Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on March 07, 2011, 09:37:PM
-
Ballistics could not tell if bullets fired through Silencer?
Blood found in silencer is what enabled Ballistic expert / blood expert, to conclude silencer must have been fitted to the guns barrel at the time Sheila was shot and killed...
-
Non fatal wound - within 3inches +SM
-
Because silencer was held within 3 inches, you should expect to have found more blood on the outside of the silencer that belonged exclusively to Sheila Caffell, yet none was found there at all...
-
It is possible to tell or to establish whether a bullet has been fired through a silencer, by scientific means, but in this case, the ballistic expert concluded that he was unable to establish if any of the twenty five bullets had been fired through the sound moderator (silencer)...
-
Non fatal wound - within 3inches +SM
... There should have been Shiela's blood on the outside of the silencer if it was not a contact wound - but none of Shiela's blood was found on the outside of the silencer...
-
Non fatal wound - within 3inches +SM
... There should have been Shiela's blood on the outside of the silencer if it was not a contact wound - but none of Shiela's blood was found on the outside of the silencer...
There was blood on the outside of the silencer, but it was an insufficient quantity for them to know who it came from. Didn't David Boutflour scrape some off - or attempt to?
-
I think it's a very reasonable assumption that IF JB did it, he'd have attempted to clean the silencer. Perhaps badly, hurriedly and in poor light (possibly), but I can't believe he'd make NO attempt at all.
-
I think it's a very reasonable assumption that IF JB did it, he'd have attempted to clean the silencer. Perhaps badly, hurriedly and in poor light (possibly), but I can't believe he'd make NO attempt at all.
Yes, and that's one of the sticking points for me re his guilt. After having gone to all that trouble to murder his entire family and cover his tracks, I would have thought he would make some attempt to clean the outside of the silencer, or take it away with him and risk someone asking where it was.
-
I think it's a very reasonable assumption that IF JB did it, he'd have attempted to clean the silencer. Perhaps badly, hurriedly and in poor light (possibly), but I can't believe he'd make NO attempt at all.
Yes, and that's one of the sticking points for me re his guilt. After having gone to all that trouble to murder his entire family and cover his tracks, I would have thought he would make some attempt to clean the outside of the silencer, or take it away with him and risk someone asking where it was.
The cleaning I've put down to him not being 'perfect'.
As to taking the silencer, or leaving it - there are pros and cons for both choices. If he takes it and is caught with it - it's going to take some explaining. What if it's found n the hedges etc? What if it's discovered MISSING from the house? or ballistics deduce a silencer was used, but it's nowhere to be found? - it's murder for sure then.
So if it he leaves it at the house - what's the best plan? I'd have THOUGHT it best to leave by the side of sheila (to make it look like she used, it, then took it off to shoot herself). If he puts it in a drawer, then it just doesn't make a lot of sense since makes sheila look less likely to kill herself, and if the police DO discover a silencer was used, they'll look for it.
Of course he may just have been a wild 25 year old kid who thought out his plan fairly well, but not well enough, did the deed, put the silencer back in the box as though it had never been used. Tried to clean it up, thought he'd done a good job, and assumed nobody would look that closely anyway, since it was suicide.
He wasn't a professional assassin that's for sure. So I think we just have to be careful of thinking of him as a mastermind (IF he did it at all). If he did do it, I think he got very lucky with regard to much stuff, but then very unlucky too if the only real reason he got caught was because the family suspected him and his girlfriend spilled the beans.
As far as I know, there's no evidence that the silencer was ever used (other than the circumstantial evidence of blood on and inside it). It's not like the fatal bullet inside sheila was proven to have travelled through that silencer first and thus categorically prove it was murder.
-
No, he wasn't a professional assassin but we're supposed to believe that he didn't hesitate to shoot his entire family for money, including two children and his own parents. That would take nerves of steel surely.
There was blood visible to the naked eye on the silencer - David Boutflour spotted it at once. Surely it can't even have received a cursory wipe just to make sure there was no blood on it.
-
Non fatal wound - within 3inches +SM
... There should have been Shiela's blood on the outside of the silencer if it was not a contact wound - but none of Shiela's blood was found on the outside of the silencer...
There was blood on the outside of the silencer, but it was an insufficient quantity for them to know who it came from. Didn't David Boutflour scrape some off - or attempt to?
... It wasn't Shiela's blood...
-
Non fatal wound - within 3inches +SM
... There should have been Shiela's blood on the outside of the silencer if it was not a contact wound - but none of Shiela's blood was found on the outside of the silencer...
There was blood on the outside of the silencer, but it was an insufficient quantity for them to know who it came from. Didn't David Boutflour scrape some off - or attempt to?
... It wasn't Shiela's blood...
How do you know that? It says in the appeal document they couldn't tell whose blood it was.
-
Were there were other contact wounds on some of the other victims?
-
Were there were other contact wounds on some of the other victims?
There was a possibility that there was a contact shot to June, and the shots to Nicholas were contact shots or close.
-
Were there were other contact wounds on some of the other victims?
There was a possibility that there was a contact shot to June, and the shots to Nicholas were contact shots or close.
So would you not expect to find blood from Sheila, Nicholas and possibly June either in/on the barrel or in/on the moderator?
-
I think it's a very reasonable assumption that IF JB did it, he'd have attempted to clean the silencer. Perhaps badly, hurriedly and in poor light (possibly), but I can't believe he'd make NO attempt at all.
... None of Shiela's blood on the silencer, and non of her DNA...
