Sheila's neck wound and the blood on her arm

[mike tesko]

I am also confident that I am right.

Good, we'll wait and see then!

[guest7363]

All this started because very infrequent poster Bill made a rare & brief visit to the forum, & said he has seen 28 scratches on Sheila. Then left.

Supporters have to jump on this as there is not much else to go on.

Yes, it will be great to see them in Jeremy's next submission, but again I suppose it will be a cover up by the CCRC again I don't think they are in the loop?

[guest7363]

I am not bothered what he was awarded, or how highly he is rated, he needs to step up to the mark and make a big issue about the piece of badly fragmented bullet (exhibit PV/29) which he took from Sheila's neck, during an autopsy he performed on the corpse of Sheila Caffell, and he needs to refute the fact stated by the ballistic expert that by 20 September it could have been a whole bullet! I'm not bothered whether Venezis is related to the Queen of Sheba, or whatever! He needs to refute the suggestion that exhibit PV/20 was a whole bullet, because it wasn't! Somebody switched it, and Venezis in all his pomp and glory needs to be refuting such a suggestion!!

But I expect that he won't..

You said he was out of the loop?  What loop?

[Caroline]

Mike, here you suggested (back in 2012) that the list of abbreviations relate to samples taken from  the nightdress http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3285.msg128816.html#msg128816

Were that the case, the document would have been headed nightdress instead the 'nightdress' forms part of the list indicating that the other entries relate to other items.

[mike tesko]

Mike, here you suggested (back in 2012) that the list of abbreviations relate to samples taken from  the nightdress http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3285.msg128816.html#msg128816

Were that the case, the document would have been headed nightdress instead the 'nightdress' forms part of the list indicating that the other entries relate to other items.

The other entries you refer to, were samples taken from the nightdress, which tested positive for 'A' type blood on 4 occasions, and tested positive for 'O' type blood on five separate occasions! In any event we have the signature of the expert confirming that 'A' and 'O' blood was found to be present on the nightdress! As you know, only Neville Bamber was the only adult victims with 'O' type blood, albeit both child victims also shared 'O' type blood! Technically speaking therefore, Neville Bambers, Daniel and Nicholas Caffells bloods could have all been found on Sheila's nightdress!

At least two different types of 'O' blood were found to be present on Sheila's nightdress, namely 003 and 002+

[mike tesko]

This suggests the the 'O' type blood found on Sheila's nightdress came from at least two but possibly three different sources! I believe this is capable of suggesting that 'O' type blood found on Sheila's nightdress originated from at least two of the four victims that she was responsible for shooting!

[Roch]

I really don't know why you bother Caroline, a person who has been involved in and invited all over the world because of his expertise in Pathology, not a blemish on his career, has either failed to spot 28 cuts/lacerations or he's as bent as nine bob note.  I don't think posters realise, the body would have been washed of blood during and after the autopsy, yet we have posters saying they can defiantly see grazing from pictures that would have been available at trial, I suppose they can read a body picture better than Vanezis..

Yes, this is well realised.  I have absolutely no doubt Vanezis would have seen the cuts and abrasions after the washing away of blood. It would be impossible for him not to have seen them.

Unless I saw the exact photos used at trial, then I don't agree with your specific point on that.

[Roch]

Yes, it will be great to see them in Jeremy's next submission, but again I suppose it will be a cover up by the CCRC again I don't think they are in the loop?

Not sure if it will be in next submission - but if people on here are a snapshot of society.. and people on here can pretend they can't see nail gouges on a human hand - then why should the CCRC be concerned about rejecting such submissions?  To some extent, they can rely upon the pretenders to shore them up.

[maggie]

All this started because very infrequent poster Bill made a rare & brief visit to the forum, & said he has seen 28 scratches on Sheila. Then left.

Supporters have to jump on this as there is not much else to go on.

Well Adam, I was not a 'supporter' I have nothing to prove, am not naive or a fool but I do recognise what my eyes see.

[guest7363]

Not sure if it will be in next submission - but if people on here are a snapshot of society.. and people on here can pretend they can't see nail gouges on a human hand - then why should the CCRC be concerned about rejecting such submissions?  To some extent, they can rely upon the pretenders to shore them up.

Does that make me corrupt, pretend I like that ha ha.  What would I pretend for, so everyone who can't see what Roch can see is either pretending or corrupt.

[Roch]

Does that make me corrupt, pretend I like that ha ha.  What would I pretend for, so everyone who can't see what Roch can see is either pretending or corrupt.

I do not believe you are corrupt and have never intimated that you are.

[guest7363]

I do not believe you are corrupt and have never intimated that you are.

Well I'm not ptretending I can assure you

[guest7363]

I do not believe you are corrupt and have never intimated that you are.

I know you don't think I'm corrupt, you think that those involved in the cover up are corrupt or pretending?

[David1819]

Yes, this is well realised.  I have absolutely no doubt Vanezis would have seen the cuts and abrasions after the washing away of blood. It would be impossible for him not to have seen them.

Unless I saw the exact photos used at trial, then I don't agree with your specific point on that.

They are not cuts. The only ones that look like cuts are the small marks near the thumb.

Which is rather interesting. Because while holding the weapon they would be in this position (give or take)

[susan]

Well all nails are not equally strong,  some are weak and bend and tear,  some are very strong, mine are very strong and would not be damaged by scratching and grabbing at another person's arm.
In the instance of Sheila's injuries it is not the strength of her nails that is in question but rather someone else's.   
We have been told there were no marks on Sheila's hand and arm when there definitely are therefore it is not too much of a stretch of imagination to question whether all or some of her nails were actually intact. I am not trying to build a conspiracy theory but rather expanding thought processes from the photographic evidence of injuries to her hand.  I might add that because your computer image is not clear does not mean the injuries to her arm don't exist.  The photo put up of Sheila's hand is clear enough to at least throw up some questions even if you struggle to equate this with your own opinion

Maggie great post I know your computer image of the marks on Sheila's hands is much clearer than mine and you can see the marks very clearly I accept that cos I know you well enough to not make it up.  The image on mine is very grainy so others who cannot see them may have the same problem as me In view of this I am willing to discuss the scratches and gouges but it seems some are not. NGB has seen them and that is good enough for me you Roch and NGB what more proof  do I need.