Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on March 27, 2011, 09:00:AM
-
Dodgy guns - handed to Bunting by two unidentified men
-
Why didn't EP insist on Bunting telling them the identities of the two persons who handed him these guns, that were linked to the Bamber investigation?
-
Why didn't EP insist on Bunting telling them the identities of the two persons who handed him these guns, that were linked to the Bamber investigation?
Exactly! This is a key question that remains unanswered and has puzzled me for quite some time. It may help to uncover another of the "mystery" areas in this case. If they have done nothing wrong name them and clear them Mr Bunting and if he not willing to do so EP should force him to.
-
Why didn't EP insist on Bunting telling them the identities of the two persons who handed him these guns, that were linked to the Bamber investigation?
Exactly! This is a key question that remains unanswered and has puzzled me for quite some time. It may help to uncover another of the "mystery" areas in this case. If they have done nothing wrong name them and clear them Mr Bunting and if he not willing to do so EP should force him to.
I have a suspicion that the police did not press Mr Bunting too hard on this because they did not believe his story about having been given the two firearms by two persons. Mr Bunting was trying to deal with his own difficulty in having shotguns and firearms illegally in his possession and was therefore owning up to the police and applying for the necesssary shotgun and firearm certificates. I may be missing something here but I have a feeling that this probably has no significance as far as the events at WHF are concerned. On the other hand there may be other factors connected with this which are significant and if so I would be interested to learn about them.
-
Why didn't EP insist on Bunting telling them the identities of the two persons who handed him these guns, that were linked to the Bamber investigation?
Exactly! This is a key question that remains unanswered and has puzzled me for quite some time. It may help to uncover another of the "mystery" areas in this case. If they have done nothing wrong name them and clear them Mr Bunting and if he not willing to do so EP should force him to.
I have a suspicion that the police did not press Mr Bunting too hard on this because they did not believe his story about having been given the two firearms by two persons. Mr Bunting was trying to deal with his own difficulty in having shotguns and firearms illegally in his possession and was therefore owning up to the police and applying for the necesssary shotgun and firearm certificates. I may be missing something here but I have a feeling that this probably has no significance as far as the events at WHF are concerned. On the other hand there may be other factors connected with this which are significant and if so I would be interested to learn about them.
-------------------
With respect - the markings which have been described as "Burn marks" found on the back of Ralph Bambers neck, could have been made by the barrel's of the unusual double gun / rifle having been thrust into the back of Ralph Bambers neck, and for this reason, we need to know the truth about how Bunting came to be in possession of such a very distinctive weapon?
-
Why didn't EP insist on Bunting telling them the identities of the two persons who handed him these guns, that were linked to the Bamber investigation?
Exactly! This is a key question that remains unanswered and has puzzled me for quite some time. It may help to uncover another of the "mystery" areas in this case. If they have done nothing wrong name them and clear them Mr Bunting and if he not willing to do so EP should force him to.
I have a suspicion that the police did not press Mr Bunting too hard on this because they did not believe his story about having been given the two firearms by two persons. Mr Bunting was trying to deal with his own difficulty in having shotguns and firearms illegally in his possession and was therefore owning up to the police and applying for the necesssary shotgun and firearm certificates. I may be missing something here but I have a feeling that this probably has no significance as far as the events at WHF are concerned. On the other hand there may be other factors connected with this which are significant and if so I would be interested to learn about them.
-------------------
With respect - the markings which have been described as "Burn marks" found on the back of Ralph Bambers neck, could have been made by the barrel's of the unusual double gun / rifle having been thrust into the back of Ralph Bambers neck, and for this reason, we need to know the truth about how Bunting came to be in possession of such a very distinctive weapon?
Mike
I understand the point you are making. You believe that a second weapon may have been used at WHF and that the double gun/rifle may have been that weapon. That does raise some difficult questions, however. Either the second weapon was used by a second killer or both were used by the same person. If the killler was Sheila, why was the second weapon not found by police at WHF? In terms of Jeremy's appeal my feeling is that this aspect of the case may create more problems than possible solutions. However I accept that EP should reveal what enquiries were made and what happened to the two firearms, and in particular whether they wre forensically examined.
-
Why didn't EP insist on Bunting telling them the identities of the two persons who handed him these guns, that were linked to the Bamber investigation?
Exactly! This is a key question that remains unanswered and has puzzled me for quite some time. It may help to uncover another of the "mystery" areas in this case. If they have done nothing wrong name them and clear them Mr Bunting and if he not willing to do so EP should force him to.
