Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: snow66! on May 17, 2025, 05:48:PM
-
Well did he?
-
He took it off after shooting Sheila.
Then put it back in it's box in the gun cupboard when he went downstairs.
It has been known for people to put things back in there usual places.
Although Bamber didn't with the rifle despite Nevill & June being in the kitchen.
-
He took it off after shooting Sheila.
Then put it back in it's box in the gun cupboard when he went downstairs.
It has been known for people to put things back in there usual places.
Although Bamber didn't with the rifle despite Nevill & June being in the kitchen.
'it has been known for people to put things back in their usual places'
I was looking for a slightly more reasoned answer, Adam! ::)
-
Well did he?
Yes, because the Anschütz rifle would be too long for Sheila to shoot herself with silencer attached.
-
And of course we have to ask the obvious question, if the silencer wasn't used on the night of the murders and the rellies or the police contaminated it in order to get the case to court, just how on earth did they think they could get away with this?
Well I suppose JB couldn't really comment about it without incriminating himself, if guilty he obviously couldn't just turn round and say, ' I know you contaminated the silencer because it wasn't on the rifle when I shot my family'! And even if JB had confessed to the shooting before trial in the hope of a reduced sentence no one would believe him if he said the police contaminated the silencer, nor would anyone care anyway!
So thinking things through, the police/rellies had nothing to lose really contaminating the silencer, did they?
Not if they were convinced of his guilt of course.
This is why I think it is a possibility that the silencer was contaminated once Julie came forward.
Ask yourself this, would the relatives or Stan really put their liberty on the line trying to frame Bamber within a week of the murders? What a risk! Money nor promotion was any good to the relatives nor Stan if they ended up in jail for perverting the course of justice!
On the other hand, after Julie came forward and the majority of the police thought JB guilty, that was the time for noble cause corruption to come into play surely?
All it meant was a back story claiming that the rellies found a silencer in the gun cupboard and various statements, notebook pages and exhibit numbers changed or introduced to suit!
I just cant see Stan or the rellies trying to frame JB within a week of the murders with no backing from the top brass! Just too risky at that stage and all allegedly taking place even before the inquest and funerals!
Oh well, thats about it!
-
Yes, because the Anschütz rifle would be too long for Sheila to shoot herself with silencer attached.
Again, too brief Steve, too brief!
-
He had to take the silencer off.
He had to go downstairs.
The silencer was not too heavy to carry.
The silencer box was in the downstairs gun cupboard.
Inside the silencer box inside the gun cupboard was well away from the crime scene.
----------
All flows together.
Agree another person may act differently. There is not a one reaction fits all.
-
Will look at things differently. Was involved in crime since 1982
I used to burn stuff, this was low level.
-
He had to take the silencer off.
He had to go downstairs.
The silencer was not too heavy to carry.
The silencer box was in the downstairs gun cupboard.
Inside the silencer box inside the gun cupboard was well away from the crime scene.
----------
All flows together.
Agree another person may act differently. There is not a one reaction fits all.
We're talking about the actions of an alleged killer, Adam! and 'why' he made them regarding the silencer.
-
We're talking about the actions of an alleged killer, Adam! and 'why' he made them regarding the silencer.
Ask yourself, where did the silencer belong? Where do you think he should have put it, in the fridge?
He could have left it out at the side of Sheila, he didn’t. Bamber would know, anything left out at the murder scene would be taken by the police straight away for testing or evidence. We don’t know how much blood was on the silencer after the shootings, So anything he didn’t want linking to the crime, he had to either get rid of or distance. So he decided to distance the silencer by placing it at the very back of the gun Cupboard after what he thought was clean. Clothing he could have got rid of, and any clothing missing wouldn’t be suspicious, the silencer he could have got rid of, this might have looked suspicious?
The idea that your putting forward, everyone was involved in the silencer cover up, the Rellies (as you put it) the Police, the TOP brass……… Yet they all had to wait for Taff to die first and Julie to come forward to execute their plan and fiddle the books, is utter nonsense!
I think you need to question whoever puts this in your head first!
-
For me a cleaning or a disposal.
-
Ask yourself, where did the silencer belong? Where do you think he should have put it, in the fridge?
He could have left it out at the side of Sheila, he didn’t. Bamber would know, anything left out at the murder scene would be taken by the police straight away for testing or evidence. We don’t know how much blood was on the silencer after the shootings, So anything he didn’t want linking to the crime, he had to either get rid of or distance. So he decided to distance the silencer by placing it at the very back of the gun Cupboard after what he thought was clean. Clothing he could have got rid of, and any clothing missing wouldn’t be suspicious, the silencer he could have got rid of, this might have looked suspicious?
The idea that your putting forward, everyone was involved in the silencer cover up, the Rellies (as you put it) the Police, the TOP brass……… Yet they all had to wait for Taff to die first and Julie to come forward to execute their plan and fiddle the books, is utter nonsense!
I think you need to question whoever puts this in your head first!
There was no reason to hide the silencer unless JB thought that Sheilas blood had got inside it, HB!
The silencer being found beside Sheila with Nevill and the boys blood on it or inside it meant nothing, it would fit with Sheila shooting them and then taking the silencer off to shoot herself.
If JB is guilty, why didn't he just take the silencer off before shooting Sheila if he was afraid of her blood may get inside it? After all, it wasn't needed at that stage was it?
The usual argument is that he didn't realize the gun was too long for Sheila to shoot herself, but he still had no reason to return the silencer to the gun cupboard unless he was afraid that Sheila's blood could have got inside it, else he would just leave it beside Sheila, surely?
Even supposing that only Nevill or the boys blood had got inside/outside the silencer it would still be suspicious putting it back in the cupboard! Far better for JB to leave the silencer lying about the house for the police to find.
No, if JB is guilty we have to conclude that he knew/suspected that Sheila's blood was inside the silencer and rather than attempt to clean it in any way risked putting it back/hiding it in the cupboard in the hope that the police simply wouldn't find it, in other words, if guilty, JB knew full well that an item was sitting in the gun cupboard that could prove his guilt if found!
But to cap it all, once the police had left the WHF JB didn't even bother to look in the gun cupboard to see if the silencer had been taken! Isn't that the first thing he would have done?
Just when did JB realize his contaminated silencer was missing?
Isn't it strange that JB showed no interest in the silencer at all, knowing it could be capable of sending him down for life?
Doesn't add up really, does it??
-
I would not waste your breath Snow! If guilty no way would Bamber have let anyone else have access to the house, he simply had to keep the keys and he was home and dry.
There was always the possibility of someone finding something that would give him away.
Bamber would have expected the police to seize all the guns, ammo silencers etc. so at the very least would have given the silencer a dam good clean. It had three different exhibit numbers at one stage or another, no wonder there was two examined!
-
There was no reason to hide the silencer unless JB thought that Sheilas blood had got inside it, HB!
The silencer being found beside Sheila with Nevill and the boys blood on it or inside it meant nothing, it would fit with Sheila shooting them and then taking the silencer off to shoot herself.
If JB is guilty, why didn't he just take the silencer off before shooting Sheila if he was afraid of her blood may get inside it? After all, it wasn't needed at that stage was it?
The usual argument is that he didn't realize the gun was too long for Sheila to shoot herself, but he still had no reason to return the silencer to the gun cupboard unless he was afraid that Sheila's blood could have got inside it, else he would just leave it beside Sheila, surely?
Even supposing that only Nevill or the boys blood had got inside/outside the silencer it would still be suspicious putting it back in the cupboard! Far better for JB to leave the silencer lying about the house for the police to find.
No, if JB is guilty we have to conclude that he knew/suspected that Sheila's blood was inside the silencer and rather than attempt to clean it in any way risked putting it back/hiding it in the cupboard in the hope that the police simply wouldn't find it, in other words, if guilty, JB knew full well that an item was sitting in the gun cupboard that could prove his guilt if found!
