The main prosecution forensic case

[susan]

David I have to agree with you.  I think if EP told him Jeremy was guilty it would be easy for him to start fitting together reasons why he then thought Sheila was not responsible.  Maybe now nearly 30 years on he may have changed his mind wonder if he has been interviewed for the forthcoming books we may learn more if he has.

[scipio_usmc]

You don't know they slept through it, no one can determine they didn't die first

There is proof they didn't die first.  I cited it.  You refuse to address it because you can't.

There is proof that at least 10 and possibly 11 shots were fired in the master bedroom at June and Nevill in succession.  In order for this to occur the gun had to have at least 10 bullets in it when the killer entered.  It happened so fast that June was still lying in bed under the covers when the shooting commenced and Nevill was in the process of getting up with his left profile facing the killer.

The gun holds a maximum of 11 rounds.  You explain how the killer could have had at least 10 bullets in the gun when the killer entered the master bedroom if the killer fired more than 1 shot in the room where the twins were staying.

If you can't come up with a plausible way for there to be 10 bullets in the gun then you have no way to establish it was possible for more than 1 shot to have been fired in the boy's room before the shooting that occurred in the master bedroom had taken place.

People like to say they want to look at things in detail but then when it turns out the finer details hurt what they want to suggest happened then suddenly they want to stop talking about the finer details.

 

[scipio_usmc]

The gunshots where not silenced. The silencer (soundmoderator) only prevents a sonic crack that scares pests rabbits/foxes away

A moderator doesn't stop a sonic crack. A moderator reduces the noise associated with the gases from the propellant.  Whether there is a sonic crack or not depends on the ammunition.  A sonic crack results when a bullet faster than the speed of sound leaves the barrel.  Subsonic ammunition is below the speed of sound it doesn't produce a sonic crack.  That is why you use subsonic ammunition in conjunction with a suppressor.  The suppressor handles the noise from the gases while the subsonic ammunition eliminates the sonic crack that would otherwise be heard. If you don't use subsonic ammunition there will be a sonic crack regardless of whether you use a sound suppressor or not.

[susan]

Scipio my mind keeps going back to the beating (if indeed a beating did occur) I feel that this points more to Jeremy than Sheila unless of course Ralph was already dead when he was beaten.  Do you think the burn marks on his back were inflicted on the night of the murders, if so, why?

[maggie]

You have no way to know whether Crispy was barking or not.  There is certainly no reason the dogs outside would have been barking but hey when making up stuff pile on all you feel like.  This is another example how you don't follow the evidence you make up what suits your agenda.  You can;t stand when people point out your agenda though you want to pretend you are objective like Graham and you react like a victim or in some other immature manner.

At least lookout is willing to admit she is a Jeremy supporter instead if trying to hide behind professions of objectivity.

Please give it a rest and stop picking on Alias, scipio. She's entitled to her own opinions just as you are.

[David1819]

There is proof they didn't die first.  I cited it.  You refuse to address it because you can't.

No there is not. Deluded skippy strikes again!

What you cited is your version of events and your opinion you have nothing concrete. How can I address you opinions and speculations? you can believe what you like as far as I am concerned just don't impose it on others

[Jan]

Scipio can we just say for the sake of discussion that Sheila was indeed the culprit and did shoot her family why did she decide to take her life in June's bedroom I read Colin;'s book and he said Sheila would have died with her boys and certainly not June because Sheila was more fond of her Dad than her Mum.

Applying logic to a situation like this is very difficult. She had delusionary thoughts about her sons as confirmed by the doctor so who knows if she even recognised them as her children?

[Jan]

A moderator doesn't stop a sonic crack. A moderator reduces the noise associated with the gases from the propellant.  Whether there is a sonic crack or not depends on the ammunition.  A sonic crack results when a bullet faster than the speed of sound leaves the barrel.  Subsonic ammunition is below the speed of sound it doesn't produce a sonic crack.  That is why you use subsonic ammunition in conjunction with a suppressor.  The suppressor handles the noise from the gases while the subsonic ammunition eliminates the sonic crack that would otherwise be heard. If you don't use subsonic ammunition there will be a sonic crack regardless of whether you use a sound suppressor or not.

Not much point in using one then?

[susan]

Jan that is a good point too I cannot dispute that.  Do you think Sheila would have beaten her Dad she really loved him I know she had strange thoughts about her children and June I think.

[scipio_usmc]

Scipio my mind keeps going back to the beating (if indeed a beating did occur) I feel that this points more to Jeremy than Sheila unless of course Ralph was already dead when he was beaten.  Do you think the burn marks on his back were inflicted on the night of the murders, if so, why?

I have no solid idea about the burn marks because no one examined them sufficiently to decide how fresh they are. I don't have evidence to make an informed decision of whether they predated the murders or not.  My speculation is that they were made the night of the murders but that it was after he was already dead.  My own personal speculation is the killer took a poker to his back to make sure he was really dead.  This is from intuition since I don't have the evidence to be able to say for sure if they were from the night of the murders or not.  They could intentionally have been made to cause confusion for all we know.