I have a suspicion that the police did not press Mr Bunting too hard on this because they did not believe his story about having been given the two firearms by two persons. Mr Bunting was trying to deal with his own difficulty in having shotguns and firearms illegally in his possession and was therefore owning up to the police and applying for the necesssary shotgun and firearm certificates. I may be missing something here but I have a feeling that this probably has no significance as far as the events at WHF are concerned. On the other hand there may be other factors connected with this which are significant and if so I would be interested to learn about them.
-------------------
With respect - the markings which have been described as "Burn marks" found on the back of Ralph Bambers neck, could have been made by the barrel's of the unusual double gun / rifle having been thrust into the back of Ralph Bambers neck, and for this reason, we need to know the truth about how Bunting came to be in possession of such a very distinctive weapon?
Mike
I understand the point you are making. You believe that a second weapon may have been used at WHF and that the double gun/rifle may have been that weapon. That does raise some difficult questions, however. Either the second weapon was used by a second killer or both were used by the same person. If the killler was Sheila, why was the second weapon not found by police at WHF? In terms of Jeremy's appeal my feeling is that this aspect of the case may create more problems than possible solutions. However I accept that EP should reveal what enquiries were made and what happened to the two firearms, and in particular whether they wre forensically examined.
----------------------
It worries me about these guns...
I want to know why they are linked to the Bamber investigation, but we do not have any further information about them? I want to know if the double barrel of this unique weapon caused the marks that were found on the back of Ralph Bambers neck?
If so - who handed this weapon to Bunting, and how come those people ended up in possession of these guns that could have been used during the shootings?
You see - there were three different measurements for the diameters of entry wounds inflicted upon the five victims ( I can provide an exact breakdown of which sizes related to each victim), (a) 3/16ths, (b) 1/4 and (c) 1/2 inch...
I don't think the same gun fired all these bullets that produced all these different sized bullet (a) 3/16ths, (b) 1/4 and (c) 1/2 inch, entry wounds (as confirmed by the pathologist during autopsy)...
I think we are talking about the strong possibility that at least three different guns were used in these shootings...
-
I think David Shaw was / is spot on, when he talks about these different sized bullet entry wounds, and the possibility that more than one weapon fired all those bullets, or even that they all came from the sam,e batch of crime scene ammunition - I think it is all a big lie (on the part of EP)...
-
Wasn't Bunting Mabel Speakman's maiden name?
--------------------
I have not heard that before, where did you get that information from ?
-
Bunting of Great Totham? Didnt Ann and Peter Eaton live on a farm at Little Totham at the time of the murders? Hmmm,this is very intersting!
-
from freebmd.org.uk
June Speakman b1924 (Maldon) Mother's maiden name Bunting
Leslie R Speakman married Mabel Bunting 1919 Maldon
(if they are the right people)
1901 census Joyces farm, Goldhanger
John Bunting , Farmer aged 62 born Tolleshunt D'Arcy
Sarah Bunting, wife, aged 55 born " "
John Bunting son aged 18 born Mayland
George Bunting son aged 16 born Mayland
Joshua Bunting aged 14 born Goldhanger
Mabel Bunting aged 10 born Goldhanger
Mabel Bunting unmarried on 1911 census, aged 20, still with parents.
Mabel Bunting (born 1891 Maldon reg district) married Leslie Speakman in 1919 at Maldon
Mabel Bunting 20 1911 dau of John retired farmer and wife Sarah Goldhanger
1937 Bunting Bros Farm, bros are principle landowers Tolleshunt Major, owners Joyces and Highams Farms 1937
looks like these two from 1901census, brothers of Mabel:
John Bunting son aged 18 born Mayland
George Bunting son aged 16 born Mayland
Graham J Bunting born Maldon reg district 1941 mother Chatterson
Woops, sorry, corrected mistake:
Is he Mabel Bunting's nephew?
-
from freebmd.org.uk
June Speakman b1924 (Maldon) Mother's maiden name Bunting
Leslie R Speakman married Mabel Bunting 1919 Maldon
(if they are the right people)
1901 census Joyces farm, Goldhanger
John Bunting , Farmer aged 62 born Tolleshunt D'Arcy
Sarah Bunting, wife, aged 55 born " "
John Bunting son aged 18 born Mayland
George Bunting son aged 16 born Mayland
Joshua Bunting aged 14 born Goldhanger
Mabel Bunting aged 10 born Goldhanger
Mabel Bunting unmarried on 1911 census, aged 20, still with parents.
