The main prosecution forensic case

[scipio_usmc]

I've always assumed they where the first to go as they where asleep. Is this most probably the case do you think?

I am thoroughly convinced June died first and then Nevill.  I suspect the boys were killed next and finally Sheila but I am recognize it could have been Sheila killed third and then the boys.

The gun held a maximum of 11 rounds (10 in the magazine and 1 in the chamber) so either had 10 or 11 rounds at the outset.  The twins were shot 8 times.  Had they been killed first there only would have been 2-3 bullets left in the gun to use on June and Nevill.  But 11 shots were fired in the master bedroom at June and Nevill (7 at June and 4 at Nevill) before the gun was empty and then things progressed to the kitchen.  This is a clear sign that the initial shooting was in the master bedroom. 

In the kitchen the gun was empty initially when both Nevill and his killer entered the kitchen.  Nevill tried to take it away and as they struggled for control the moderator scratched the mantle, broke the ceiling lampshade and various things were knocked over.  Eventually the killer gained full control over the weapon and bashed Nevill with the butt of the weapon.  Nevill tried to block the blows with his right arm and that is how his arm was gouged and bruised.  His watch was torn off as well during the course of this. Eventually the killer managed to bash his head in with the stock and in the process part of the stock broke off. Nevill was rendered unconscious.  This permitted the killer some time to reload the gun.  To make sure he didn't wake up and put up another fight the killer only partially loaded it and fired 4 rounds into his head killing him.  The killer then fully loaded the magazine with 10 rounds and went up upstairs using 8 on the boys and the remaining 2 on Sheila.

There is no way to know for sure whether Sheila was killed first or the boys.  If Sheila was already up then it would make sense to kill her first.  But if she was still in bed it would make sense to kill the boys first and then to kill her.  He needed to stage her body and as he tried to do so she might scream enough to wake up the boys and then he would have to worry about chasing 2 boys before they could escape. If they run in different directions that is a problem so it makes sense to kill them first as they sleep and then to deal with Sheila last unless she was already out of her room which would force him to deal with her right away.

If they had more than 1 magazine reloading would not have been as big an issue but when you have only one magazine you are forced to load bullets into that magazine which takes more time than changing a spare magazine that was already preloaded plus you need to go to the bullet supply to do that.  Knowing this your choice of first targets would be the most dangerous targets.  Nevill and June were the most dangerous so they were chosen as the first victims. Not only are they the most dangerous because they were the strongest and were in the same room togtheter, his plan of pretending Nevill called meant he could not kill Nevill in his sleep If Nevill was killed in bed he could not have called.  So he needed to shoot June in bed and give Nevill a chance to get up before shooting him. He would want the gun with the maximum load during the course of trying such a thing not kill the kids and risk the parents waking up from the noise of killing the kids and then have to deal with Nevill and June (an Sheila) with only 2-3 rounds left in the gun.  Since even with the 11 rounds fired in the bedroom Nevill was still was able to reach the kitchen and put up such a fight it is safe to say the killer would have been really screwed with only 2-3 rounds (instead of 11) to deal with June and Nevill.

These kinds of considerations are ones that are usually not considered except by people who are skilled in gun use and actually think about the reloading issue. I'm still amazed they only had 1 magazine. I have 8 magazines for my rifle.  I had to alter them from holding 20 rounds to 15 because of a stupid state law but that still means 120 rounds.    The smallest number of magazines I have for any of my pistols is 3.  One magazine limits your options somewhat. If it ended up misfeeding (some magazines have problems) he would have been up the proverbial creek.

Going back to the twins I don't know why one was shot 5 times and the other only 3.  Maybe he intentionally was saving 2 for Sheila in case he needed more than 1 or maybe they died last and the gun was empty so that was why 1 only got 3.  We have no way to know unless Jeremy decided to talk but have no expectation he ever will admit anything. He invested too much in his denials all these years, I can't imagine him confessing even on his death bed.

