Author Topic: The main prosecution forensic case  (Read 37667 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #150 on: February 24, 2015, 09:36:PM »
Isnt it strange that people accept the weirdest scenarios to explain how there was no evidence on JB - like wetsuits /marigolds/ getting rid of the clothes ( although the police were at his house the next day) cycling in the dark / doing the murders in the nude. plastic bags on feet etc etc
And yet when it is suggested that Sheila might have washed her hands  or even her clothes in a bucket - horror of horrors that is impossible.

BTW don't forget the slippers/canvas shoes  the police took and told Anne to say nothing about them

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #151 on: February 24, 2015, 09:38:PM »
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.

House keeper said about the shower head not being in usual position - so could apply to EITHER of them

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #152 on: February 24, 2015, 09:39:PM »
Not much point in using one then?

Well if you don't use both a moderator and subsonic ammunition then you are not going to get the optimal desired effects.  It will still be less noisy with the moderator than without but the sonic crack is going to give away the shot anyway. Less noise still helps if you are shooting from a distance and also on your ears.  Shooting without hearing protection harms ears.  One of the advantages of subsonic ammo with a moderator is that you don't need to worry about hearing protection.   

Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #153 on: February 24, 2015, 09:39:PM »
Jan it is a strange situation I am in because I can see everything you say as being possible and also what posters say who are adamant that Jeremy is guilty is also possible.  I think I am confused :'(

Mr. Gee

  • Guest
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #154 on: February 24, 2015, 09:40:PM »
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.
Possible that could be what she in fact did? The shower head was on the floor remember. Other than that there is no mention that the police actually examined the shower. Not much is said about the clothes in the buckets either. As far as I can see the house was not examined entirely and what examination was done was pretty scant to say the least.

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #155 on: February 24, 2015, 09:41:PM »
Jan once again I agree with you but can also see where Scipio is coming from.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #156 on: February 24, 2015, 09:43:PM »
Well if you don't use both a moderator and subsonic ammunition then you are not going to get the optimal desired effects.  It will still be less noisy with the moderator than without but the sonic crack is going to give away the shot anyway. Less noise still helps if you are shooting from a distance and also on your ears.  Shooting without hearing protection harms ears.  One of the advantages of subsonic ammo with a moderator is that you don't need to worry about hearing protection.

I meant in the house on the night.

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #157 on: February 24, 2015, 09:45:PM »
Scipio do you know the story of the Romeo killer Chris Porco or something he reminds me so much of Jeremy Bamber and he was convicted purely on circumstantial evidence and got 50 years or so. Same nature and popular like Jeremy.

Mr. Gee

  • Guest
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #158 on: February 24, 2015, 09:46:PM »
Well if you don't use both a moderator and subsonic ammunition then you are not going to get the optimal desired effects.  It will still be less noisy with the moderator than without but the sonic crack is going to give away the shot anyway. Less noise still helps if you are shooting from a distance and also on your ears.  Shooting without hearing protection harms ears.  One of the advantages of subsonic ammo with a moderator is that you don't need to worry about hearing protection.
This was a fair ground rifle and didn't have much of a sonic "crack" anyway. None of the fairground guns have silencers on. But what David says is in fact a valid point. If there was no danger of the kids waking up during the gun fire (strange that the parents did though) and Jeremy knew what this rifle was like as it was his, then there was not really much point in using the silencer.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13779
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #159 on: February 24, 2015, 09:46:PM »
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.

I remember you telling me once about the Haldol injection and from others but I have never seen a record that proves it. If there is a GP record or notes from psychiatrist great I would love to keep it for my own record as I have not seen it.

I can come up will all kinds of detailed scenarios that are plausible but guess what? I actually have a life and a career I cant just spend tones of times writing essays and novels for you on what might have happened.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13779
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #160 on: February 24, 2015, 09:48:PM »
Jan it is a strange situation I am in because I can see everything you say as being possible and also what posters say who are adamant that Jeremy is guilty is also possible.  I think I am confused :'(

Welcome to the world of the White House Farm mystery  ;D

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #161 on: February 24, 2015, 09:50:PM »
Isnt it strange that people accept the weirdest scenarios to explain how there was no evidence on JB - like wetsuits /marigolds/ getting rid of the clothes ( although the police were at his house the next day) cycling in the dark / doing the murders in the nude. plastic bags on feet etc etc
And yet when it is suggested that Sheila might have washed her hands  or even her clothes in a bucket - horror of horrors that is impossible.

BTW don't forget the slippers/canvas shoes  the police took and told Anne to say nothing about them

Jeremy left the scene and had ample opportunity to wash and dispose of any clothing he used.

Sheila never left.  Her bloody clothing and gloves would have to have been somewhere and worse there is no way for her to have changed out of the clothing she died in which also lacked the evidence it would have had she killed herself while wearing it.

You are also failing to consider Jeremy would have a reason to change and dispose of his clothing- he didn't want to get caught.   Someone who has decided to commit murder suicide has no reason to change and try to conceal evidence of having murdered others.  That is what people who plan to keep on living but want to avoid spending the rest of their life in jail do.

There are no known cases where someone who decided to commit murder suicide washed up and disposed of evidence proving they committed the crime before killing themself.  The closest anyone could come to that is a doomsday religious cult where the victims willingly allowed themselves to be killed, a few people cleaned up the dead bodies afterwards to purify them, cleaned their own bodies as much as possible and then finally committed suicide themselves.  That in no way helps to make it plausible Sheila would take a bath and change her clothing before killing herself.  The only thing that could make that plausible is if they found clothing she changed from and proof she killed herself.  Then the unlikely would be established and there would be a known case where it happened.  Saying maybe it happened for the first time ever and police hid the clothing she changed of doesn't cut it. That is what a Jeremy supporter speculates but speculation is enough proof is.

 
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13779
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #162 on: February 24, 2015, 09:53:PM »
Isnt it strange that people accept the weirdest scenarios to explain how there was no evidence on JB - like wetsuits /marigolds/ getting rid of the clothes ( although the police were at his house the next day) cycling in the dark / doing the murders in the nude. plastic bags on feet etc etc
And yet when it is suggested that Sheila might have washed her hands  or even her clothes in a bucket - horror of horrors that is impossible.

BTW don't forget the slippers/canvas shoes  the police took and told Anne to say nothing about them

Wait what! ...... Jeremy cycling and committing the murders in the nude? people actually think he could have done that? whoever suggests that must have been joking

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #163 on: February 24, 2015, 09:57:PM »
I remember you telling me once about the Haldol injection and from others but I have never seen a record that proves it. If there is a GP record or notes from psychiatrist great I would love to keep it for my own record as I have not seen it.

I can come up will all kinds of detailed scenarios that are plausible but guess what? I actually have a life and a career I cant just spend tones of times writing essays and novels for you on what might have happened.

Here are links to statements from three doctors who had Sheila as their parient. They are all interesting. Read them carefully and notice all details. You will see what a big hot mess Sheila´s treatment was.

DR HUGH CAMERON FURGUSEN
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1199.0.html
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1200.0.html
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1201.0.html
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1204.0.html

Dr. MYRTO ANGELOGLOU
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1202.0.html
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1203.0.html

DR ANN FIONA ROSEMARY WILKINSON
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1206.0.html


Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: The main prosecution forensic case
« Reply #164 on: February 24, 2015, 09:59:PM »
Hahaha David  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D