Mabel Bunting (born 1891 Maldon reg district) married Leslie Speakman in 1919 at Maldon
Mabel Bunting 20 1911 dau of John retired farmer and wife Sarah Goldhanger
1937 Bunting Bros Farm, bros are principle landowers Tolleshunt Major, owners Joyces and Highams Farms 1937
looks like these two from 1901census, brothers of Mabel:
John Bunting son aged 18 born Mayland
George Bunting son aged 16 born Mayland
Graham J Bunting born Maldon reg district 1941 mother Chatterson
Woops, sorry, corrected mistake:
Is he Mabel Bunting's nephew?
1970 GJ Bunting at Sheepcoates Farm, Great Totham - which covered Goldhanger - Telephone Directory entry
-
from freebmd.org.uk
June Speakman b1924 (Maldon) Mother's maiden name Bunting
Leslie R Speakman married Mabel Bunting 1919 Maldon
(if they are the right people)
1901 census Joyces farm, Goldhanger
John Bunting , Farmer aged 62 born Tolleshunt D'Arcy
Sarah Bunting, wife, aged 55 born " "
John Bunting son aged 18 born Mayland
George Bunting son aged 16 born Mayland
Joshua Bunting aged 14 born Goldhanger
Mabel Bunting aged 10 born Goldhanger
Mabel Bunting unmarried on 1911 census, aged 20, still with parents.
Mabel Bunting (born 1891 Maldon reg district) married Leslie Speakman in 1919 at Maldon
Mabel Bunting 20 1911 dau of John retired farmer and wife Sarah Goldhanger
1937 Bunting Bros Farm, bros are principle landowers Tolleshunt Major, owners Joyces and Highams Farms 1937
looks like these two from 1901census, brothers of Mabel:
John Bunting son aged 18 born Mayland
George Bunting son aged 16 born Mayland
Graham J Bunting born Maldon reg district 1941 mother Chatterson
Woops, sorry, corrected mistake:
Is he Mabel Bunting's nephew?
1970 GJ Bunting at Sheepcoates Farm, Great Totham - which covered Goldhanger - Telephone Directory entry
1984 telephone directory: GJ Bunting, Sheepcoates Farm, Great Totham
-
We know that the Baltflours and Ann Eaton took weapons from WHF following the murders.Is it possible that they included these 2 same guns and they suspected they could have been used in the murders,panicked,and then got a family member to hand them in "anonymously" ?
-
We know that the Baltflours and Ann Eaton took weapons from WHF following the murders.Is it possible that they included these 2 same guns and they suspected they could have been used in the murders,panicked,and then got a family member to hand them in "anonymously" ?
It is possible but there are problems with that scenario. The two "dodgy" weapons were not covered by the firearm certificates of any of the family members so were illegal weapons. I doubt if Nevill Bamber would have allowed them to be kept at WHF. If family members had found them at WHF subsequently (which means that the police did not notice them) they would have been likely to hand them to the police. There would have been no need to panic.
I am interested in Mike Tesko's theory about the possible use of the combined 20 bore shotgun/.22 rifle during the course of the shootings at WHF. If the shotgun had been fired the end of the barrel would have been hot enough to cause the burn marks to Nevill's neck and the aperture of the 20 bore barrel would be the right size to cause such a mark. If this weapon was used it suggests to me a third party being responsible for the murders. Possibly holding the barrel of the weapon to Nevill's neck was a means of threatening him and inducing him to make a telephone call to Jeremy. On the other hand there is no evidence of a shotgun being fired inside the house. The pellets even from a 20 bore cartridge would have caused some visible damage, although in view of the lax treatment by EP of the scene it is possible this could have been overlooked.
-
So guns had already been fired to make the 20 bore hot? I doubt Nevill would be made to anything, even with a gun to his head, if his family was lying dead around him.
So the .22 is considered to small to cause the ring marks?
-
So guns had already been fired to make the 20 bore hot? I doubt Nevill would be made to anything, even with a gun to his head, if his family was lying dead around him.
So the .22 is considered to small to cause the ring marks?
If the killer had a gun to Sheila's neck and said: phone Jeremy, he would have had no choice but to phone.
-
But its Nevill with the ring marks!! The guns been fired, people are lying dead or dying!!
-
But its Nevill with the ring marks!! The guns been fired, people are lying dead or dying!!