But to cap it all, once the police had left the WHF JB didn't even bother to look in the gun cupboard to see if the silencer had been taken! Isn't that the first thing he would have done?
Just when did JB realize his contaminated silencer was missing?
Isn't it strange that JB showed no interest in the silencer at all, knowing it could be capable of sending him down for life?
Doesn't add up really, does it??
How do you know taking the silencer off meant nothing? Taking the silencer off after he killed Sheila was his decision, he had two choices, leave it beside Sheila, or hide it to make it looked like it wasn’t used. He might have been frightened, he knew that it would be took with the rifle and sent for testing, he had no idea what the tests could produce, if he hides it, it distances it from the crime. You have know idea what went through his head, the same as I don’t really. He wouldn’t really know that the rifle was too long until he had shot Sheila after he placed the rifle on top of her? It’s ok saying what anyone should or did do after the event, it’s what the killer decides in the moment,
Bamber never entered WHF until all the gun cupboard had been emptied, he didn’t know the police had the silencer, as far as he was aware the relatives had got everything i think? At one stage he said he didn’t want to go into WHF again, that’s why Ann was asked to be a key holder. Ann was told by Stan she would have to clean the house up, she said “no way” at first?
You say it doesn’t add up, your theory about the Police the top brass and Relies waiting for Taff to die and for Julie to come forward before they could cook the books and fiddle the silencer does I suppose?
-
I would not waste your breath Snow! If guilty no way would Bamber have let anyone else have access to the house, he simply had to keep the keys and he was home and dry.
There was always the possibility of someone finding something that would give him away.
Bamber would have expected the police to seize all the guns, ammo silencers etc. so at the very least would have given the silencer a dam good clean. It had three different exhibit numbers at one stage or another, no wonder there was two examined!
Why not waste your breath, snow has raised some good points, it’s not just about me and snow, others like to read the posts. I don’t agree with Snow about waiting for Taff to die and Julie to come forward before the police the top brass and the relies could fiddle things and frame Bamber.
I suppose because you back Snow and you haven’t challenged and agree with him on this, he’s not wasting his breath on you then?
-
I would not waste your breath Snow! If guilty no way would Bamber have let anyone else have access to the house, he simply had to keep the keys and he was home and dry.
There was always the possibility of someone finding something that would give him away.
Bamber would have expected the police to seize all the guns, ammo silencers etc. so at the very least would have given the silencer a dam good clean. It had three different exhibit numbers at one stage or another, no wonder there was two examined!
I wonder what makes you think that? Surely a strategically placed gun on the body of the murderer/suicide victim would have eliminated the need for an immediate search for other weapons?
It also occurs to me that anything which arose which could have incriminated him, he'd have kept very quiet about. After all, why could he have given an opinion on anything which happened when he claimed not to have been there? Regarding any fingerprints found to be his? He'd been there. He'd handled the murder weapon.
-
Bamber committed the massacre minus sights and with silencer.
He took the silencer off & put it back in it's box. Next to the sights he had taken off pre massacre.
Suspicious relatives found the silencer and handed it to the police.
The test results at Huntingdon confirmed Sheila had been murdered. Her receiving 2 shots didn't help either.
-
I wonder what makes you think that? Surely a strategically placed gun on the body of the murderer/suicide victim would have eliminated the need for an immediate search for other weapons?
It also occurs to me that anything which arose which could have incriminated him, he'd have kept very quiet about. After all, why could he have given an opinion on anything which happened when he claimed not to have been there? Regarding any fingerprints found to be his? He'd been there. He'd handled the murder weapon.
They said they were never looking for a silencer and if they had searched the gun cupboard and found one, they doubt they would have realised the significance Jane.
-
Why not waste your breath, snow has raised some good points, it’s not just about me and snow, others like to read the posts. I don’t agree with Snow about waiting for Taff to die and Julie to come forward before the police the top brass and the relies could fiddle things and frame Bamber.
I suppose because you back Snow and you haven’t challenged and agree with him on this, he’s not wasting his breath on you then?
Rob never said that he agrees with all my theories, HB, only that JB would have cleaned the silencer before putting it in the gun cupboard!
-
Rob never said that he agrees with all my theories, HB, only that JB would have cleaned the silencer before putting it in the gun cupboard!
Well I would have thought his first choice would be to simple leave it beside Sheila Snow, he would have been well aware the use of a silencer might be detectable.
But if for some bizarre reason he decides to put it in the gun cupboard I am sure he would give it a dam good clean, after all according to some he spent ages messing around burning Nevil's back. Surely he had a few extra minutes to clean the silencer?
-
Bamber committed the massacre minus sights and with silencer.
He took the silencer off & put it back in it's box. Next to the sights he had taken off pre massacre.
Suspicious relatives found the silencer and handed it to the police.
The test results at Huntingdon confirmed Sheila had been murdered. Her receiving 2 shots didn't help either.
Well thats another slightly peculiar aspect of the silencer evidence, Adam, the fact that the blood inside it wasn't an exact match for Sheila! So where did it come from if JB was framed?
I mean, if the blood was planted, why didn't the 'planter' as it were make sure there was enough of Sheila's blood to get an exact match?
What does this tell us?
Was the planter scarce of blood, or 'decent' blood, like Daves theory? Could this be why no exact match was found?
Surely the police would have a sufficient amount of Sheila's blood to get a perfect match if they were the culprits? Here's me contradicting my own theories now!
What if the blood was genuine backspatter? Why wasn't there enough to get an exact match?
Mmmm! More questions than answers!
Anyone any more ideas why the blood wasn't an exact match for Sheila?
-
Rob never said that he agrees with all my theories, HB, only that JB would have cleaned the silencer before putting it in the gun cupboard!
The fact he never challenged you and told you to stop wasting your breath with me for challenging you suggests he does.
-
Rob never said that he agrees with all my theories, HB, only that JB would have cleaned the silencer before putting it in the gun cupboard!
If you don’t want posters to challenge what you say, don’t post.
-
They said they were never looking for a silencer and if they had searched the gun cupboard and found one, they doubt they would have realised the significance Jane.
That is not what Cook says HB? He says:
"I never saw the silencer in that cupboard, if I had, as I have already stated, I would have taken it."
-
Well thats another slightly peculiar aspect of the silencer evidence, Adam, the fact that the blood inside it wasn't an exact match for Sheila! So where did it come from if JB was framed?
I mean, if the blood was planted, why didn't the 'planter' as it were make sure there was enough of Sheila's blood to get an exact match?
What does this tell us?
Was the planter scarce of blood, or 'decent' blood, like Daves theory? Could this be why no exact match was found?
Surely the police would have a sufficient amount of Sheila's blood to get a perfect match if they were the culprits? Here's me contradicting my own theories now!
What if the blood was genuine backspatter? Why wasn't there enough to get an exact match?
Mmmm! More questions than answers!
Anyone any more ideas why the blood wasn't an exact match for Sheila?
Part of my narrative is the MF could have created the flake using blood that was sent to him from Taylor with the bullet PV20 ( see my posts ) It maybe that its quality was impaired by the fact that it was not refrigerated.
-
Part of my narrative is the MF could have created the flake using blood that was sent to him from Taylor with the bullet PV20 ( see my posts ) It maybe that its quality was impaired by the fact that it was not refrigerated.
Thanks Bubo, that may explain it!
When did that take place?
-
That is not what Cook says HB? He says:
"I never saw the silencer in that cupboard, if I had, as I have already stated, I would have taken it."
It must have been well hiden. Plus they were not looking for one.
-
The prosecution will always say he took the sights off and inserted the silencer pre massacre.
