Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on August 13, 2013, 09:49:PM
-
Marks made a month later, to frame Jeremy Bamber...
-
I pose the following series of questions for consideration and debate:-
-
I pose the following series of questions for consideration and debate:-
(1) - did the struggle next to the aga surround, take place before Ralph was shot, or afterward?
(2) - why is there an absence of any blood, on the aga surround, on the blue and white jacket, or on the carpet directly beneath the aga where the scratch mark was supposedly made?
-
(1) - did the struggle next to the aga surround, take place before Ralph was shot, or afterward?
(2) - why is there an absence of any blood, on the aga surround, on the blue and white jacket, or on the carpet directly beneath the aga where the scratch mark was supposedly made?
If Ralph had already been shot four times before the struggle in front of the aga surround, his blood would have been everywhere...
-
Lack of any of Ralphs blood, on any part of the aga surround, upon the carpet, or upon the blue and white striped jacket which covers that part of the underside of the aga surround, or on the carpet directly in front of the damaged aga, helps to establish that no such struggle took place near the aga involving Ralph and his killer...
-
Mr Sutherst mentions that there were no scratches on the aga on the morning of 7th August 1985, and that these did not materialize until about a month later, and that there were no fragments of red paint on the carpet, in the 7th August 1985, photographs...
But did he examine photographs taken on 12th September 1985, to see if corresponding red paint samples were present on the kitchen carpet at that vital stage?
-
It's only a matter of time, before everything falls into place...
-
Lets start by looking at the 12th September 1985, photographs, to see if there are any fresh paint fragments on the carpet beneath the aga surround...
Eureka...
-
Lack of any of Ralphs blood, on any part of the aga surround, upon the carpet, or upon the blue and white striped jacket which covers that part of the underside of the aga surround, or on the carpet directly in front of the damaged aga, helps to establish that no such struggle took place near the aga involving Ralph and his killer...
I agree with this and have said the same many times. It simply does not make sense that the so called scratch marks were made by the end of the silencer because this means there was a struggle in front of the Aga and yet like you say there is no trace evidence and we know that NB had already sustained at least 4 shots and must have been bleeding profusely at this stage, yet there is no or little blood to confirm what the CPS presented in court....Surely people must see this and think this is not right. ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
I agree with this and have said the same many times. It simply does not make sense that the so called scratch marks were made by the end of the silencer because this means there was a struggle in front of the Aga and yet like you say there is no trace evidence and we know that NB had already sustained at least 4 shots and must have been bleeding profusely at this stage, yet there is no or little blood to confirm what the CPS presented in court....Surely people must see this and think this is not right. ;D ;D ;D ;D
It is true Patti, the 'fight in the kitchen' appears to be one of those myths which has grown up around the case. There is no evidence to support such a fight ever took place.
-
It is true Patti, the 'fight in the kitchen' appears to be one of those myths which has grown up around the case. There is no evidence to support such a fight ever took place.
Hi Maggi...If you hit someone over the head the implement that has been used carries spatter and that spatter would leave a trace and there is none...I have looked at the floor and all I can see is droplets which are not elongated, which suggests that the person they dropped from was stationary at the time and, certainly not made with any implement that was used in the way it has been suggested....I honestly think that more tests could still be done regarding the blood spatter that are on the crime scene photographs....it makes perfect sense to do this...imo... ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
I agree!! Also if Neville was hit with the rifle, his blood and hair would have been found on it!!
-
Hi Maggi...If you hit someone over the head the implement that has been used carries spatter and that spatter would leave a trace and there is none...I have looked at the floor and all I can see is droplets which are not elongated, which suggests that the person they dropped from was stationary at the time and, certainly not made with any implement that was used in the way it has been suggested....I honestly think that more tests could still be done regarding the blood spatter that are on the crime scene photographs....it makes perfect sense to do this...imo... ;D ;D ;D ;D
I agree Patti and I believe Neville was far too badly injured by that time to struggle much with anyone, the damage had been done by then imo.
-
I agree!! Also if Neville was hit with the rifle, his blood and hair would have been found on it!!
That is very true Caroline. There has never been a mention of anything found on it to point to what it was used for.
-
I agree!! Also if Neville was hit with the rifle, his blood and hair would have been found on it!!
