Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?

[Steve_uk]

You have just pulled the rug from Steve Caroline. Who believes the conniving relatives after that? Mendacity oozes everywhere, you should all be thoroughly ashamed to be complicit in this crime against Bamber.

Well at least we know where we stand. But for the most part we are civil debaters here and don't accuse each other of wilful lying.

[Caroline]

You have just pulled the rug from Steve Caroline. Who believes the conniving relatives after that? Mendacity oozes everywhere, you should all be thoroughly ashamed to be complicit in this crime against Bamber.

There has been no crime against Bamber and Steve may be right, it's just not an opinion I share. As for being ashamed? What a ridiculous thing to say! 

[Caroline]

Actually I still believe there was some kind of life or death struggle. Nevill wouldn't have given up without a fight and had it been his daughter in the tranquillized state she ascended the stairs after Pamela's telephone call he would easily have been able to disarm her. I believe Julie's evidence when Jeremy told her he had temporarily lost control of his senses, or words to that effect, when he finally no longer had to go through the motions of existence under constant threat of disinheritance.

You may well be right Steve but I just believe that Jeremy told Julie a load of tosh.

[Samson]

Well at least we know where we stand. But for the most part we are civil debaters here and don't accuse each other of wilful lying.

Fair enough.
I avoid making evidence free statements.
It is an axiom, that since Bamber is innocent, there is a small army complicit in keeping him in jail, and keeping the lid on the pressure cooker. It is unavoidable that all those who post on the internet claiming he is guilty are tarred with this brush.
I am sorry it is this way, because I have no doubt in every day life you are reasonable compassionate people, but when the science and logistics in a criminal case offer only one explanation that fits, as is the case here, it is incumbent on all who understand this to apply as much pressure as is consistent within civilized discourse.

It is dangerous to accord people  the right to opinions that are proved wrong, you may have your own opinions but the fact that Bamber is innocent is immutable, beyond any doubt.

[JackiePreece]

Fair enough.
I avoid making evidence free statements.
It is an axiom, that since Bamber is innocent, there is a small army complicit in keeping him in jail, and keeping the lid on the pressure cooker. It is unavoidable that all those who post on the internet claiming he is guilty are tarred with this brush.
I am sorry it is this way, because I have no doubt in every day life you are reasonable compassionate people, but when the science and logistics in a criminal case offer only one explanation that fits, as is the case here, it is incumbent on all who understand this to apply as much pressure as is consistent within civilized discourse.

It is dangerous to accord people  the right to opinions that are proved wrong, you may have your own opinions but the fact that Bamber is innocent is immutable, beyond any doubt.

Agreed

[Caroline]

Fair enough.
I avoid making evidence free statements.
It is an axiom, that since Bamber is innocent, there is a small army complicit in keeping him in jail, and keeping the lid on the pressure cooker. It is unavoidable that all those who post on the internet claiming he is guilty are tarred with this brush.
I am sorry it is this way, because I have no doubt in every day life you are reasonable compassionate people, but when the science and logistics in a criminal case offer only one explanation that fits, as is the case here, it is incumbent on all who understand this to apply as much pressure as is consistent within civilized discourse.

It is dangerous to accord people  the right to opinions that are proved wrong, you may have your own opinions but the fact that Bamber is innocent is immutable, beyond any doubt.

No it isn't.

[Samson]

No it isn't.

Caroline, you contributed nothing on IA to the discussion showing there was no reconstruction that allowed gun wound trajectories to be consistent with both Jeremy and Sheila being in the house at the same time.
Carol Anne Lee never discussed this in her book. I see no discussion on red or blue forums, yet this and lack of livor mortis in Sheila's corpse tell the complete story.
Yes you are winning in having your old friend in jail, but in science and logistics you are missing in action.

[Caroline]

Caroline, you contributed nothing on IA to the discussion showing there was no reconstruction that allowed gun wound trajectories to be consistent with both Jeremy and Sheila being in the house at the same time.
Carol Anne Lee never discussed this in her book. I see no discussion on red or blue forums, yet this and lack of livor mortis in Sheila's corpse tell the complete story.
Yes you are winning in having your old friend in jail, but in science and logistics you are missing in action.

You're big on scenarios and yet all those that you have written simply show a lack of knowledge. You're not just missing in action you're AWOL.

Just to clarify, Jeremy was never a 'friend' - I supported him when I thought he was innocent, writing to him gave me a different impression and took me back to the drawing board. It didn't take long to understand that the rubbish posted on the internet re: two bodies in the kitchen, a call to the police from Nevill, police being in communication - were all just attempts to manipulate those willing to believe he's innocent.

[notsure]

You're big on scenarios and yet all those that you have written simply show a lack of knowledge. You're not just missing in action you're AWOL.

