Disturbing Evidence, which confirms that cops handed back silencer to the family

[Adam]

David prefers to suggest  the relatives -

Dipped their hands into a bucket of cold water.

Pulled out some soaking wet underwear which may have had some diluted blood on.

Waited until this underwear dried.

Expertly transferred any miniscule dried blood embedded into underwear into the silencer baffles.

Oh, and then scratched the aga.

As mentioned, David is also suggesting the relatives guessed the following & hoped for the best -


Contact shots during the massacre. 

Liklihood of back splatter with that rifle. 

Blood already on rifle nozzle. 

Photos of aga. 

Lenght of rifle with silencer. 

Lenght of Sheila's arms. 

Other evidence showing guilt/innocence. 

Police checks already carried out on silencers. 

Where to get Sheila's blood. 

How to insert Sheila's blood. 

If unable to get Sheila's blood, what was her blood type. 

Would someone else's blood be enough. 

How to effectivly scrape the aga to replicate a scrape during a random fight.

Possibility of a successful silencer frame securing a conviction. 

Punishment if convicted of a attempting to frame a man of murdering 5 people. 

[lookout]

According to JB,he saw documentation which had stated that a silencer had been found under a bed on 7th of August and returned to the cupboard for safe-keeping by SJ. JB actually saw the said statement.
This is mentioned in CAL's book.

JB was never able to prove what he saw written because EP dismissed it as " nonsense ".

In my estimation,it would have been the truth ! That which is withheld.

[buddy]

The notion that the silencer was contaminated with blood from the underwear is absurd! I toyed with the idea but dismissed it as desperate. If the silencer was faked, it had to be the police.

I agree up to a point Caroline, but you have to remember that the silencer was found by the family.
They reported the blood, and damage on the silencer, the police found blood on the baffles.
Why would the police fake the silencer? Could it have been Jone's dislike of Bamber. Who put the paint on to it?

[David1819]

I agree up to a point Caroline, but you have to remember that the silencer was found by the family.
They reported the blood, and damage on the silencer, the police found blood on the baffles.
Why would the police fake the silencer? Could it have been Jone's dislike of Bamber. Who put the paint on to it?

Google image search "menstrual blood" it looks very much like AE described it on the Sound moderator "A BLOB OF JAM"!   

[David1819]

As mentioned, David is also suggesting the relatives guessed the following & hoped for the best -


Contact shots during the massacre.

Liklihood of back splatter with that rifle.

Blood already on rifle nozzle.

Photos of aga.

Lenght of rifle with silencer.

Lenght of Sheila's arms.

Other evidence showing guilt/innocence.

Police checks already carried out on silencers.

Where to get Sheila's blood.

How to insert Sheila's blood.

If unable to get Sheila's blood, what was her blood type.

Would someone else's blood be enough.

How to effectivly scrape the aga to replicate a scrape during a random fight.

Possibility of a successful silencer frame securing a conviction.

Punishment if convicted of a attempting to frame a man of murdering 5 people.

"A straw man is a logical fallacy which occurs when a debater intentionally misrepresents their opponent's argument as a weaker version, and rebuts said version — rather than their opponent's genuine argument. Intentional strawmanning is usually done with a certain goal in mind, including:

1.Avoiding real debate against an opponent's real argument, because the misrepresenter risks losing in fair debate

2.Making the opponent's position appear ridiculous as a way of poisoning the well"

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Straw_man

[lookout]

Yet none of Sheila's DNA was found ? Or any other materials associated with menstrual blood.

[buddy]

Google image search "menstrual blood" it looks very much like AE described it on the Sound moderator "A BLOB OF JAM"!   

You have posted that the blood would have dried black over a time David, besides there would still have been residue on the gnarled end.

[lookout]

How can anyone explain the SBJ/1,DB/1 and DRB/1 ? Why ? One exhibit made to look like 3. No wonder the jury were baffled.

[Adam]

"A straw man is a logical fallacy which occurs when a debater intentionally misrepresents their opponent's argument as a weaker version, and rebuts said version — rather than their opponent's genuine argument. Intentional strawmanning is usually done with a certain goal in mind, including:

1.Avoiding real debate against an opponent's real argument, because the misrepresenter risks losing in fair debate

2.Making the opponent's position appear ridiculous as a way of poisoning the well"

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Straw_man

You can't answer any of my points. So come up with some straw man bullshit to try to deflect from this.

No one believes you changed stance because you realised the silencer could be fabricated. And no one agrees that the relatives transferred Sheila's blood into silencer baffles from diluted blood from wet underwear in a bucket.

[Adam]

I don't know why David doesn't just say whether the police approached the relatives or the relatives approached the police. The bucket of water theory is dead in the water.

He claims he changed stance from a hardcore guilter because he realised the silencer could be fabricated. This is a non evidence reason as there is no proof it happened.  David then makes it worse for himself as he won't even say who approached who with the silencer.

[lookout]

The first thing that everyone should have looked at was the altered positioning of the deceased which it was said by DCS Gradwell to be "very,very serious " because it had amounted to destroyed evidence.

There shouldn't have been a case to answer to !! Beyond that,it was a complete fit-up by EP.

[David1819]

Yet none of Sheila's DNA was found ? Or any other materials associated with menstrual blood.

They recoverd a partial DNA profile that contained 17 bands that match Sheila.

Still It is rather odd. That is all they could find. Blood and DNA remains preseved for a long time. Some of the artwork in anchient egypitain tombs are done using blood, they remain to this day.

the point at which half the bonds in a DNA molecule backbone would be broken — is 521 years. That means that, under ideal conditions, DNA would last about 6.8 million years, after which all the bonds would be broken

It is an accepted fact that all the blood in the moderator was tested to destruction. However they must have cleaned it out thoroughly from there only to be so little DNA left.

[lookout]

There was probably only a minute trace because wasn't it Webster who'd said there was none of Sheila's DNA ? That the major component had come from June ?

[David1819]

You can't answer any of my points. So come up with some straw man bullshit to try to deflect from this.

No one believes you changed stance because you realised the silencer could be fabricated. And no one agrees that the relatives transferred Sheila's blood into silencer baffles from diluted blood from wet underwear in a bucket.

I've answered all your points before. But like allways you keep posting them over and over and over again. Why should I waste my time repeating myself because you either decide to repeat stuff deliberately to be annoying or you have the memory of a goldfish. I suspect it's a combination of both rather than one or the other.

[buddy]

You can't answer any of my points. So come up with some straw man bullshit to try to deflect from this.

No one believes you changed stance because you realised the silencer could be fabricated. And no one agrees that the relatives transferred Sheila's blood into silencer baffles from diluted blood from wet underwear in a bucket.

I believe he changed his stance bcause he realised the silencer could be fabricated.
I agree that the relatives could have transferred the blood into the silencer, so stop saying that no one agrees Adam.