That's a good point...there would have been blood group O on the rifle....so many opportunities missed to gather the correct evidence then they destroy the bit they had in 1996 just when before the breakthrough of DNA to me this is gross misconduct...in the USA it would be regarded as negligent.... ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Also if you look the tea towels are perfectly folded in front of the Aga, they are not even disturbed.... ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Also if you look the tea towels are perfectly folded in front of the Aga, they are not even disturbed.... ;D ;D ;D ;D
Personally, I don't think there was any such struggle, I think once Neville had been shot twice in the arm sadly, he wouldn't have needed to be over-powered.
-
I don't think it was confirmed that Neville was struck on the head with the rifle. The head wounds were described as being caused by a "linear" object. Was it the prosecution that suggested a poker? Surely they must have forensically tested the poker...then again probably not!
-
I don't think it was confirmed that Neville was struck on the head with the rifle. The head wounds were described as being caused by a "linear" object. Was it the prosecution that suggested a poker? Surely they must have forensically tested the poker...then again probably not!
No, I know it was never confirmed but it is 'bandied' about here from time to time. The same would be true of the poker if that had been used (or any other object).
-
The similarities of "finger nail " grab marks on both June and Neville. Can only be made with longer nails.
Nails which were never examined ( scrapings from underneath )
-
The similarities of "finger nail " grab marks on both June and Neville. Can only be made with longer nails.
Nails which were never examined ( scrapings from underneath )
Hi lookout, didn't Sheila have these marks on her arms as well? This has always puzzled me. ::)
-
Hi lookout, didn't Sheila have these marks on her arms as well? This has always puzzled me. ::)
Maggie,,they may have been self-inflicted as she was a self-harmer. Then again,it could have been June making a grab for the rifle ( dependent on the circumference of the marks,i.e. feminine/masculine )
-
The photos at the beginning of this thread are intriguing as I cannot see any marks on the Aga and yet Sutherst (the photographic expert) was unable to confirm this point with the CCRC.
As I’ve stated before the marks are either there or not – surely an “expert” can determine this with some certainty.
Has Sutherst given up on this point?
If the expert gives up what chance has a mere poster with Forum pictures got?
-
The photos at the beginning of this thread are intriguing as I cannot see any marks on the Aga and yet Sutherst (the photographic expert) was unable to confirm this point with the CCRC.
As I’ve stated before the marks are either there or not – surely an “expert” can determine this with some certainty.
Has Sutherst given up on this point?
If the expert gives up what chance has a mere poster with Forum pictures got?
Thanks for that Nickos. I can't see any marks on the Aga, either :)
-
Correct me if I have got this wrapped round my neck, but I eventually came to realise that the said marks had been gouged, out of sight, to the underside of the wooden surround to the fireplace.
-
This is what everyone should be focusing upon - the casts made of the marks and scratches (ND/48 and ND/49) found on the aga surround by DS Davidson on 1st October 1985:-
-
Marks and scratches were located on a part of the kitchen aga behind where the blue and white jacket is hanging...
-
Mr Sutherst mentions that there were no scratches on the aga on the morning of 7th August 1985, and that these did not materialize until about a month later, and that there were no fragments of red paint on the carpet, in the 7th August 1985, photographs...
But did he examine photographs taken on 12th September 1985, to see if corresponding red paint samples were present on the kitchen carpet at that vital stage?
The problem is Sutherst got battered. For whatever reason. They should have got another expert in to review his findings and claims.
-
Marks and scratches were located on a part of the kitchen aga behind where the blue and white jacket is hanging...
Yet, the blue and white striped jacket which can clearly be seen to be hanging there, was not even made into an exhibit. But it was arguably a very significant piece of evidence, since as it were, it served to protect the very area where marks and scratches later became photographed (12th September 1985). With this in mind, I would like to invite you all to look at that part of the blue and white striped jacket which is hanging below the level of the mantlepiece shelf, I would like to suggest to you all that the overlapping part of the jacket, is either slightly greater than the distance beneath the mantlepiece, so that anything coming into contact with the underside of the mantlepiece on that part of the aga, would also have come into direct contact with the jacket, thus lifting it up against the underside of the shelf, and preventing the sort of gouge mark shown in the image being made there, without also damaging the material of the jacket in question. Basically, what I am trying to say is that you might not only get one gouging on the underside of the shelf, you would also get some damage to the material of the jacket which was covering that particular part of the aga at the time of the shootings...
