Sheila's neck wound and the blood on her arm

[guest2181]

How can any of those officers say her hands were perfectly clean though . They obviously were not .

Statements prepared for application to the CPS by police seem to be made to cover particular points. Her hands being clean must have been important to the case.

How clean were her hands? Well we can see blood staining to her wrist and a small stain on the back of her index finger, we can't see her palm or the insides of her fingers but Vanezis notes that they were free from blood staining.

If Vanezis is accurate, and we have no reason to doubt him, then on balance, a description of her hands being perfectly clean appears to be an accurate description.

[Jan]

Statements prepared for application to the CPS by police seem to be made to cover particular points. Her hands being clean must have been important to the case.

How clean were her hands? Well we can see blood staining to her wrist and a small stain on the back of her index finger, we can't see her palm or the insides of her fingers but Vanezis notes that they were free from blood staining.

If Vanezis is accurate, and we have no reason to doubt him, then on balance, a description of her hands being perfectly clean appears to be an accurate description.

No print left on the nightdress from her palm then ?

[Jane]

I love the way you're so judgemental, dictatorial and convinced about what a 20 year old 'should' have done under those extreme circumstances. I wonder just how clear her thinking was that day? I wonder just how much he'd told her of his plans? I wonder how frightened she might have been in case, if she said anything, he'd implicate her. I wonder how numb she might have been? You slate her for not refusing to identify the twins. The only other person who offered was turned down by the police. Certainly, I believe it was possible for her to 'know' he'd done it, but I'll bet she didn't truly KNOW -because she hadn't experienced it- until it sunk in after she'd seen the children.
[/quote


I am judgemental and Dictorial ?

  Because she left out vital bits out of her statements and changed her whole story ?

Wonder where I got that attitude from . Perhaps it's posters being equally judgemental and dictorial about Jeremy and how he would act .



Also I do think if we want to be honest her story in the news of the world did not seem to be the actions of some little shy scared shrinking violet .

But of course if it keeps you happy  all my posts will in future be of course  in my opinion only .

I would be the first to agree that her actions, post trial, weren't those of "some little shy scared shrinking violet", but her relief that it was all over is surely understandable. I suspect too, that fear would have rendered her less up front than she would usually have been.

[Jan]

I can agree with certain things she said, I knew my son in law had committed something terrible my daughter didn't think one minute he'd done it, I didn't want to believe it and it puts you in a confused state in your head hoping your wrong.  I couldn't  talk or tell anyone about it for a year.

Yes but Julie was very clear about all the plans he had discussed with her before hand . Very explicit . So not exactly a shock .

[guest7363]

Yes but Julie was very clear about all the plans he had discussed with her before hand . Very explicit . So not exactly a shock .

I know Jan, I have never agreed with what Julie did totally, I just said parts of her statement I could agree with, you just want it to go away if that makes sense?

[guest2181]

No print left on the nightdress from her palm then ?

No, if her palms were clean then that is not possible.

Yes Vanezis suggests a palm print initially in his notes, but he later indicates her palms were clean. I can see the apparent contradiction and I do not have the answer for it. There are suggestions that it was a stain transferred from her wrist, or by her killer (Macdonnell suggested this). I personally do not find this troubling, we do not know the precise goings on that evening.

[Adam]

Who else was there available who could tell the twins apart ?

Anyway, you're view is if you were a 20 year old woman suddenly put in Julie's position, you wouldn't identify the twins. However you're view does not represent everyone.

Hopefully someone else will answer my question I asked Jan in reply 739.

[Jane]

I know Jan, I have never agreed with what Julie did totally, I just said parts of her statement I could agree with, you just want it to go away if that makes sense?

Justice, I too, have never condoned what she did but it doesn't mean I can't empathize with the reasons for her doing it. Just wanting it to go away makes perfect sense...........to me.

[guest2181]

Yes but Julie was very clear about all the plans he had discussed with her before hand . Very explicit . So not exactly a shock .

I think a person fantasising about killing people is one thing (and quite despicable), to actually go through with is quite another.

[guest7363]

Justice, I too, have never condoned what she did but it doesn't mean I can't empathize with the reasons for her doing it. Just wanting it to go away makes perfect sense...........to me.

Thanks Jane, I've been put in two terrible positions in my life, not through choice or my fault, it does your head in and you would give/do anything to get rid.

[Jane]

I think a person fantasising about killing people is one thing (and quite despicable), to actually go through with is quite another.

Absolutely H. The safest place for fantasies is generally inside our heads. Once we start to give them voice, the next stage, unless someone discourages us, is to act them out!!!

[mike tesko]

No, if her palms were clean then that is not possible.

Yes Vanezis suggests a palm print initially in his notes, but he later indicates her palms were clean. I can see the apparent contradiction and I do not have the answer for it. There are suggestions that it was a stain transferred from her wrist, or by her killer (Macdonnell suggested this). I personally do not find this troubling, we do not know the precise goings on that evening.

you see the trouble with your argument involves the fact that according to DC Hammersley, as soon as he removed the plastic hand bags, he proceeded to take hand swabs, thus destroying any blood that was present on her palms and her fingers!We all know she had blood on her hands and fingers, we can see it in some of the photographs, but DC Hammersley destroyed any prospect of the extent of blood there by taking hand swabs as stated...

[mike tesko]

I think a person fantasising about killing people is one thing (and quite despicable), to actually go through with is quite another.

Yeah, only Jeremy didn't kill the other four, Sheila did! And Jeremy had no opportunity of killing his sister on the bedroom floor and staging her death scene there as a suicide, after her body was reported present downstairs in the kitchen, and later upstairs on the bed in the main bedroom, cops are responsible for doing that! Ann Eaton knows this is true, she was told by Jones and Clark that they had seen Sheila and Junes bodies laid on top of the bed, the rifle inbetween both bodies!!

[guest2181]

you see the trouble with your argument involves the fact that according to DC Hammersley, as soon as he removed the plastic hand bags, he proceeded to take hand swabs, thus destroying any blood that was present on her palms and her fingers!We all know she had blood on her hands and fingers, we can see it in some of the photographs, but DC Hammersley destroyed any prospect of the extent of blood there by taking hand swabs as stated...

I'm not making an argument.

The trouble with your argument is that people would be required to accept your assertions on face value alone. Unfortunately there is usually a pinch or two of salt not too far away.

[mike tesko]

Yeah, only Jeremy didn't kill the other four, Sheila did! And Jeremy had no opportunity of killing his sister on the bedroom floor and staging her death scene there as a suicide, after her body was reported present downstairs in the kitchen, and later upstairs on the bed in the main bedroom, cops are responsible for doing that! Ann Eaton knows this is true, she was told by Jones and Clark that they had seen Sheila and Junes bodies laid on top of the bed, the rifle inbetween both bodies!!

Its utterly amazing that these relatives should kick up a fuss because they believed Sheila could not have been responsible, yet when faced with speaking out about what cops told them, for example, that Sheila's and Junes bodies had been found on the bed with the rifle on the bed, they choose to stay silent because to speak out damages the prosecutions case that got them what they wanted! Why isn't Ann Eaton screaming from the roof tops that Sheila's and Junes bodies were on top of the bed when Jones and Clark visited the main bedroom at about 9.10am, or that Sheila had only been shot once by that stage?