[scipio_usmc]

I hear what you say and no one has the right to rob another of their life. However, I think that most women will react in the same way, ie, emotionally, over the death of a child. This rises exponentially with the death of two children together.

My weakness when it comes to crimes is rape.  I am enraged by rapes especially of children.  That is where I view it even worse when the victim is a child.  In college I was stabbed while breaking up a rape.  I interrupted it before they actually managed to rape her they only tore off some of her clothing.  She was around my age so not a child but still young.  She went with me to the hospital and on the way I tried to convince her to press charges and wanted to know the names of the guys.  She kept saying they were her friends. I had every intention of pressing charges for being stabbed. It was astonishing to me that she wanted to protect them after what they did. She vanished from the hospital while I was treated.  I never found out her name, she didn't seek any mental help at the hospital and I never saw her again so never found out the identity of the attempted rapists.  Had I known she was going to do that I would not have let them get away so easily.


A few years later I was dismissed from a jury because while being questioned I expressed supportive of life sentences for those who rape children. That scared the crap out of the defense attorney.  It probably sounds odd that I feel murder is murder but rape of children is worse than adults but that is how I feel.   


   

[guest154]

April, as far as I remember, you accused me of something that wasn´t there as if you had a preconception of what I was thinking.
I had to counter that, because I did feel offended by it. You said I had made it FAR from clear what I thought about a certain matter.
I put forward evidence of what I thought and had expressed, which was in fact very clear, but there was no response from you. It is still all there to see.
Mat chimed in and asked me something along the lines: As a supporter isn´t it natural that you want to believe what Mike says? (!)
How about reading what I write instead of going by your own preconceptions?

April, this is what you said to Mr. Gee and me:

 
After I had said:

Was I "FAR from clear", as you later claimed? I can´t see how much clearer I could have been, but you still KNEW how much I wanted it to be true - and Mat too!
One of the reasons I feel like leaving this place. People think you believe everything Mike says and that you think along the same lines. People think you are an idiot for posting here.

You bet I was mad, April! Again, read what I write actually, before you form your opinion!

Really not sure what your issue is, ALIAS. You SEEM to tend to play the victim, I am not sure why you are even bringing me into it. I said it is natural for supporters to want there to be evidence to show innocence, so what? You didn't say anything negative to that at the time because you KNEW I wasn't accusinse you of believing Mike. I knew you didn't believe there would be photos from Mike.  I knew you hadn't edited the photos when Mike accused you of doing so. I stood up and said so, numerous times. I feel you've used my words that were nothing but supportive - to have a pop at APRIL and make it seem this is something that it really wasn't.

But to quote yourself.

Total and utter bullshit!

[guest154]

I understand that the firearms expert could not tell if the bullets were fired through the silencer or not? Is that always the case, or can you tell in some instances but the marks on the bullets?

This is something I am confused by too, Grahame. If a bullet passes through the barrel and has marks left on it, unique marks, then why doesn't a silencer leave marks too?
I am sure there will be a simple answer - but it's something I have wondered about.

[scipio_usmc]

This is something I am confused by too, Grahame. If a bullet passes through the barrel and has marks left on it, unique marks, then why doesn't a silencer leave marks too?
I am sure there will be a simple answer - but it's something I have wondered about.

The barrel of most guns are rifled.  The rifling makes a bullet spin. If a bullet didn't spin it would tumble. That results in less stability, velocity, and thus less accuracy and range.  Consider a rugby ball. WHat happens if you spin it? You can get it to go further and straighter when you pass it.  American footballs are smaller than rugby balls so that you can throw them with one hand.  They are spun when you throw them.  If you fail to spin it then it just tumbles and goes practically no where.

The bullets touch the rifling that is how the bullet is forced to spin.  As it touches the barrel it becomes notched with the rifling characteristics (class characteristics) as well as any unique features specific to that barrel and no other (incidental characteristics).

The central channel of a baffled moderator is wider than the rifle barrel so that the bullet will not touch anything but air as it passes through the moderator unless the moderator is not properly assembled or not properly attached to the weapon.     

