Who moved Sheila's arm and hand?

[susan]

Hello tyler quite a few forum members have wondered if two rifles were used and I guess unless JB is guilty nobody knows exactly the sequence of events .

[Caroline]

I think NGB said it was 'theoretically possible' that a second rifle was used, but in his view highly unlikely.  Some of the recovered bullets were in a state where they could be positively identified as having been fired from the Anschutz. Others were so deformed that it was not possible to say whether they had been fired from the Anschutz or not. That therefore leaves open the theoretical possibility that another .22 rifle was used.

If the Brno rifle was at WHF that night, with its silencer, it still couldn't have been fired without its bolt and even Jeremy agrees that the bolt had been removed. This is consistent with Pargeter's evidence at trial, although in his statement to COLP, I believe he said he took the whole rifle from WHF a week or so before the tragedy? However, I think they can both use the same ammunition so the possibility remains.

If I remember rightly, NGB said that Andrew Hunter's claim that a .223 Ruger carbine was carried by one of the raid team, but it's use as a murder weapon could be ruled out because this was a high powered centrefire rifle and at close range, a shot to the head with the Ruger - would have blown the head apart.

[scipio_usmc]

well 2 riffles would the killer wouldn't of had to reload witch would explian a lot.

1) Both rifles combined would need to hold 25 rounds for there to be no reloading required.

2) The spent casings did not have any markings to indicate some were fired by a different weapon.  The bullets are not the only thing to look at, the spent casings have breech marks, firing pin impressions and extraction marks that are unique to specific weapons.

3) The only way for an additional rifle to have been used would have been for Jeremy to take a rifle with him to the scene and then remove it from the scene. 

A) Where would he get one from?

B) If he had a weapon to use he would not have bothered making his father buy one

C) Taking it away would be sheer folly and completely ruin his plan so why would he take it away?  To use a different weapon- which police could determine from the lands and grooves as well as the marks on the casings- and then take it with you would be absolute proof someone else was there and had left the scene alive.  That would ruin his narrative of Sheila committing the murders so if you were going to use 2 weapons you would have to leave both.  For 2 weapons to be used Jeremy would have to be the luckiest man alive with all rounds from another weapon being too mangled to rule out the weapon it was fired from.  The chances of all the bullets fired by the Anschutz being intact enough to match the land and groove markings to the Anschutz and all the bullets from the other weapon too mangled to rule out being fired by the Anschutz defies the laws of averages.

[lookout]

 Surely,if Jeremy had have murdered his family,then re-staged everything,he'd have put Sheila with her boys and not left on the floor where she was found,i.e.kitchen or bedroom ? Particularly the bedroom with the person Sheila had detested the most,and who'd " planted the seed of hatred " by calling her daughter " devils child ".
I'm sorry but I can't imagine any mother using the word devil and children in the same context.

I also wonder if there'd been anything in Nevilles' cup of tea that both he and Sheila shared while both were in the kitchen ??

There are far more aspects to this case than blaming someone who just liked the high-life and everything that went with it. Jeremy was made an example of and those responsible knew that he was then on his own and out on a limb,without support and without a leg to stand on simply for being in bed.
I can't think of anything more despicable.

[Caroline]

Surely,if Jeremy had have murdered his family,then re-staged everything,he'd have put Sheila with her boys and not left on the floor where she was found,i.e.kitchen or bedroom ? Particularly the bedroom with the person Sheila had detested the most,and who'd " planted the seed of hatred " by calling her daughter " devils child ".
I'm sorry but I can't imagine any mother using the word devil and children in the same context.

I also wonder if there'd been anything in Nevilles' cup of tea that both he and Sheila shared while both were in the kitchen ??

There are far more aspects to this case than blaming someone who just liked the high-life and everything that went with it. Jeremy was made an example of and those responsible knew that he was then on his own and out on a limb,without support and without a leg to stand on simply for being in bed.
I can't think of anything more despicable.

I think if Sheila had shot herself - that's where she would have wanted to be but Jeremy obviously didn't think about it. "Those responsible"? I thought you didn't believe he was framed?  Who do you think was responsible?

[lookout]

I think if Sheila had shot herself - that's where she would have wanted to be but Jeremy obviously didn't think about it. "Those responsible"? I thought you didn't believe he was framed?  Who do you think was responsible?

That's right,I still don't believe he was framed.The impression being,because EP made such a pigs ear of the investigation and in them covering,or trying to cover where they cocked-up,would make anyone believe that they did frame him.

Sheila was the one responsible for the tragedies. All three adults had " fought " with each other beforehand.

[Jane]

That's right,I still don't believe he was framed.The impression being,because EP made such a pigs ear of the investigation and in them covering,or trying to cover where they cocked-up,would make anyone believe that they did frame him.

