Doesnt it say in the 2002 appeal that without the sound moderator evidence and julie mugfords testimony there would have been little to implicate jm to the murders.
Reasonable doubt yes
Those were the particular pieces of evidence used at trial to convict beyond a reasonable doubt thus if they can be refuted Jeremy would be entitled to a new trial.
There is other evidence not used at trial which could have been used. They tried using it on appeal but couldn't because it was not new evidence it is something they could have raised at trial so only would be able to raise it legally if the conviction were vacated and there were a new trial.
From the standpoint of analyzing this case the most important things to look at are:
1) Nevill's alleged call to Jeremy
A) Nevill would not have called Jeremy
B) Nevill would have had no opportunity to call Jeremy eve if he wanted to
C) Jeremy's actions after allegedly receiving such call did not comport with the actions of someone who had received such a call
2) Lack of evidence that Sheila beat Nevill or shot anyone (often referred to as her cleanliness) If she had killed them then she would have had evidence on her body and clothing.
3) The evidence proving Sheila did not kill herself
A) Lack of any GSR on her hands and clothing and lack of soot on her clothing
B) The moderator evidence/ lack of blood in the muzzle of the rifle
C) Evidence Sheila was shot and killed while seated but her body was shortly thereafter moved flat in order to place the gun on her to make it appear she killed herself
D) Evidence the Bible was opened and closed in her blood and placed in a pool of blood that formed after her death, while that pool of blood was still wet
4) Julie's testimony
Some other issues that don't fall neatly in the above but still relate to them in some way are things like:
i) evidence prior to the murders that Jeremy relocated the phone form the master bedroom to the kitchen and hid the kitchen phone claiming the kitchen phone broke though it didn't
ii) evidence that Jeremy lied to police about Sheila firing all weapons in the house
iii) evidence Jeremy lied about calling police before calling Julie- he clearly calle djulie first and it is suspect that he called her at all.
iv) evidence that before the police entered and found the bodies Jeremy called Julie and told her not to go to work because he needed her to speak to police tell the that he told her he received a distress call from WHF- her claiming he told her such was intended to help confirm he received such a call
v) evidence that his story about taking the gun out to shoot rabbits and leaving it, the loaded magazine and spare bullets out was contrived.
vi) evidence he lied about the murder weapon not fitting in the closet with the accessories attached and that he changed his story about when he last used it in order to try pretending he and Nevill used it often the week before the murders in order to pretend Nevill kept removing the scope and moderator and thus make it seem possible that he would have found the weapon in the closet without the moderator and scope attached. This issues has several aspects:
A) He made up a story about taking the gun out and leaving it out along with bullets and a loaded magazine for 2 different reasons. A) to pretend Sheila found a loaded weapon of opportunity at her fingertips. Sheila was not interested in guns and would not go searching for one. Even if she had been arguing with Nevill and went and got a gun he could have grabbed it as she was loading the magazine which takes two hands to do. His story featured the gun being there for her to grab while arguing with Nevill and the magazine already loaded so that she could quickly load it before he could stop her. I even featured him leaving extra bullets out for her to use for reloading. B) This story featured him saying he left the gun out without the scope or moderator attached so that police would not wonder about the scope or moderator.
B) The scope was always used with the rifle, one would want to use the scope when shooting targets or animals. There was no reason to remove it except to commit the murders. The scope was for shooting at a distance and would be a nuisance in close quarter shooting like that done during the murders. Jeremy thus removed it and initially told police the lie the gun could not be stored with the accessories attached thus they had to be removed in order to put it away. At the time of his interrogation he at first said he had not used the weapon a week to fortnight before the murders. Police cited AP's testimony that he saw the weapon in the closet with the scope and moderator attached and he put it away like this. They established he was the last known user based on Jeremy's prior admission of when he last used it. Thus Jeremy should have found it with the scope and moderator attached. In response Jeremy changed his story and said he and Nevill repeatedly used it the week before the murders and claims sometimes Nevill removed the scope and moderator to put it away other times he didn't. It is clear he changed his claims just to deny AP fro being the last known user and that his claims Nevill repeatedly removed the scope was made up there is no reason why Nevill would do so.
C) He left too many bullets in the kitchen thus revealing his story was false. He claimed he left a full box or near full box in the kitchen. He said it was already open and wasn't sealed but was near full. A full box has 50. 25 shots were fired to kill the victims that means even if full only 25 bullets should have been remaining. Yet there were 30 rounds left. The killer would not have used 20 rounds from this supply then gone to the closet to get 5 more. This is damning to his story of having left the out. It made no sense anyway for him to get it out as it is getting dark to go shoot rabbis or to leave the gun out knowing his nephews were staying there. His story about the rabbits is contradictory anyway. He claimed 3 different accounts 1) he heard them while in the kitchen, 2) he saw them from the kitchen window; 3) his last account is he the while outside then after being in the kitchen for a while decided to go try to shoot them. He wasn't known to shoot rabbits period let alone to do it anytime he saw them.
It is plain that his story about these rabbits and leaving the gun/bullets out was contrived in an effort to frame his sister. Lying to police at the scene telling them she had fired all weapons in the house was another lie he told to get them to believe Sheila was responsible.
----
Thus even without the moderator and Julie's testimony there is still evidence that could convict Jeremy beyond a reasonable doubt but it is a more difficult proposition than with such evidence. The moderator evidence and Julie's testimony are what made police believe she did it and thus he might not have been prosecuted had it not been for these eve though there is other evidence the police and prosecution might have failed to recognize such and use it to its full potential.