-
I think it's a very reasonable assumption that IF JB did it, he'd have attempted to clean the silencer. Perhaps badly, hurriedly and in poor light (possibly), but I can't believe he'd make NO attempt at all.
... None of Shiela's blood on the silencer, and non of her DNA...
This is from the 2002 Appeal Judgement:
75. Traces of blood in the form of smears were found in three places on the outside of the moderator: on the flat surface at the muzzle end, in the knurled end and in the ridge at the gun end of the device. The blood on the outside of the moderator was confirmed to be of human origin but there were insufficient quantities to permit grouping analysis.
76. Inside the moderator, on the four or five baffles nearest to the end from which the bullet would exit, there was a considerable amount of blood. At one point blood had pooled to form a flake when it dried, and this flake was subjected to group testing. Results were obtained for four of the five tests performed. Mr Hayward, the forensic scientist said that they showed that the blood could have come from Sheila Caffell but not from any of the other individuals involved. Mr. Hayward said that there was a possibility that the blood could be a mixture of blood from more than one person and if it was, a mixture of blood from Nevill Bamber and June Bamber could account for the findings in the grouping tests. However he judged that possibility to be a “remote” one.
-
Were there were other contact wounds on some of the other victims?
There was a possibility that there was a contact shot to June, and the shots to Nicholas were contact shots or close.
So would you not expect to find blood from Sheila, Nicholas and possibly June either in/on the barrel or in/on the moderator?
I have no idea. They did find June's DNA in the silencer, so that could have been from blood. They also found DNA from a male person.
I'm just saying that they couldn't tell at the time whose blood it was on the outside of the silencer. It could have been Nevill's if he was struck with the gun.
-
Were there were other contact wounds on some of the other victims?
There was a possibility that there was a contact shot to June, and the shots to Nicholas were contact shots or close.
So would you not expect to find blood from Sheila, Nicholas and possibly June either in/on the barrel or in/on the moderator?
I have no idea. They did find June's DNA in the silencer, so that could have been from blood. They also found DNA from a male person.
I'm just saying that they couldn't tell at the time whose blood it was on the outside of the silencer. It could have been Nevill's if he was struck with the gun.
They didn't categorically say it was June's DNA (from memory) but it was about 1 in 3000 chance of it not being her (they had to match against her sister) which isn't ideal, since in theory her sister could have a 100% difference in genes, or even a 100% match, but on 'average' - 50% matching genes
-
Were there were other contact wounds on some of the other victims?
There was a possibility that there was a contact shot to June, and the shots to Nicholas were contact shots or close.
So would you not expect to find blood from Sheila, Nicholas and possibly June either in/on the barrel or in/on the moderator?
I have no idea. They did find June's DNA in the silencer, so that could have been from blood. They also found DNA from a male person.
I'm just saying that they couldn't tell at the time whose blood it was on the outside of the silencer. It could have been Nevill's if he was struck with the gun.
They didn't categorically say it was June's DNA (from memory) but it was about 1 in 3000 chance of it not being her (they had to match against her sister) which isn't ideal, since in theory her sister could have a 100% difference in genes, or even a 100% match, but on 'average' - 50% matching genes
True. It wasn't for sure, but the appeal judges accepted it was June's DNA. They had to really as the police had managed to destroy the blood evidence so they had to give Jeremy the benefit of the doubt.
-
Were there were other contact wounds on some of the other victims?
There was a possibility that there was a contact shot to June, and the shots to Nicholas were contact shots or close.
So would you not expect to find blood from Sheila, Nicholas and possibly June either in/on the barrel or in/on the moderator?
I have no idea. They did find June's DNA in the silencer, so that could have been from blood. They also found DNA from a male person.
I'm just saying that they couldn't tell at the time whose blood it was on the outside of the silencer. It could have been Nevill's if he was struck with the gun.
They didn't categorically say it was June's DNA (from memory) but it was about 1 in 3000 chance of it not being her (they had to match against her sister) which isn't ideal, since in theory her sister could have a 100% difference in genes, or even a 100% match, but on 'average' - 50% matching genes
... But they eliminated any lingering doubts that the DNA could have been Shiela's...
-
Were there were other contact wounds on some of the other victims?
There was a possibility that there was a contact shot to June, and the shots to Nicholas were contact shots or close.
So would you not expect to find blood from Sheila, Nicholas and possibly June either in/on the barrel or in/on the moderator?
I have no idea. They did find June's DNA in the silencer, so that could have been from blood. They also found DNA from a male person.
I'm just saying that they couldn't tell at the time whose blood it was on the outside of the silencer. It could have been Nevill's if he was struck with the gun.
They didn't categorically say it was June's DNA (from memory) but it was about 1 in 3000 chance of it not being her (they had to match against her sister) which isn't ideal, since in theory her sister could have a 100% difference in genes, or even a 100% match, but on 'average' - 50% matching genes
... But they eliminated any lingering doubts that the DNA could have been Shiela's...
They did at first, but then one of them said her DNA was maybe found in the silencer after all when more tests were done. Bit confusing to be honest.
-
Were there were other contact wounds on some of the other victims?
There was a possibility that there was a contact shot to June, and the shots to Nicholas were contact shots or close.
So would you not expect to find blood from Sheila, Nicholas and possibly June either in/on the barrel or in/on the moderator?
I have no idea. They did find June's DNA in the silencer, so that could have been from blood. They also found DNA from a male person.