Sheila was the one responsible for the tragedies. All three adults had " fought " with each other beforehand.

If there was concrete proof of it, Lookout, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[lookout]

If there was concrete proof of it, Lookout, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

What stands out are the grab marks on the forearms of all three adults. Had the police/pathologist done their jobs properly,then they'd have taken scrapings from under the nails of the deceased.

[Jane]

What stands out are the grab marks on the forearms of all three adults. Had the police/pathologist done their jobs properly,then they'd have taken scrapings from under the nails of the deceased.

The trouble with that is, Lookout, there isn't a single picture, taken that night, which tells us anything much OTHER than they've all been shot. It wouldn't have been thought necessary to take scrapings as they weren't looking for a murderer.

[lookout]

The trouble with that is, Lookout, there isn't a single picture, taken that night, which tells us anything much OTHER than they've all been shot. It wouldn't have been thought necessary to take scrapings as they weren't looking for a murderer.

Serves them right for not having been thorough,as surely common sense would have told them that the markings came from one of them so it was their job not to have jumped to conclusions from the start before they were 100% satisfied that it was 4 murders and a suicide, who'd killed who,and studied those injuries properly,because of 3 adults being involved.
What did they do ? Toss a coin ? They might just as well have done.
EVERYONE agrees that it was botched !

[lookout]

You've only to see how the pathologist didn't come to any conclusions over the marks on Nevilles' neck.
This again,should have been relevant to the investigation and not passed off as " unidentified "as they were possibly made during the tragic event.
It's like going to the GP and him saying " I don't know what's the matter with you ".You'd want a second opinion to find out.
Just because a person is deceased doesn't mean that you cast him aside and forget about it.

[Jane]

You've only to see how the pathologist didn't come to any conclusions over the marks on Nevilles' neck.
This again,should have been relevant to the investigation and not passed off as " unidentified "as they were possibly made during the tragic event.
It's like going to the GP and him saying " I don't know what's the matter with you ".You'd want a second opinion to find out.
Just because a person is deceased doesn't mean that you cast him aside and forget about it.

Lookout, SURELY a pathologist would have known the difference between old scars and recently acquired wounds. I would have thought, that had it been concluded that the likelihood was that they weren't recent, they'd have been dismissed.

[Jane]

Serves them right for not having been thorough,as surely common sense would have told them that the markings came from one of them so it was their job not to have jumped to conclusions from the start before they were 100% satisfied that it was 4 murders and a suicide, who'd killed who,and studied those injuries properly,because of 3 adults being involved.
What did they do ? Toss a coin ? They might just as well have done.
EVERYONE agrees that it was botched !

Supposing they did? HOW is it going to be proved now. I imagine that MANY connected with the case are, by now, dementing or dead. Personally, I wouldn't feel comfortable about ANY person being released from a murder sentence on the grounds that a mistake MAY have been made -but cannot be proved- during post mortem on a victim.

[scipio_usmc]

Surely,if Jeremy had have murdered his family,then re-staged everything,he'd have put Sheila with her boys and not left on the floor where she was found,i.e.kitchen or bedroom ? Particularly the bedroom with the person Sheila had detested the most,and who'd " planted the seed of hatred " by calling her daughter " devils child ".
I'm sorry but I can't imagine any mother using the word devil and children in the same context.

I also wonder if there'd been anything in Nevilles' cup of tea that both he and Sheila shared while both were in the kitchen ??

There are far more aspects to this case than blaming someone who just liked the high-life and everything that went with it. Jeremy was made an example of and those responsible knew that he was then on his own and out on a limb,without support and without a leg to stand on simply for being in bed.
I can't think of anything more despicable.

Restaging bodies is a clear sign the bodies were staged and that someone else was there.  If he moved her body to the room with her boys then the police would have been able to figure out her body was moved to that location by someone and that would let the cat out of the bag that she didn't kill herself. 

You have to avoid leaving any drag marks, any blood trails, any marks on the body from touching it, have to move the shell casings...

It's not the simple endeavor you suggest, at least not if you want it to work.   

[Jane]

Restaging bodies is a clear sign the bodies were staged and that someone else was there.  If he moved her body to the room with her boys then the police would have been able to figure out her body was moved to that location by someone and that would let the cat out of the bag that she didn't kill herself. 

You have to avoid leaving any drag marks, any blood trails, any marks on the body from touching it, have to move the shell casings...

It's not the simple endeavor you suggest, at least not if you want it to work.   

The police had already done that, Scipio. Apparently, still alive but injured, they'd been taken from June's bedroom to another room, photographed, then taken back to Jun's bedroom where the were dispatched prior to being photographed again.