Just to clarify, Jeremy was never a 'friend' - I supported him when I thought he was innocent, writing to him gave me a different impression and took me back to the drawing board. It didn't take long to understand that the rubbish posted on the internet re: two bodies in the kitchen, a call to the police from Nevill, police being in communication - were all just attempts to manipulate those willing to believe he's innocent.

but the two bodies in the kitchen is a bi o e Caroline, do t you agree, how on earth can one mistake one body from two. I can see how the communication thing can be a mistake but two bodies no way. I haven't read any explanation that would convince me  that this was just an error.

[Adam]

but the two bodies in the kitchen is a bi o e Caroline, do t you agree, how on earth can one mistake one body from two. I can see how the communication thing can be a mistake but two bodies no way. I haven't read any explanation that would convince me  that this was just an error.

There is a simple explanation for that. Bamber is just trying to manipulate a log.

But if want to believe Sheila kept herself alive in the kitchen for some unexplained reason, then went upstairs after the raid team entered WHF without being seen & shot herself with an upstairs rifle, feel free.

[Adam]

Caroline, you contributed nothing on IA to the discussion showing there was no reconstruction that allowed gun wound trajectories to be consistent with both Jeremy and Sheila being in the house at the same time.
Carol Anne Lee never discussed this in her book. I see no discussion on red or blue forums, yet this and lack of livor mortis in Sheila's corpse tell the complete story.
Yes you are winning in having your old friend in jail, but in science and logistics you are missing in action.

Not sure what you mean by gun shot trajectories ?

June, and the twins were shot in bed while they slept. Sheila was shot by the bed. Nevill received four shots after being put onto a coal scuttle and four close range shots upstairs by his bed.

Bamber could have fired all these shots.

[Samson]

Not sure what you mean by gun shot trajectories ?

June, and the twins were shot in bed while they slept. Sheila was shot by the bed. Nevill received four shots after being put onto a coal scuttle and four close range shots upstairs by his bed.

Bamber could have fired all these shots.

No he could not.
The 4 shots upstairs were all descending trajectory through the body.
Therefore the shooter was above Nevill, therefore Nevill must have been below on the stairs. The first 2 as he came up were to his face, the next two as he fled to the rear of his left arm.
June was shot first as she was asleep, as seen by the blood on the bed, yet Nevill was downstairs at that time. Why?
This is where the proof begins, then all else follows.

[guest2181]

No he could not.
The 4 shots upstairs were all descending trajectory through the body.
The shooter was above Nevill so he was below on the stairs. The first 2 as he came up were to his face, the next two as he fled to the rear of his left arm.
This is where the proof begins, then all else follows.

Shell casings and blood stains indicate otherwise.

1 or 2 of the shots were as Nevill took flight and headed down stairs. 4 shots were post death in the kitchen and 2 or 3 shots must have been received when he was in the bedroom.

If the wounds are consistent with a downwards trajectory, could it not simply be explained by Nevill being shot as he got out of bed or by him ducking or raising his arms when shot?

[Samson]

Shell casings and blood stains indicate otherwise.

1 or 2 of the shots were as Nevill took flight and headed down stairs. 4 shots were post death in the kitchen and 2 or 3 shots must have been received when he was in the bedroom.

If the wounds are consistent with a downwards trajectory, could it not simply be explained by Nevill being shot as he got out of bed or by him ducking or raising his arms when shot?

Well no. the first two shots were focussed, a pair to the mouth from close range, but downwards trajectory.
This can only be explained by shooter at the doorway on the landing. and Nevill coming up to this unpleasant surprise.
This fits the placing of the cartridge cases.

[guest2181]

Well no. the first two shots were focussed, a pair to the mouth from close range, but downwards trajectory.
This can only be explained by shooter at the doorway on the landing. and Nevill coming up to this unpleasant surprise.
This fits the placing of the cartridge cases.

Opinions aren't facts.

The shell cases eject to the right. There is an insufficient number of shell casings in that area to make your assertions a realistic scenario. There is also what is thought to be Nevil's blood stains outside the main bedroom.

Whilst I don't wish to take a leaf out of your book and speak in such absolute terms (as I wasn't there), it seems rather plausible that the shooter was in the main bedroom at the foot of the bed, with Nevill being shot 2 or 3 times as he got out of bed and escaped past the shooter towards the stairs, the shooter then pursued firing a further 1 or 2 shots at Nevill as he fled downstairs. The shell casings in the main bedroom appear to add weight to such a scenario.

The bullet trajectories need to take account of the position of the rifle when fired AND the position of the victim. You only seem to be taking in to consideration the former. If Nevil's arm was in the air, the wound is caused by a bullet with an upwards trajectory for example.

Should we then consider your downward trajectory theory to indicate a taller shooter?