Supporters will always say EP, the relatives and Huntingdon worked together to fabricate it. Not sure why they would when there was so much other evidence.
-
That is not what Cook says HB? He says:
"I never saw the silencer in that cupboard, if I had, as I have already stated, I would have taken it."
But, I’m relaying what Stone, Dickinson, Cartledge and Taplin said when questioned by the Press immediately after the trial.
Cook probably would have taken it, but not put any significance to it. I think personally Cook tries to cover his own back for his failings, he never searched the gun cupboard or removed the remaining guns and ammunition from the Gun cupboard. He went to the Autopsy with the bodies at 1.50pm on the day of the murders, he was all day on the 8th at the Autopsy, and on the 9th the Keys to WHF were handed back.
-
It must have been well hiden. Plus they were not looking for one.
The silencer was at the back of the Gun cupboard in a box with the sights, the cupboard was 3 feet at the door entrance sloping down to 8 inches high at the back wall.
The rifle was seen the week before the murders, with the silencer and sights attached by AP, he couldn’t remember if the Magazine was attached, he also saw two boxes of 50 rounds of ammunition on the desk in the den, he thought the ammunition was German make?
The rifle on a farm is to control vermin, used more effectively with a silencer and sights attached, the silencer is more effective when taking out larger numbers of vermin.
Bamber used to like target shooting, i would think with the sights attached, the murder scene showed that there was a rifle on top of Sheila minus sights and silencer, so, without question, someone must have taken the sights and silencer off the rifle during the week before the murders, it’s been suggested Neville took them off for cleaning, but why place them out of sight right at the back of the gun cupboard?
AP said the rifle scope and silencer looked new, would it need cleaning, do you have to remove the sights every time you clean the rifle or sights?
-
The prosecution will always say he took the sights off and inserted the silencer pre massacre.
Supporters will always say EP, the relatives and Huntingdon worked together to fabricate it. Not sure why they would when there was so much other evidence.
To remove the sights you needed an Allen key or pliers I think, it couldn’t just be removed by hand? So it was either Neville or Bamber who removed them, just like it was either Sheila or Bamber who killed everyone?
-
Thanks Bubo, that may explain it!
When did that take place?
He received the bullet PV20 with some blood on the 11/09/85.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10645.msg494082.html#msg494082
-
The silencer was at the back of the Gun cupboard in a box with the sights, the cupboard was 3 feet at the door entrance sloping down to 8 inches high at the back wall.
The rifle was seen the week before the murders, with the silencer and sights attached by AP, he couldn’t remember if the Magazine was attached, he also saw two boxes of 50 rounds of ammunition on the desk in the den, he thought the ammunition was German make?
The rifle on a farm is to control vermin, used more effectively with a silencer and sights attached, the silencer is more effective when taking out larger numbers of vermin.
Bamber used to like target shooting, i would think with the sights attached, the murder scene showed that there was a rifle on top of Sheila minus sights and silencer, so, without question, someone must have taken the sights and silencer off the rifle during the week before the murders, it’s been suggested Neville took them off for cleaning, but why place them out of sight right at the back of the gun cupboard?
AP said the rifle scope and silencer looked new, would it need cleaning, do you have to remove the sights every time you clean the rifle or sights?
The rifle, sights, silencer and ammo were all purchased during Nov '84. Some 20 months pre Aug '85. NB had been the tenant farmer at WHF since the 1950's. Which was the firearm and accessories of choice ie sights, silencer, ammo, for controlling vermin prior to the Nov '84 purchase?
We know the relatives, including AP, said this, that and the other in relation to the rifle, sights, silencer but they were only very occasional visitors. What did others say who were regular visitors at WHF eg Babs Wilson, Jean Boutell and Len Foakes?
-
Well I would have thought his first choice would be to simple leave it beside Sheila Snow, he would have been well aware the use of a silencer might be detectable.
But if for some bizarre reason he decides to put it in the gun cupboard I am sure he would give it a dam good clean, after all according to some he spent ages messing around burning Nevil's back. Surely he had a few extra minutes to clean the silencer?
I think we are awaiting your theory about how the silencer was fabricated. There's a recent thread dedicated to this topic. Thanks in anticipation.
-
The prosecution will always say he took the sights off and inserted the silencer pre massacre.
Supporters will always say EP, the relatives and Huntingdon worked together to fabricate it. Not sure why they would when there was so much other evidence.
The prosecution will always be a runaway train in the absence of a robust defence.
-
To remove the sights you needed an Allen key or pliers I think, it couldn’t just be removed by hand? So it was either Neville or Bamber who removed them, just like it was either Sheila or Bamber who killed everyone?
How can we rule out NB lending his rifle to some other member of the farming community? Or some other person who had a legitimate right to borrow/use the rifle?
-
Well thats another slightly peculiar aspect of the silencer evidence, Adam, the fact that the blood inside it wasn't an exact match for Sheila! So where did it come from if JB was framed?
I mean, if the blood was planted, why didn't the 'planter' as it were make sure there was enough of Sheila's blood to get an exact match?
What does this tell us?
Was the planter scarce of blood, or 'decent' blood, like Daves theory? Could this be why no exact match was found?
Surely the police would have a sufficient amount of Sheila's blood to get a perfect match if they were the culprits? Here's me contradicting my own theories now!
What if the blood was genuine backspatter? Why wasn't there enough to get an exact match?
Mmmm! More questions than answers!
Anyone any more ideas why the blood wasn't an exact match for Sheila?
I don't know what you mean by "the fact that the blood inside it wasn't an exact match for Sheila".
We are told a flake of blood inside the silencer matched SC's ABO, a protein and enzyme groups which didn't match any of the other victims.
-
It is possible he removed the sights and inserted the silencer after his window access.
Also possible he did both in the days or hours leading up to the massacre.
-
EP, the relatives & Huntingdon are three sets of law abiding individuals. The police are supposed to uphold the law & Huntingdon had no interest in the case.
So very optimistic to expect them to all simultaneously break the law so seriously and quickly.
-
It is possible he removed the sights and inserted the silencer after his window access.
Also possible he did both in the days or hours leading up to the massacre.
The rifle, sights, silencer and ammo were all purchased during Nov '84. Some 20 months pre Aug '85. NB had been the tenant farmer at WHF since the 1950's. Which was the firearm and accessories of choice ie sights, silencer, ammo, for controlling vermin prior to the Nov '84 purchase?
We know the relatives, including AP, said this, that and the other in relation to the rifle, sights, silencer but they were only very occasional visitors. What did others say who were regular visitors at WHF eg Babs Wilson, Jean Boutell and Len Foakes?
-
EP, the relatives & Huntingdon are three sets of law abiding individuals. The police are supposed to uphold the law & Huntingdon had no interest in the case.
So very optimistic to expect them to all simultaneously break the law so seriously and quickly.
It isn't necessary to show who was responsible for fabricating the silencer just that it was. Post acquittal the responsibility of attempting to determine who was responsible will rest with the relevant authorities.
-
Will look at things differently. Was involved in crime since 1982
I used to burn stuff, this was low level.
Surprised you met JB on a cat A wing based on your low level crime?
-
The rifle, sights, silencer and ammo were all purchased during Nov '84. Some 20 months pre Aug '85. NB had been the tenant farmer at WHF since the 1950's. Which was the firearm and accessories of choice ie sights, silencer, ammo, for controlling vermin prior to the Nov '84 purchase?
We know the relatives, including AP, said this, that and the other in relation to the rifle, sights, silencer but they were only very occasional visitors. What did others say who were regular visitors at WHF eg Babs Wilson, Jean Boutell and Len Foakes?
Years spent in finance and still can't add up. 20 months? :o
-
Years spent in finance and still can't add up. 20 months? :o
I said 'some 20 months'!
-
I said 'some 20 months'!
