What makes Bamber innocent?

[David1819]

adam there would be no point in wearing the wetsuit underneath the clothes,cause he would still have to dispose of any blooded clothing.if he did stay the night all he had to do was get up around 2am put the wetsuit and the other stuff youve mentioned on and carry out his work taking all the time he needed.people will disagree with me but its not impossible that he showered after the event.imo

In the behind mansion walls documentary reconstruction, they have him wearing it. It does look and seem rather ridiculous. However it would make sense if you argue that all he had on was the wetsuit, Takes a shower after and then has no need to dispose of anything. 

[David1819]

still waiting for david to say why he thinks silencer was not used.

Fowlers report does show the sound moderator was not attached during the fatal shots

The evidence of Dr Fowler is set out in a more substantial report.  That report has been peer?reviewed by Dr Dragovich, who is Chief Medical Examiner in Oakland County, Michigan and Dr Marcella Fierro, who is the retired Chief Medical Examiner to the Commonwealth of Virginia.  Both have qualifications as forensic pathologists.  In his careful report, Dr Fowler makes clear that he has reviewed the evidence, which was available in relation to the wounds. He concluded that the abrasions found were consistent with those of a rifle without a silencer, that there were no distinctive marks on the body which showed that a silencer had been attached, and the residue was consistent with contact wounds. Bamber vs CCRC 2012


New evidence obtained by Bamber's lawyers seem to rule out the possibility of the silencer being attached to the rifle during the killings. Three reports, by eminent experts, suggest the shots were fired without the silencer attached. One, compiled by David Fowler, the chief medical examiner of the US state of Maryland, has examined photographs of the victim's wounds and concluded they were caused by the rifle without the silencer attached.

Fowler, who has reviewed 3,000 shooting murders, says the wounds are consistent with "the rifle not having a silencer-attached". His conclusions are corroborated by two other American experts and a leading British forensic scientist.
Guardian article

Below is a suicide under the chin with a surpressor (only one I could find) the blood has been cleared but you can see the marks it has left


The muzzle marks show that what is being played out bellow cannot have taken place

so there were contact shots and shots at close range yet not a trace of blood in the barrel.puzzling

Puzzling? no not really

Blood is more often detected on the outside of the muzzle than inside the barrel. In a
study of 653 revolvers, 242 pistols, 181 shotguns, and 124 rifles used in suicides, blood was
detected on the barrel 74% of the time for revolvers, 76% for pistols, 85% for shotguns, and
81% for rifles.4 In contrast, blood was detected inside the barrel in 53% of the revolvers, 57%
of pistols, 72% of shotguns, and 58% of rifles. The presence of blood inside the barrel of a
gun indicates that the weapon was within a few inches of the body at the time of discharge.
Absence of blood on or in the barrel does not preclude a close range or contact wound.[/color]
Page 362 of Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques by Vincent J.M. DiMaio

splashes of such blood that
have been propelled into a firearm’s barrel by force of
projectile impact take a comparably long period of time to
dry. If this time is not conceded before sample collection,
the still liquid droplets of blood may be blasted out of the
barrel by force of subsequent shots

For samples taken after the first shot DNA-analysis yielded STR profiles eligible for reliable
individualization in 17 of 20 cases. After a second shot had been fired 8 or more STR systems were
amplified successfully in 14 of 20 barrels.
Persistence of biological traces in gun barrels Int J Legal Med. 2012 May

Firstly, that as I have already stated, the basic use of the cloth in
the PULL-THROUGH is insuf?cient for cleaning purposes,
since this does not get into the many inaccessible areas in the
corners of the lands and grooves, or to the very bottom of the
?ne tooling marks that are engrained into the surface of the
barrel.
If the rifle was used in the shooting of Sheila Caffell without the
use of the silencer, and because of the nature of the wounds
inflicted upon her, there is every chance that some form of
BACKSPATTER occurred and that very ?ne sprays of blood,
tissue and bone fragmentations were forced back into the open
end of the barrel.
These traces of blood would dry inside the lining of the barrel
and be partially concealed in the corners of the lands and
grooves, ri?ing and ?ne tooling marks. It would only be
possible to detect their presence if the cleaning process
involving the cloth PULL-TROUGH was applied shortly after
the blood had entered the end of the barrel, in its wet condition.
Once the blood had had an opportunity to dry, I would expect
the cloth to simply glide over the top of the blood without any of
it being transferred onto the cloth.
More specifically, if some of the blood had seeped into the
inaccessible areas aforementioned, it is possible that the cloth
did not even touch the surface of the dried blood, since the dried
blood may have been engrained on the shallowest parts of the
marks beneath the level of the surface on the inner Wall of the
barrel.
Mallison report page 7

[Adam]

And its important to note that the scratches on the bathroom window used as evidence against him in court were created after the massacre when he had no keys 

That is wrong.

No one knows when Bamber put the scatch marks on the bathroom window with his hack saw. Just that it was definately Bamber who did this.

Bamber makes the ridiculous suggestion he made them after the massacre to get inside.  Quite why he could not get front door keys for his own property, no one knows. Telephones did exist in 1985.

The judge suggested Bamber used his hack saw prior to the massacre to ensure a quiet and easy access on the night.

[Adam]

David knows the evidence shows the silencer was certainly on the rifle during the massacre. He also knows the evidence could not be wrong due to human error, or by creating false evidence which would fool the lab.

