mugford rwb and the order of death.

[Kaldin]

I get that you want JB to be innocent.

I just don't agree that the children being killed first sheds any light on who was most likely to be responsible for the murders.

It doesn't. Either way, I think that a magazine-full was used on Nevill/June and Nicholas/Daniel. I don't know which order it happened in though.

[Stephanie]

I think I can, Steph. I hear what Maggie is saying. She simply paraphrased what I said. It's no easy journey -opening our eyes, learning, changing is often a painful process- but once we're on the road, we're beginning to get there. I guess the best we can say, who are on that road, is that we're closer to getting there than we were when we started.

Of that there is no doubt Jane

[guest2181]

the order of death as I see it is only correct on the assumption Sheila did it.

otherwise its highly improble


but of course it just happens to be the order of death that best suits the inheritance claims of the wife of the main prosecution witness.

why sneak past the adults to kill the kids when he can just kill the adults first.

I disagree with your conclusion. I can't see why the order of deaths of the children excludes either of the potential perpetrators.

The killer did not need to sneak past anybody, everybody was in bed.

The inheritance side of things doesn't make any sense either. The only relative in line to inherit was Pamela, she refused the inheritance which then filtered down to others. The 'others' couldn't possibly know that Pamela would refuse.

[lookout]

well the simplest answer to that would be to shoot the dog but for some reason that dident happen.

I don't understand why it didn't happen as killers don't care and would have shut the dog up once and for all,especially considering that JB hated the animal.

[Kaldin]

I disagree with your conclusion. I can't see why the order of deaths of the children excludes either of the potential perpetrators.

The killer did not need to sneak past anybody, everybody was in bed.

The inheritance side of things doesn't make any sense either. The only relative in line to inherit was Pamela, she refused the inheritance which then filtered down to others. The 'others' couldn't possibly know that Pamela would refuse.

Not true. Nevill's relatives were in line too. Also, if it could have been proved that the twins died last, there might have been complications - it depends on the law and the wording of the Wills.

[guest2181]

Not true. Nevill's relatives were in line too. Also, if it could have been proved that the twins died last, there might have been complications - it depends on the law and the wording of the Wills.

I think the point's been lost.

[Kaldin]

I think the points been lost.

Probably. 

[guest2181]

Probably. 

It started out as the children were killed first therefore JB is innocent.

It then deviated to inheritance, implying that the relatives had a motive as they inherited. I don't know how we got there.

[nugnug]

It started out as the children were killed first therefore JB is innocent.

It then deviated to inheritance, implying that the relatives had a motive as they inherited. I don't know how we got there.

the newspaper headline David referred to said the twins died first but that newspaper was working on the assumption of the killer.

[guest2181]

the newspaper headline David referred to said the twins died first but that newspaper was working on the assumption of the killer.

I don't understand what you mean.

I don't know what order the children were murdered in. I think there is a good chance that they were first simply because they do not appear to have been woken.

[nugnug]

I don't understand what you mean.

I don't know what order the children were murdered in. I think there is a good chance that they were first simply because they do not appear to have been woken.

wich would point to Sheila because she was nearer to them.

[guest2181]

wich would point to Sheila because she was nearer to them.

Oh, okay, that makes sense.

[Jane]

I don't understand why it didn't happen as killers don't care and would have shut the dog up once and for all,especially considering that JB hated the animal.

Forget the dog, Lookout. Jeremy did. Yes, Jeremy hated it. I'm certain that had he not cared about getting caught he happily have shot it but in order for it to look as if Sheila had been responsible, he had to let it live because Sheila didn't hate it.

[Kaldin]

If Sheila did it, what we don't know is if she intended to kill everyone, including herself. Maybe one killing led to another in her mind.

[nugnug]

Forget the dog, Lookout. Jeremy did. Yes, Jeremy hated it. I'm certain that had he not cared about getting caught he happily have shot it but in order for it to look as if Sheila had been responsible, he had to let it live because Sheila didn't hate it.

but she dident hate her children ethere so does that one work out.

so people she shoot her children but not a dog why would they believe that.