You'd wriggle your way out of jail if you got the chance. Unlike Jeremy Bamber.
-
You'd wriggle your way out of jail if you got the chance. Unlike Jeremy Bamber.
She has a habit of doing it.
-
Am I right in saying the rifle Ammo/ bullets we’re covered with bees wax NGB? Was this to make it easy to load into the Mag as well as travelling down the rifle on exit? I read where gun enthusiasts have a rag on hand to remove this oil/ wax from their hands after reloading?
If a person wasn’t wearing gloves and had this wax/oil on their hand, would the wax have shown more on handling the rifle, especially fingerprints etc? Would it also make the bullets a bit more cumbersome for someone not used to firing/loading a Mag? Of course I could be completely wrong, but would appreciate your thoughts NGB.
-
She has a habit of doing it.
I hear she threatened to steal your bike?
I have no doubt what she would have bought with the proceeds.
-
Am I right in saying the rifle Ammo/ bullets we’re covered with bees wax NGB? Was this to make it easy to load into the Mag as well as travelling down the rifle on exit? I read where gun enthusiasts have a rag on hand to remove this oil/ wax from their hands after reloading?
If a person wasn’t wearing gloves and had this wax/oil on their hand, would the wax have shown more on handling the rifle, especially fingerprints etc? Would it also make the bullets a bit more cumbersome for someone not used to firing/loading a Mag? Of course I could be completely wrong, but would appreciate your thoughts NGB.
Technical data:
https://eley.co.uk/eley-subsonic-hollow/
It can be shown MF's trial testimony is a crock of shite.
-
I hear she threatened to steal your bike?
I have no doubt what she would have bought with the proceeds.
Nothing given I said I would nick it to hide it.
-
Am I right in saying the rifle Ammo/ bullets we’re covered with bees wax NGB? Was this to make it easy to load into the Mag as well as travelling down the rifle on exit? I read where gun enthusiasts have a rag on hand to remove this oil/ wax from their hands after reloading?
If a person wasn’t wearing gloves and had this wax/oil on their hand, would the wax have shown more on handling the rifle, especially fingerprints etc? Would it also make the bullets a bit more cumbersome for someone not used to firing/loading a Mag? Of course I could be completely wrong, but would appreciate your thoughts NGB.
You are correct HB that the rifle ammunition is waxed and this aids lubrication. Loading does tend to leave some residue on the hands. The waxing does not make it more difficult to handle the ammunition. It is quite a thin film.
-
You are correct HB that the rifle ammunition is waxed and this aids lubrication. Loading does tend to leave some residue on the hands. The waxing does not make it more difficult to handle the ammunition. It is quite a thin film.
As I think you know I went to a local gun shop and loaded the exact same cartridges into the exact same magazine and I could not detect any residues whatsover on my hands either by feel, look or odour.
I contacted the manufacturers via email to clarify whether they had changed from earlier manufacturing and I was told, via email, no changes.
My findings above completely contradict MF's trial testimony.
-
As I think you know I went to a local gun shop and loaded the exact same cartridges into the exact same magazine and I could not detect any residues whatsover on my hands either by feel, look or odour.
I contacted the manufacturers via email to clarify whether they had changed from earlier manufacturing and I was told, via email, no changes.
My findings above completely contradict MF's trial testimony.
I remember you mentioning this a while ago. I have to say I am a bit surprised. There is not much residue but I could always detect some after handling rifle ammunition.
-
You are correct HB that the rifle ammunition is waxed and this aids lubrication. Loading does tend to leave some residue on the hands. The waxing does not make it more difficult to handle the ammunition. It is quite a thin film.
. Thank you NGB, So, would it be fair to say the fingerprints then become Patent fingerprints, meaning when transferred with oil, grease, blood the fingerprint is visible to the naked eye? Latent fingerprint is normal fingerprints, through sweat etc not visible to the naked eye.
So if Sheila had reloaded the Mag three times and handled 25 bullets, she would have had to have wax on her fingers and palms of her hands, possibly transferred such to the rifle while shooting? From this I would assume the shooter most probably was wearing gloves?
-
. Thank you NGB, So, would it be fair to say the fingerprints then become Patent fingerprints, meaning when transferred with oil, grease, blood the fingerprint is visible to the naked eye? Latent fingerprint is normal fingerprints, through sweat etc not visible to the naked eye.
So if Sheila had reloaded the Mag three times and handled 25 bullets, she would have had to have wax on her fingers and palms of her hands, possibly transferred such to the rifle while shooting? From this I would assume the shooter most probably was wearing gloves?
Somebody handling 25 rounds without gloves would be expected to get some trace of lubricant on the hands and a bit of that could be transferred to the rifle, but that would probably not be noticeable. The traces of was would be small so I doubt if that would result in fingerprints being visible.
-
nks Bubo, so that would suggest the police fabricated the silencer then?
But possibly asked the relatives to give a back story to suit it?
-
I don't know what you mean by "the fact that the blood inside it wasn't an exact match for Sheila".
We are told a flake of blood inside the silencer matched SC's ABO, a protein and enzyme groups which didn't match any of the other victims.
Well thats basically what I meant, Cutie!
Why wasn't there enough blood to yield a full profile for Sheila?
-
EP, the relatives & Huntingdon are three sets of law abiding individuals. The police are supposed to uphold the law & Huntingdon had no interest in the case.
So very optimistic to expect them to all simultaneously break the law so seriously and quickly.
Not if the shenanigans took place after Julie came forward, Adam!
-
I remember you mentioning this a while ago. I have to say I am a bit surprised. There is not much residue but I could always detect some after handling rifle ammunition.
Was this when using:
https://eley.co.uk/eley-subsonic-hollow/
-
. Thank you NGB, So, would it be fair to say the fingerprints then become Patent fingerprints, meaning when transferred with oil, grease, blood the fingerprint is visible to the naked eye? Latent fingerprint is normal fingerprints, through sweat etc not visible to the naked eye.
So if Sheila had reloaded the Mag three times and handled 25 bullets, she would have had to have wax on her fingers and palms of her hands, possibly transferred such to the rifle while shooting? From this I would assume the shooter most probably was wearing gloves?
It is difficult to recover fingerprints from some surfaces, firearms being one such surface.
-
Well thats basically what I meant, Cutie!
Why wasn't there enough blood to yield a full profile for Sheila?
Full profile? The results produced were sufficient to differentiate SC's blood groups from the other victims' blood groups.
-
Not if the shenanigans took place after Julie came forward, Adam!
The relatives found the silencer on the 9th August. Julie came forward on the 7th September.
-
The Eley tech data states the lubricant is a firm hydrocarbon to reduce residues.
-
Not if the shenanigans took place after Julie came forward, Adam!
- Outside contaminants: blood, hair, paint and scratches. We are told found by relatives on 10th Aug.
- Inside contaminant: blood. We are told found by FSS around mid Sep. After we are told JM came forward.
-
- Outside contaminants: blood, hair, paint and scratches. We are told found by relatives on 10th Aug.
- Inside contaminant: blood. We are told found by FSS around mid Sep. After we are told JM came forward.
Yes, we are 'told', Cutie! hair, paint, scratches.
Have you seen all the bonafide contemporary documentation relating to this?
Certainly no mention of hair,paint and scratches in any of the relatives statements prior to sept was there?
What about police notebooks, etc,.?
-
Yes, we are 'told', Cutie! hair, paint, scratches.
Have you seen all the bonafide contemporary documentation relating to this?
Certainly no mention of hair,paint and scratches in any of the relatives statements prior to sept was there?
What about police notebooks, etc,.?
I think there was mention of a grey hair, which disappeared in transit.
-
I think there was mention of a grey hair, which disappeared in transit.
Again, so we are told, Steve!
-
Surprised you met JB on a cat A wing based on your low level crime?
