Backspatter phenomena, could not have occurred at time of fatal shot under chin

[mike tesko]

Backspatter phenomena, could not have occurred at time of fatal shot under chin

According to the ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher, Shela's blood was forced back into the silencer at the time she was fatally shot under the chin, but this could not have happened because any gases and propellant which followed the bullet into the fatal entry wound under the chin, would have become dispersed in the void of her mouth, and therefore, it could not have been forced backwards out of the bullet entry wound, as mentioned, by the ballistic expert...

(1) http://www.flickr.com/photos/miketeskowski/5278023213/
(2) http://www.flickr.com/photos/miketeskowski/5278660470/

On the other hand, the path and trajectory taken by the non fatal bullet to the right side of Sheila's neck, was capable of producing th aforementioned phenomena, since there was nowhere for the gases and propellant which followed the non fatal bullet into the neck. to escape to, or from - these gases and propellant wound naturally be forced back out along the path taken by the non fatal bullet and escape back out of the non fatal entry wound...

[mike tesko]

If no Back-spatter at time of fatal shot under chin - no need for anyone to remove silencer from barrel of gun and take it downstairs to conceal it in the gun cupboard, as alleged by Prosecution case

(1) No Backspatter at time of fatal shot under chin, path and trajectory of fatal bullet, up through base and roof off victims mouth and deposited in her brain

(2) No need for anyone to remove silencer and take it downstairs to hide it in the gun cupboard, after Sheila was killed

(3) No silencer photographed on weapon allegedly found on body of Sheila...

[Hartley]

According to Mr Fletcher a fire arms expert who gave evidence at the 2002 appeal stated that:

If the shot to Shelia Caffell, which was a contact shot to the throat, had been fired without the moderator in place, he would have expected to find blood in the barrel of the gun. If the moderator was attached it was “virtually certain” that Sheila Caffell’s blood would get into the moderator. There was, he said “a very slight possibility of it not happening, but very slight”.

So one would assume that Sheila's blood would be found either in the muzzle of the gun or in the silencer.

Her blood was not found in the muzzle of the gun.

So I would suggest that this would add weight to the possibility that the blood found in the silencer was indeed Sheila's.

How would the lack of blood from both gun muzzle and silencer be explained otherwise?

[TheBrilliantMistake]

Quite right Mr Hartley

From my logic he says:

1) The gun, with or without the moderator was against her skin (or near as dammit)
2) The blood would, with a very high probability) end up in the 'hole' at the end!...
3) If the moderator was used, it would only get as far as the moderator aperture and not get as far as the gun barrel

I think I prefer my phrasing... Blood is gonna end up in the hole.

[TheBrilliantMistake]

If no Back-spatter at time of fatal shot under chin - no need for anyone to remove silencer from barrel of gun and take it downstairs to conceal it in the gun cupboard, as alleged by Prosecution case

(1) No Backspatter at time of fatal shot under chin, path and trajectory of fatal bullet, up through base and roof off victims mouth and deposited in her brain

(2) No need for anyone to remove silencer and take it downstairs to hide it in the gun cupboard, after Sheila was killed

(3) No silencer photographed on weapon allegedly found on body of Sheila...

I strongly doubt having just wiped out 5 people, in a possibly dimly lit situation COULD check the inside of the silencer for blood.
I do think they might wipe it, or check it for obvious signs of blood, but anything more? no.

Besides, why even leave it at the house in the first place?

If Sheila committed suicide, why put the silencer away? I can understand taking it off, but not putting it away.
If Jeremy murdered her, then the same, why put the silence back and not take it with him? (it's a gamble to take it with him, but arguably a greater one not to).

[Kaldin]

If no Back-spatter at time of fatal shot under chin - no need for anyone to remove silencer from barrel of gun and take it downstairs to conceal it in the gun cupboard, as alleged by Prosecution case

(1) No Backspatter at time of fatal shot under chin, path and trajectory of fatal bullet, up through base and roof off victims mouth and deposited in her brain

(2) No need for anyone to remove silencer and take it downstairs to hide it in the gun cupboard, after Sheila was killed

(3) No silencer photographed on weapon allegedly found on body of Sheila...