I'm just saying that they couldn't tell at the time whose blood it was on the outside of the silencer. It could have been Nevill's if he was struck with the gun.
They didn't categorically say it was June's DNA (from memory) but it was about 1 in 3000 chance of it not being her (they had to match against her sister) which isn't ideal, since in theory her sister could have a 100% difference in genes, or even a 100% match, but on 'average' - 50% matching genes
... But they eliminated any lingering doubts that the DNA could have been Shiela's...
They did at first, but then one of them said her DNA was maybe found in the silencer after all when more tests were done. Bit confusing to be honest.
------------------
No, Sheila's DNA was not found inside the silencer, on any baffle plate where any blood was / may have previously been seen / found. I strongly dispute such a suggestion, because that is not strictly true...
Lets get the facts right, so that there can be no mistake about this point - some DNA was found to be present upon the inverted thread, inside the silencer that screws onto the external thread of a guns barrel. How it got there has never official been discussed or explained, but it seems odds on, that it got there purely by accidental or innocent contamination - when the police were moving the guns barrel around upon Sheila's neck / throat, which was the very occasion that Sheila's DNA was put onto the end of the barrel of that gun...
You then have various police officers screwing the silencer onto the end of the guns barrel, (PC Whidon, and DI Cook) before the silencer was even sent to the Lab', on 30th August 1985, brought about because Sheila's DNA that was present on the external thread on the end of the guns barrel, was fitted internally to the silencer, by screwing the threads of both together in an airtight fashion, which forced Sheila's DNA by dynamic process, into the silencer where it was eventually found in and by 2002...
There is nothing difficult in trying to fathom out how Sheila's DNA got into the silencer, since it was not discovered there in that part of the silencer until 2002, long after the silencer was put at risk of contamination by the police, and the ballistics expert, Fletcher, and others...
in my opinion...
-
No, Sheila's DNA was not found inside the silencer, on any baffle plate where any blood was / may have previously been seen / found. I strongly dispute such a suggestion, because that is not strictly true...
Lets get the facts right, so that there can be no mistake about this point - some DNA was found to be present upon the inverted thread, inside the silencer that screws onto the external thread of a guns barrel. How it got there has never official been discussed or explained, but it seems odds on, that it got there purely by accidental or innocent contamination - when the police were moving the guns barrel around upon Sheila's neck / throat, which was the very occasion that Sheila's DNA was put onto the end of the barrel of that gun...
You then have various police officers screwing the silencer onto the end of the guns barrel, (PC Whidon, and DI Cook) before the silencer was even sent to the Lab', on 30th August 1985, brought about because Sheila's DNA that was present on the external thread on the end of the guns barrel, was fitted internally to the silencer, by screwing the threads of both together in an airtight fashion, which forced Sheila's DNA by dynamic process, into the silencer where it was eventually found in and by 2002...
There is nothing difficult in trying to fathom out how Sheila's DNA got into the silencer, since it was not discovered there in that part of the silencer until 2002, long after the silencer was put at risk of contamination by the police, and the ballistics expert, Fletcher, and others...
in my opinion...
One of the prosecution experts said that in her opinion Sheila's DNA was in the silencer.
Anyhow, the appeal judges conceded that it was not possible to conclude if it was in there or not. It seems to me that the appeal judges rejected that ground because a lot of the blood from the silencer was no longer available - that was hardly Jeremy's fault.
At the trial it was conceded that the blood in the silencer could be a mixture of June and Nevill's. Did they test the blood grouping of Nicholas Caffell? As the shots to his head were contact ones or very close, one might expect his blood to be in the silencer rather than Nevill's.
-
No, Sheila's DNA was not found inside the silencer, on any baffle plate where any blood was / may have previously been seen / found. I strongly dispute such a suggestion, because that is not strictly true...
Lets get the facts right, so that there can be no mistake about this point - some DNA was found to be present upon the inverted thread, inside the silencer that screws onto the external thread of a guns barrel. How it got there has never official been discussed or explained, but it seems odds on, that it got there purely by accidental or innocent contamination - when the police were moving the guns barrel around upon Sheila's neck / throat, which was the very occasion that Sheila's DNA was put onto the end of the barrel of that gun...
You then have various police officers screwing the silencer onto the end of the guns barrel, (PC Whidon, and DI Cook) before the silencer was even sent to the Lab', on 30th August 1985, brought about because Sheila's DNA that was present on the external thread on the end of the guns barrel, was fitted internally to the silencer, by screwing the threads of both together in an airtight fashion, which forced Sheila's DNA by dynamic process, into the silencer where it was eventually found in and by 2002...
There is nothing difficult in trying to fathom out how Sheila's DNA got into the silencer, since it was not discovered there in that part of the silencer until 2002, long after the silencer was put at risk of contamination by the police, and the ballistics expert, Fletcher, and others...
in my opinion...
One of the prosecution experts said that in her opinion Sheila's DNA was in the silencer.
Anyhow, the appeal judges conceded that it was not possible to conclude if it was in there or not. It seems to me that the appeal judges rejected that ground because a lot of the blood from the silencer was no longer available - that was hardly Jeremy's fault.
At the trial it was conceded that the blood in the silencer could be a mixture of June and Nevill's. Did they test the blood grouping of Nicholas Caffell? As the shots to his head were contact ones or very close, one might expect his blood to be in the silencer rather than Nevill's.
-------------------------------
Sheila's DNA was only found inside the internal thread that screws onto the external thread on the rifles barrel...