[guest154]

The barrel of most guns are rifled.  The rifling makes a bullet spin. If a bullet didn't spin it would tumble. That results in less stability, velocity, and thus less accuracy and range.  Consider a rugby ball. WHat happens if you spin it? You can get it to go further and straighter when you pass it.  American footballs are smaller than rugby balls so that you can throw them with one hand.  They are spun when you throw them.  If you fail to spin it then it just tumbles and goes practically no where.

The bullets touch the rifling that is how the bullet is forced to spin.  As it touches the barrel it becomes notched with the rifling characteristics (class characteristics) as well as any unique features specific to that barrel and no other (incidental characteristics).

The central channel of a baffled moderator is wider than the rifle barrel so that the bullet will not touch anything but air as it passes through the moderator unless the moderator is not properly assembled or not properly attached to the weapon.   

Knew it would be a somewhat simple answer, thanks Scip.

[Jane]

My weakness when it comes to crimes is rape.  I am enraged by rapes especially of children.  That is where I view it even worse when the victim is a child.  In college I was stabbed while breaking up a rape.  I interrupted it before they actually managed to rape her they only tore off some of her clothing.  She was around my age so not a child but still young.  She went with me to the hospital and on the way I tried to convince her to press charges and wanted to know the names of the guys.  She kept saying they were her friends. I had every intention of pressing charges for being stabbed. It was astonishing to me that she wanted to protect them after what they did. She vanished from the hospital while I was treated.  I never found out her name, she didn't seek any mental help at the hospital and I never saw her again so never found out the identity of the attempted rapists.  Had I known she was going to do that I would not have let them get away so easily.


A few years later I was dismissed from a jury because while being questioned I expressed supportive of life sentences for those who rape children. That scared the crap out of the defense attorney.  It probably sounds odd that I feel murder is murder but rape of children is worse than adults but that is how I feel.   


 

I feel certain that this will be taken the wrong way, but I think it MAY be "kinder" for a child to be killed than raped. Killed results in being dead. Raped can result in a living death. Life long physical injuries and mental scars. Scans and x rays can show if the body has healed but there's no yardstick to tell how well the mind has healed.

I don't know what I feel is the appropriate punishment for a child rapist. I'm torn between the death sentence OR locking them into a room with other prisoners and turning a blind eye to what happens. Vindictive? Yes.

[Alias]

Really not sure what your issue is, ALIAS. You SEEM to tend to play the victim, I am not sure why you are even bringing me into it. I said it is natural for supporters to want there to be evidence to show innocence, so what? You didn't say anything negative to that at the time because you KNEW I wasn't accusinse you of believing Mike. I knew you didn't believe there would be photos from Mike.  I knew you hadn't edited the photos when Mike accused you of doing so. I stood up and said so, numerous times. I feel you've used my words that were nothing but supportive - to have a pop at APRIL and make it seem this is something that it really wasn't.

But to quote yourself.

You to me: "But as a supporter wouldn't you want what Mike said to be true?"

No why? If someone is obviously lying I don´t want it to be true!
Is that what you take me for?

Well, obviously.

[guest154]

You to me: "But as a supporter wouldn't you want what Mike said to be true?"

No why? If someone is obviously lying I don´t want it to be true!
Is that what you take me for?

Well, obviously.

If they are LYING then of course it can't be TRUE. 
 I was trying to explain to you how APRILS post to you was non-malicious. But I think you knew she meant no harm with her posts.

[Alias]

If they are LYING then of course it can't be TRUE. 
 I was trying to explain to you how APRILS post to you was non-malicious. But I think you knew she meant no harm with her posts.

I don´t know, Mat. As everyone can see, I made it perfectly clear what I thought about the whole thing, still I have to listen to people telling me that I wanted it to be true! (+ being accused by Mike of doctoring the screenshots I took.)

Why was it neccessary to say that someone KNEW that I wanted it to be true - when I clearly didn´t? Just didn´t feel right and still doesn´t. What was the purpose of it?