I didn't meet him when I was 14 you tit haha, I was 25.
-
Was this when using:
https://eley.co.uk/eley-subsonic-hollow/
Yes, that is the right ammunition.
-
I remember you mentioning this a while ago. I have to say I am a bit surprised. There is not much residue but I could always detect some after handling rifle ammunition.
Your right NGB, it was a question raised in Court by Drake, they did have a lubricant on them and it would be expected to show on your hands. AP said his wife found them Slippery? I’ve read where target shooting practices used a cloth to wipe their hands when loading the Magazine, the guy across from my house Shoots regular, he said the beeswax bullets felt more greasy, parrafin wax wasn’t as greasy? I look after his house while he goes away, his guns are in a special case, I’ve not seen them, he gives me his house alarm number for his house.
So we’ve established that after loading 25 oily bullets with no gloves into a mag, you’d expect to see this oily residue transferred to the rifle stock somewhere? My guess again the killer was wearing gloves.
At Court
From my experience from loading this type of Magazine and watching others loading this type of magazine, you get VISIBLE residue on your hands from the loading procedure from the material of the bullet and the lubricant on the bullet.
Did you find any traces of oil or residue on the nightdress, A I did not sir.
-
How can we rule out NB lending his rifle to some other member of the farming community? Or some other person who had a legitimate right to borrow/use the rifle?
So you think he let someone have the rifle minus the sights and silencer?
The sights were removed and the silencer was found in the same box, it’s always been suggested the sights were removed for cleaning, if so why remove the silencer and put in the same box as the sights? You can clean the sights while attached to the rifle, why go to the trouble removing the sights just to clean?
If Neville took the trouble to clean the sights, why didn’t he clean the rifle, at trial MF said he could tell the rifle had not been cleaned.
-
So you think he let someone have the rifle minus the sights and silencer?
The sights were removed and the silencer was found in the same box, it’s always been suggested the sights were removed for cleaning, if so why remove the silencer and put in the same box as the sights? You can clean the sights while attached to the rifle, why go to the trouble removing the sights just to clean?
If Neville took the trouble to clean the sights, why didn’t he clean the rifle, at trial MF said he could tell the rifle had not been cleaned.
Too much is made of the sights and silencer off the rifle. NB had been farming at WHF some 40 years prior to the murders. The rifle, sights and silencer were purchased some 20 months pre murders. What was the firearm of choice for bunny hunting prior to the recent purchase?
-
Too much is made of the sights and silencer off the rifle. NB had been farming at WHF some 40 years prior to the murders. The rifle, sights and silencer were purchased some 20 months pre murders. What was the firearm of choice for bunny hunting prior to the recent purchase?
Funny how AP said they looked new a few days before Jeremy shot and killed everyone, like you said it was purchased some 9 months prior to the murders in Nov 84 for shooting vermin.
-
Your right NGB, it was a question raised in Court by Drake, they did have a lubricant on them and it would be expected to show on your hands. AP said his wife found them Slippery? I’ve read where target shooting practices used a cloth to wipe their hands when loading the Magazine, the guy across from my house Shoots regular, he said the beeswax bullets felt more greasy, parrafin wax wasn’t as greasy? I look after his house while he goes away, his guns are in a special case, I’ve not seen them, he gives me his house alarm number for his house.
So we’ve established that after loading 25 oily bullets with no gloves into a mag, you’d expect to see this oily residue transferred to the rifle stock somewhere? My guess again the killer was wearing gloves.
At Court
From my experience from loading this type of Magazine and watching others loading this type of magazine, you get VISIBLE residue on your hands from the loading procedure from the material of the bullet and the lubricant on the bullet.
Did you find any traces of oil or residue on the nightdress, A I did not sir.
MF claims the residues were black. Impossible. Even if there were residues on SC's hand they would not be obviously visible. Her hands were swabbed but there's no reliable forensic tests for residues from handling cartridges. The only reliable test is for gsr and a test wasn't carried out to detect this because the swabs had potentially come into contact with a firearm related to another case. And in any event given SC's hand was in contact with a firearm that had been fired some 25 times and her person in an environment where the firearm had been fired some 13 times they would prove nothing.
Why would SC's nightdress contain any residues other than possibly gsr which wasn't tested for?
-
Your right NGB, it was a question raised in Court by Drake, they did have a lubricant on them and it would be expected to show on your hands. AP said his wife found them Slippery? I’ve read where target shooting practices used a cloth to wipe their hands when loading the Magazine, the guy across from my house Shoots regular, he said the beeswax bullets felt more greasy, parrafin wax wasn’t as greasy? I look after his house while he goes away, his guns are in a special case, I’ve not seen them, he gives me his house alarm number for his house.
So we’ve established that after loading 25 oily bullets with no gloves into a mag, you’d expect to see this oily residue transferred to the rifle stock somewhere? My guess again the killer was wearing gloves.
At Court
From my experience from loading this type of Magazine and watching others loading this type of magazine, you get VISIBLE residue on your hands from the loading procedure from the material of the bullet and the lubricant on the bullet.
Did you find any traces of oil or residue on the nightdress, A I did not sir.
So, if there was no oil or grease traces on the nightdress, it shows Sheila never wiped her hands on the night dress to remove the Greasy lubricants after handling the greasy cartridges, making it more likely her hands and fingerprints would be transferred to the rifle stock?
Handling greasy bullet cases makes the finger print more Patent, compared to a Latent fingerprint which is your normal hand sweat. The patent fingerprint would have been visible on the rifle wood/stock and could last for six months.
-
Funny how AP said they looked new a few days before Jeremy shot and killed everyone, like you said it was purchased some 9 months prior to the murders in Nov 84 for shooting vermin.
Oh yes it was Nov 84! I was thinking it was Nov 83 even though I typed Nov 84 hence I said some 20 months!
But NB had been farming at WHF for some 40 years prior to the Nov 84 purchase so which firearm was used to control vermin prior to this purchase?
The rifle was used to wield blows against NB so that was hardly likely to look new since it wasn't designed for that purpose. And someone deliberately scatched the silencer to implicate JB so that was hardly likely to look new either.
-
So, if there was no oil or grease traces on the nightdress, it shows Sheila never wiped her hands on the night dress to remove the Greasy lubricants after handling the greasy cartridges, making it more likely her hands and fingerprints would be transferred to the rifle stock?
Handling greasy bullet cases makes the finger print more Patent, compared to a Latent fingerprint which is your normal hand sweat. The patent fingerprint would have been visible on the rifle wood/stock and could last for six months.
May I suggest you go to a gun shop and check it out for yourself.
Patent? Do you mean latent? I have already said fingerprints are difficult to recover from firearms hence only 1 from JB and 1 from SC was found.
-
May I suggest you go to a gun shop and check it out for yourself.
Patent? Do you mean latent? I have already said fingerprints are difficult to recover from firearms hence only 1 from JB and 1 from SC was found.
Maybe you should clue yourself up on subjects before you try to preach to others.
A patent print is simply a visible print. Many of these types of prints are wholly visible to the unaided eye, and only some form of imaging is needed for preservation. A good example of a patent print would be a greasy impression left on a windowpane. Patent prints can also be left in blood, paint, ink, mud, or dust.
-
Oh yes it was Nov 84! I was thinking it was Nov 83 even though I typed Nov 84 hence I said some 20 months!
But NB had been farming at WHF for some 40 years prior to the Nov 84 purchase so which firearm was used to control vermin prior to this purchase?
The rifle was used to wield blows against NB so that was hardly likely to look new since it wasn't designed for that purpose. And someone deliberately scatched the silencer to implicate JB so that was hardly likely to look new either.
Your arguments and accusations may wash on others Cutie, but may I add, even if I was a neutral I would take you on on your lies. I don’t believe in making things up for the sake of it!