Once jury sent note to judge, blood evidence was presented differently to that given to the court beforehand - whic effectively changed the course of the trial...
In my opinion...
-
No, Sheila's DNA was not found inside the silencer, on any baffle plate where any blood was / may have previously been seen / found. I strongly dispute such a suggestion, because that is not strictly true...
Lets get the facts right, so that there can be no mistake about this point - some DNA was found to be present upon the inverted thread, inside the silencer that screws onto the external thread of a guns barrel. How it got there has never official been discussed or explained, but it seems odds on, that it got there purely by accidental or innocent contamination - when the police were moving the guns barrel around upon Sheila's neck / throat, which was the very occasion that Sheila's DNA was put onto the end of the barrel of that gun...
You then have various police officers screwing the silencer onto the end of the guns barrel, (PC Whidon, and DI Cook) before the silencer was even sent to the Lab', on 30th August 1985, brought about because Sheila's DNA that was present on the external thread on the end of the guns barrel, was fitted internally to the silencer, by screwing the threads of both together in an airtight fashion, which forced Sheila's DNA by dynamic process, into the silencer where it was eventually found in and by 2002...
There is nothing difficult in trying to fathom out how Sheila's DNA got into the silencer, since it was not discovered there in that part of the silencer until 2002, long after the silencer was put at risk of contamination by the police, and the ballistics expert, Fletcher, and others...
in my opinion...
One of the prosecution experts said that in her opinion Sheila's DNA was in the silencer.
Anyhow, the appeal judges conceded that it was not possible to conclude if it was in there or not. It seems to me that the appeal judges rejected that ground because a lot of the blood from the silencer was no longer available - that was hardly Jeremy's fault.
At the trial it was conceded that the blood in the silencer could be a mixture of June and Nevill's. Did they test the blood grouping of Nicholas Caffell? As the shots to his head were contact ones or very close, one might expect his blood to be in the silencer rather than Nevill's.
-------------------------------
Sheila's DNA was only found inside the internal thread that screws onto the external thread on the rifles barrel...
Once jury sent note to judge, blood evidence was presented differently to that given to the court beforehand - whic effectively changed the course of the trial...
In my opinion...
So her DNA was found in the silencer then - you said it wasn't. How it got there is another matter.
The jury has nothing to do with it - the DNA was found years later when there was no jury.
-
No, Sheila's DNA was not found inside the silencer, on any baffle plate where any blood was / may have previously been seen / found. I strongly dispute such a suggestion, because that is not strictly true...
Lets get the facts right, so that there can be no mistake about this point - some DNA was found to be present upon the inverted thread, inside the silencer that screws onto the external thread of a guns barrel. How it got there has never official been discussed or explained, but it seems odds on, that it got there purely by accidental or innocent contamination - when the police were moving the guns barrel around upon Sheila's neck / throat, which was the very occasion that Sheila's DNA was put onto the end of the barrel of that gun...
You then have various police officers screwing the silencer onto the end of the guns barrel, (PC Whidon, and DI Cook) before the silencer was even sent to the Lab', on 30th August 1985, brought about because Sheila's DNA that was present on the external thread on the end of the guns barrel, was fitted internally to the silencer, by screwing the threads of both together in an airtight fashion, which forced Sheila's DNA by dynamic process, into the silencer where it was eventually found in and by 2002...
There is nothing difficult in trying to fathom out how Sheila's DNA got into the silencer, since it was not discovered there in that part of the silencer until 2002, long after the silencer was put at risk of contamination by the police, and the ballistics expert, Fletcher, and others...
in my opinion...
One of the prosecution experts said that in her opinion Sheila's DNA was in the silencer.
Anyhow, the appeal judges conceded that it was not possible to conclude if it was in there or not. It seems to me that the appeal judges rejected that ground because a lot of the blood from the silencer was no longer available - that was hardly Jeremy's fault.
At the trial it was conceded that the blood in the silencer could be a mixture of June and Nevill's. Did they test the blood grouping of Nicholas Caffell? As the shots to his head were contact ones or very close, one might expect his blood to be in the silencer rather than Nevill's.
-------------------------------
Sheila's DNA was only found inside the internal thread that screws onto the external thread on the rifles barrel...
Once jury sent note to judge, blood evidence was presented differently to that given to the court beforehand - whic effectively changed the course of the trial...
In my opinion...
So her DNA was found in the silencer then - you said it wasn't. How it got there is another matter.
The jury has nothing to do with it - the DNA was found years later when there was no jury.
... Blood was not found inside internal thread of silencer...
-
Blood was not found inside internal thread of silencer...
I said DNA, not blood. It was the opinion of one of the experts that Sheila's DNA was inside the silencer, and you have agreed, so let's move on.
-
I'd like to know why there was a record of Robert Boutflour's blood group. Were tests done on all the relatives for elimination purposes? After all, some of them were around when the silencer was fiddled with.
-
Blood was not found inside internal thread of silencer...
I said DNA, not blood. It was the opinion of one of the experts that Sheila's DNA was inside the silencer, and you have agreed, so let's move on.
... I do not agree with what you are implying, since, there was no DNA belonging to Shiela found anywhere inside the silenber where any blood was seen or found by anyone, at any stage. Some Dna was found on an internal screw thread, but there can be no suggestion that it got there at the time of the shootings, because the internal thread of the silencer, was screwed air tight onto the external thread on the end of the guns barrel - with the silencer fitted to the gun in this way, it would be nigh on impossible, for any blood or DNA, to get onto the thread of the silencer. Any DNA found there in that part of the silencer could only have got there, by a process of innocent, or accidental contamination. It is wrong for anyone to try and suggest that Shiela's DNA could have got into the silencer at the time she was shot and killed...