We don't know at what stage Nevill sustained the ring mark burns. He could even have been having a look around the grounds after hearing noises before any killngs began when this gun was pressed against his neck.
If it was towards the end of the massacre and the killer/s was/ were threatening Sheila - probably the last to be killed? - I believe Nevill would have done what they wanted in an attempt to save her.
-
So guns had already been fired to make the 20 bore hot? I doubt Nevill would be made to anything, even with a gun to his head, if his family was lying dead around him.
So the .22 is considered to small to cause the ring marks?
I have not seen photographs of the burn marks to Nevill's neck but from the description of them they seem to be too big to have been caused by contact with a .22 rifle barrel, although I could be wrong on that. If a silencer was attached to the rifle the contact area would of course have been bigger, but I am not sure whether the end of the silencer would become hot enough to cause a burn as the silencer itself has a secondary effect of dissipating heat. I can if necessary test that later to see how hot the end of a silencer becomes after 15 - 20 shots have been fired within a short period.
-
But its Nevill with the ring marks!! The guns been fired, people are lying dead or dying!!
We don't know at what stage Nevill sustained the ring mark burns. He could even have been having a look around the grounds after hearing noises before any killngs began when this gun was pressed against his neck.
If it was towards the end of the massacre and the killer/s was/ were threatening Sheila - probably the last to be killed? - I believe Nevill would have done what they wanted in an attempt to save her.
How do we know there weren't two killers, Paul?
-
So guns had already been fired to make the 20 bore hot? I doubt Nevill would be made to anything, even with a gun to his head, if his family was lying dead around him.
So the .22 is considered to small to cause the ring marks?
I have not seen photographs of the burn marks to Nevill's neck but from the description of them they seem to be too big to have been caused by contact with a .22 rifle barrel, although I could be wrong on that. If a silencer was attached to the rifle the contact area would of course have been bigger, but I am not sure whether the end of the silencer would become hot enough to cause a burn as the silencer itself has a secondary effect of dissipating heat. I can if necessary test that later to see how hot the end of a silencer becomes after 15 - 20 shots have been fired within a short period.
Probably a stupid question but, would it be possible to heat the end of the barrel of shotgun, say on an Aga, merely to use it to torture someone?
-
So guns had already been fired to make the 20 bore hot? I doubt Nevill would be made to anything, even with a gun to his head, if his family was lying dead around him.
So the .22 is considered to small to cause the ring marks?
I have not seen photographs of the burn marks to Nevill's neck but from the description of them they seem to be too big to have been caused by contact with a .22 rifle barrel, although I could be wrong on that. If a silencer was attached to the rifle the contact area would of course have been bigger, but I am not sure whether the end of the silencer would become hot enough to cause a burn as the silencer itself has a secondary effect of dissipating heat. I can if necessary test that later to see how hot the end of a silencer becomes after 15 - 20 shots have been fired within a short period.
Probably a stupid question but, would it be possible to heat the end of the barrel of shotgun, say on an Aga, merely to use it to torture someone?
Because I'm still thinking about that field of opium poppies Nevill had.
-
So guns had already been fired to make the 20 bore hot? I doubt Nevill would be made to anything, even with a gun to his head, if his family was lying dead around him.
So the .22 is considered to small to cause the ring marks?
I have not seen photographs of the burn marks to Nevill's neck but from the description of them they seem to be too big to have been caused by contact with a .22 rifle barrel, although I could be wrong on that. If a silencer was attached to the rifle the contact area would of course have been bigger, but I am not sure whether the end of the silencer would become hot enough to cause a burn as the silencer itself has a secondary effect of dissipating heat. I can if necessary test that later to see how hot the end of a silencer becomes after 15 - 20 shots have been fired within a short period.
Probably a stupid question but, would it be possible to heat the end of the barrel of shotgun, say on an Aga, merely to use it to torture someone?
Yes, it would be quite easy to do.
-
Keira, think about the telephone call Jeremy says he received.
Now if someone wanted him (Jeremy)at the WHF, they wouldn't tell Nevill to say "sister has gone crazy with gun". Just a simple, i need help Jeremy, sister fallen downstairs or something.
If Nevill was asked to say what he supposedly said, then the killer would be an absolute idiot, as police would be at WHF within minutes.
So 2 killers? Highly highly unlikely.
Shotgun warmed up as a torture weapon?? Using a lighter or lit cigarette would be easier.
