Author Topic: Silencer. Conclusion of recent forensic evidence breakthroughs:  (Read 2564 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44485
The submitted to court and current silencer evidence:

This shows 100% the silencer was on the rifle throughout the massacre.


The possibility of the silencer evidence being incorrect:

There was no possibility of all the evidence on the silencer being wrong due to human error or testing methods.

There was no possibility of the police or relatives successfully contaminating the silencer.

The evidence was accepted at court. Further tests have just reaffirmed the evidence. With Sheila matching 13 out of 17 markers.


Implications of the undisputed silencer evidence:

The silencer evidence alone shows Bamber is 100% guilty.

It was impossible for Sheila to commit the massacre and leave this evidence on the silencer.

There are multiple obstacles and no reason why Sheila would put the silencer on pre massacre.

It is not confirmed that Sheila knew how to insert the silencer,  knew where it was or considered it advantageous to use.

Bamber testified he was proficient with the murder weapon.

There are multiple reasons why Bamber would use a silencer.

There are multiple reasons why Bamber would put the silencer away.


                                     _________________

All of the above points are the result of recent investigations resulting in undisputed threads.

On this one piece of evidence alone, Bamber is guilty, beyond reasonable doubt. Although there are over a hundred supporting pieces of incriminating forensic and circumstantial evidence. Some of which is in the library.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2016, 08:30:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Where does it state " beyond reasonable doubt ?"

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44485
Where does it state " beyond reasonable doubt ?"

It says it in my thread post. My silencer investigations show Bamber is 100% guilty.

The jury voted guilty 'beyond reasonable doubt'.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
It says it in my thread post. My silencer investigations show Bamber is 100% guilty.

The jury voted guilty 'beyond reasonable doubt'.




Documented ? Not just because YOU said so.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44485



Documented ? Not just because YOU said so.

Lookout the jury voted Bamber guilty 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

The silencer evidence has always shown this. There was a very slim chance of human error or deliberate contamination as suggested by optimistic supporters. But my investigations show this was impossible.

You must post as a guilter. The evidence shows he is 100% guilty. You can still debate the case, as other guilters do. Some who were previous supporters.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2016, 04:34:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Lookout the jury voted Bamber guilty 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

The silencer evidence has always shown this. There was a very slim chance of human error or deliberate contamination as suggested by optimistic supporters. But my investigations show this was impossible.

You must post as a guilter. The evidence shows he is 100% guilty. You can still debate the case, as other guilters do. Some who were previous supporters.






I'm not interested in what the jury stated. I want to see the " beyond reasonable doubt " in black and white/ documented .

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
Lookout the jury voted Bamber guilty 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

The silencer evidence has always shown this. There was a very slim chance of human error or deliberate contamination as suggested by optimistic supporters. But my investigations show this was impossible.

You must post as a guilter. The evidence shows he is 100% guilty. You can still debate the case, as other guilters do. Some who were previous supporters.
yes adam i agree ,lookout should follow the advice in the last paragraph above :)

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076





I'm not interested in what the jury stated. I want to see the " beyond reasonable doubt " in black and white/ documented .

Then you should want to see the same case evidence that Sheila was responsible - in black and white.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Then you should want to see the same case evidence that Sheila was responsible - in black and white.





Another cop-out on your part. I asked the question first and it WASN'T referring to Sheila.

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490





I'm not interested in what the jury stated. I want to see the " beyond reasonable doubt " in black and white/ documented .
nit picking you know full well it was 10 out of 12 that were convinced beyond reasonable doubt,so now do you want us to fake a document to say the above,the innocent camp would do that, but we dont,had they found jb not guilty iam sure you would be happy :)

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
nit picking you know full well it was 10 out of 12 that were convinced beyond reasonable doubt,so now do you want us to fake a document to say the above,the innocent camp would do that, but we dont,had they found jb not guilty iam sure you would be happy :)





I couldn't give a flying f++k that it was 10 out of 12.What I'm after is something WRITTEN which states by the LAW that it was beyond reasonable doubt !

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490




I couldn't give a flying f++k that it was 10 out of 12.What I'm after is something WRITTEN which states by the LAW that it was beyond reasonable doubt !
well you might have to wait a long time,about the same time as jb has spent in the nick,what law you talking about ,not sods law :)

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
well you might have to wait a long time,about the same time as jb has spent in the nick,what law you talking about ,not sods law :)





It was sods law that got him inside !!

Offline sami

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490




It was sods law that got him inside !!
ive had a fair share of sods law :)

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
ive had a fair share of sods law :)
Think sods law affects s all sami.  Have you thought about checking out food intolerances?  :)