It’s obvious it’s a recent rifle/scope/silencer, it’s obvious from gun experts, NGB and a guy who is in his 80s and been shooting all his life, It’s obvious when it’s said in Court that the bullets were greasy, yet you want to argue they wasn’t. All I want to know is why Sheila didn’t transfer this grease/lubricant onto the rifle, that’s all. My suggestion the shooter must have been wearing gloves?
-
Patent prints can be found on a wide variety of surfaces: smooth or rough, porous (such as paper, cloth or wood)
-
Your arguments and accusations may wash on others Cutie, but may I add, even if I was a neutral I would take you on on your lies. I don’t believe in making things up for the sake of it!
It’s obvious it’s a recent rifle/scope/silencer, it’s obvious from gun experts, NGB and a guy who is in his 80s and been shooting all his life, It’s obvious when it’s said in Court that the bullets were greasy, yet you want to argue they wasn’t. All I want to know is why Sheila didn’t transfer this grease/lubricant onto the rifle, that’s all. My suggestion the shooter must have been wearing gloves?
Where have I made anything up? I admitted I made a mistake in working out the number of months since the purchase of the rifle etc.
I have no idea what you are talking about? If its a subject that interests you why not go along to a gun shop and check them out for yourself. All I can say is that having loaded the magazine to full capacity inside the gun shop I could not detect any residues on my hands my way of appearance, feel or odour. In fact it was only when I picked at the cartridge with my nail I was able to remove the lubricant which I would describe as similar to candle wax.
With regard to NGB you are overlooking the fact he is handling the cartridges outdoors where the humidity levels will be much higher than indoors. Forensics need to be conducted on a like for like basis because any variation can alter the outcome. Eg taking the jury to an outdoor shooting range to hear the difference in sound with the silencer on and off. What was the point when the shootings took place indoors with a mountain of soft furnishings which would completely alter the sound.
It was said in court the handling of the cartridges caused black residues which is complete BS.
-
Patent prints can be found on a wide variety of surfaces: smooth or rough, porous (such as paper, cloth or wood)
Patent prints aka visible fingerprints are notoriously difficult to recover from firearms.
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/factors-affecting-recovery-latent-prints-firearms
Fingerprint specialists have had some success in recovering latent prints from firearms, but it is a difficult process and very few latent prints are developed from firearms.
The fact the rifle was able to produce a fingerprint from each of JB and Sheila supports the idea both had handled it extensively.
-
Maybe you should clue yourself up on subjects before you try to preach to others.
A patent print is simply a visible print. Many of these types of prints are wholly visible to the unaided eye, and only some form of imaging is needed for preservation. A good example of a patent print would be a greasy impression left on a windowpane. Patent prints can also be left in blood, paint, ink, mud, or dust.
What is Detective Special Brew rambling on about now?
-
Where have I made anything up? I admitted I made a mistake in working out the number of months since the purchase of the rifle etc.
I have no idea what you are talking about? If its a subject that interests you why not go along to a gun shop and check them out for yourself. All I can say is that having loaded the magazine to full capacity inside the gun shop I could not detect any residues on my hands my way of appearance, feel or odour. In fact it was only when I picked at the cartridge with my nail I was able to remove the lubricant which I would describe as similar to candle wax.
With regard to NGB you are overlooking the fact he is handling the cartridges outdoors where the humidity levels will be much higher than indoors. Forensics need to be conducted on a like for like basis because any variation can alter the outcome. Eg taking the jury to an outdoor shooting range to hear the difference in sound with the silencer on and off. What was the point when the shootings took place indoors with a mountain of soft furnishings which would completely alter the sound.
It was said in court the handling of the cartridges caused black residues which is complete BS.
Your a serial accuser without evidence, you accuse Stan of placing his own DNA on the silencer, you accuse Stan of scratching the AGA mantle, you accuse Stan of climbing through WHF window to do such nonsense, you accuse Stan of taking a bung from the relatives, you accuse Stan of drinking till the small hours with PE, all without evidence and made up.
-
Patent prints aka visible fingerprints are notoriously difficult to recover from firearms.
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/factors-affecting-recovery-latent-prints-firearms
Fingerprint specialists have had some success in recovering latent prints from firearms, but it is a difficult process and very few latent prints are developed from firearms.
The fact the rifle was able to produce a fingerprint from each of JB and Sheila supports the idea both had handled it extensively.
This article above is about Latent prints, my argument, not so much about identifying the print, it’s to support that the shooter did wear gloves, I think there would be more transferable grease or wax on the rifle if the shooter hadn’t got gloves on, so to me it looks like the shooter had gloves on? It’s about handling the bullets to load and not the discharge from the rifle, I would expect Sheila to wipe her hands possibly on her nighty, if they were sticky like APs wife said she found them?
-
Oh yes it was Nov 84! I was thinking it was Nov 83 even though I typed Nov 84 hence I said some 20 months!
But NB had been farming at WHF for some 40 years prior to the Nov 84 purchase so which firearm was used to control vermin prior to this purchase?
The rifle was used to wield blows against NB so that was hardly likely to look new since it wasn't designed for that purpose. And someone deliberately scatched the silencer to implicate JB so that was hardly likely to look new either.
I know what the rifle was used for thank you, I said AP said it looked new when he seen the rifle and scope and silencer all fitted a few days before the murders. Why the need to remove and clean them? Again how do you know someone deliberately scratched them, you’re making things up again, maybe the scratch came from when Jeremy was hitting Neville and he smashed the lamp in the kitchen? The rifle being long and raised to strike would hit higher objects?
-
Would it be fair to say that loading the magazine would consist of holding it in one hand and loading the bullets with the finger tips of the other?
-
This article above is about Latent prints, my argument, not so much about identifying the print, it’s to support that the shooter did wear gloves, I think there would be more transferable grease or wax on the rifle if the shooter hadn’t got gloves on, so to me it looks like the shooter had gloves on? It’s about handling the bullets to load and not the discharge from the rifle, I would expect Sheila to wipe her hands possibly on her nighty, if they were sticky like APs wife said she found them?
The manufacturing technical data states "firm hydrocarbon lubricant to reduce residues". The idea the cartridges are slathered in lubricant to the extent the user would transfer residues to the firearm and/or his/her person is wrong. NGB has never suggested otherwise.
At trial MF told the court "you get a black discolouration". Absolute BS. So we know for sure we have at least one forensic scientist who is either incompetent, corrupt or both.
-
What is Detective Special Brew rambling on about now?
Hi Incel. You are in no position to talk about others rambling after your long winded theory about lead tests when it is impossible for such a test to prove anything. Hence none of the FSP's offer such a test. You fail to recognise the FSS/80's featured quality failures:
3.3.1 Following some high profile quality failures in the 1980s the FSS implemented accreditation to quality standards from 1993 onwards, a world first for forensic science.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmsctech/writev/forensic/m61.htm
-
Would it be fair to say that loading the magazine would consist of holding it in one hand and loading the bullets with the finger tips of the other?
How would you expect someone not used to loading Bullets in a magazine, to load them? APs wife found them slippery while trying to load them, and at trial it was stated that the bullets left a VISIBLE residue on the hands while loading the bullets from the lubricant on the Bullet . Cutie can argue all she wants, it doesn’t alter the fact that the bullets had a lubricant transferable substance to the hand. If it leaves a residue I would expect this residue to be transferred to the murder weapon?
-
How would you expect someone not used to loading Bullets in a magazine, to load them? APs wife found them slippery while trying to load them, and at trial it was stated that the bullets left a VISIBLE residue on the hands while loading the bullets from the lubricant on the Bullet . Cutie can argue all she wants, it doesn’t alter the fact that the bullets had a lubricant transferable substance to the hand. If it leaves a residue I would expect this residue to be transferred to the murder weapon?
