Balance of Probability

[Caroline]

She has a rifle and nothing else. There are no handguns around to inflict headshots to herself in such scenario. Plus women tend not to shoot themselves in a way that will effect their facial features

Women who commit suicide are more likely than men to avoid facial disfiguration, but not necessarily in the name of vanity.

Valerie Callanan from the University of Akron and Mark Davis from the Criminal Justice Research Center at the Ohio State University, USA, show that there are marked gender differences in the use of suicide methods that disfigure the face or head.

While firearms are the preferred method for both men and women, women are less likely to shoot themselves in the head.

This would explain why she would not resort to this 

So I will ask again, why pick a 46 degree angle? The above explains nothing.

[lookout]

How do any of us know that there wasn't a fierce argument after JB had left that night ? We DON'T do we ?
With Sheila's vulnerability brought about by the horrendous life she had, it would have culminated in a heightened and impulsive anger and being surrounded by guns made her " job " in ridding that which caused her situation,easier. Without any planning,her reaction would have been instant and carried out on impulse,as suicides are.
Just the split from her husband would have been enough on its own to tip her over the edge,but being ill,helpless in looking after her sons,unfit to work and at loggerheads with her mother,it would take a strong person to overcome what Sheila endured as well as the thought that she was losing control of her sons.
It reads the same as a list of warning signs leading to suicide.FACT.
 

[sami]

How do any of us know that there wasn't a fierce argument after JB had left that night ? We DON'T do we ?
With Sheila's vulnerability brought about by the horrendous life she had, it would have culminated in a heightened and impulsive anger and being surrounded by guns made her " job " in ridding that which caused her situation,easier. Without any planning,her reaction would have been instant and carried out on impulse,as suicides are.
Just the split from her husband would have been enough on its own to tip her over the edge,but being ill,helpless in looking after her sons,unfit to work and at loggerheads with her mother,it would take a strong person to overcome what Sheila endured as well as the thought that she was losing control of her sons.
It reads the same as a list of warning signs leading to suicide.FACT.

we do know all was calm after jb left and junes sister phoned,if it was impulse she would have opened her mouth put the barrel in it and push the trigger,leading to suicide yes but murder and suicide ,NO

[David1819]

So I will ask again, why pick a 46 degree angle? The above explains nothing.

Oh Dear.......

Well if one has a rifle (those are straight BTW) and is sitting up with the stock between the legs and wants to avoid facial disfiguration then the natural alternative option of firing to the neck is exactly around 45 degrees give or take.



I put a red box and green arrow to help you 

[sami]

Oh Dear.......

Well if one has a rifle (those are straight BTW) and is sitting up with the stock between the legs and wants to avoid facial disfiguration then the natural alternative option of firing to the neck is exactly around 45 degrees give or take.



I put a red box and green arrow to help you 

have you been smoking pot,its nonsense to say she wanted to avoid disfiguration. she could have just placed it in her mouth.well after worrying about her looks she then places it under the chin,why did she not aim at the neck again,all on an impulse as lookout said,yet she had time to worry about her looks.i think you should pay more attention to adams first sentence in a previous post

[Caroline]

Oh Dear.......

Well if one has a rifle (those are straight BTW) and is sitting up with the stock between the legs and wants to avoid facial disfiguration then the natural alternative option of firing to the neck is exactly around 45 degrees give or take.



I put a red box and green arrow to help you 

You can stick your red box where the sun doesn't shine and try being honest for a change. Sheila wasn't sitting up or she would have had blood all down her night dress!! You change the facts to suit yourself but you're fooling no one!

[sami]

You can stick your red box where the sun doesn't shine and try being honest for a change. Sheila wasn't sitting up or she would have had blood all down her night dress!! You change the facts to suit yourself but you're fooling no one!

well said caroline.diagram of complete nonsense

[David1819]

You can stick your red box where the sun doesn't shine and try being honest for a change. Sheila wasn't sitting up or she would have had blood all down her night dress!! You change the facts to suit yourself but you're fooling no one!

Really?   Try reading the 2002 appeal statement point 45

    The lower of the two injuries must have been
    the first since it had led to haemorrhaging inside the neck and this would not have
    occurred to the same extent if the other wound, which would have been immediately fatal,
    had preceded it. Dr Vanezis gave evidence that the nature of the blood stains to the
    nightdress suggested that Sheila Caffell was sitting up when she received both injuries.
    After the second injury she would have immediately fallen back.

[sami]

Really?   Try reading the 2002 appeal statement point 45

    The lower of the two injuries must have been
    the first since it had led to haemorrhaging inside the neck and this would not have
    occurred to the same extent if the other wound, which would have been immediately fatal,
    had preceded it. Dr Vanezis gave evidence that the nature of the blood stains to the
    nightdress suggested that Sheila Caffell was sitting up when she received both injuries.
    After the second injury she would have immediately fallen back.

vanezis is not a blood pattern expert,impossible she was sat up right simply because no blood from the wounds ran down vertically,even a six year old can see that

[Adam]

She may have been sitting up slightly and fell down instantly. Meaning there was no time for blood to fall vertically.

Are you aware that Sheila's legs were pulled after the second shot ? It's in the 2002 appeal. The judges suggesting it is massive incriminating forensic evidence against Bamber. 

[sami]

She may have been sitting up slightly and fell down instantly. Meaning there was no time for blood to fall vertically.

Are you aware that Sheila's legs were pulled after the second shot ? It's in the 2002 appeal. The judges suggesting it is massive incriminating forensic evidence against Bamber.

thats interesting adam,i didnt know that

[Caroline]

Really?   Try reading the 2002 appeal statement point 45

    The lower of the two injuries must have been
    the first since it had led to haemorrhaging inside the neck and this would not have
    occurred to the same extent if the other wound, which would have been immediately fatal,
    had preceded it. Dr Vanezis gave evidence that the nature of the blood stains to the
    nightdress suggested that Sheila Caffell was sitting up when she received both injuries.
    After the second injury she would have immediately fallen back.

Try reading what Venezis ACTUALLY said not how he was misquoted - but that suits you better! Venezis said "in my view both injuries were produced while she was slightly on her right side and PARTIALLY sitting up".

[Adam]

thats interesting adam,i didnt know that

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6908.msg322096.html#msg322096

To be fair documentaries and articles focus on the silencer. It's the most dramatic piece of evidence as a third party found it.  There isn't enough time to focus on all the other forensic evidence.

This in turn means the CT focus on the silencer and uninformed supporters start believing it's the only forensic evidence. Or dishonest supporters try to pretend it's the only forensic evidence. Hence my creation of the forensic evidence library to assist and correct posters.   

[sami]

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6908.msg322096.html#msg322096

To be fair documentaries and articles focus on the silencer. It's the most dramatic piece of evidence as a third party found it.  There isn't enough time to focus on all the other forensic evidence.

This in turn means the CT focus on the silencer and uninformed supporters start believing it's the only forensic evidence. Or dishonest supporters try to pretend it's the only forensic evidence. Hence my creation of the forensic evidence library to assist and correct posters.

excellent library adam,good work

[sami]

Try reading what Venezis ACTUALLY said not how he was misquoted - but that suits you better! Venezis said "in my view both injuries were produced while she was slightly on her right side and PARTIALLY sitting up".

yes that can also account for the blood found on the right side of her nightie