Reason to believe cops shot Sheila, and how her blood ended up inside Silencer!

[buddy]

By 8.10am Sheila's body was not upstairs by that stage, otherwise the TFG would have reported four bodies found upstairs, not three at that point..

NO Mike they said a further three bodies upstairs. It is clear they were mistaken in two bodies downstairs.

[mike tesko]

Even if by some miracle Sheila's body was always in the bedroom, and we pretend the TFG hadn't declared only three bodies upstairs by 8.10am, let's assume they found four bodies upstairs by 8.10am, not three - then the case is still problematic because the only rifle found anywhere upstairs at the scene was resting against the first floor box room window from 7.15am, onward! How did that rifle get from the box room window, onto Sheila's body in time for the TFG to discover her body on the bedroom floor by 8.10am?

It doesn't fit...

[buddy]

I think the rifle was removed by the police, and photographed in the box room window, then placed on Sheila's body multiple times. That is why we have different positions of the rifle.
Fact is they had it right the first time murder/suicide. Cops didn't kill her.

[mike tesko]

NO Mike they said a further three bodies upstairs. It is clear they were mistaken in two bodies downstairs.

A further three bodies upstairs (8.10am), five dead in total, after two bodies had been signalled as found downstairs in the kitchen upon entry! No mistake there, simple arithmetic, two plus three equals five! That issue aside, how did the only rifle found upstairs at the scene (the anshuzt rifle) manage to get from its position at the first floor box room window (7.15am) onto Sheila's body on the bedroom floor in time for PC Bird (SOCO) to photograph it there in Sheila Caffells possession after 10 am? This is in addition to the rifle being on the bed between the two bodies of Sheila and June by the time 'Stan' Jones and Mick Clarke visited the main bedroom and viewed the bodies of the two women upon the bed, and by reference to PS Adams who viewed Sheila's body at around 9am, when he told the COLP investigators that he had no recollection of the gun being with Sheila's body by that stage! Adams left the scene shortly after 9am, and there was no gun with Sheila's body by that time! Then we had the Coroner's Officer, PC Wright who arrived at the scene and whilst visiting the main bedroom at around 9.30am, told the COLP investigators that the gun had been removed from Sheila's body by the time he first saw her body! Yet, no sooner does PC 'David' Bird start taking photographs of Sheila's body on the main bedroom floor (not the bed) the anshuzt rifle is in her possession, whereas earlier it could not have been

[mike tesko]

I think the rifle was removed by the police, and photographed in the box room window, then placed on Sheila's body multiple times. That is why we have different positions of the rifle.
Fact is they had it right the first time murder/suicide. Cops didn't kill her.

Cops did kill her, that's why they tampered with one of the two bullets (the original PV/20 was a piece of badly fragmented bullet, which was replaced by a test fired round fired in the anshuzt rifle post date the shootings. The swap over of this bullet enabled the police ballistic expert to conclude that the two wounds received in Sheila's neck had been fired from the same rifle, the rifle cops staged Sheila's death scene on the bedroom floor with, after Jones and Clarke had seen Sheila's and Junes bodies on the bed with the rifle laid on the bed between both bodies, after PS Adams had seen Sheila's body without any gun being in her possession at around 9am, and also after the Coroner's Officer, PC Wright had viewed Sheila's body at 9.30am, when according to PC Wright the gun had been removed from Sheila's body by that stage 9.30am) used in her shooting! If she had killed herself with use of the anshuzt rifle there would have been no need to swap either of the two bullets over!

[buddy]

Cops did kill her, that's why they tampered with one of the two bullets used in her shooting! If she had killed herself with use of the anshuzt rifle there would have been no need to swap either of the two bullets over!

Police don't use hollow point ammo.
Anyway why cover it up? They would have been justified in shooting Sheila if she was a threat.

[Roch]

Roch, whether you accept JB as a convicted multiple murderer or not, is immaterial. It is simply a fact in Law that he is. If a person refers to JB as a murderer, then they are quite correct to do so.

The relatives (or any number of other people), who you cannot show with evidence to have acted unlawfully, should not be the recipient of any such unsubstantiated and unnecessary accusations.

I think the above is reasonable to accept.

Having said that, I'm not particularly bothered by the unreasonable postings, such rhetoric is common place on the forum and is hardly a new development.

I am not arguing whether it's legally correct or not to refer to Jeremy Bamber as a murderer.  Fact is, if somebody hasn't committed any murders - then they're not a murderer.  It is possible in this world to be a convicted murderer without having actually committed any murders.

That I personally am not adept, at directly showing how the relatives acted unlawfully, does not mean that they didn't act unlawfully.  There'll be a few more twists and turns in this case before it reaches its' culmination, if it ever does.   

[Roch]

I think your reaction (Roch) when you thought you were being accused of lying, provides an effective example of your position when it comes to unsubstantiated accusations.

Quite possibly, yes.  But the nature of an MOJ is that dodgy evidence is substituted for the genuine evidence that was omitted.  In this model, if a person chooses to substantiate their arguments from the remaining body of evidence... 

[Roch]

Are you alluding to "A" police officer in general or "THE" police officer in particular? Can you name the police officer concerned.

Well in the post I was referring to an officer.  Having considered your question, I believe several officers were involved to varying degrees (under the stewardship of an officer). 