[David1819]

I am thoroughly convinced June died first and then Nevill.  I suspect the boys were killed next and finally Sheila but I am recognize it could have been Sheila killed third and then the boys.

The gun held a maximum of 11 rounds (10 in the magazine and 1 in the chamber) so either had 10 or 11 rounds at the outset.  The twins were shot 8 times.  Had they been killed first there only would have been 2-3 bullets left in the gun to use on June and Nevill.  But 11 shots were fired in the master bedroom at June and Nevill (7 at June and 4 at Nevill) before the gun was empty and then things progressed to the kitchen.  This is a clear sign that the initial shooting was in the master bedroom. 

In the kitchen the gun was empty initially when both Nevill and his killer entered the kitchen.  Nevill tried to take it away and as they struggled for control the moderator scratched the mantle, broke the ceiling lampshade and various things were knocked over.  Eventually the killer gained full control over the weapon and bashed Nevill with the butt of the weapon.  Nevill tried to block the blows with his right arm and that is how his arm was gouged and bruised.  His watch was torn off as well during the course of this. Eventually the killer managed to bash his head in with the stock and in the process part of the stock broke off. Nevill was rendered unconscious.  This permitted the killer some time to reload the gun.  To make sure he didn't wake up and put up another fight the killer only partially loaded it and fired 4 rounds into his head killing him.  The killer then fully loaded the magazine with 10 rounds and went up upstairs using 8 on the boys and the remaining 2 on Sheila.

There is no way to know for sure whether Sheila was killed first or the boys.  If Sheila was already up then it would make sense to kill her first.  But if she was still in bed it would make sense to kill the boys first and then to kill her.  He needed to stage her body and as he tried to do so she might scream enough to wake up the boys and then he would have to worry about chasing 2 boys before they could escape. If they run in different directions that is a problem so it makes sense to kill them first as they sleep and then to deal with Sheila last unless she was already out of her room which would force him to deal with her right away.

If they had more than 1 magazine reloading would not have been as big an issue but when you have only one magazine you are forced to load bullets into that magazine which takes more time than changing a spare magazine that was already preloaded plus you need to go to the bullet supply to do that.  Knowing this your choice of first targets would be the most dangerous targets.  Nevill and June were the most dangerous so they were chosen as the first victims. Not only are they the most dangerous because they were the strongest and were in the same room togtheter, his plan of pretending Nevill called meant he could not kill Nevill in his sleep If Nevill was killed in bed he could not have called.  So he needed to shoot June in bed and give Nevill a chance to get up before shooting him. He would want the gun with the maximum load during the course of trying such a thing not kill the kids and risk the parents waking up from the noise of killing the kids and then have to deal with Nevill and June (an Sheila) with only 2-3 rounds left in the gun.  Since even with the 11 rounds fired in the bedroom Nevill was still was able to reach the kitchen and put up such a fight it is safe to say the killer would have been really screwed with only 2-3 rounds (instead of 11) to deal with June and Nevill.

These kinds of considerations are ones that are usually not considered except by people who are skilled in gun use and actually think about the reloading issue. I'm still amazed they only had 1 magazine. I have 8 magazines for my rifle.  I had to alter them from holding 20 rounds to 15 because of a stupid state law but that still means 120 rounds.    The smallest number of magazines I have for any of my pistols is 3.  One magazine limits your options somewhat. If it ended up misfeeding (some magazines have problems) he would have been up the proverbial creek.

Going back to the twins I don't know why one was shot 5 times and the other only 3.  Maybe he intentionally was saving 2 for Sheila in case he needed more than 1 or maybe they died last and the gun was empty so that was why 1 only got 3.  We have no way to know unless Jeremy decided to talk but have no expectation he ever will admit anything. He invested too much in his denials all these years, I can't imagine him confessing even on his death bed.

If Jeremy committed the crime I speculate this. The Twins most probably died first, one still had his thumb in his mouth indicating he was asleep and by all reports  said they probably died in their sleep.
Its extremely unlikely they would have slept thought the massacre had they not been first.

