The circumstances and evidence to undermine the sound moderator seem overwhelming.
David Boutflour is alleged to find the sound moderator on the 10th of August.
http://postimg.org/image/lcvqnvy03/This is handed into the lab on the 13th by DI Cook. Multiple copies of the submissions have been made and altered.
http://postimg.org/image/3x8nb89xx/It is then alleged in a document typed in November 1985 that on that day human blood was discovered inside the moderator.
http://postimg.org/image/rtbvjrvbz/If so why did this initial discovery of human blood on the 13th not trigger an arrest for Jeremy? If the accounts written in retrospect are correct then they had the smoking gun evidence within a matter of days?
DI Cook in the COLP investigations then explains the lack of paperwork
As I intended carrying out the examination myself using their facilities then the items would never I leave my possession and therefore proof of continuity using those forms Was not required, as they were only intended for submission to the Huntingdon Laboratory. The continuity of these exhibits was solely my responsibility. On the 29th of August 1985 DI Cook unscrews the silencer and takes out the baffle plates, he takes the photograph below.
The significance of this is that DI Cook never reports finding any blood. The Crown claims that a considerable amount of blood and blood flakes is sprayed from baffle plates 1 to 6. If we are to believe the silencers authenticity we now must believe DI Cook just happened to miss seeing all this blood.
In the transcripts of the recorded COLP interview DS Davidson who was involved in handling the evidence forms claims he has never seen a silencer and was never aware any relatives found silencer
http://s30.postimg.org/t20j9jbzl/didavidson.jpgAlso in transcripts of the recorded COLP interview with DS Davidson he claims to have no idea of DI Cook having a sound moderator only to say at a much later stage of the interview that DI Cook did tell him about the sound moderator. Its seem DS Davidson has either been caught out or has used information told to him in the earlier stages of the interview to cover his mistakes.
Then in September a second sound moderator is found - according to this police log
http://s12.postimg.org/vvj3kgfnh/2_DB_finds_moderator_september.jpgPC Whiddon's statement further corroborates a second sound moderator is found.
http://s10.postimg.org/vm6jjae2h/3_widdon_confirmed_moderator_september.jpgSuperintendent Mckay in the COLP interview with DS Davidson. Also mentions a second silencer
‘Knowing there was only one silencer there did you have knowledge at all of the second silencer?’
This is sentence is very interesting, It seems to me that Superintendent Mckay knows a second silencer is involved otherwise would he not refer to it as the alleged second silencer? And not “the second silencer” This further corroborates the points made above.
It seems to me that two silencers have passed through the investigation but the evidence has been merged to make it appear as the same silencer at trial. Then evidence has been typed up in retrospect to conceal this. A covert campaign of subterfuge it seems
It is very easy to dismantle a parker hale sound moderator with ones bare hands you do not need any tools. Once the end is screwed off the baffle plates then drop out of the tube. Flakes of dried blood or even fresh blood can then be placed onto the baffle plates or in between the muffler cups. Infact you could even plant the blood using the assembly rod alone and not even dismantle the silencer.
Dr Fowler a US medical expert who has investigated three thousand gunshot homicides examines the evidence and concludes the silencer was not attached when Shelia's contact wounds to the neck were inflicted. (also confirmed by two peer reviewers) to this day Dr Fowler's conclusions remain unchallenged, The CCRC hired Mr Laws who claimed Peter Sutherst evidence on the scratch marks are inconclusive enabling them to continue the assertion that the silencer was attached.
Onto the subject of the scratch marks, Not only does Peter Sutherst conclude that there are no scratches present on the original crime scene. DS Davidson seems to remember there being red paint on barrel end of the weapon with no silencer
He is then interupted and the subject is quickly changed.
How anyone can have faith in this investigation is beyond me.
There are also several sets of circumstances relevant to the silencer I find rather peculiar.
On the American TV show Behind Mansion Walls produced by Investigation Discovery, Former MP Andrew Hunter along with the narrator of the program say that Jeremy was framed by his relatives in order to inherit the estate. On the CI channel documentary Peter Sutherst insinuates to the viewers that his relatives put the scratches on the kitchen mantle. If the claims made on both these programs are false why has there been no lawsuit for defamation filed against the producers of the shows?
Secondly. Although Jeremy wanted a more aggressive approach in his defence strategy, If he murdered his family with the silencer attached and put it away why does he decide to instruct Rivlin QC to pursue a defence whereby the silencer was attached during the murders? Is Jeremy really that stupid?
And finally if Jeremy murdered everyone with a silencer he would know from the beginning that the only option then is to claim the evidence is bogus, So why does Jeremy spend over 20 years pursuing a conventional explanation for the blood in the sound moderator? Conspiracy theory is the final refuge and it seems rather strange that a guilty party would wait 25 years to resort to that belief?