-
Blood was not found inside internal thread of silencer...
I said DNA, not blood. It was the opinion of one of the experts that Sheila's DNA was inside the silencer, and you have agreed, so let's move on.
... I do not agree with what you are implying, since, there was no DNA belonging to Shiela found anywhere inside the silenber where any blood was seen or found by anyone, at any stage. Some Dna was found on an internal screw thread, but there can be no suggestion that it got there at the time of the shootings, because the internal thread of the silencer, was screwed air tight onto the external thread on the end of the guns barrel - with the silencer fitted to the gun in this way, it would be nigh on impossible, for any blood or DNA, to get onto the thread of the silencer. Any DNA found there in that part of the silencer could only have got there, by a process of innocent, or accidental contamination. It is wrong for anyone to try and suggest that Shiela's DNA could have got into the silencer at the time she was shot and killed...
Seven swabs were taken of the inside of the silencer, and five of those showed components of Sheila's DNA. It's not clear where those swabs were from but I doubt they were all from the internal screw thread.
-
Blood was not found inside internal thread of silencer...
I said DNA, not blood. It was the opinion of one of the experts that Sheila's DNA was inside the silencer, and you have agreed, so let's move on.
... I do not agree with what you are implying, since, there was no DNA belonging to Shiela found anywhere inside the silenber where any blood was seen or found by anyone, at any stage. Some Dna was found on an internal screw thread, but there can be no suggestion that it got there at the time of the shootings, because the internal thread of the silencer, was screwed air tight onto the external thread on the end of the guns barrel - with the silencer fitted to the gun in this way, it would be nigh on impossible, for any blood or DNA, to get onto the thread of the silencer. Any DNA found there in that part of the silencer could only have got there, by a process of innocent, or accidental contamination. It is wrong for anyone to try and suggest that Shiela's DNA could have got into the silencer at the time she was shot and killed...
Seven swabs were taken of the inside of the silencer, and five of those showed components of Sheila's DNA. It's not clear where those swabs were from but I doubt they were all from the internal screw thread.
... I have got all the lab' file as per the dna profiling, of the silencer and its baffle plates, and the inverted thread I have been talking about, and I can assure everyone that none of Shiela's dna was found on any baffle plate. The only dna which could remotely be associated with Shiela, was found in the screw thread - nowhere else.,
-
... I have got all the lab' file as per the dna profiling, of the silencer and its baffle plates, and the inverted thread I have been talking about, and I can assure everyone that none of Shiela's dna was found on any baffle plate. The only dna which could remotely be associated with Shiela, was found in the screw thread - nowhere else.,
I'm not talking about the baffles. Are you suggesting that the seven swabs were all taken from the screw thread?
-
... I have got all the lab' file as per the dna profiling, of the silencer and its baffle plates, and the inverted thread I have been talking about, and I can assure everyone that none of Shiela's dna was found on any baffle plate. The only dna which could remotely be associated with Shiela, was found in the screw thread - nowhere else.,
I'm not talking about the baffles. Are you suggesting that the seven swabs were all taken from the screw thread?
---------------------
The only place inside the silencer that any DNA that could be linked or associated with Sheila was found inside the inverted screw thread end, no other DNA evidence that could be linked to her was found anywhere else inside the silencer...
What you have been saying is misleading and inaccurate...
-
Where did you get the information about the number of swabs, Kaldin?
-
Where did you get the information about the number of swabs, Kaldin?
From the appeal document, Paras 493/494. Perhaps I've misunderstood - it is rather detailed and complicated.
Since the CCRC referred this case to the court, further DNA testing has taken place of other parts of the moderator. Seven swabbings have been taken from internal parts of the moderator apart from the baffles. All seven results indicated that DNA from more than one person was present. The results were complex and incomplete and it was not possible to determine how many people had contributed to the DNA from the mixture. The predominant contribution appeared to have come from a female or females.
When comparisons were possible, components matching Sheila Caffell's DNA profile were detected in five of these seven results. The other two results also contained components which matched those of Sheila Caffell, but not at all of the ten areas of DNA tested where information was available for comparison.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2002/2912.htm
-
... I have got all the lab' file as per the dna profiling, of the silencer and its baffle plates, and the inverted thread I have been talking about, and I can assure everyone that none of Shiela's dna was found on any baffle plate. The only dna which could remotely be associated with Shiela, was found in the screw thread - nowhere else.,
I'm not talking about the baffles. Are you suggesting that the seven swabs were all taken from the screw thread?
---------------------
The only place inside the silencer that any DNA that could be linked or associated with Sheila was found inside the inverted screw thread end, no other DNA evidence that could be linked to her was found anywhere else inside the silencer...
What you have been saying is misleading and inaccurate...
Perhaps you could summarise ground 15 in the 2002 appeal then?
-
503
74. Ms Grombridge reports that DNA has been detected throughout the sound moderator and states that some of the DNA within the sound moderator could have originated from Sheila Caffell.
75. Plainly, the distribution of DNA detected does not reflect the distribution of blood originally present within the sound moderator. For example, DNA has been detected on baffles 13-17 where no blood had previously been detected.
76. Therefore, some action not necessarily associated with the deposition of blood must have caused DNA to be transferred to various areas of the sound moderator, including DNA that could possibly have originated from Sheila Caffell.
