Author Topic: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards  (Read 19141 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #165 on: May 19, 2016, 10:28: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.

Except they didn't say it was a rifle, they said they saw something with COULD be a rifle. Give that they were told that someone had gone crazy with a rifle, it's not surprising that they were on the lookout for rifle shaped objects!
« Last Edit: May 19, 2016, 10:28:PM by Caroline »
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #166 on: May 19, 2016, 10:28:PM »
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






Go in the archives and find the statements.

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #167 on: May 19, 2016, 10:34:PM »
Except they didn't say it was a rifle, they said they saw something with COULD be a rifle. Give that they were told that someone had gone crazy with a rifle, it's not surprising that they were on the lookout for rifle shaped objects!
thank you caroline .no need for me to lookup their statement but maybe lookout should learn how to read them correctly

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #168 on: May 19, 2016, 10:36:PM »
Here it is Sami - she clearly states that she saw what 'appeared' to be a rifle.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #169 on: May 19, 2016, 10:37:PM »
Here it is Sami - she clearly states that she saw what 'appeared' to be a rifle.

She also states that 'there was no sign of movement in the house'
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #170 on: May 19, 2016, 10:39:PM »
thank you caroline .no need for me to lookup their statement but maybe lookout should learn how to read them correctly





I can read,thank you very much. I'm not the illiterate one here !!

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #171 on: May 19, 2016, 10:41:PM »




I can read,thank you very much. I'm not the illiterate one here !!

But not quote correctly.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #172 on: May 19, 2016, 10:42:PM »
She also states that 'there was no sign of movement in the house'
thank you caroline good work . appearing to be and actully being a rifle are two different things.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #173 on: May 19, 2016, 10:43:PM »
thank you caroline good work . appearing to be and actully being a rifle are two different things.

Exactly, they would have have been high on adrenalin and looking for things that might be a danger. he fact that Jeremy had mentioned the rifle, puts them on high alert to make sure there are no surprises.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #174 on: May 19, 2016, 10:44:PM »




I can read,thank you very much. I'm not the illiterate one here !!
iam not saying you cant read iam saying when you write down what youve read your economical with the truth

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #175 on: May 19, 2016, 10:49:PM »
thank you caroline good work . appearing to be and actully being a rifle are two different things.






It's police language-----" appeared to be ". Like someone who's rat-arsed " appeared to be drunk ".
You've got a lot to learn. A cop will never commit himself-----------ask yourself why.

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #176 on: May 19, 2016, 10:57:PM »





It's police language-----" appeared to be ". Like someone who's rat-arsed " appeared to be drunk ".
You've got a lot to learn. A cop will never commit himself-----------ask yourself why.
but quite a few did .in this case they said jb was the killer how much more committed do you want they didnt say he jb appeared to be the killer they said jb was the killer
« Last Edit: May 19, 2016, 11:10:PM by sami »

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13779
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #177 on: May 19, 2016, 11:20:PM »
Then how did it end up so neatly and suggestively across her chest?

seriously do I have to explain this?


1. Person sits up with the rifle muzzle end on their neck and the stock end between their legs

2. With one hand by the trigger and the other hand round the barrel

3. Once they are dead or dying they will fall back, the rifle then goes down with the body due to gravity and partially directed by the individuals grip on the barrel but mainly due to gravity.




 

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #178 on: May 19, 2016, 11:30:PM »
seriously do I have to explain this?


1. Person sits up with the rifle muzzle end on their neck and the stock end between their legs

2. With one hand by the trigger and the other hand round the barrel

3. Once they are dead or dying they will fall back, the rifle then goes down with the body due to gravity and partially directed by the individuals grip on the barrel but mainly due to gravity.
yes but the paths the bullets took show clearly that the rifle was NOT between her legs but was at an angle and to the right of her body no shots were straight through the neck from in front of her

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Re: are the appeal court and the ccrc guilty of double standards
« Reply #179 on: May 19, 2016, 11:33:PM »
theres no way sc fired those 2 shots she would have had to hold the rifle at an impossible angle