Recent Discovery of a document exposes fundamental flaw in Hand Swab evidence...

[mike tesko]

In recent days I have stumbled upon a document which describes what exhibit DRH/33  (Lab' Item No. 17, consisted of - this was the item that was rejected at Huntingdon Lab' on the 9th August 1985, namely the supposed hand swabs taken from Sheila Caffell...

Essex police responded to the rejection of this exhibit by allocating 'it' a different Exhibit reference (DRH/44) Lab' Item No. 75...

Now, the rather disturbing issue surrounding the original submission of item DRH/33, Lab' Itrem No.17 was that it included swabs taken from Sheila Caffells left and right hands, her 'HEAD' and a control swab! There are strong grounds for suspecting that during the course of the re-submission of RDH/33, Lab' Item No.17, that only the 'HEAD' swab and the control swab were resubmitted, and that this was why the levels of lead deposit were so lowly detected! It is very interesting to note that at the time the swabs were resubmitted under a different exhibit reference of DRH/44, Lab' Item No.75, that no results were provided for the detection of lead deposit on either the 'HEAD' swab, or the Control swabs..

Essex police switched the swabs, and disguised what they had done by altering its exhibit reference and Lab' Item No. from DRH/33 to DRH/44, and from 17 to 75, to try and cover their tracks...

[David1819]

In recent days I have stumbled upon a document which describes what exhibit DRH/33  (Lab' Item No. 17, consisted of - this was the item that was rejected at Huntingdon Lab' on the 9th August 1985, namely the supposed hand swabs taken from Sheila Caffell...

Essex police responded to the rejection of this exhibit by allocating 'it' a different Exhibit reference (DRH/44) Lab' Item No. 75...

Now, the rather disturbing issue surrounding the original submission of item DRH/33, Lab' Itrem No.17 was that it included swabs taken from Sheila Caffells left and right hands, her 'HEAD' and a control swab! There are strong grounds for suspecting that during the course of the re-submission of RDH/33, Lab' Item No.17, that only the 'HEAD' swab and the control swab were resubmitted, and that this was why the levels of lead deposit were so lowly detected! It is very interesting to note that at the time the swabs were resubmitted under a different exhibit reference of DRH/44, Lab' Item No.75, that no results were provided for the detection of lead deposit on either the 'HEAD' swab, or the Control swabs..

Essex police switched the swabs, and disguised what they had done by altering its exhibit reference and Lab' Item No. from DRH/33 to DRH/44, and from 17 to 75, to try and cover their tracks...

Mike. There is nothing wrong with the swab evidence. They show the same patterns of copper and lead on both Sheila and Testees.

The conclusions drawn is that Sheila was unlikley to have loaded to gun "shortly before her death"

This supports Sheila taking her own life long after loading the gun. est (5:30am - 7:35am) and in your case cops shooting Sheila after 7:35am.

[Caroline]

Mike. There is nothing wrong with the swab evidence. They show the same patterns of copper and lead on both Sheila and Testees.

The conclusions drawn is that Sheila was unlikley to have loaded to gun "shortly before her death"

This supports Sheila taking her own life long after loading the gun. est (5:30am - 7:35am) and in your case cops shooting Sheila after 7:35am.

No it doesn't, you have been told that such deposits could have some from various sources but you take no notice. 

[lookout]

I didn't see the sense or logic in taking swabs after the hands had been cleaned.

[David1819]

No it doesn't, you have been told that such deposits could have some from various sources but you take no notice. 

Such as? and why would Sheila be handling those items in the middle of the night. What ever they may be?


Don't tell me ....

Sheila being involved doesn't point to an innocent Jeremy.

[Caroline]

Such as? and why would Sheila be handling those items in the middle of the night. What ever they may be?


Don't tell me ....

You've already been told that there are many sources for such trace evidence. However, she didn't have to be handling them in 'the middle of the night'. For example, her cosmetics are laid out on the bed, she had clearly used them recently - women take off their make-up before going to bed etc.

Your theory would fall flat at the first hurdle because as usual - you conclusions come without any real thought other than the first thing that pops into your head that supports Sheila being the killer. You just never think it through!

[lookout]

Sheila may have thought about putting on makeup as afterall she'd showered and had wanted to look her best--------but didn't get as far as applying her makeup. To my mind,Sheila looked perfect in those sad photographs and not facially/bodily contorted as one would be who was facing death by another hand.!
I've seen people who've died in pain and they don't look like that I can assure you.