77. There appears to have been many opportunities for DNA from a variety of sources to be deposited on and in the sound moderator and for DNA to be transferred between different areas of the sound moderator as a result of the way the sound moderator was handled after the incident."
------------------------------
I have previously pointed out that the silencer was contaminated as a result of mishandling by various persons, after its discovery, in particular, at the time of the unofficial test firing of the bloodstained rifle, silencer and control ammunition, and that at this time blood which lined the barrel of the bloodstained rifle was blasted into the silencer, in front of, behind and carried upon control bullets fired via the weapon at that stage...
Of course, not only blood could have contaminated the inside of the silencer at that time - but also DNA...
-
So you do concede that Sheila's DNA may have been in the silencer then. How it got there is a matter of opinion. I therefore don't think that what I said was misleading as I was merely going on the opinion of an expert witness.
-
So you do concede that Sheila's DNA may have been in the silencer then. How it got there is a matter of opinion. I therefore don't think that what I said was misleading as I was merely going on the opinion of an expert witness.
---------------------------------
No, I don't concede, because there are varying comments thrown around in the judgement, including others that say there was no evidence of Sheila's DNA inside the silencer, example:-
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
478 - the results of these tests were that the DNA in the silencer could not have come from Sheila Caffell...
479 - the commission consider that the absence of Sheila Caffells DNA is significant
497 (ii) Sheila Caffells DNA may have been in the sound moderator but it was not possible to conclude one way or the other whether it was...
------------------------------------------------
It should also be noted that although there is reference to seven swabs that were taken, it does not specify exactly whereabouts in the silencer, other than by excluding baffle plates, that these swabs were taken from - my suggestion is that the internal thread of the silencer was tested and some DNA found there which could have originated from Sheila...
It is possible that some of Sheila's DNA got into the silencer at the time of unofficial test firings of control bullet that took place before 20th September 1985, as described by me p
-
So you do concede that Sheila's DNA may have been in the silencer then. How it got there is a matter of opinion. I therefore don't think that what I said was misleading as I was merely going on the opinion of an expert witness.
---------------------------------
No, I don't concede, because there are varying comments thrown around in the judgement, including others that say there was no evidence of Sheila's DNA inside the silencer, example:-
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
478 - the results of these tests were that the DNA in the silencer could not have come from Sheila Caffell...
479 - the commission consider that the absence of Sheila Caffells DNA is significant
497 (ii) Sheila Caffells DNA may have been in the sound moderator but it was not possible to conclude one way or the other whether it was...
------------------------------------------------
It should also be noted that although there is reference to seven swabs that were taken, it does not specify exactly whereabouts in the silencer, other than by excluding baffle plates, that these swabs were taken from - my suggestion is that the internal thread of the silencer was tested and some DNA found there which could have originated from Sheila...
It is possible that some of Sheila's DNA got into the silencer at the time of unofficial test firings of control bullet that took place before 20th September 1985, as described by me p
The result which showed that the DNA could not have come from Sheila was from an earlier test. The fact remains that Miss Groombridge took the view that Sheila's DNA was in the silencer. I'm not necessarily agreeing with her, but it's incorrect to state that Sheila's DNA was definitely not in there.
So you are suggesting that all seven swabs came from the internal thread then. I doubt that.
-
So you do concede that Sheila's DNA may have been in the silencer then. How it got there is a matter of opinion. I therefore don't think that what I said was misleading as I was merely going on the opinion of an expert witness.
---------------------------------
No, I don't concede, because there are varying comments thrown around in the judgement, including others that say there was no evidence of Sheila's DNA inside the silencer, example:-
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
478 - the results of these tests were that the DNA in the silencer could not have come from Sheila Caffell...
479 - the commission consider that the absence of Sheila Caffells DNA is significant
497 (ii) Sheila Caffells DNA may have been in the sound moderator but it was not possible to conclude one way or the other whether it was...
------------------------------------------------
It should also be noted that although there is reference to seven swabs that were taken, it does not specify exactly whereabouts in the silencer, other than by excluding baffle plates, that these swabs were taken from - my suggestion is that the internal thread of the silencer was tested and some DNA found there which could have originated from Sheila...
It is possible that some of Sheila's DNA got into the silencer at the time of unofficial test firings of control bullet that took place before 20th September 1985, as described by me p
The result which showed that the DNA could not have come from Sheila was from an earlier test. The fact remains that Miss Groombridge took the view that Sheila's DNA was in the silencer. I'm not necessarily agreeing with her, but it's incorrect to state that Sheila's DNA was definitely not in there.
So you are suggesting that all seven swabs came from the internal thread then. I doubt that.
-------------------------------------
Appellate judges rejected the later tests results, stating that there was no evidence either way to prove or confirm that Sheila's DNA was found inside the silencer - does this mean that we have to accept what Groombridge said, despite it being rejected by the judgement?
There is no published record where these seven additional swabs were taken from, other than they were not taken from Baffle plates...
-
So you do concede that Sheila's DNA may have been in the silencer then. How it got there is a matter of opinion. I therefore don't think that what I said was misleading as I was merely going on the opinion of an expert witness.
---------------------------------
No, I don't concede, because there are varying comments thrown around in the judgement, including others that say there was no evidence of Sheila's DNA inside the silencer, example:-
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
478 - the results of these tests were that the DNA in the silencer could not have come from Sheila Caffell...