All I meant was, the only way to load bullets into a magazine is by using the thumb and finger tips of one hand!
-
All I meant was, the only way to load bullets into a magazine is by using the thumb and finger tips of one hand!
I agree, all the more reason to suspect transfer of lubricant to the fingers, she could even grasp them in the hand after lifting, she might have had quite a few in her hands at the same time, she would find them hard to load and slippery like APs wife did, meaning taking her time to load the Magazine?
-
The manufacturing technical data states "firm hydrocarbon lubricant to reduce residues". The idea the cartridges are slathered in lubricant to the extent the user would transfer residues to the firearm and/or his/her person is wrong. NGB has never suggested otherwise.
At trial MF told the court "you get a black discolouration". Absolute BS. So we know for sure we have at least one forensic scientist who is either incompetent, corrupt or both.
You never heard of Black Bees wax?
-
All I meant was, the only way to load bullets into a magazine is by using the thumb and finger tips of one hand!
Doesn't matter if you're right-handed or even left-handed, but if you're cack-handed like Sheila was there is NO-WAY she would waste time and effort trying to load at least 15 more bullets (assuming it already contained 10) into a tiny .22 magazine. All this in the midst of a psychotic breakdown too! Far more realistic for her to grab hold of a sharp, pointed cook's knife from the kitchen drawer with which to stab her family to death.
-
Eley are known or have been known to use both beeswax and paraffin wax for coating their many different rounds, so although Subsonics aren't mentioned here, in 1984 and before they might have used beeswax on them rather than paraffin wax, despite what Cambridge was told when she wrote to them -
https://eley.co.uk/waxing-lyrical-about-22lr-lubricants-beeswax-or-paraffin-wax/
-
Eley are known or have been known to use both beeswax and paraffin wax for coating their many different rounds, so although Subsonics aren't mentioned here, in 1984 and before they might have used beeswax on them rather than paraffin wax, despite what Cambridge was told when she wrote to them -
https://eley.co.uk/waxing-lyrical-about-22lr-lubricants-beeswax-or-paraffin-wax/
Do you think Jeremy from WHF -
Rang his AM.
Answered his own call when arriving back at GH.
Made no call from WHF.
-
Eley are known or have been known to use both beeswax and paraffin wax for coating their many different rounds, so although Subsonics aren't mentioned here, in 1984 and before they might have used beeswax on them rather than paraffin wax, despite what Cambridge was told when she wrote to them -
https://eley.co.uk/waxing-lyrical-about-22lr-lubricants-beeswax-or-paraffin-wax/
Everything MF said at trial is there to be challenged by the defence, he says you get visible residue on your hands from the loading procedure, they have lubricant on them and he even passed one to Drake to feel. All I’m saying, in my mind the shooter must have been wearing gloves? Drake even suggests that MFs hands were sticky from handling the bullets the day before, he says as seen, if one’s hands were sticky what we saw yesterday when Mr Fletcher was in the witness box.
-
Your arguments and accusations may wash on others Cutie, but may I add, even if I was a neutral I would take you on on your lies. I don’t believe in making things up for the sake of it!
It’s obvious it’s a recent rifle/scope/silencer, it’s obvious from gun experts, NGB and a guy who is in his 80s and been shooting all his life, It’s obvious when it’s said in Court that the bullets were greasy, yet you want to argue they wasn’t. All I want to know is why Sheila didn’t transfer this grease/lubricant onto the rifle, that’s all. My suggestion the shooter must have been wearing gloves?
In my view it would be very difficult to reload the magazine wearing gloves. The rounds are very small and have to be inserted individually in the magazine.
-
In my view it would be very difficult to reload the magazine wearing gloves. The rounds are very small and have to be inserted individually in the magazine.
I mean in the actual handling of the rifle NGB? Could he/she load the bullets by hand and then put gloves on to fire the shots leaving no residue on the rifle? It’s the only explanation I can think of? That means someone deliberately trying to hide their prints?
-
I agree, all the more reason to suspect transfer of lubricant to the fingers, she could even grasp them in the hand after lifting, she might have had quite a few in her hands at the same time, she would find them hard to load and slippery like APs wife did, meaning taking her time to load the Magazine?
Well, Sheila had all the time in the world to re-load after she had shot June, Nevill was lying against the Aga at this time,and the boys were still sleeping!
-
Doesn't matter if you're right-handed or even left-handed, but if you're cack-handed like Sheila was there is NO-WAY she would waste time and effort trying to load at least 15 more bullets (assuming it already contained 10) into a tiny .22 magazine. All this in the midst of a psychotic breakdown too! Far more realistic for her to grab hold of a sharp, pointed cook's knife from the kitchen drawer with which to stab her family to death.
You think Sheila would have opted for a knife to kill her family, Curiosity!
Thats a new suggestion!
-
Well, Sheila had all the time in the world to re-load after she had shot June, Nevill was lying against the Aga at this time,and the boys were still sleeping!
😂😂. Yes I forgot about Neville being unconscious for three hours. Doesn’t alter the fact she would have had sticky lubricant on her hands though Snow, unless she was wearing gloves.
-
😂😂. Yes I forgot about Neville being unconscious for three hours. Doesn’t alter the fact she would have had sticky lubricant on her hands though Snow, unless she was wearing gloves.
Again, she had plenty of time to wash them after the final re-load, HB!
Sheila couldn't very well write farewell letters with grease on her fingers!
-
How would you expect someone not used to loading Bullets in a magazine, to load them? APs wife found them slippery while trying to load them, and at trial it was stated that the bullets left a VISIBLE residue on the hands while loading the bullets from the lubricant on the Bullet . Cutie can argue all she wants, it doesn’t alter the fact that the bullets had a lubricant transferable substance to the hand. If it leaves a residue I would expect this residue to be transferred to the murder weapon?
What difference would it make whether someone was experienced in handling the cartridges or a novice? The cartridges are coated in a firm hydrocarbon to reduce residues. The hydrocabon is not only firm but clear unlike MF's trial testimony.
-
You never heard of Black Bees wax?
The cartridges were not coated in black bees wax as per the manufactureres technical data.
-
Eley are known or have been known to use both beeswax and paraffin wax for coating their many different rounds, so although Subsonics aren't mentioned here, in 1984 and before they might have used beeswax on them rather than paraffin wax, despite what Cambridge was told when she wrote to them -
https://eley.co.uk/waxing-lyrical-about-22lr-lubricants-beeswax-or-paraffin-wax/
The link you posted states otherwise.
-
Doesn't matter if you're right-handed or even left-handed, but if you're cack-handed like Sheila was there is NO-WAY she would waste time and effort trying to load at least 15 more bullets (assuming it already contained 10) into a tiny .22 magazine. All this in the midst of a psychotic breakdown too! Far more realistic for her to grab hold of a sharp, pointed cook's knife from the kitchen drawer with which to stab her family to death.
What evidence exists that SC was "cack-handed"? According to CAL she decorated/painted her flat. Her nails looked immaculate.
-
I mean in the actual handling of the rifle NGB? Could he/she load the bullets by hand and then put gloves on to fire the shots leaving no residue on the rifle? It’s the only explanation I can think of? That means someone deliberately trying to hide their prints?
Why don't you take yourself off to a gun shop and check it out for yourself. Loading the cartridges indoors will replicate the situation at WHF. If my experience is anything to go by you will find no noticeable residue.
-
I mean in the actual handling of the rifle NGB? Could he/she load the bullets by hand and then put gloves on to fire the shots leaving no residue on the rifle? It’s the only explanation I can think of? That means someone deliberately trying to hide their prints?
Well given the rifle contained one print from JB and one from SC what does that tell you?
