Possibility of silencer evidence being wrong due to testing mistakes:

[Adam]

Aga paint:

This evidence could not be wrong. Testing methods were easily advanced enough to compare the silencer paint with the aga paint and make a match.

The paint inside the silencer would have come from somewhere inside WHF. The only explanation is it came from the silencer during the definate kitchen fight.

The  scratch marks on the aga support the paint being inside the silencer. The ramdonness of the scratch marks support a kitchen fight.


Human blood inside the silencer:

In 1985 it was impossible to not be able to determine human blood.

It was quite a new rifle. So it may not made any successful short range shots at an animal.

Several of the shots inside WHF were contact or short range. There was no blood on the rifle nozzle.


Sheila's blood inside the silencer:

It was certainly human blood inside the silencer, which could have only come from inside WHF.

Sheila received a contact shot.

Sheila was almost certainly the last person shot.

Human blood in the silencer shows it was on during the massacre. So no reason to take it off to shoot Sheila.

Sheila's blood being inside the silencer was not disputed at trial or for several years afterwards. Further more advanced tests years later just reaffirmed it was Sheila's blood.


Neville's burn marks:

Bamber's experts have said these were inflicted by the killer minus the silencer. This is the reason why the evidence already inside the silencer, remained inside and was not destroyed.


The grey hair:

Both the police and relatives said there was a grey hair inside the silencer. Neither could be wrong as it was not possible to mistake a grey hair with anything else.

The evidence that the silencer was used during the massacre shows that the grey hair was almost certainly Neville's. If this had been confirmed from tests it would have been very damaging for Bamber.

                                       ------------------------

In conclusion there was human error in losing the hair on the silencer. Which the police have never tried to hide. However there was no possibility of the tests on the maintained evidence being wrong.

It is not conclusive whether Neville's burn marks were made with or without the silencer attached. However the experts view that it was without the silencer attached is the reason why there was so much available evidence left inside the silencer which had not beeen destroyed by heat.

[Adam]

The silencer evidence could not be wrong due to testing methods or human error.

The only option now is to see if it was possible for deliberate, convincing and successful silencer contamination. If this is not possible, then the silencer evidence alone shows Bamber is 100% guilty.

At present the forensic evidence shows the silencer was on the rifle pre massacre and used for the massacre. It was impossible for Sheila to commit the massacre and leave this evidence on the silencer.

I will research to see of it was possible to deliberately fabricate the silencer evidence.

[sami]

The silencer evidence could not be wrong due to testing methods or human error.

The only option now is to see if it was possible for deliberate, convincing and successful silencer contamination. If this is not possible, then the silencer evidence alone shows Bamber is 100% guilty.

At present the forensic evidence shows the silencer was on the rifle pre massacre and used for the massacre. It was impossible for Sheila to commit the massacre and leave this evidence on the silencer.

I will research to see of it was possible to deliberately fabricate the silencer evidence.

that will be interesting adam.ivr read its impossible to fabricate the blood found between the baffills of silencer

[Adam]

We are getting very close to having 100% confirmation of Bambers guilt. From just one piece of evidence.

This happens a lot in cases. One piece of forensic evidence can convict a criminal. Providing things such as no alibi and a motive support it. One piece is all it takes.

However in this case there is literally a library full.

[mike tesko]

The silencer evidence could not be wrong due to testing methods or human error.

The only option now is to see if it was possible for deliberate, convincing and successful silencer contamination. If this is not possible, then the silencer evidence alone shows Bamber is 100% guilty.

At present the forensic evidence shows the silencer was on the rifle pre massacre and used for the massacre. It was impossible for Sheila to commit the massacre and leave this evidence on the silencer.

I will research to see of it was possible to deliberately fabricate the silencer evidence.

It does not prove clear cut that Bamber  is the killer at all. For a start it needs to be properly established whether or not the silencer in question was 'present' at the scene, or elsewhere in somebody elses' possession and control, before  Ann Eaton handed 'it' over to DC Oakey on the 11th September 1985...

Bamber certainly had 'not' got possession of 'it' after the shootings, but the relatives did...

[mike tesko]

On the official site, Jeremy is saying that the COLP investigators confirmed the existence of two separate identical looking parker Hale silencers that were at one time or another in police possession, and at the lab' together. He is maintaining that evidence of blood inside one, and paint from the aga surround on the other, were presented as though both had been found on the same silencer, and that cops and those at the lab' made out a false case that there was only one silencer at any one time...