I strongly doubt having just wiped out 5 people, in a possibly dimly lit situation COULD check the inside of the silencer for blood.
I do think they might wipe it, or check it for obvious signs of blood, but anything more? no.

Besides, why even leave it at the house in the first place?

If Sheila committed suicide, why put the silencer away? I can understand taking it off, but not putting it away.
If Jeremy murdered her, then the same, why put the silence back and not take it with him? (it's a gamble to take it with him, but arguably a greater one not to).

Yes. Jeremy couldn't possibly have known that the police would not look for all articles associated with guns in the house, and he couldn't have known that they would miss the silencer. In fact, you'd expect them to have taken all the firearms and associated articles away really.

There was allegedly blood on the outside of the silencer, so the killer didn't even bother to wipe it - that's quite careless isn't it?

Sheila could have taken the silencer off and put it back in the cupboard. She could have put the gun back in there too and taken it out again later to shoot herself minus the silencer. I know that sounds a bit far fetched, but so does the idea that Jeremy would just put the silencer back in the cupboard without even checking to see if there was blood on it.

I wonder if they examined the box the silencer was found in. You'd think there would be some blood in it which had transferred from the outside of the silencer.

[TheBrilliantMistake]

If no Back-spatter at time of fatal shot under chin - no need for anyone to remove silencer from barrel of gun and take it downstairs to conceal it in the gun cupboard, as alleged by Prosecution case

(1) No Backspatter at time of fatal shot under chin, path and trajectory of fatal bullet, up through base and roof off victims mouth and deposited in her brain

(2) No need for anyone to remove silencer and take it downstairs to hide it in the gun cupboard, after Sheila was killed

(3) No silencer photographed on weapon allegedly found on body of Sheila...

I strongly doubt having just wiped out 5 people, in a possibly dimly lit situation COULD check the inside of the silencer for blood.
I do think they might wipe it, or check it for obvious signs of blood, but anything more? no.

Besides, why even leave it at the house in the first place?

If Sheila committed suicide, why put the silencer away? I can understand taking it off, but not putting it away.
If Jeremy murdered her, then the same, why put the silence back and not take it with him? (it's a gamble to take it with him, but arguably a greater one not to).

Yes. Jeremy couldn't possibly have known that the police would not look for all articles associated with guns in the house, and he couldn't have known that they would miss the silencer. In fact, you'd expect them to have taken all the firearms and associated articles away really.

There was allegedly blood on the outside of the silencer, so the killer didn't even bother to wipe it - that's quite careless isn't it?

Sheila could have taken the silencer off and put it back in the cupboard. She could have put the gun back in there too and taken it out again later to shoot herself minus the silencer. I know that sounds a bit far fetched, but so does the idea that Jeremy would just put the silencer back in the cupboard without even checking to see if there was blood on it.

I wonder if they examined the box the silencer was found in. You'd think there would be some blood in it which had transferred from the outside of the silencer.

On this matter, we think alike.
Trouble is this -

If JB did it, his thought processes aren't quite typical of most. He killed 5. Enough said. So who's to say what level of arrogance, carelessness, adrenalin rushed confusion he was in?
If he didn't do it, then the putting the silencer back in the cupboard is equally 'bonkers'.

Either way, killing 4 then yourself is quite extreme, and killing 5 every bit as much. So whoever did it was not thinking rightly! Mapping that onto OUR minds is possibly our downfall.

Here's what I think though (on the assumption JB planned it, as best he could).

1) It's going to look like a robber, or suicide. Robbery is messy and they need to find the killer, so suicide works best (helpful of Sheila to have instability issues too)
2) Do I need to use a moderator? Might be best if I do, so as to make sure I'm not heard by distant farm hands etc.
3) Either I don't yet know that sheila will stuggle, or find impossible to shoot herself with the moderator fitted, or I do know about that problem, and decide the last shot will require it to be removed - they won't know there was a moderator used, because they;ll see the suicide gun, and that's that.
4) If I take the silencer with me, and for whatever reason I get caught with it - I'm done for. If I leave it at the house - it's just one of lots of gun stuff, and they probably won't even look. I might even clean it if I have to then put it back where it belongs

There is actually every chance he didn't think through every last detail (like backspatter) and was possibly too arrogant to think they might work out it was murder. Who knows?
If he hadn't actually known she couldn't kill herself easily with the moderator fitted, it MIGHT have been a last minute issue, and lucky he spotted the problem. So he removes it, shoots her without it, then has the silencer in his hand.... what does he do? he was GOING to leave it on the gun, but he can't do that now... panic panic ... put it back in the drawer.