479 - the commission consider that the absence of Sheila Caffells DNA is significant
497 (ii) Sheila Caffells DNA may have been in the sound moderator but it was not possible to conclude one way or the other whether it was...
------------------------------------------------
It should also be noted that although there is reference to seven swabs that were taken, it does not specify exactly whereabouts in the silencer, other than by excluding baffle plates, that these swabs were taken from - my suggestion is that the internal thread of the silencer was tested and some DNA found there which could have originated from Sheila...
It is possible that some of Sheila's DNA got into the silencer at the time of unofficial test firings of control bullet that took place before 20th September 1985, as described by me p
The result which showed that the DNA could not have come from Sheila was from an earlier test. The fact remains that Miss Groombridge took the view that Sheila's DNA was in the silencer. I'm not necessarily agreeing with her, but it's incorrect to state that Sheila's DNA was definitely not in there.
So you are suggesting that all seven swabs came from the internal thread then. I doubt that.
-------------------------------------
Appellate judges rejected the later tests results, stating that there was no evidence either way to prove or confirm that Sheila's DNA was found inside the silencer - does this mean that we have to accept what Groombridge said, despite it being rejected by the judgement?
There is no published record where these seven additional swabs were taken from, other than they were not taken from Baffle plates...
They didn't think it was certain that it was Sheila's DNA, and yet they still rejected the appeal. I think that's because they weren't certain that her DNA was not in there. I was quite surprised that ground of the appeal failed to be honest. If June's DNA was found in there it's reasonable to assume that her blood was in there too, and yet they didn't seem convinced of that.
-
So you do concede that Sheila's DNA may have been in the silencer then. How it got there is a matter of opinion. I therefore don't think that what I said was misleading as I was merely going on the opinion of an expert witness.
---------------------------------
No, I don't concede, because there are varying comments thrown around in the judgement, including others that say there was no evidence of Sheila's DNA inside the silencer, example:-
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
478 - the results of these tests were that the DNA in the silencer could not have come from Sheila Caffell...
479 - the commission consider that the absence of Sheila Caffells DNA is significant
497 (ii) Sheila Caffells DNA may have been in the sound moderator but it was not possible to conclude one way or the other whether it was...
------------------------------------------------
It should also be noted that although there is reference to seven swabs that were taken, it does not specify exactly whereabouts in the silencer, other than by excluding baffle plates, that these swabs were taken from - my suggestion is that the internal thread of the silencer was tested and some DNA found there which could have originated from Sheila...
It is possible that some of Sheila's DNA got into the silencer at the time of unofficial test firings of control bullet that took place before 20th September 1985, as described by me p
The result which showed that the DNA could not have come from Sheila was from an earlier test. The fact remains that Miss Groombridge took the view that Sheila's DNA was in the silencer. I'm not necessarily agreeing with her, but it's incorrect to state that Sheila's DNA was definitely not in there.
So you are suggesting that all seven swabs came from the internal thread then. I doubt that.
-------------------------------------
Appellate judges rejected the later tests results, stating that there was no evidence either way to prove or confirm that Sheila's DNA was found inside the silencer - does this mean that we have to accept what Groombridge said, despite it being rejected by the judgement?
There is no published record where these seven additional swabs were taken from, other than they were not taken from Baffle plates...
They didn't think it was certain that it was Sheila's DNA, and yet they still rejected the appeal. I think that's because they weren't certain that her DNA was not in there. I was quite surprised that ground of the appeal failed to be honest. If June's DNA was found in there it's reasonable to assume that her blood was in there too, and yet they didn't seem convinced of that.
-----------------------------
The way I see it, there is a perfectly simple explanation for how the blood got into the silencer, and how the DNA from one or more of the victims could have got ion there as well. The judgement from the 2002 appeal makes it clear that it accepts that the silencer was contaminated by DNA because of mishandling, well my point is this, if you can contaminate the silencer with DNA because of mishandling of the silencer, then of course, the silencer can be contaminated with blood through mishandling. I have already given a few examples of how this occurred, and because it was possible for these things to have happened, the silencer / blood based evidence should really not have been allowed in as legitimate evidence...
Silencer evidence is dodgy...
-
The way I see it, there is a perfectly simple explanation for how the blood got into the silencer, and how the DNA from one or more of the victims could have got ion there as well. The judgement from the 2002 appeal makes it clear that it accepts that the silencer was contaminated by DNA because of mishandling, well my point is this, if you can contaminate the silencer with DNA because of mishandling of the silencer, then of course, the silencer can be contaminated with blood through mishandling. I have already given a few examples of how this occurred, and because it was possible for these things to have happened, the silencer / blood based evidence should really not have been allowed in as legitimate evidence...
Silencer evidence is dodgy...
I agree that it's dodgy - not least because they were testing for DNA on an object that had been handled many times by many people. The sticking point is that the flake of blood which showed Sheila's blood group was no longer available for DNA testing.
I asked this before but I don't think you replied. Do you know why they had details of Robert Boutflour's blood group?
-
The way I see it, there is a perfectly simple explanation for how the blood got into the silencer, and how the DNA from one or more of the victims could have got ion there as well. The judgement from the 2002 appeal makes it clear that it accepts that the silencer was contaminated by DNA because of mishandling, well my point is this, if you can contaminate the silencer with DNA because of mishandling of the silencer, then of course, the silencer can be contaminated with blood through mishandling. I have already given a few examples of how this occurred, and because it was possible for these things to have happened, the silencer / blood based evidence should really not have been allowed in as legitimate evidence...
