From my perspective, Sheila did not shoot herself dead in the incident!
She was shot twice by someone else!!
I don't know if this is good or bad, from Bambers point of view, but what 'I do know' is that he could not have shot and killed his sister, because the existing photographic evidence, proves she had been shot a second time by refrence to 'this' photograph, and the the evidence does not support the claim that the second shot which killed Sheila had been inflicted as long ago as 3.30am, or there abouts!
If Sheila had been shot a second time, from as early as round 3.30am, then plrease, why does the blood which is flowing from the upper wound appear so 'fresh looking'?