Feasible?

[Kaldin]

If no Back-spatter at time of fatal shot under chin - no need for anyone to remove silencer from barrel of gun and take it downstairs to conceal it in the gun cupboard, as alleged by Prosecution case

(1) No Backspatter at time of fatal shot under chin, path and trajectory of fatal bullet, up through base and roof off victims mouth and deposited in her brain

(2) No need for anyone to remove silencer and take it downstairs to hide it in the gun cupboard, after Sheila was killed

(3) No silencer photographed on weapon allegedly found on body of Sheila...

I strongly doubt having just wiped out 5 people, in a possibly dimly lit situation COULD check the inside of the silencer for blood.
I do think they might wipe it, or check it for obvious signs of blood, but anything more? no.

Besides, why even leave it at the house in the first place?

If Sheila committed suicide, why put the silencer away? I can understand taking it off, but not putting it away.
If Jeremy murdered her, then the same, why put the silence back and not take it with him? (it's a gamble to take it with him, but arguably a greater one not to).

Yes. Jeremy couldn't possibly have known that the police would not look for all articles associated with guns in the house, and he couldn't have known that they would miss the silencer. In fact, you'd expect them to have taken all the firearms and associated articles away really.

There was allegedly blood on the outside of the silencer, so the killer didn't even bother to wipe it - that's quite careless isn't it?

Sheila could have taken the silencer off and put it back in the cupboard. She could have put the gun back in there too and taken it out again later to shoot herself minus the silencer. I know that sounds a bit far fetched, but so does the idea that Jeremy would just put the silencer back in the cupboard without even checking to see if there was blood on it.

I wonder if they examined the box the silencer was found in. You'd think there would be some blood in it which had transferred from the outside of the silencer.

On this matter, we think alike.
Trouble is this -

If JB did it, his thought processes aren't quite typical of most. He killed 5. Enough said. So who's to say what level of arrogance, carelessness, adrenalin rushed confusion he was in?
If he didn't do it, then the putting the silencer back in the cupboard is equally 'bonkers'.

Either way, killing 4 then yourself is quite extreme, and killing 5 every bit as much. So whoever did it was not thinking rightly! Mapping that onto OUR minds is possibly our downfall.

Here's what I think though (on the assumption JB planned it, as best he could).

1) It's going to look like a robber, or suicide. Robbery is messy and they need to find the killer, so suicide works best (helpful of Sheila to have instability issues too)
2) Do I need to use a moderator? Might be best if I do, so as to make sure I'm not heard by distant farm hands etc.
3) Either I don't yet know that sheila will stuggle, or find impossible to shoot herself with the moderator fitted, or I do know about that problem, and decide the last shot will require it to be removed - they won't know there was a moderator used, because they;ll see the suicide gun, and that's that.
4) If I take the silencer with me, and for whatever reason I get caught with it - I'm done for. If I leave it at the house - it's just one of lots of gun stuff, and they probably won't even look. I might even clean it if I have to then put it back where it belongs

There is actually every chance he didn't think through every last detail (like backspatter) and was possibly too arrogant to think they might work out it was murder. Who knows?
If he hadn't actually known she couldn't kill herself easily with the moderator fitted, it MIGHT have been a last minute issue, and lucky he spotted the problem. So he removes it, shoots her without it, then has the silencer in his hand.... what does he do? he was GOING to leave it on the gun, but he can't do that now... panic panic ... put it back in the drawer.

Feasible?

It's feasible, but still far fetched to me.

