The rifle had little or no blood on it.

[Hartley]

im the same when it comes to reading about the sliencer(s) i just glaze over and go on to something else

It would be nice if it could be explained with even the tiniest bit of clarity.

[andrea]

its the numbers DRB/1 etc that confuse me i know the basics where it was found and by who etc...but the rest, it just sends me to sleep, so i dont bother reading 

[Kaldin]

2002 appeal [Quote:...He said that he understood that Dr Vanezis, the pathologist, had given evidence that there was no blood on the palm side of Sheila Caffell’s hands.  Therefore, he concluded, this staining must have been deposited by another individual.  However, whilst Mr Ismail rightly recorded the evidence of Dr Vanezis, Mr Turner was able to point to a note made by Dr Vanezis at the time of the post-mortem examination that read:
“bloodstained palm prints on nightdress matches bloodstains appeared to have transferred from R hand. ”]

Yes, so why did Mr Turner oppose that evidence being introduced in the appeal?

[smiffy]

sarann posted;

2002 appeal [Quote:...He said that he understood that Dr Vanezis, the pathologist, had given evidence that there was no blood on the palm side of Sheila Caffell’s hands.  Therefore, he concluded, this staining must have been deposited by another individual.  However, whilst Mr Ismail rightly recorded the evidence of Dr Vanezis, Mr Turner was able to point to a note made by Dr Vanezis at the time of the post-mortem examination that read:
“bloodstained palm prints on nightdress matches bloodstains appeared to have transferred from R hand. ”]

For those who wish to leap to a claim that the palm print on the nightdress could not have come from Sheila herself but still want it to be a palm print...
There was nothing in this claimed print to identify it being from JB.
We know Ralph (Neville) had a bloodied left hand at least ...so it could have come from him ..which if correct could support Sheila having been in the kitchen with him.

[mike tesko]

sarann posted;

2002 appeal [Quote:...He said that he understood that Dr Vanezis, the pathologist, had given evidence that there was no blood on the palm side of Sheila Caffell’s hands.  Therefore, he concluded, this staining must have been deposited by another individual.  However, whilst Mr Ismail rightly recorded the evidence of Dr Vanezis, Mr Turner was able to point to a note made by Dr Vanezis at the time of the post-mortem examination that read:
“bloodstained palm prints on nightdress matches bloodstains appeared to have transferred from R hand. ”]

For those who wish to leap to a claim that the palm print on the nightdress could not have come from Sheila herself but still want it to be a palm print...
There was nothing in this claimed print to identify it being from JB.
We know Ralph (Neville) had a bloodied left hand at least ...so it could have come from him ..which if correct could support Sheila having been in the kitchen with him.

-----------------

In addition. why do EP ignore for the fact that a set of bloodied fingerprints were found on the edge of the kitchen worktop in close proximity to the bullets and the telephone?

[Kaldin]

That blood on the edge is quite odd. There doesn't appear to be any on the top of the surface, so it's as if someone was on the floor and they reached up and left those stains there.

[John]

It is interesting and very noticeable that Sheila had no blood whatsoever on her left hand.  Are we expected to believe that she was a one handed gun-woman now?

[sandy]

It is interesting and very noticeable that Sheila had no blood whatsoever on her left hand.  Are we expected to believe that she was a one handed gun-woman now?

Rather convenient isn't it.  Certainly the rifle had little or no blood on it because Sheila Caffell never handled it.

[HMEssex]

Did they take 'swabs' of those bloodied fingerprints, I wonder, to find out whose blood it was?

Slight, change to topic sorry, but looking at the phone's handpiece in the pic, was Ralph left-handed as that is where he may have placed it?  Then, again, Mike has said one of the policemen used the phone for about 15 mins so maybe it was in this position after he had used it.

[Kaldin]

Did they take 'swabs' of those bloodied fingerprints, I wonder, to find out whose blood it was?