No such damage exists on the material of the jacket, and no fibers from the said jacket were found to embedded into the gouge and scratches - this gives a good indication that the story about the silencer being fitted to the guns barrel at the time of a purported struggle between Ralph and his killer is probably bogus...
-
Yet, the blue and white striped jacket which can clearly be seen to be hanging there, was not even made into an exhibit. But it was arguably a very significant piece of evidence, since as it were, it served to protect the very area where marks and scratches later became photographed (12th September 1985). With this in mind, I would like to invite you all to look at that part of the blue and white striped jacket which is hanging below the level of the mantlepiece shelf, I would like to suggest to you all that the overlapping part of the jacket, is either slightly greater than the distance beneath the mantlepiece, so that anything coming into contact with the underside of the mantlepiece on that part of the aga, would also have come into direct contact with the jacket, thus lifting it up against the underside of the shelf, and preventing the sort of gouge mark shown in the image being made there, without also damaging the material of the jacket in question. Basically, what I am trying to say is that you might not only get one gouging on the underside of the shelf, you would also get some damage to the material of the jacket which was covering that particular part of the aga at the time of the shootings...
No such damage exists on the material of the jacket, and no fibers from the said jacket were found to embedded into the gouge and scratches - this gives a good indication that the story about the silencer being fitted to the guns barrel at the time of a purported struggle between Ralph and his killer is probably bogus...
[/quote
This area was most likely chosen for the very fact that the jacket was hanging there in the first place!! Another 'convenient' piece of evidence!!
-
What is interesting, regarding the detail recorded in the above diagram, is that DS Davidson took these two cast impressions (ND,48 and ND/49) on 1st October 1985, and that he identified regular scratches in these - consistent with the pattern of the rifles metal end cap that normally screws onto the end of the threaded barrel. With this in mind, I would like you all to consider what DS Davidson said to the COLP investigators in 1991 / 92 - when he was being questioned by COLP about the existence of a paint sample bearing the identifying mark RC/1 which came into existence on 8th August 1985, Davidson told colp THAT THE REASON that paint sample (RC/1) was taken on 8th August 1985, was because some paint had been found on the end of a guns barrel, downstairs. He reiterated to COLP that he was not talking about paint being found on the end of a silencer, he was specific, he told them he was referring to paint found on the end of a guns barrell...
It becomes clear to me, that the marks of which DS Davidson made casts, had been made by the end of a guns barrel, not by a silencer, and more importantly, the gun barrel which made those marks, could have been made anytime before the day of the shootings...
I have no doubt at all in my mind, that additional marks were made on the aga surround by use of a silencer, or two, or three, which would explain why ingrained paint was found in the knurl of one or other of the silencers...
-
Since, DS Davidson identified to the COLP investigators in 1992, that paint had been found on the end of a guns barrell (downstairs), it is imperative that every effort is made to compel Essex police to reveal all information about this / that gun, since it is almost cetain that any marks present on the aga surround on the morning of 7th August 1985, were caused by the end of a guns barrell coming into contact there, but not necessarily during the shootings...
-
The regulated marks found within the indentation of the gouge, by DS Davidson, on 1st October 1985, could have been made by the end of a guns barrel, not a silencer, but a rifles metal end cap, or even the thread on the end of a guns barrel = for these reasons, the casts of the gouge which were taken at the scene by DS Davidson, need to be examined and looked at scientifically to see if it is possible to resolve this matter, one way or another...
Additionally, the gun with paint found on the end of its barrel, as alluded to by DS Davidson in his COLP interview (1992), needs to be identified as a matter of urgency, and the barrel of that gun forensically examined with a view to linking it to the gouge mark under the aga mantlepiece, and the casts of that gouge made by Davidson on 1st October 1985...
-
Seize the casts made by DS Davidson, and get them examined by an expert, with a view to identifying the item which made the gouge beneath the aga shelf...