I have always thought that Jeremy would have shot them both first point blank range one shot each to the head, Then once everyone was eliminated he would have reloaded the gun and fired more shots to make it look more like the work of a deranged mind than that of a calculated killer.

Does that make sense?

[Caroline]

I don´t know, Mat. As everyone can see, I made it perfectly clear what I thought about the whole thing, still I have to listen to people telling me that I wanted it to be true! (+ being accused by Mike of doctoring the screenshots I took.)

Why was it neccessary to say that someone KNEW that I wanted it to be true - when I clearly didn´t? Just didn´t feel right and still doesn´t. What was the purpose of it?

As far as I can see, April simply meant that it would be nice if such a photograph did exist and especially for his supporters. She wasn't being condescending - let me put it this way, who wouldn't have been pleased if he photograph turned out to be real? Even I would and I think he's guilty.

[Jane]

If they are LYING then of course it can't be TRUE. 
 I was trying to explain to you how APRILS post to you was non-malicious. But I think you knew she meant no harm with her posts.

Bless you, Mat You know, when I first joined this forum -withing the first month, I think- Mike was promising that he had evidence which would bring about Jeremy's release immediately, if not SOONER!!!! Believing Jeremy innocent, I can't begin to tell you how thrilled I was -I went round telling people about it, for God's sake- I was a forum virgin. I didn't think people would tell lies over something SO important. I can STILL recall how I felt when the penny dropped an d it dawned on me that it was never going to happen. To say I felt let down would be a gross understatement. I WAS GUTTED. AS A SUPPORTER I WANTED WHAT MIKE SAID TO BE TRUE.I would NEVER have taken  offence if someone had suggested  it to me.

When I offered support to Grahame -and included Alias- I was recalling my own feelings of disappointment. Despite that she's plastered on line the post I supposedly responded to, is it likely, HAD I responded to that post, that I would have offered HER my support? Surely common sense decrees that I'd have confined it to Grahame.

I can only believe that if Alias found malice and offence in what I said, she must have been looking for ANYTHING she could throw at me. Mat, I DO appreciate your support but I'm truly sorry that you've been made part of this.

[guest154]

Bless you, Mat You know, when I first joined this forum -withing the first month, I think- Mike was promising that he had evidence which would bring about Jeremy's release immediately, if not SOONER!!!! Believing Jeremy innocent, I can't begin to tell you how thrilled I was -I went round telling people about it, for God's sake- I was a forum virgin. I didn't think people would tell lies over something SO important. I can STILL recall how I felt when the penny dropped an d it dawned on me that it was never going to happen. To say I felt let down would be a gross understatement. I WAS GUTTED. AS A SUPPORTER I WANTED WHAT MIKE SAID TO BE TRUE.I would NEVER have taken  offence if someone had suggested  it to me.

Apes,
I think a lot of people will be able to relate to this. When you're new to the board and you read something that sounds SO prominising that there is no way it can't be true it does open your eyes. As a supporter I can't imagine the moment when you realise that maybe not everything is as it seems.

I can only believe that if Alias found malice and offence in what I said, she must have been looking for ANYTHING she could throw at me. Mat, I DO appreciate your support but I'm truly sorry that you've been made part of this.

Perhaps that why Caroline and I saw that there was nothing but support in your posts because we were looking at it with friendly eyes? Sadly I agree, I think Alias was looking for a reason to have a go at you - and she clung onto it -  I don't feel that you should have had to spend so much time in EXPLAINING ONE post that you have time and time again said was meant without malice.  My post was clearly supportive too - and rather than getting annoyed at how it has been turned into something it wasn't I think I will just take the hard lesson and learn who to converse with from now on.

[Caroline]

Actually reading back on the photograph thread, to be fair to Mike, I don't think he was suggesting that Alias had interfered with the pictures (because I posted the same ones), I think he was talking about the programme maker.