Silencer evidence is dodgy...
I agree that it's dodgy - not least because they were testing for DNA on an object that had been handled many times by many people. The sticking point is that the flake of blood which showed Sheila's blood group was no longer available for DNA testing.
I asked this before but I don't think you replied. Do you know why they had details of Robert Boutflour's blood group?
------------------------
Yes, of course, DCI "Taff" Jones thought the relative were trying to stitch Jeremy up for the murders and that they might have used their own blood in the silencer...
DCI Jones, knew this, because he was aware that DS "Stan" Jones, had already found a silencer (SBJ/1) at the scene (7th August 1985)and that had some blood on it, and then when the relatives were producing one silencer after the other with blood and paint on them, you would n't need to be a sherlock Holmes to fathom out what the relatives were up to?
But for his untimely death, DCI Jones would have been the defenses's star witness...
in my opinion...
-
The way I see it, there is a perfectly simple explanation for how the blood got into the silencer, and how the DNA from one or more of the victims could have got ion there as well. The judgement from the 2002 appeal makes it clear that it accepts that the silencer was contaminated by DNA because of mishandling, well my point is this, if you can contaminate the silencer with DNA because of mishandling of the silencer, then of course, the silencer can be contaminated with blood through mishandling. I have already given a few examples of how this occurred, and because it was possible for these things to have happened, the silencer / blood based evidence should really not have been allowed in as legitimate evidence...
Silencer evidence is dodgy...
I agree that it's dodgy - not least because they were testing for DNA on an object that had been handled many times by many people. The sticking point is that the flake of blood which showed Sheila's blood group was no longer available for DNA testing.
I asked this before but I don't think you replied. Do you know why they had details of Robert Boutflour's blood group?
------------------------
Yes, of course, DCI "Taff" Jones thought the relative were trying to stitch Jeremy up for the murders and that they might have used their own blood in the silencer...
DCI Jones, knew this, because he was aware that DS "Stan" Jones, had already found a silencer (SBJ/1) at the scene (7th August 1985)and that had some blood on it, and then when the relatives were producing one silencer after the other with blood and paint on them, you would n't need to be a sherlock Holmes to fathom out what the relatives were up to?
But for his untimely death, DCI Jones would have been the defenses's star witness...
in my opinion...
Are you saying that DCI Jones thought that the blood could have been Robert Boutflour's, and that he asked for a blood sample so that it could be tested against the blood in the silencer?
-
There was a possibility that there was a contact shot to June, and the shots to Nicholas were contact shots or close.
So would you not expect to find blood from Sheila, Nicholas and possibly June either in/on the barrel or in/on the moderator?
I think there was a metal end cap on the barrel of the rifle during the shootings and any blood or dna would have got onto that...
-
The ballistics expert made a statement confirming that he was unable to make an association between any of the bullets and part bullets fired via the Anshulz rifle, which is a very significant piece of evidence capable of supporting the recent findings obtained in Arizona (which concludes that Sheila was not shot by a rifle with a silencer attached to the end of its barrel):-
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=478.0;attach=1482;image)(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=478.0;attach=1483;image)
-
I think there was a metal end cap on the barrel of the rifle during the shootings and any blood or dna would have got onto that...
In future can you reply a bit quicker? I consider waiting 17 month for a reply a bit too long. ;D ;D ;)
-
In future can you reply a bit quicker? I consider waiting 17 month for a reply a bit too long. ;D ;D ;)
Imagine how frustrating it must be for Jeremy having to wait over 27 years for the truth to come out?
-
Whoever used that rifle,was NOT familiar with its workings.!
Just as AE pointed out,,,that Sheila didn't know one end of a rifle from the other.There's your answer.
-
I think its a bit contradictory, inconsistent, and ambiguous for the ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher, to conclude that he can find no association between any of the 25 crime scene bullets and the fact that any of them were or had been fired through a silencer, and then in the next breath produce a theory to explain how Sheila's blood got into the silencer by claiming it was fitted to the guns barrel at the time Sheila was shot under the chin and killed...
This is a prime example of how the evidence can be manipulated/misinterpreted to help convict an innocent man of crimes he did not, and could not have committed...
-
I think its a bit contradictory, inconsistent, and ambiguous for the ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher, to conclude that he can find no association between any of the 25 crime scene bullets and the fact that any of them were or had been fired through a silencer, and then in the next breath produce a theory to explain how Sheila's blood got into the silencer by claiming it was fitted to the guns barrel at the time Sheila was shot under the chin and killed...
This is a prime example of how the evidence can be manipulated/misinterpreted to help convict an innocent man of crimes he did not, and could not have committed...
When Flcther concluded that he could not associate any of the 25 crime scene bullets with having been fired through a silencer, this came about after he had test fired the rifle, with contyrol ammunition and the silencer, which allegedly took place after the flake of Sheila's blood had already been found inside the silencer, tested and results obtained to confirm it was Sheila's blood - under such circumstances, why does Fletcher conclude that he cannot find any evidence to associate any of the 25 bullets he examined as having been fired through the silencer, if the bullets in question had blood and debris on them from the victims. In particular, that two of the bullets 9PV/20 and PV/19) related to Sheila, and which had blood on them from Sheila, which could have been matched to the blood found in the silencer, and led to such an association being avaialble to Fletcher at the time he concluded in the negative...
It just doesn't add up what Fletcher said, or is saying...
It's all bonkers...