NGB: I'd like to know if the silencer gets hot, so go for it.
And on the burn marks, if something hot is pressed into skin, it leaves a bigger burn as skin is wrapped around the hot object. Try pressing a blunt object into your skin, see how much skin comes into contact with the object.
-
Keira, think about the telephone call Jeremy says he received.
Now if someone wanted him (Jeremy)at the WHF, they wouldn't tell Nevill to say "sister has gone crazy with gun". Just a simple, i need help Jeremy, sister fallen downstairs or something.
If Nevill was asked to say what he supposedly said, then the killer would be an absolute idiot, as police would be at WHF within minutes.
So 2 killers? Highly highly unlikely.
Shotgun warmed up as a torture weapon?? Using a lighter or lit cigarette would be easier.
NGB: I'd like to know if the silencer gets hot, so go for it.
And on the burn marks, if something hot is pressed into skin, it leaves a bigger burn as skin is wrapped around the hot object. Try pressing a blunt object into your skin, see how much shin comes into contact with the object.
Good points. Though I'm unconvinced that a cigarette or lighter would be easier, especially if you don't smoke.
-
Keira, think about the telephone call Jeremy says he received.
Now if someone wanted him (Jeremy)at the WHF, they wouldn't tell Nevill to say "sister has gone crazy with gun". Just a simple, i need help Jeremy, sister fallen downstairs or something.
If Nevill was asked to say what he supposedly said, then the killer would be an absolute idiot, as police would be at WHF within minutes.
So 2 killers? Highly highly unlikely.
Shotgun warmed up as a torture weapon?? Using a lighter or lit cigarette would be easier.
NGB: I'd like to know if the silencer gets hot, so go for it.
And on the burn marks, if something hot is pressed into skin, it leaves a bigger burn as skin is wrapped around the hot object. Try pressing a blunt object into your skin, see how much shin comes into contact with the object.
Good points. Though I'm unconvinced that a cigarette or lighter would be easier, especially if you don't smoke.
And "highly Unlikely" is weak reasoning.
-
Keira, think about the telephone call Jeremy says he received.
Now if someone wanted him (Jeremy)at the WHF, they wouldn't tell Nevill to say "sister has gone crazy with gun". Just a simple, i need help Jeremy, sister fallen downstairs or something.
If Nevill was asked to say what he supposedly said, then the killer would be an absolute idiot, as police would be at WHF within minutes.
So 2 killers? Highly highly unlikely.
Shotgun warmed up as a torture weapon?? Using a lighter or lit cigarette would be easier.
NGB: I'd like to know if the silencer gets hot, so go for it.
And on the burn marks, if something hot is pressed into skin, it leaves a bigger burn as skin is wrapped around the hot object. Try pressing a blunt object into your skin, see how much shin comes into contact with the object.
Good points. Though I'm unconvinced that a cigarette or lighter would be easier, especially if you don't smoke.
And "highly Unlikely" is weak reasoning.
No, but highly highly unlikely is ok. ;D
-
But remember,there were no burn or scorch marks on his pyjamas.
-
But its Nevill with the ring marks!! The guns been fired, people are lying dead or dying!!
We don't know at what stage Nevill sustained the ring mark burns. He could even have been having a look around the grounds after hearing noises before any killngs began when this gun was pressed against his neck.
If it was towards the end of the massacre and the killer/s was/ were threatening Sheila - probably the last to be killed? - I believe Nevill would have done what they wanted in an attempt to save her.
How do we know there weren't two killers, Paul?
Hi Chochokeira
Could you list your version of events - makes it easier to follow with reference to when you think it started, who was involved, when the other killer escaped?
-
But its Nevill with the ring marks!! The guns been fired, people are lying dead or dying!!
We don't know at what stage Nevill sustained the ring mark burns. He could even have been having a look around the grounds after hearing noises before any killngs began when this gun was pressed against his neck.
If it was towards the end of the massacre and the killer/s was/ were threatening Sheila - probably the last to be killed? - I believe Nevill would have done what they wanted in an attempt to save her.
How do we know there weren't two killers, Paul?
Hi Chochokeira
Could you list your version of events - makes it easier to follow with reference to when you think it started, who was involved, when the other killer escaped?
Who on here has done that, Paul? No one as far as I can see, though Mike T must be getting close to it. No one has posted a clear version of events because no one has one. We're all just exploring possiblities and I'm as entitled to do that as anyone.