-
Since, DS Davidson identified to the COLP investigators in 1992, that paint had been found on the end of a guns barrell (downstairs), it is imperative that every effort is made to compel Essex police to reveal all information about this / that gun, since it is almost cetain that any marks present on the aga surround on the morning of 7th August 1985, were caused by the end of a guns barrell coming into contact there, but not necessarily during the shootings...
Yes,the end of a guns barrell and NOT a silencer.He was very specific about that wasn't he. From his COLP evidence it appeared that he wasn't 'in' on the bogus paint 'evidence'. He admitted that it was dealt with by 'dodgy' Cook!
-
Seize the gun which had paint on the end of its barrel, and check to see if the paint found there was from the red painted aga surround...
-
Yes,the end of a guns barrell and NOT a silencer.He was very specific about that wasn't he. From his COLP evidence it appeared that he wasn't 'in' on the bogus paint 'evidence'. He admitted that it was dealt with by 'dodgy' Cook!
Yes, I agree...
-
Later today, I am visiting Full Sutton...
I will update everyone later...
-
Later today, I am visiting Full Sutton...
I will update everyone later...
Hi Mike,,we all send our good wishes to Jeremy and are with him in thought every step of the way.
Looking forward to what you have to say later. Take care.
Hope your wife is progressing nicely.
-
Thankyou Mike for clarifying for u s plebs, the positioning of the scratch marks under the mantle of the surround to the Aga.
May I put in my "pennorth" re the suspended striped Blazer(possibly June's?)? It is likely that it was hanging from the wooden barred airer, which was hanging down from the kitchen ceiling. Ergo an optical illusion that it was adjacent to the mantelpiece.
I shall desist on commenting on your visit today, but obviously most of us are agog, just to say "all power to your elbow".
Ditto as per very appropriate wishes from lookout!
-
Yet, the blue and white striped jacket which can clearly be seen to be hanging there, was not even made into an exhibit. But it was arguably a very significant piece of evidence, since as it were, it served to protect the very area where marks and scratches later became photographed (12th September 1985). With this in mind, I would like to invite you all to look at that part of the blue and white striped jacket which is hanging below the level of the mantlepiece shelf, I would like to suggest to you all that the overlapping part of the jacket, is either slightly greater than the distance beneath the mantlepiece, so that anything coming into contact with the underside of the mantlepiece on that part of the aga, would also have come into direct contact with the jacket, thus lifting it up against the underside of the shelf, and preventing the sort of gouge mark shown in the image being made there, without also damaging the material of the jacket in question. Basically, what I am trying to say is that you might not only get one gouging on the underside of the shelf, you would also get some damage to the material of the jacket which was covering that particular part of the aga at the time of the shootings...
No such damage exists on the material of the jacket, and no fibers from the said jacket were found to embedded into the gouge and scratches - this gives a good indication that the story about the silencer being fitted to the guns barrel at the time of a purported struggle between Ralph and his killer is probably bogus...
..the said item of apparel could have been placed there by Jeremy after the scratches were made in the hope that they would be concealed in the process.
-
You don't give up,do you,Steve. ::) ?
Why would Jeremy have been bothered about replacing items of clothing.? If it was made to look like a break-in,you don't start tidying up.
-
..the said item of apparel could have been placed there by Jeremy after the scratches were made in the hope that they would be concealed in the process.
Yes Steve, and I guess it may STILL be possible that the moon is made of cheese, which I actually find easier to understand than why a person of your obvious intelligence should wish to be seen as, now, now April, a little circumspection, if you please.....................a person who comes up with some unlikely/improbable/unworkable/and often VERY SILLY theories.
-
You don't give up,do you,Steve. ::) ?
Why would Jeremy have been bothered about replacing items of clothing.? If it was made to look like a break-in,you don't start tidying up.
But all witnesses to the state of the house the preceding evening had been slain,and who mentioned a break-in..Jeremy just had to make it look like Sheila had done it.
-
Police asked thhe housekeeper if anything was out of place. She only mentioned the items around the sink area,which it later emerged the police had moved whilst clearing up!
-
..the said item of apparel could have been placed there by Jeremy after the scratches were made in the hope that they would be concealed in the process.
So he notices the scratches 'under' the mantel but not the wealth of forensic evidence that covers the moderator? Of course he'd never think that the police might actually 'move' the jacket during their search? ::) ::) ::) ::)