This is why he didn't comment on my silencer threads.

However he believes if he posts a long post with a lot of pictures on this thread it may convince people. Unfortunately since the 'forensic evidence breakthrough' fiasco all credibility has been lost.

[sami]

David knows the evidence shows the silencer was certainly on the rifle during the massacre. He also knows the evidence could not be wrong due to human error, or by creating false evidence which would fool the lab.

This is why he didn't comment on my silencer threads.

However he believes if he posts a long post with a lot of pictures on this thread it may convince people. Unfortunately since the 'forensic evidence breakthrough' fiasco all credibility has been lost.

thanks to your work on the silencer topic theres no doubt it was on the rifle when used.getting other experts to look at it and come to a very different conclusion .who the heck should believe dr fowler.and your wrong again if silencer was not used than the barrel should have contained blood

[sami]

david thats a poor excuse for not detecting blood in the barrel ,but at least you admit theres a chance of it getting in the barrel,as for detecting it iam sure the lab was not staffed by idiots there for i assume they would have moisten the fabric and barrel before the pull through

[David1819]

thanks to your work on the silencer topic theres no doubt it was on the rifle when used.getting other experts to look at it and come to a very different conclusion .who the heck should believe dr fowler.and your wrong again if silencer was not used than the barrel should have contained blood

Who the heck should believe Dr Fowler?  Dr Dragovich, Chief Medical Examiner in Oakland County, Michigan and Dr Marcella Fierro, retired Chief Medical Examiner to the Commonwealth of Virginia.
They agree with him and to this date his conclusions have remained unchallenged.

https://youtu.be/VeLsEeE0zTI?t=49s

Your position requires you to deny forensic evidence. Like the other day when I explained to you how the shell casing could be ejected to the left. You accepted my argument but you still decided the shell casing should not be there anyway.

[David1819]

david thats a poor excuse for not detecting blood in the barrel ,but at least you admit theres a chance of it getting in the barrel,as for detecting it iam sure the lab was not staffed by idiots there for i assume they would have moisten the fabric and barrel before the pull through

How is that a poor excuse? A study of 124 rifles used in suicides and 58% of them had blood in the barrel the other 42% did not.

I am not saying the lab is staffed by idiots but you have to bare in mind that gun related murders in the country are very rare compared to that in the states. in 1985 they will have had limited knowledge and only a handful of cases as experience.

[sami]

How is that a poor excuse? A study of 124 rifles used in suicides and 58% of them had blood in the barrel the other 42% did not.

I am not saying the lab is staffed by idiots but you have to bare in mind that gun related murders in the country are very rare compared to that in the states. in 1985 they will have had limited knowledge and only a handful of cases as experience.

yes but iam sure they knew how to recover dried blood from a rifle barrel.common sense will tell you that if they attempted it a while after the murders than the cloth would have been sprayed before the attempt

[sami]

iam sure you know in usa one can get an expert to say just about anything one would ask them to say.you only qoute studies which favour you

[Steve_uk]

Is it not possible to get backspatter from a non-contact shot with silencer attached? Isn't it also possible that after the rifle was damaged after the fight with Nevill Jeremy unscrewed the silencer and made his way back upstairs to Sheila, killing her sans silencer?

[David1819]

iam sure you know in usa one can get an expert to say just about anything one would ask them to say.you only qoute studies which favour you

That's not how it works. The American experts have not been challenged by the CCRC. If you can pay anyone to say anything why don't they? 

[David1819]

Is it not possible to get backspatter from a non-contact shot with silencer attached? Isn't it also possible that after the rifle was damaged after the fight with Nevill Jeremy unscrewed the silencer and made his way back upstairs to Sheila, killing her sans silencer?

The Crowns case was that Sheila was shot with the Silencer on therefore she could not have shot herself.

The CCRC's position now is. Well just because the silencer was not attached when Sheila injuries were inflicted does not nessisarily mean it was not on at all during the murders 

The scenario you have suggested does not make sense, because if Jeremy and Neville are downstairs fighting, What is Sheila doing? You would have to argue that Sheila and the twins slept through it all. Reason being the twins were shot while asleep and if Sheila woke up she would realise they are all in danger and go to check on the twins and as a result wake them up and try to get them to safety. This is incompatible with the facts of the crime.

Another factor is one of the twins had a contact shot to the head, yet no evidence of their blood or brain tissue in the moderator 

[sami]

That's not how it works. The American experts have not been challenged by the CCRC. If you can pay anyone to say anything why don't they? 

no need too the jury believed it was on the rifle.and nothing about dr fowler 's report will change that

[sami]

The Crowns case was that Sheila was shot with the Silencer on therefore she could not have shot herself.

The CCRC's position now is. Well just because the silencer was not attached when Sheila injuries were inflicted does not nessisarily mean it was not on at all during the murders 

The scenario you have suggested does not make sense, because if Jeremy and Neville are downstairs fighting, What is Sheila doing? You would have to argue that Sheila and the twins slept through it all. Reason being the twins were shot while asleep and if Sheila woke up she would realise they are all in danger and go to check on the twins and as a result wake them up and try to get them to safety. This is incompatible with the facts of the crime.

Another factor is one of the twins had a contact shot to the head, yet no evidence of their blood or brain tissue in the moderator

where does it say that is the ccrc position now