Author Topic: New video:  (Read 49352 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

guest2181

  • Guest
Re: New video:
« Reply #435 on: May 22, 2015, 10:43:PM »
Gotta go, now you can all safely ignore me and vice versa, and there won´t be any conflicts - at least not invplving Alias.  ;)

Be good, all!  ;D ;D
Night night.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33781
Re: New video:
« Reply #436 on: May 22, 2015, 10:43:PM »
Gotta go, now you can all safely ignore me and vice versa, and there won´t be any conflicts - at least not invplving Alias.  ;)

Be good, all!  ;D ;D


Enjoy your holiday :)

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: New video:
« Reply #437 on: May 22, 2015, 10:49:PM »
Gotta go, now you can all safely ignore me and vice versa, and there won´t be any conflicts - at least not invplving Alias.  ;)

Be good, all!  ;D ;D
Night Alias.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: New video:
« Reply #438 on: May 22, 2015, 10:52:PM »
Absolutely agree Maggie. I think I've had conflict with most and the reality in the cold light of day is that it's all been meaningless, maybe even a little nasty at times :-[.

Generally, as far as a forum of this nature goes, there is a good core group of people, regardless of viewpoints.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D  ... very true, think we need something new to talk about that's half the problem as we've discussed it all over and over and over ........

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: New video:
« Reply #439 on: May 22, 2015, 10:59:PM »
what a poster on the internet isnt really what they cliam to be thats hardly a conspriacy yhoery is it.

Your willingness to believe he isn't implies that he has an ulterior motive. Who he is has nothing to do with anyone but he has no reason to lie.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17252
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Re: New video:
« Reply #440 on: May 22, 2015, 11:03:PM »
its done to imply supreriority but anyone who looks at it closely can see both are clearly untrue.

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: New video:
« Reply #441 on: May 22, 2015, 11:09:PM »
when you first here ngb a real gun expert had to point out the diffrence to you.

a reall matine would allready now the diffrence a real lawyer who defends people in court would also know the diffrence.

You as usual have no idea what you are talking about.  Post a link where I couldn't tell the difference between a military weapon and civilian weapon and needed NGB to point it out. What was this supposed weapon anyway?.

"the fact you couldent tell a miltary weapon from a civlan one proves you have never been a marine"

How much do people want to wager that nugnug can't back up his/her claims and as always is talking about of his.her butt.

Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: New video:
« Reply #442 on: May 23, 2015, 12:10:AM »
its done to imply supreriority but anyone who looks at it closely can see both are clearly untrue.

I don't feel he is superior, if people feel 'inferior' that says more about them.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: New video:
« Reply #443 on: May 23, 2015, 12:11:AM »
You as usual have no idea what you are talking about.  Post a link where I couldn't tell the difference between a military weapon and civilian weapon and needed NGB to point it out. What was this supposed weapon anyway?.

"the fact you couldent tell a miltary weapon from a civlan one proves you have never been a marine"

How much do people want to wager that nugnug can't back up his/her claims and as always is talking about of his.her butt.

I never bet butt ......  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: New video:
« Reply #444 on: June 20, 2015, 12:56:AM »
Just watched part of the video again and it's not David Boutflour that said they found the silencer after the funeral, it was the narrator and such programmes are notorious for getting things wrong. However, this is the first time I have heard him suggest that the silencer was 'sticky'!!

Highlighted for David
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: New video:
« Reply #445 on: June 20, 2015, 09:03:AM »
 Mmm,sticky silencer,eh ? Well AE DID remark on a " blob of jam ",which it MUST have been. After all,it was supposedly displayed on the table at the Boutflours.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: New video:
« Reply #446 on: June 20, 2015, 12:02:PM »
1. Uncontaminated hands and nightdress completely free of any gunfire residue or gun oil.  In fact no contaminants of any sort indicated that Sheila never handled the rifle let alone fired it 25 times in quick succession and reloaded its magazine at least twice.

2. Uncontaminated feet.  Sheila's feet were completely clean and free of blood or any other contaminants evidencing the fact that she had been in bed when the attack took place and thereafter only walked on carpet. She could never have been downstairs in the kitchen that morning.

3. Uncut feet. Nevill Bamber was brutally attacked in the kitchen after having been shot several times in the upstairs bedroom.  During the assault in the kitchen a glass lampshade was smashed leaving glass fragments all over the floor. Had Sheila taken part in that attack the soles of her feet or the soles of her slippers would have been pock marked with glass fragments.  Sheila's feet were unmarked as were the soles of her slippers.

4. Only one fingerprint on the rifle evidencing the fact that Sheila did not wield it or fire it.  Had she shot herself twice as alleged by some her thumbprint would have been on the trigger since she would have to had pushed it.  It wasn't.

5. It is almost certain that blood and DNA belonging to Sheila was found in the sound moderator.  Group 'A' human blood matching Sheila was recovered from the sound moderator in 1985.  Later, advances in forensic science methods led to the recovery of DNA from inside the sound moderator which returned 17 markers out of 20 as a match to Sheila which was substantially better than the maximum coincidence rate of thirteen.  Sheila could not have shot herself with the sound moderator attached nor could she have returned it to the gun cupboard after shooting herself twice in the throat.

6. Sheila was in good spirits, looking forward to the future as a family again. Her doctor and her ex husband stated that she was not capable of hurting her father or her children.

7. Two gunshots to her neck.  Hardly indicative of a suicide especially when the first one would have incapacitated her. It is also noticeable that the gun and magazine were empty when found. Was that another coincidence that Sheila just happened to use the last bullet and had no others on her person?

