Author Topic: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards  (Read 19174 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44340
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #150 on: May 19, 2016, 07:52:PM »
Its no good Jeremy just standing in court saying he saw it, the prosecution would just say he is lying.

They would need police material to back it up, that they didn't have.

Bamber should have told his lawyers. His lawyers should then have got the police to hand over supporting evidence. The police haven't exactly denied this since. 
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13779
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #151 on: May 19, 2016, 07:57:PM »
How can she have shot herself with the silencer on ?

How?

She didn't shoot herself with the silencer on. but for argument sake the only possible way with it attached would be like this


Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #152 on: May 19, 2016, 08:00:PM »
How?

She didn't shoot herself with the silencer on. but for argument sake the only possible way with it attached would be like this
would the rifle not be found with her big toe inserted or near it had she used this action to pull the trigger her toenails were intact

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33773
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #153 on: May 19, 2016, 08:07:PM »
How?

She didn't shoot herself with the silencer on. but for argument sake the only possible way with it attached would be like this

Then how did it end up so neatly and suggestively across her chest?

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #154 on: May 19, 2016, 08:33:PM »
why did she choose the neck surely a quicker kill shot would be the temple or open mouth upwards someone chose for her jb i think
« Last Edit: May 19, 2016, 08:38:PM by sami »

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #155 on: May 19, 2016, 08:35:PM »
Then how did it end up so neatly and suggestively across her chest?

Because that's where Jeremy left it.
Few people have the imagination for reality

John

  • Guest
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #156 on: May 19, 2016, 08:40:PM »

That is just your interpretation. I believe Vanezis has since changed his mind and I note the word used by Professor Knight was "extraordinary" NOT "impossible".

He has indeed, the moment he saw the original photos of Sheila it changed everything.

John

  • Guest
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #157 on: May 19, 2016, 08:42:PM »
would the rifle not be found with her big toe inserted or near it had she used this action to pull the trigger her toenails were intact

The photos we see of the rifle sitting neatly on Sheila are staged in my opinion, that is not how the rifle would have been found had Sheila shot herself twice.  That is not how the first police officers to the scene found it.  The idiots who put the rifle back on her body thought she had shot herself and repositioned the rifle accordingly for the sake of the photos.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2016, 08:47:PM by John »

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #158 on: May 19, 2016, 08:47:PM »
The photos we see of the rifle sitting neatly on Sheila are staged in my opinion, that is not how the rifle would have been found had Sheila shot herself twice.  That is not how the first police officers to the scene found it.  The idiots thought she had shot herself and positioned the rifle accordingly for the sake of the photos.
just goes to show what a good job jb did in convincing police about what was going on .it was a very important part of his plan to be there with police and not lying in bed at his cottage.

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #159 on: May 19, 2016, 08:52:PM »
The photos we see of the rifle sitting neatly on Sheila are staged in my opinion, that is not how the rifle would have been found had Sheila shot herself twice.  That is not how the first police officers to the scene found it.  The idiots who put the rifle back on her body thought she had shot herself and repositioned the rifle accordingly for the sake of the photos.
john we cant be sure which postion the rifle was found.

John

  • Guest
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #160 on: May 19, 2016, 09:52:PM »
john we cant be sure which postion the rifle was found.

I agree but if Sheila had shot herself the rifle would have fallen away to the side. Could be the numpty who shot her laid the rifle on her without realising this.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2016, 09:55:PM by John »

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #161 on: May 19, 2016, 09:57:PM »
I agree but if Sheila had shot herself the rifle would have fallen away to the side. Could be the numpty who shot her laid the rifle on her without realising this.
i see your point

guest7363

  • Guest
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #162 on: May 19, 2016, 10:06:PM »
I originally came here several years ago somewhat sceptical but with an open mind, I really wanted Jeremy to be innocent of such a dreadful crime and not yet another victim of police corruption but over time I came to see that iin the final analysis it came down to him or Sheila.  The amount of forensic evidence is substantial and any unbiased reading of it clearly points away from Sheila, I'm afraid that leaves only one other suspect and that is Jeremy.  Add further circumstantial evidence and the testimony of several witnesses and it becomes clear that Jeremy had a history of criminal behaviour, hated his adopted family and had been scheming to get rid of them for some time.

My own view is that something or someone changed him while he was in New Zealand, he came home with only one thought and that was to get rich and return. The rest as they say is history.
Quite right John and that someone or something has never said a lot after Bambers conviction?

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #163 on: May 19, 2016, 10:13:PM »
The rifle which was " found " on Sheila's body had flown through the air and landed there after two armed officers had seen it on a windowsill through their telescopic sights.The rifle was spotted between 07.30 and 09.30 before both Jeapes and Brown,both of who referenced the sighting in their statements.
If JB was supposed to have killed everyone,how did the said rifle end up on Sheila's body if she had been killed  before 03.30 as stated by the prosecution ? 

BTW,the two officers who saw the rifle at the window were at separate locations.

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #164 on: May 19, 2016, 10:21:PM »
The rifle which was " found " on Sheila's body had flown through the air and landed there after two armed officers had seen it on a windowsill through their telescopic sights.The rifle was spotted between 07.30 and 09.30 before both Jeapes and Brown,both of who referenced the sighting in their statements.
If JB was supposed to have killed everyone,how did the said rifle end up on Sheila's body if she had been killed  before 03.30 as stated by the prosecution ? 

BTW,the two officers who saw the rifle at the window were at separate locations.
we have been through this before the claim you make is not true because from where the police were they could only see the top 6 to 8ins of the rifle barrel which could not have been made out from where they were it could just as easy a pipe or broom handle .it was immpossible to say it was a rifle from the distance and angle they were at