out of context, the logs says 'Firearms talking to someone inside the farm' (or words to that effect). But the logs also state numerous times - 'no response'.

'Someone inside the farm' can be interpreted as a physical being inside the house, or simple an insider who is au fait with the house and the family, i.e. Jeremy.

The logs TRY to be as good a record as possible, but they are written on the fly and prone to error, or due to their relative brevity, missing a wider context. This is why testimony is given afterwards to elaborate on the detail, or clear up any ambiguities (accepting that sometimes, some will remain).

[TheBrilliantMistake]

[2002] EWCA Crim 2912 Case No: 20011745 S1

"Having walked to the house from the lane there was further conversation. The appellant told the police that Sheila Caffell could use a gun. He said they had gone target shooting together and she had used all the guns in the house before. In the light of what they were told the uniformed officers requested armed assistance before any attempt to search the house was made. The appellant dictated a list of the firearms kept at the house. He told the police that he had loaded the .22 automatic rifle the previous night because he thought he had heard rabbits outside. He said he had left the gun on the kitchen table with a full magazine and a box of ammunition nearby. Those who saw the appellant at the scene at that time described him as remarkably calm. At some stage during their conversations that morning PC Myall and the appellant spoke about motor cars. The appellant said that the Osea Road Caravan Site company, "would be able to stand him a Porsche" car at some point during the year."

[Jane]

He said he left the gun in the back hallway leaning on the wall near the wellies.

I wish people would understand that he didn't say he left it on the kitchen table.

Irrelevant of where he left it, it wasn't put away. If it was left where he said Sheila would have been able to see it, that was particularly fortuitous and far too convenient to be coincidental.

[lookout]

It doesn't matter what the logs say Lookout, the person writing the log isn't the person giving the account. The logs are NOT set in stone, that's why there is always a debrief to get the facts straight.

But logs should be " set in stone " as those who write them are usually the first response after a crime has occurred and it's vital that things are written as seen to assist those who are following up a case.

It's the re-typing that becomes the problem with editing galore.

[Kaldin]

Irrelevant of where he left it, it wasn't put away. If it was left where he said Sheila would have been able to see it, that was particularly fortuitous and far too convenient to be coincidental.

Irrelevant? If people can't even get that bit right, what hope is there?

It might have been put away ...

In any case, I don't think it's true to say that Nevill always put guns away. There were guns found on the kitchen stairs, and there were guns in the downstairs shower room.

[lookout]

Irrelevant? If people can't even get that bit right, what hope is there?

It might have been put away ...

In any case, I don't think it's true to say that Nevill always put guns away. There were guns found on the kitchen stairs, and there were guns in the downstairs shower room.

There was also a shotgun upstairs which had Sheila's fingerprints on it. AE found it there.

[Jane]

Irrelevant? If people can't even get that bit right, what hope is there?

It might have been put away ...

In any case, I don't think it's true to say that Nevill always put guns away. There were guns found on the kitchen stairs, and there were guns in the downstairs shower room.

Oh! I couldn't agree more. It's why I loathe sweeping statements. Truly, I tire of having it claimed that "Nevill (or any other name) always did........................" NOBODY "always" does!

[TheBrilliantMistake]

But logs should be " set in stone " as those who write them are usually the first response after a crime has occurred and it's vital that things are written as seen to assist those who are following up a case.

It's the re-typing that becomes the problem with editing galore.

In many cases, the logs are summaries of events as they happened, sometimes observed, sometimes heard, and on occasion misheard, or misinterpreted. In this case, the logs are largely radio messages which are by their nature brief and not always fully explanatory. Ideally, a log would be 100% perfect and fully descriptive. In reality, they are indicative of events, but not proof positive.

[Caroline]

He didn't say he left it on the kitchen table. He left it on a bench outside the downstairs office.

No he didn't. he said he left the magazine there and the rifle next to the wellington boots.

[TheBrilliantMistake]

JB's testimony varies a little bit, but generally, he made it safe, and left outside the kitchen, but the boots in the hallway.
However, on the night in question he is alleged to have told the officers on the scene that he had left it on the table, loaded.

That may be a false recollection, or equally it may have been erroneous on JB's part, or a deliberate exaggeration, either from genuine concern to progress matters quickly, or from a more sinister attempt to paint a picture of increasingly probable tragedy.

[sami]

No he didn't. he said he left the magazine there and the rifle next to the wellington boots.