8. No marks or injuries following a fight.  Sheila was tiny compared to the 6' 2" Nevill.  She could not have fought with him without sustaining some sort of injury or damage to her clothing.

9. Sheila had traces of cannabis in her system rendering her calm and docile, not violent or murderous.

10. Sheila had run out of her procyclidine which counteracts the effects of her medication haloperidol. Without this she would have been very shaky and uncoordinated (as described by various witnesses) and would not have had the control needed to get off 25 shots without missing one never mind trying to reload an awkward magazine in between time. 

11. Sheila was unfamiliar with the rifle or any firearm for that matter and would have been unable to make 25 target shots.

12. If Sheila had shot herself in the throat and had remained conscious, there would have been blood in her mouth and throat with resultant blood spatter everywhere as she struggled to breathe. Her fingers would have touched the burning wound and ended up covered in blood as would have her face and neck.  The blood trails running from this wound would have been smudged yet it was not. There was no secondary blood staining to her face or neck when the police initially found her.  The inside of her hands and her finger tips did not have any blood staining.  Sheila therefore was not conscious after the first shot and most certainly did not fire the second one.

13. Sheila's body was found on the far side of the master bedroom away from everyone. Had she committed suicide as some allege it is more than likely that she would have done so beside her children and not remote from them.

14. Perfectly manicured nails and all intact and unbroken.  If Sheila had used the rifle and loaded it at least once she would have ended up with some nail damage.  There was none.

15: No one is able to post a credible explanation of how Sheila could have committed the massacre. Which matches the crime scene.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: New video:
« Reply #447 on: June 20, 2015, 08:28:PM »
Is this all your own work Adam?  Or are you quoting extracts again?  By the way all points have been answers on various old threads.

guest154

  • Guest
Re: New video:
« Reply #448 on: June 20, 2015, 10:12:PM »
1. Uncontaminated hands and nightdress completely free of any gunfire residue or gun oil.  In fact no contaminants of any sort indicated that Sheila never handled the rifle let alone fired it 25 times in quick succession and reloaded its magazine at least twice.

2. Uncontaminated feet.  Sheila's feet were completely clean and free of blood or any other contaminants evidencing the fact that she had been in bed when the attack took place and thereafter only walked on carpet. She could never have been downstairs in the kitchen that morning.

3. Uncut feet. Nevill Bamber was brutally attacked in the kitchen after having been shot several times in the upstairs bedroom.  During the assault in the kitchen a glass lampshade was smashed leaving glass fragments all over the floor. Had Sheila taken part in that attack the soles of her feet or the soles of her slippers would have been pock marked with glass fragments.  Sheila's feet were unmarked as were the soles of her slippers.

4. Only one fingerprint on the rifle evidencing the fact that Sheila did not wield it or fire it.  Had she shot herself twice as alleged by some her thumbprint would have been on the trigger since she would have to had pushed it.  It wasn't.

5. It is almost certain that blood and DNA belonging to Sheila was found in the sound moderator.  Group 'A' human blood matching Sheila was recovered from the sound moderator in 1985.  Later, advances in forensic science methods led to the recovery of DNA from inside the sound moderator which returned 17 markers out of 20 as a match to Sheila which was substantially better than the maximum coincidence rate of thirteen.  Sheila could not have shot herself with the sound moderator attached nor could she have returned it to the gun cupboard after shooting herself twice in the throat.

6. Sheila was in good spirits, looking forward to the future as a family again. Her doctor and her ex husband stated that she was not capable of hurting her father or her children.

7. Two gunshots to her neck.  Hardly indicative of a suicide especially when the first one would have incapacitated her. It is also noticeable that the gun and magazine were empty when found. Was that another coincidence that Sheila just happened to use the last bullet and had no others on her person?

8. No marks or injuries following a fight.  Sheila was tiny compared to the 6' 2" Nevill.  She could not have fought with him without sustaining some sort of injury or damage to her clothing.

9. Sheila had traces of cannabis in her system rendering her calm and docile, not violent or murderous.

10. Sheila had run out of her procyclidine which counteracts the effects of her medication haloperidol. Without this she would have been very shaky and uncoordinated (as described by various witnesses) and would not have had the control needed to get off 25 shots without missing one never mind trying to reload an awkward magazine in between time.

11. Sheila was unfamiliar with the rifle or any firearm for that matter and would have been unable to make 25 target shots.

12. If Sheila had shot herself in the throat and had remained conscious, there would have been blood in her mouth and throat with resultant blood spatter everywhere as she struggled to breathe. Her fingers would have touched the burning wound and ended up covered in blood as would have her face and neck.  The blood trails running from this wound would have been smudged yet it was not. There was no secondary blood staining to her face or neck when the police initially found her.  The inside of her hands and her finger tips did not have any blood staining.  Sheila therefore was not conscious after the first shot and most certainly did not fire the second one.

13. Sheila's body was found on the far side of the master bedroom away from everyone. Had she committed suicide as some allege it is more than likely that she would have done so beside her children and not remote from them.

14. Perfectly manicured nails and all intact and unbroken.  If Sheila had used the rifle and loaded it at least once she would have ended up with some nail damage.  There was none.

15: No one is able to post a credible explanation of how Sheila could have committed the massacre. Which matches the crime scene.

Good collection and some of the many reasons Sheila isn't guilty, which by default makes Bamber.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33781
Re: New video:
« Reply #449 on: June 20, 2015, 10:26:PM »
Good collection and some of the many reasons Sheila isn't guilty, which by default makes Bamber.



Good cutting and pasting, eh Mat? ;)