-
But its Nevill with the ring marks!! The guns been fired, people are lying dead or dying!!
We don't know at what stage Nevill sustained the ring mark burns. He could even have been having a look around the grounds after hearing noises before any killngs began when this gun was pressed against his neck.
If it was towards the end of the massacre and the killer/s was/ were threatening Sheila - probably the last to be killed? - I believe Nevill would have done what they wanted in an attempt to save her.
How do we know there weren't two killers, Paul?
Hi Chochokeira
Could you list your version of events - makes it easier to follow with reference to when you think it started, who was involved, when the other killer escaped?
Also, read my post again and you'll see that am not contending that there were two killers, I'm simply not excluding the possiblity.
-
But its Nevill with the ring marks!! The guns been fired, people are lying dead or dying!!
We don't know at what stage Nevill sustained the ring mark burns. He could even have been having a look around the grounds after hearing noises before any killngs began when this gun was pressed against his neck.
If it was towards the end of the massacre and the killer/s was/ were threatening Sheila - probably the last to be killed? - I believe Nevill would have done what they wanted in an attempt to save her.
How do we know there weren't two killers, Paul?
Hi Chochokeira
Could you list your version of events - makes it easier to follow with reference to when you think it started, who was involved, when the other killer escaped?
Who on here has done that, Paul? No one as far as I can see, though Mike T must be getting close to it. No one has posted a clear version of events because no one has one. We're all just exploring possiblities and I'm as entitled to do that as anyone.
No worries. Was interested in your posts and wondered if you could do a bullet point list as it'd be easier to follow. That's all :)
-
Not relevant, but the local bloody farmers are shooting the crap out rabbits, and its nearly 10pm. Where are the silencers now??!!
-
Confused about that document. It lists five guns, and then lists another two. Were there seven altogether or am I reading it wrong?
-
Confused about that document. It lists five guns, and then lists another two. Were there seven altogether or am I reading it wrong?
Kaldin.........I would say 7 altogether.The serial numbers of the two guns in question do not match any of the serial numbers of the first 5.
-
Confused about that document. It lists five guns, and then lists another two. Were there seven altogether or am I reading it wrong?
Kaldin.........I would say 7 altogether.The serial numbers of the two guns in question do not match any of the serial numbers of the first 5.
That's what I thought, and yet they seem to focus on two guns only.
-
Confused about that document. It lists five guns, and then lists another two. Were there seven altogether or am I reading it wrong?
Kaldin.........I would say 7 altogether.The serial numbers of the two guns in question do not match any of the serial numbers of the first 5.
That's what I thought, and yet they seem to focus on two guns only.
There were a total of seven. The first five were classified as shotguns and therefore the owner or keeper of them needed a shotgun certificate to retain them legally. The next two were legally classified as firearms, requiring the owner or keeper to have a firearm certificate, which is far more restrictive and harder to obtain than a shotgun certificate. The reason for the last gun, the .410, to be classified as a firearm rather than as a shotgun is the length of the barrel. It was shorter than the minimum length for a shotgun (I believe from memory 22 inches at that time). The penalties for unlawful possession of a firearm are more severe than for unlawful possession of a shotgun. I suspect that may be why the "unidentified men" explanation was given by Mr Bunting to the police explain his possession of the two firearms, whereas he was happy to admit to unlawful ownership of the five shotguns.
-
Confused about that document. It lists five guns, and then lists another two. Were there seven altogether or am I reading it wrong?
Kaldin.........I would say 7 altogether.The serial numbers of the two guns in question do not match any of the serial numbers of the first 5.
That's what I thought, and yet they seem to focus on two guns only.
There were a total of seven. The first five were classified as shotguns and therefore the owner or keeper of them needed a shotgun certificate to retain them legally. The next two were legally classified as firearms, requiring the owner or keeper to have a firearm certificate, which is far more restrictive and harder to obtain than a shotgun certificate. The reason for the last gun, the .410, to be classified as a firearm rather than as a shotgun is the length of the barrel. It was shorter than the minimum length for a shotgun (I believe from memory 22 inches at that time). The penalties for unlawful possession of a firearm are more severe than for unlawful possession of a shotgun. I suspect that may be why the "unidentified men" explanation was given by Mr Bunting to the police explain his possession of the two firearms, whereas he was happy to admit to unlawful ownership of the five shotguns.
OK, thanks. :D
-
Good evening all
Mike, do you know the exact date the guns were handed in?
Thankyou.