[Jane]

Sheila may have thought about putting on makeup as afterall she'd showered and had wanted to look her best--------but didn't get as far as applying her makeup. To my mind,Sheila looked perfect in those sad photographs and not facially/bodily contorted as one would be who was facing death by another hand.!
I've seen people who've died in pain and they don't look like that I can assure you.

Now, where is the evidence, -ie, wet towels, shampoo bottle, body wash- of Sheila having recently showered. It's interesting that you mention pain. Do you believe Sheila wasn't in pain after the first shot? Then having to position a gun -if you believe it to have been self inflicted- and tilt her damaged neck to get the angle right next time? It may have been a relief that it was all over.

[lookout]

Now, where is the evidence, -ie, wet towels, shampoo bottle, body wash- of Sheila having recently showered. It's interesting that you mention pain. Do you believe Sheila wasn't in pain after the first shot? Then having to position a gun -if you believe it to have been self inflicted- and tilt her damaged neck to get the angle right next time? It may have been a relief that it was all over.

Have we got a pic of the bathroom ? Toiletries,etc etc------broken shower head ?

As for the shots to the neck,Sheila had appeared to have been in the mindset of it having to have been the inevitability of how things would end and so had prepared herself for the end.

[Jane]

Have we got a pic of the bathroom ? Toiletries,etc etc------broken shower head ?

As for the shots to the neck,Sheila had appeared to have been in the mindset of it having to have been the inevitability of how things would end and so had prepared herself for the end.

Bathroom? I thought it was posited that she'd used the downstairs shower-room? I wouldn't know if it had been considered necessary for photo's to be taken of that area? I rather think I might have accepted "the inevitability" had I had a gun pointing in my face.

[lookout]

Bathroom? I thought it was posited that she'd used the downstairs shower-room? I wouldn't know if it had been considered necessary for photo's to be taken of that area? I rather think I might have accepted "the inevitability" had I had a gun pointing in my face.

WHF was a place of crime where EVERY room should have been pictured--------so how is it you asked about toiletries when neither of us knows because the bathroom was never shown ? Sheila had been meticulous about her appearance and given her menstrual condition would have NATURALLY showered.

Sheila had accepted her inevitability by her own hand,but she certainly wouldn't have had it been by someone else's.

[Jane]

WHF was a place of crime where EVERY room should have been pictured--------so how is it you asked about toiletries when neither of us knows because the bathroom was never shown ? Sheila had been meticulous about her appearance and given her menstrual condition would have NATURALLY showered.

Sheila had accepted her inevitability by her own hand,but she certainly wouldn't have had it been by someone else's.

"Had been" seems to be the key word(s) here. During her last fortnight this was not the case. You make assumptions. I'm not saying she didn't shower, but I'm not hazarding a guess about WHEN she showered. Again, you make assumptions. You CANNOT know that "she certainly wouldn't have (accepted her inevitability) had it been by someone else's".

[Steve_uk]

Such as? and why would Sheila be handling those items in the middle of the night. What ever they may be?


Don't tell me ....

Jeremy could have staged the scene however he liked. He could have rubbed her hands with the spare bullets on the blue and white chequered worktop for all you know.

[mike tesko]

STOP, right there, exhibit DRH/33 (Lab' item no.17 or exhibit DRH/44, Lab' item no. 75) compromised of hand swabs taken from the right and left hand, head and a control swab (rejected on 9th August, 1985), now, forgive me for appealing for commonsense to prevail, how do we know that when the swabs were re-submitted under the exhibit reference DRH/44 (Lab' item no. 75) that Essex police did not just submit the head swab, and the control sample?

You can't trust corrupt coppers, they will do, and did anything in that era, to establish a case against this person or that person!

Take my word for it, cops in this era were not like the cops we have today, those in that era were worse than common criminals, supported and backed up by the powers that be - a totally vile, evil lot the lot of them!

[mike tesko]

Jeremy could have staged the scene however he liked. He could have rubbed her hands with the spare bullets on the blue and white chequered worktop for all you know.

C'mon, Jeremy didn't stage the scene, please get a grip of yourself, cops staged Sheila's death scene on the bedroom floor after they moved her body there from on top of the bed!