As for a beating it definitely occurred.  There is no question Nevill's head was bashed in with the butt of the rifle and that it gouged his right arm as he attempted to defend himself from the blows.  Had the gun still been loaded then there would not have been any need for this to occur he simply would have been shot further.  They struggled over the weapon and he was thus beaten out of necessity.  He was shot in the position he was found in. Someone didn't stage his body after shooting him so he was beaten and knocked in that position before being shot.  Had Sheila done the beating she would have cut her feet unless she was wearing shoes.  Moreover, Nevill's blood would have gotten on her. Medium velocity spatter got on the stock of the rifle, it definitely would have gotten on the person wielding it as well. Unless she was wearing gloves she would have gotten her prints in the blood that was on the stock. In addition unless wearing gloves when the stock broke it would have at least scratched her hand if not cut it. No gloves were found at WHF though for her to have worn and no clothing with spatter that she could have changed out of.  To try avoiding these realities Jeremy advocates deny Nevill was beaten or suggest she committed the murders completely nude except for shoes.

There are a few cases where people got nude to commit murders so that they would not get any evidence on their clothes but by definition that was to avoid being caught they didn't do so and then commit suicide. If you try to not leave evidence of your guilt then you don't plan to kill yourself you plan to live and avoid prosecution.   
 

[Jan]

There is proof they didn't die first.  I cited it.  You refuse to address it because you can't.

There is proof that at least 10 and possibly 11 shots were fired in the master bedroom at June and Nevill in succession.  In order for this to occur the gun had to have at least 10 bullets in it when the killer entered.  It happened so fast that June was still lying in bed under the covers when the shooting commenced and Nevill was in the process of getting up with his left profile facing the killer.

The gun holds a maximum of 11 rounds.  You explain how the killer could have had at least 10 bullets in the gun when the killer entered the master bedroom if the killer fired more than 1 shot in the room where the twins were staying.



If you can't come up with a plausible way for there to be 10 bullets in the gun then you have no way to establish it was possible for more than 1 shot to have been fired in the boy's room before the shooting that occurred in the master bedroom had taken place.

People like to say they want to look at things in detail but then when it turns out the finer details hurt what they want to suggest happened then suddenly they want to stop talking about the finer details.

t
How do you know all the shots were made to each person all at one time?
assuming the person did know how to re-load  how long would it take?
How do you think you know more than all the experts who tried to define the order of the killing when those trying to define that order at the time for inheritance purposes failed?

[Mr. Gee]

You have no way to know whether Crispy was barking or not.  There is certainly no reason the dogs outside would have been barking but hey when making up stuff pile on all you feel like.  This is another example how you don't follow the evidence you make up what suits your agenda.  You can;t stand when people point out your agenda though you want to pretend you are objective like Graham and you react like a victim or in some other immature manner.

At least lookout is willing to admit she is a Jeremy supporter instead if trying to hide behind professions of objectivity.

Unfortunately the same thing can be said of your entire scenario. No one really knows what really happened that night as none of us were there? Whatever any of us say must alas remain in the realms of speculation and certainly it is not a subject that fairs well with dogmatism.

[Jan]

Jan that is a good point too I cannot dispute that.  Do you think Sheila would have beaten her Dad she really loved him I know she had strange thoughts about her children and June I think.

to be clear"Sheila believed that one of the boys might rape her and was capable of murder"

If on the night they were talking about foster care ( and we know that was perfectly possible) the if her father agreed with June then perhaps that was the ultimate betrayal? Was it not said June was worried because Sheila was not interested in the children?

[scipio_usmc]

No there is not. Deluded skippy strikes again!

What you cited is your version of events and your opinion you have nothing concrete. How can I address you opinions and speculations? you can believe what you like as far as I am concerned just don't impose it on others

No I cited a fact. Anytime facts that you don't like are pointed out you hide from them.  How many times have I noted either the the exact date that Sheila's last Haldol injection was given to you or the less precise that it was 3 weeks before the murders?  At least 10 and you still keep saying we don't know when the last injection was. 

It is a fact that Nevill was shot 4 times in the master bedroom and June shot 6-7 times during the same shooting episode.  At least 10 shots were fired total at them prior to the killer and Nevill tangling in the kitchen where the gun was reloaded and then he was shot 4 more times.

Explain how things went down in light of the above.  Incorporate the above facts into your assessment of how the murders were committed including detailing when the gun was reloaded at each stage when it was reloaded.

You can't which is why you want to hide from this. All Jeremy supporters want to hide from this even the defense at trial refused to address it.

If you follow the evidence and make your decision of what happened on the basis of the evidence then you don't end up with the same problems as when you decide in advance what you would like to believe and then try to find a way to get around the evidence.

[susan]

Scipio what you are saying does make sense to me.  I did wonder if the burn marks were an act of contempt but I do agree it is strange that Sheila did not have her Father's blood on her.  Have seen programmes on the TV of cases in America where the murders were committed nude then the culprit showered no forensic evidence.