However, this claim can be shown to be a dishonest one, since cops submitted one of the silencers to the lab' under an exhibit reference of DB/1, item reference No. 23, and the second one on the 20th September 1985 (exhibit reference and lab' item number concealed in / on paperwork). This latter silencer was the one that Ann Eaton handed over to DC Oakey on the 11th September 1985, the day before her brother contacted the police to tell them that he had found the silencer to the gun. At around this time cops were fingerprinting the farmhouse, and the executor of the parents estates, Basil John Cock was also present at the farmhouse. DS Davidson and DS Eastwood fingerprinted 'this' silencer on the 13th September - how did Ann Eaton have possession of the silencer cops had already sent to the lab' 12 days earlier?

Furthermore, how could the blood have been found in the same second silencer that the paint was found on, that was not sent to the lab' (20th September 1985) until after the blood found in the 'other' silencer had already been found in 'it' (11th September, 1985) and fully analysed (12th to 19th September, 1985)?

[Adam]

Mike the forensic evidence shows 100% the silencer was on for the massacre.It was impossible for Sheila to commit the massacre and leave this evidence on the silencer. 

The only option for supporters is to say the silencer evidence is wrong through human testing error or deliberate fabrication.

This thread has ruled out human testing error.

[sami]

On the official site, Jeremy is saying that the COLP investigators confirmed the existence of two separate identical looking parker Hale silencers that were at one time or another in police possession, and at the lab' together. He is maintaining that evidence of blood inside one, and paint from the aga surround on the other, were presented as though both had been found on the same silencer, and that cops and those at the lab' made out a false case that there was only one silencer at any one time...

However, this claim can be shown to be a dishonest one, since cops submitted one of the silencers to the lab' under an exhibit reference of DB/1, item reference No. 23, and the second one on the 20th September 1985 (exhibit reference and lab' item number concealed in / on paperwork). This latter silencer was the one that Ann Eaton handed over to DC Oakey on the 11th September 1985, the day before her brother contacted the police to tell them that he had found the silencer to the gun. At around this time cops were fingerprinting the farmhouse, and the executor of the parents estates, Basil John Cock was also present at the farmhouse. DS Davidson and DS Eastwood fingerprinted 'this' silencer on the 13th September - how did Ann Eaton have possession of the silencer cops had already sent to the lab' 12 days earlier?

Furthermore, how could the blood have been found in the same second silencer that the paint was found on, that was not sent to the lab' (20th September 1985) until after the blood found in the 'other' silencer had already been found in 'it' (11th September, 1985) and fully analysed (12th to 19th September, 1985)?

interesting point mike,

[mike tesko]

Mike the forensic evidence shows 100% the silencer was on for the massacre.It was impossible for Sheila to commit the massacre and leave this evidence on the silencer. 

The only option for supporters is to say the silencer evidence is wrong through human testing error or deliberate fabrication. This thread has ruled out human testing error.

I disagree...

I only have to think back to the 'occasion'  when DI 'Ron' Cook took it 'upon himself' to 'dismantle the silencer' in his possession before he rebuilt it, and sent it 'back to the lab' on the 30th August 1985. Cook removed the baffles and separated the top baffles from each other, but he did not find any blood on any of the separated baffles before he rebuilt it, and sent it off to the lab', on that occasion. There are no notes available suggesting that Cook had seen any blood inside on the baffles when he had stripped it down. In the first instance, Cook should not have been interfering with the silencer before it was to be examined at the lab', and if there had been blood inside the silencer it should have been him that found it there, but he stayed 'mute' on that point. This was 'suspicious' in my opinion, because I don't believe that the ballistic expert, Fletcher, was the first person to see the blood inside on the baffle plates when he stripped 'it' down on the 11th September. How could there have been no blood there on those baffle plates when 'Ron' Cook stripped the silencer down, but 'hey presto' when Fletcher stripped the same silencer down that Cook had sent to the lab' on the 30th August, the same baffles were all bloodstained?

Alarm bells are 'ringing'...

[Adam]

Mike this thread is about whether it was possible for human error or testing methods could have meant all the silencer evidence was accidentially wrong. Of which there is no possibility.

Later this week I will investigate whether it was possible for the relatives and/or the police to fabricate evidence that fooled the lab team.