Apparently, Stan Jones mentioned a silencer on 9th August (I think), so if Jeremy was the culprit you'd think he'd remember he'd chucked the silencer into the cupboard and he'd try and retrieve it somehow before the police found it. He didn't though did he? Not only that, but he did nothing about Ann Eaton having the keys and free run of the house. I would have thought that someone who'd killed their family would start to worry about evidence they'd left behind.

[TheBrilliantMistake]

According to Mr Fletcher a fire arms expert who gave evidence at the 2002 appeal stated that:

If the shot to Shelia Caffell, which was a contact shot to the throat, had been fired without the moderator in place, he would have expected to find blood in the barrel of the gun. If the moderator was attached it was “virtually certain” that Sheila Caffell’s blood would get into the moderator. There was, he said “a very slight possibility of it not happening, but very slight”.

So one would assume that Sheila's blood would be found either in the muzzle of the gun or in the silencer.

Her blood was not found in the muzzle of the gun.

So I would suggest that this would add weight to the possibility that the blood found in the silencer was indeed Sheila's.

How would the lack of blood from both gun muzzle and silencer be explained otherwise?

I'm confused - which silencer are you talking about exactly?

I believe he refers to the moderator (silencer)  - for most, the term moderator is synonymous with silencer, although some like to make a distinction (Jeremy Bamber in particular!)
The muzzle is simply the end of the gun...


So:
In theory, the blood SHOULD end up in the end of the silencer (if fitted) OR inside the end of the gun (if not fitted), but it would not go all the way through the silence AND into the end of the gun.


That make sense?

[mike tesko]

In order for back spatter to apply, the bullet has to enter the surface of the skin and proceed along a track or path, until it comes to a complete standstill, at which point the gases from the blast which are following behind the bullet into the track / path, until it has nowhere else to go, and is therefore forced backwards out of the wound, along the track / path in reverse and back onto, or into the muzzle of the weapon, or the silencer, if it is held in a contact, or close contact position...

What I am saying is that because the shot under the chin, penetrated the base of Sheila's mouth, and up into the roof of her mouth, that the pressure of the gases and the blast which followed the bullet into the wound under her chin, would be dissipated inside th w void of her mouth, and not be forced back out of the entry wound under the chin, as described, and that this feature serves to seriously undermine that part of the ballistic experts evidence regarding his theory on back spatter in this case...

The position of the fatal shot under the chin, makes it far less likely that the phenomena of Back spatter could have occurred...

in my opinion...

[TheBrilliantMistake]

In order for back spatter to apply, the bullet has to enter the surface of the skin and proceed along a track or path, until it comes to a complete standstill, at which point the gases from the blast which are following behind the bullet into the track / path, until it has nowhere else to go, and is therefore forced backwards out of the wound, along the track / path in reverse and back onto, or into the muzzle of the weapon, or the silencer, if it is held in a contact, or close contact position...

What I am saying is that because the shot under the chin, penetrated the base of Sheila's mouth, and up into the roof of her mouth, that the pressure of the gases and the blast which followed the bullet into the wound under her chin, would be dissipated inside th w void of her mouth, and not be forced back out of the entry wound under the chin, as described, and that this feature serves to seriously undermine that part of the ballistic experts evidence regarding his theory on back spatter in this case...

The position of the fatal shot under the chin, makes it far less likely that the phenomena of back spatter could have occurred...




in my opinion...

And backspatter from a baseball bat?
you're cherry picking how backspatter can occur, there are additional reasons for droplets of blood 'spraying' with any high velocity impact, even relatively low velocity ones.

Blood is also 'sucked' into the end of the gun when hot gases are propelled outwards, and are already starting to cool rather than 'forced back in from gas 'returning'.

[Janet (Formerly known as Takeshi)]

IF we are going down the "Jeremy did it" route, I still cannot get my head around the fact that Sheila would be so submissive. Her sons have been killed. Her parents have been killed. She does whatever Jeremy tells her and either shoots herself or is completely submissive.

Sorry but I don't buy it. Choose what prescription drugs she was on, and we know the sedative ones were halved the previous month, I believe if she was a victim and knew her sons were dead she would have fought with her killer until her dying breath.

I know because I am a mother.