72. The weapon was also examined for fingerprints. A print from the appellant's right forefinger was found on the breech end of the barrel, above the stock and pointing across the gun and Sheila Caffell's right ring fingerprint was found on the right side of the butt, pointing downwards. There were three further finger marks on the rifle, each of insufficient detail for identification purposes.
It tells me both handled the firearm extensively.
-
I mean in the actual handling of the rifle NGB? Could he/she load the bullets by hand and then put gloves on to fire the shots leaving no residue on the rifle? It’s the only explanation I can think of? That means someone deliberately trying to hide their prints?
It would be easy to fire the rifle wearing gloves, but it would be harder to reload it. I think it is not easy to detect prints on a firearm. Just because prints were not detected does not necessarily mean gloves were worn.
-
Why don't you take yourself off to a gun shop and check it out for yourself. Loading the cartridges indoors will replicate the situation at WHF. If my experience is anything to go by you will find no noticeable residue.
I don’t make things up Cutie, I go by evidence at trial? Was this challenged, if so what was said?
I’m not being awkward, it’s on here for all to see, Curiosity has already said, and I have read the same, Ely has two different coatings they used, one was Bees wax the other Parafin wax, the later I believe is not as greasy?
-
It would be easy to fire the rifle wearing gloves, but it would be harder to reload it. I think it is not easy to detect prints on a firearm. Just because prints were not detected does not necessarily mean gloves were worn.
Thanks NGB, I’m just going by the evidence at trial, I’m just surprised if it leaves residue on your hands, I would expect it to be transferable to the rifle, making it more noticeable. Yes I did know about prints not being easy to detect on firearms, that’s why I thought the wax/oil would help in that department?
-
Well given the rifle contained one print from JB and one from SC what does that tell you?
72. The weapon was also examined for fingerprints. A print from the appellant's right forefinger was found on the breech end of the barrel, above the stock and pointing across the gun and Sheila Caffell's right ring fingerprint was found on the right side of the butt, pointing downwards. There were three further finger marks on the rifle, each of insufficient detail for identification purposes.
It tells me both handled the firearm extensively.
I know how many prints was found on the rifle, this is why I think the shooter was wearing gloves, I would expect more from handling 25 greasy/oily/wax bullets?
-
I don’t make things up Cutie, I go by evidence at trial? Was this challenged, if so what was said?
I’m not being awkward, it’s on here for all to see, Curiosity has already said, and I have read the same, Ely has two different coatings they used, one was Bees wax the other Parafin wax, the later I believe is not as greasy?
But beeswax wasn't used on Eley subsonic. I have uploaded the technical data several times:
https://eley.co.uk/eley-subsonic-hollow/
"Non greasy all weather lubricant"
"Firm hydrocarbon lubricant to reduce residues"
"The round has a paraffin wax lubricant for smooth operation in semi-automatic rifles and improves functioning in all weather conditions".
If the magazine was full, SC only needed to load another 15 cartridges.
-
But beeswax wasn't used on Eley subsonic. I have uploaded the technical data several times:
https://eley.co.uk/eley-subsonic-hollow/
"Non greasy all weather lubricant"
"Firm hydrocarbon lubricant to reduce residues"
"The round has a paraffin wax lubricant for smooth operation in semi-automatic rifles and improves functioning in all weather conditions".
If the magazine was full, SC only needed to load another 15 cartridges.
That is now, not 39 years ago!
-
That is now, not 39 years ago!
Oh pleeze stop clutching at straws! I have it in writing that the manufacturing of the subsonic has never changed.
The info you uploaded describes the circumstances under which the two types of lubricant are used. Beeswax is used for pinpoint accuracy. Parrafin wax, firmer, is used for semi-autos where numerous rounds are discharged in quick succession which prevents the lubricant/parrafin wax, gunging up the mechanism.
-
That is now, not 39 years ago!
You can’t get it through to her, it was shown in Court as being sticky, greasy and leaves residues, but she’s a ammunition expert. Ely did use two lubricants, bees wax and parrafin wax,
https://eley.co.uk/waxing-lyrical-about-22lr-lubricants-beeswax-or-paraffin-wax/
-
Oh pleeze stop clutching at straws! I have it in writing that the manufacturing of the subsonic has never changed.
The info you uploaded describes the circumstances under which the two types of lubricant are used. Beeswax is used for pinpoint accuracy. Parrafin wax, firmer, is used for semi-autos where numerous rounds are discharged in quick succession which prevents the lubricant/parrafin wax, gunging up the mechanism.
No one is clutching at straws, YOU wasn’t at trial and seen the evidence presented, all I’m saying in my mind the shooter must have been wearing gloves, prove I’m wrong.
-
But beeswax wasn't used on Eley subsonic. I have uploaded the technical data several times:
https://eley.co.uk/eley-subsonic-hollow/
"Non greasy all weather lubricant"
"Firm hydrocarbon lubricant to reduce residues"
"The round has a paraffin wax lubricant for smooth operation in semi-automatic rifles and improves functioning in all weather conditions".
If the magazine was full, SC only needed to load another 15 cartridges.
22 subsonics have always been similar in the past; below the speed of sound and offered as a hollow point for pest control.
This is designed to give subsonic velocities that function in semi-automatic and other action-types reliability and accurately. Eley state that it’s a 40-grain bullet of round nose design and has a velocity of 1090 fps and 106 ft/lbs energy.
It uses a 40-grain, round-nosed bullet design that has a beeswax/tallow lubricant for reliable feeding through a magazine and when chambering.
-
You can’t get it through to her, it was shown in Court as being sticky, greasy and leaves residues, but she’s a ammunition expert. Ely did use two lubricants, bees wax and parrafin wax,
https://eley.co.uk/waxing-lyrical-about-22lr-lubricants-beeswax-or-paraffin-wax/
I have never claimed to be an expert but I did take it upon myself to visit a gun shop to check it out for myself. I then spoke with Eley and received an email confirming the manufacturing of the range had never changed.
-
I have never claimed to be an expert but I did take it upon myself to visit a gun shop to check it out for myself. I then spoke with Eley and received an email confirming the manufacturing of the range had never changed.
Specs:
Bullet weight: 40 grains
Velocity: 1085 fps
Lubricant: Beeswax / Tallow
Profile: Flat Nose
-
22 subsonics have always been similar in the past; below the speed of sound and offered as a hollow point for pest control.
This is designed to give subsonic velocities that function in semi-automatic and other action-types reliability and accurately. Eley state that it’s a 40-grain bullet of round nose design and has a velocity of 1090 fps and 106 ft/lbs energy.
It uses a 40-grain, round-nosed bullet design that has a beeswax/tallow lubricant for reliable feeding through a magazine and when chambering.
You are quoting for two different cartridges. The cartridges used at WHF were hollow point not round-nosed.
As I have said many times you either suffer profound learning difficulties or you are taking the p*$$.
-
Specs:
Bullet weight: 40 grains
Velocity: 1085 fps
Lubricant: Beeswax / Tallow
Profile:Flat Nose
Ahhh now they're flat nosed?
You have uploaded free text quoting hollow point, round nosed and flat nosed.
The ammo used in this case was hollow point.
You are a p*$$ taker.
-
Was the Sticky, transparent lubricant challenged at Trial?
I’m not accusing either Jeremy or Sheila being the shooter, all I’m suggesting the Shooter must have worn gloves when handling the rifle? Especially while using it as a club to attack someone. The normal grip position would change.
-
Ahhh now they're flat nosed?
You have uploaded free text quoting hollow point, round nosed and flat nosed.
The ammo used in this case was hollow point.
You are a p*$$ taker.
No I’m pointing out they used Bees wax that's all.
-
No I’m pointing out they used Bees wax that's all.
The Expert at trial offered the bullets to the Judge and jury to feel the lubricant if he was lying it would have been obvious to them. The judge backed him up the next day when he reminded everyone.