It may be that many officers played a role of sorts.  I think that when the full truth comes out, it may pertinent to ask whether for example, officers like Julia Jeapes are fit to serve the public in a civic role?  She did not oversee the concealment of evidence did she?  But how would you like it if your local councillor was privy to the knowledge that an innocent man was sent to prison while it was known Sheila had been alive in the farmhouse before police went in? 

[mike tesko]

Police don't use hollow point ammo.
Anyway why cover it up? They would have been justified in shooting Sheila if she was a threat.

The bullet they substituted was not a .22 hollow point round, it was a police round, which they swapped over with a.22 hollow point test fired control round taken from exhibit DRH/42 (29 live .22 hollow point rounds recovered from the kitchen worktop on the first morning of the investigation!) Only 27 of these 29 control rounds were accounted for during test firing performed by the ballistic expert Fletcher! When queried about these two missing control rounds in the batch of exhibit DRH/42, Fletcher told COLP that they must have been misplaced! Fletcher lied, he knew exactly what had happened to the missing two rounds of .22 hollow point rounds, he had performed unreported test firings in the anshuzt rifle prior to the date (20th September 1985) when he performed the official test firings of the other 27 control rounds! This fact is established beyond doubt by the notes recorded on various General Examination Records' pertaining to pieces of ammunition relating to the five deaths which had comparison tests performed against markings on unreported test fired rounds, enabling the said comparison tests to be performed on dates prior to the 20th September 1985! This proves there was an earlier test fire of the anshuzt rifle and control ammunition belonging to exhibit DRH/42 on or prior to 12th September 1985, because some comparison tests were carried out on 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985 (before the date when the ballistic expert had carried out the official test firing of rifle and 27 of the 29 control rounds n 20th September, 25th September, and 2nd October 1985)...

Cops and their ballistic expert didn't go to all this trouble for no purpose at all! They did it to try and cover up for the fact that a police bullet wounded Sheila during a shooting incident which occurred in the kitchen to which an Officers report had to be submitted! That report concerns the shooting of Sheila in the kitchen, claiming that she appeared to want the officer to shoot her by pulling the barrel of his gun in toward her own throat! There exists a paper trail of compelling evidence to support the fact that cops and their ballistic expert  (Malcom Fletcher) tampered with at least one crime scene bullet (PV/20) by replacing it with a test fired control round which had been fired via the anshuzt rifle post the date of the shootings, so that Sheila's death could be presented as a suicide involving one gun which fired both bullets! But the same gun did not fire both bullets which wounded Sheila, the anshuzt rifle only fired one of these, that being bullet PV/19!

[mike tesko]

I don't believe that in the true circumstances of how an unarmed Sheila Caffell was originally shot downstairs in the kitchen by a cop gun, that cops could have justified shooting her, in view of the fact that just prior to them shooting her in the kitchen, Sheila had signalled to the police surrounding the farmhouse her intention to give herself up by showing the rifle at the first floor box room window, and then making her way downstairs to the kitchen to hand herself over to the police! She was affectively acting under a truce of white flag at the time cops shot her! The anshuzt rifle was still resting against the first floor box room window at the time cops pronounced her death downstairs in the kitchen, 7.35am, 7.37am and 7.38am! It stands to reason therefore that Sheila was not originally shot by use of the anshuzt rifle in the kitchen, when the rifle which supposedly inflicted both shots was resting against a first floor box room window upstairs!

[Jane]

Well in the post I was referring to an officer.  Having considered your question, I believe several officers were involved to varying degrees (under the stewardship of an officer). 

It may be that many officers played a role of sorts.  I think that when the full truth comes out, it may pertinent to ask whether for example, officers like Julia Jeapes are fit to serve the public in a civic role?  She did not oversee the concealment of evidence did she?  But how would you like it if your local councillor was privy to the knowledge that an innocent man was sent to prison while it was known Sheila had been alive in the farmhouse before police went in?

It's always possible that little green men live on Mars, I suppose. I don't believe my local counselor was privy to the sort of thing you're suggesting unless he was being lied to.

[Adam]

I think the rifle was removed by the police, and photographed in the box room window, then placed on Sheila's body multiple times. That is why we have different positions of the rifle.
Fact is they had it right the first time murder/suicide. Cops didn't kill her.

The rifle was not moved prior to the crime scene photographer arriving.

It was not police protocol to dusturb a crime scene prior to photo's being taken. Otherwise there is no point in taking photo's in the first place.

The police did say they moved her lower arm slightly after the first photo. To show injuries.

[Adam]

I am not arguing whether it's legally correct or not to refer to Jeremy Bamber as a murderer.  Fact is, if somebody hasn't committed any murders - then they're not a murderer.  It is possible in this world to be a convicted murderer without having actually committed any murders.

That I personally am not adept, at directly showing how the relatives acted unlawfully, does not mean that they didn't act unlawfully.  There'll be a few more twists and turns in this case before it reaches its' culmination, if it ever does.

For someone who is "not adept at directly showing how the relatives acted unlawfully", you don't half write long posts accusing them.

[Adam]

Thanks for answering in reply 608. At the 4th request.

Very vague with no sources or explanations on how you know this. A pity as if one or some of the statements were provable, Bamber would be free.