[Kaldin]

IF we are going down the "Jeremy did it" route, I still cannot get my head around the fact that Sheila would be so submissive. Her sons have been killed. Her parents have been killed. She does whatever Jeremy tells her and either shoots herself or is completely submissive.

Sorry but I don't buy it. Choose what prescription drugs she was on, and we know the sedative ones were halved the previous month, I believe if she was a victim and knew her sons were dead she would have fought with her killer until her dying breath.

I know because I am a mother.

Yes. I think the only way he could do it was to take her by surprise and shoot her in the neck. After that she would perhaps be too shocked or incapacitated to fight. How he would take her by surprise is a mystery though. I just wonder what she was doing in the main bedroom.

[mike tesko]

In order for back spatter to apply, the bullet has to enter the surface of the skin and proceed along a track or path, until it comes to a complete standstill, at which point the gases from the blast which are following behind the bullet into the track / path, until it has nowhere else to go, and is therefore forced backwards out of the wound, along the track / path in reverse and back onto, or into the muzzle of the weapon, or the silencer, if it is held in a contact, or close contact position...

What I am saying is that because the shot under the chin, penetrated the base of Sheila's mouth, and up into the roof of her mouth, that the pressure of the gases and the blast which followed the bullet into the wound under her chin, would be dissipated inside th w void of her mouth, and not be forced back out of the entry wound under the chin, as described, and that this feature serves to seriously undermine that part of the ballistic experts evidence regarding his theory on back spatter in this case...

The position of the fatal shot under the chin, makes it far less likely that the phenomena of back spatter could have occurred...




in my opinion...

And backspatter from a baseball bat?
you're cherry picking how backspatter can occur, there are additional reasons for droplets of blood 'spraying' with any high velocity impact, even relatively low velocity ones.

Blood is also 'sucked' into the end of the gun when hot gases are propelled outwards, and are already starting to cool rather than 'forced back in from gas 'returning'.

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

The backspatter I am talking about is in connection with bullet wounds, where the muzzle of the weapon was either in a contact, or close contact position, with the surface of the skin, at the time a shot was discharged. The evidence given at Jeremy's trial about this, is clear and this was why the ballistic expert went on to describe each of the wounds which had been inflicted, by reference to the muzzle of the gun / silencer, being in contact, close contact, or within a few inches...

The court was told that gases from the blast follow the bullet into the track or path taken by the bullet, and that when the bullet stops, the pursuing gases have nowhere to go, and therefore they are forced back out of the wound, the reverse way that they entered and back into or onto the muzzle of the weapon - what I am saying is that the path / trajectory of the fatal bullet under the chin, did not come to a stop at any stage before the bullet entered the void of the victims mouth, and so there would not be the back pressure, forcing the gases and blood back out of the entry wound under the chin, because all that pressure would have become dispersed inside the victims mouth...

In my opinion...

[chochokeira]

"you'd expect them to have taken all the firearms and associated articles away really"


The sloppy attitude of the police towards evidence collection and the amount of evidence they destroyed adds strong support to the contention that, having been first hand witnesses of the scene, the police were convinced that this was a case of four murders and a suicide, the suicide, Sheila, being the murderer of the other four. That's certainly how the police presented the case to the press too initially...until Mugford made her allegations to the contrary.

I'd like to know at what stage the News Of The World's reporters contacted Mugford, holed up in a hotel with her and offered her a huge sum of money (around a £100,000 in today's terms, I believe) for 'her' story - or their, highly sensationalised version of it? Among the red top Sunday newspapers at that time there was considerable competition for - and big money in - the sensationalised accounts of murders. A story of the brutal masacre of an ordinary, church going, middle class family by one of their own: the alleged killer a beautiful young model too - it had all the elements of a big money spinner. Reporters would have been dispatched to Tolleshunt D'Arcy and Goldhanger as soon as news of the murders broke: the day after the murders? I would think the press would have been swarming around those villages and around Whitehouse Farm and JB's cottage like bees around a hive.

It's not hard to visualise how quickly the press would have learned of and swooped on Mugford. It was alleged that Mugford sold her story to the News Of The World before the trial and, if so, that clearly raises issues regarding how much objectivity and truth can be ascribed to her account.