submit questions for the Essex Police Challenge

[lookout]

Who said that Jeremy framed his sister ? Nobody framed anyone.

[Caroline]

Caroline,this is something you ain't heard.Sorry to burst your bubble.

Probably not but then again I don't think I'd have fallen for it! 

[scipio_usmc]

Who said that Jeremy framed his sister ? Nobody framed anyone.

The authorities proved in court that he tried to frame her.

Julie testified to it.  Initial responders talked about how Jeremy lied to them by asserting Sheila had used all weapons int he house and he had trained her how to use the weapon he left out.  He made up the tale of taking the gun out to shoot rabbits and leaving it and ammunition out and staged bullets in support of his story but staged too many.  He made up the tale that Nevill called him to report that Sheila had the gun and was going crazy.  In fact, someone else shot and killed everyone including Sheila then after all were dead removed the silencer and put it away to conceal it had been used.  Sheila's body was dragged flat and the gun was placed on top of her to make it look like she was responsible. A Bible was place in a pool of her blood to make it appear she had been reading the Bible before she died but it should have been placed by her waist.

[lookout]

The authorities proved in court that he tried to frame her.

Julie testified to it.  Initial responders talked about how Jeremy lied to them by asserting Sheila had used all weapons int he house and he had trained her how to use the weapon he left out.  He made up the tale of taking the gun out to shoot rabbits and leaving it and ammunition out and staged bullets in support of his story but staged too many.  He made up the tale that Nevill called him to report that Sheila had the gun and was going crazy.  In fact, someone else shot and killed everyone including Sheila then after all were dead removed the silencer and put it away to conceal it had been used.  Sheila's body was dragged flat and the gun was placed on top of her to make it look like she was responsible. A Bible was place in a pool of her blood to make it appear she had been reading the Bible before she died but it should have been placed by her waist.

Oh,I don't think so.

[Caroline]

Lookout, if THIS one goes pear shaped. I think that YOU may feel more despondent than Jeremy about it

I think this must be the new evidence warming up for final subs to the CCRC? 

[lookout]

Probably not but then again I don't think I'd have fallen for it! 

This is entirely different.

[Jane]

Oh,I don't think so.

But 5/6ths of the jury did.

[Caroline]

This is entirely different.

Yes, of course it is 

[lookout]

This is entirely different.

It's definitely got the " WOW" factor I can assure you.

[guest154]

Oh, grow up. Do you know how silly it sounds? Almost gloating  "I know something you don't know!".  Shame on whoever told you - leaks like this are stupid. It will turn out like all the rest of the "developments" but by that time you will have moved onto even more new stuff that has been "found".

[Caroline]

It's definitely got the " WOW" factor I can assure you.

Ur huh - of course it has. Anything sounds good when it's told with enthusiasm and you WANT to believe it. Lets just wait and see 

[Caroline]

Oh, grow up. Do you know how silly it sounds? Almost gloating  "I know something you don't know!".  Shame on whoever told you - leaks like this are stupid. It will turn out like all the rest of the "developments" but by that time you will have moved onto even more new stuff that has been "found".

Exactly - fairy dust!!

[Jane]

It's definitely got the " WOW" factor I can assure you.

As I said, lookout. I fear you will be much more disappointed than Jeremy when this one goes the way of the others. If it gets to the point that it's a technicality that's being relied on, it really is clutching at straws time.

[scipio_usmc]

Where did you get that from?

I already broke down the DNA findings many times. I posted them again just the other day:

There were 10 areas of the moderator tested for DNA.  Each test detected 1 major donor and then at least 1 minor donor. There were at least 3 major donors and possibly 4.  There were 10 minor donors. The DNA profile of the minor donors was so small there was no way to rule it out as having been from anyone except the specific major donor. The minor donor could be the same person, the minor donor could be the major donor of a different test sample or each minor donor could be a unique person. 
So the donors could have been as few as just 4 of the victims or could be as many as all 5 victims plus 9 other people. 4-14 people talk about a big range.

1) June + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim)
2) June + at least another male (could be any male victim or a non-victim)
3) June + at least another male (could be any male victim or a non-victim)
4) Sheila + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim)
5) Sheila + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim)
6) Sheila + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim)
7) Sheila + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim)
8 ) Sheila + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim)
9) Most likely one of the twins + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim)
10) Most likely one of the twins + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim)

If you want to use a math formula and plug in variables then here are the variables to understand it then here you go:

1) A + B
2) A + C
3) A + D
4) E + F
5) E + G
6) E + H
7) E + I
8 ) E + J
9) K + L
10) M + N

K and M might be the same person or might be different people. The DNA of K and M were very close to E's (Sheila's) DNA so was either 1 of the twins or both.

B,C,D,F,G,H,I,J,L, and N could all be 1 person or could be as many as 10 different people. The major donor in 1 sample could be the minor donor in another sample. The only major donor ruled out is the major donor from that specific sample.

This is all in the 2002 Court of Appeals decision in addition to defense documents.   

[scipio_usmc]

As I said, lookout. I fear you will be much more disappointed than Jeremy when this one goes the way of the others. If it gets to the point that it's a technicality that's being relied on, it really is clutching at straws time.

The things that would qualify as a technicality that he could be released on have already been tried and exhausted.  The only way he is getting out is if Julie recants (and even that might not be enough it would depend on the judges some would release him some wouldn't) or credible evidence it put forth that the blood evidence was planted in the moderator and blood found in the rifle was concealed.  If someone testified they did such or saw it done etc or knew it to have happened and has some evidence to back it up that would result in the conviction being vacated.