Slight, change to topic sorry, but looking at the phone's handpiece in the pic, was Ralph left-handed as that is where he may have placed it?  Then, again, Mike has said one of the policemen used the phone for about 15 mins so maybe it was in this position after he had used it.

I haven't read anything to indicate they tested the blood on the edge of work top. They should have done so of course.

[lebaleb]

It is interesting and very noticeable that Sheila had no blood whatsoever on her left hand.  Are we expected to believe that she was a one handed gun-woman now?

Rather convenient isn't it.  Certainly the rifle had little or no blood on it because Sheila Caffell never handled it.

I've just read that both of Sheila's hand's were contaminated with blood? In Venezis autopsy report. It was the feet that were reported to be clean. If Shiela never handled the gun how come her fingerprint is on it?

[Kaldin]

It is interesting and very noticeable that Sheila had no blood whatsoever on her left hand.  Are we expected to believe that she was a one handed gun-woman now?

Rather convenient isn't it.  Certainly the rifle had little or no blood on it because Sheila Caffell never handled it.

I've just read that both of Sheila's hand's were contaminated with blood? In Venezis autopsy report. It was the feet that were reported to be clean. If Shiela never handled the gun how come her fingerprint is on it?

Presumably because someone put her hand on it to make it look like she killed herself. Her right hand was on the gun so that could account for the fingerprint. However, I would expect there to be more of her prints on it if someone wanted it to look like she killed herself - they would surely make sure her prints were on it.

[sandy]

It is interesting and very noticeable that Sheila had no blood whatsoever on her left hand.  Are we expected to believe that she was a one handed gun-woman now?

Rather convenient isn't it.  Certainly the rifle had little or no blood on it because Sheila Caffell never handled it.

I've just read that both of Sheila's hand's were contaminated with blood? In Venezis autopsy report. It was the feet that were reported to be clean. If Shiela never handled the gun how come her fingerprint is on it?

Wherever you read that it is completely wrong. 

DC Hammersley, the Scenes of Crimes Officer placed plastic bags over Sheila's hands and feet before her body was removed from the farmhouse. He saw some blood staining to the back of the right hand, but apart from that the hands, to his eye were clean and the nails intact.

The firearms officers who were the first to see her body noted that her feet and hands were “perfectly clean”. He added that her fingernails were well manicured and not broken and that there were no marks or indentations on any of her fingers. Her fingertips were clean and free from any blood.

Whoever is feeding you anything to the contrary is feeding you misinformation.  It has always been said that Sheila could not possibly have handled that rifle.

[jon]

It is interesting and very noticeable that Sheila had no blood whatsoever on her left hand.  Are we expected to believe that she was a one handed gun-woman now?

Rather convenient isn't it.  Certainly the rifle had little or no blood on it because Sheila Caffell never handled it.

I've just read that both of Sheila's hand's were contaminated with blood? In Venezis autopsy report. It was the feet that were reported to be clean. If Shiela never handled the gun how come her fingerprint is on it?

Wherever you read that it is completely wrong. 

DC Hammersley, the Scenes of Crimes Officer placed plastic bags over Sheila's hands and feet before her body was removed from the farmhouse. He saw some blood staining to the back of the right hand, but apart from that the hands, to his eye were clean and the nails intact.

The firearms officers who were the first to see her body noted that her feet and hands were “perfectly clean”. He added that her fingernails were well manicured and not broken and that there were no marks or indentations on any of her fingers. Her fingertips were clean and free from any blood.

Whoever is feeding you anything to the contrary is feeding you misinformation.  It has always been said that Sheila could not possibly have handled that rifle.

Said by whom though ? Read solicitor's complaint's about thing's which were withheld from him you will see he his not happy with the hand swab evidence !

[sandy]

Said in testimony at the trial.  Undoubtedly the solicitor is not happy with many things but that doesn't change Jeremy's culpability.

All the professionals who attended the scene spoke of the lack of blood on Sheila's hands and the fact that her nails were intact.  The post mortem returned the same results.