Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: nugnug on October 25, 2015, 03:41:PM
-
now i could see why jeremy might discard the slincer in the cupboard on the spur of the moment but why does he never go back to retrieve it.
-
now i could see why jeremy might discard the slincer in the cupboard on the spur of the moment but why does he never go back to retrieve it.
I think this point has already been raised. I suggested that the mud in the creek would have been a suitable place for it, but as Scipio (I think) said, questions would have been asked by the family as to why it was missing and where it had gone.
-
a missing silencer would hardly be proof of guilt though.
there could be many reasons a silencer went missing and there would be no way of proving who took it.
-
I think this point has already been raised. I suggested that the mud in the creek would have been a suitable place for it, but as Scipio (I think) said, questions would have been asked by the family as to why it was missing and where it had gone.
I can see scipio's(?) point but why didn't he at least clean it either at the time or later, at least get rid of any blood and hair which was apparent to the naked eye.... I find that very strange. :-\
-
i do to i mean to i mean it wouldent of taken him long.
-
I can see scipio's(?) point but why didn't he at least clean it either at the time or later, at least get rid of any blood and hair which was apparent to the naked eye.... I find that very strange. :-\
Much of what we understand now is courtesy of hindsight. I wonder what we -SHOULD we have found ourselves in similar circumstances- would have prioritized and how thorough and meticulous we'd have been given that things had already gone awry. The things we can see as being important now, obviously weren't seen, by Jeremy, as being important then.
-
how long did he have to ethere get rid of the silencer or clean it he had plenty of time.
-
how long did he have to ethere get rid of the silencer or clean it he had plenty of time.
Nugs?!!! How long is a piece of string?!!!!!
-
sory that ones a bit to cryptic for me.
-
sory that ones a bit to cryptic for me.
Sorry Nugs. What I meant was that unless we have a time frame there's no possible way of knowing some of the finer details. Sometimes guesswork is a fruitless and pointless exercise.
-
To me the silencer is the one and only bit of physical evidence that is relevant.
You would say that Sheila would not use it and then put it in the back of the cupboard before using it - though if she was not in the middle of a episode it is possible - but I think she would have just taken it off and thrown it down - she would have NO reason to hide it. And why would she put it on in the first place ?
If Jeremy is innocent then I would guess it was never on the gun at all.
But the blood evidence is so confusing that I don't think most people understand it ( as verified by the expert in the last appeal )
If I was trying to help Jeremy this would be the only thing to concentrate on really that could save him .Well there are a couple of other things but they could just be rumours
-
as jeremys knows the relatives suspect him surely he knows hes got to do somthing about the silencer.
-
I can see scipio's(?) point but why didn't he at least clean it either at the time or later, at least get rid of any blood and hair which was apparent to the naked eye.... I find that very strange. :-\
The amount of blood on it was quite small, he may not have noticed it. They suspected there was more blood on it and that he did clean it but missed the tiny bits on the face of it. He clearly didn't know anything about drawback let alone appreciate they could figure out Sheila's blood was inside it and the significance that such blood would have. What he expected was that since he stated it was not attached the the gun when he left it out and since it was in the closet in the box when they searched things that no one would suspect it had been used. His plan worked at first. It was the lab not police that figured out the moderator was indeed used. The drawback is what put the giant wrench in the works but he would have needed to know about drawback to recognize the problem and thus take precautions to deal with it. The police didn't even know about such it took the lab so it is not surprising that Jeremy didn't know.
-
The amount of blood on it was quite small, he may not have noticed it. They suspected there was more blood on it and that he did clean it but missed the tiny bits on the face of it. He clearly didn't know anything about drawback let alone appreciate they could figure out Sheila's blood was inside it and the significance that such blood would have. What he expected was that since he stated it was not attached the the gun when he left it out and since it was in the closet in the box when they searched things that no one would suspect it had been used. His plan worked at first. It was the lab not police that figured out the moderator was indeed used. The drawback is what put the giant wrench in the works but he would have needed to know about drawback to recognize the problem and thus take precautions to deal with it. The police didn't even know about such it took the lab so it is not surprising that Jeremy didn't know.
According to AE it was a blob of jelly, like jam and there was a white hair attached, thik he may have noticed this but heyho maybe she made a mistake. :-\
-
if had used it he would know that the blood wasnt jam and surely it wouls ocur to him that he should at least clean it off.
-
According to AE it was a blob of jelly, like jam and there was a white hair attached, thik he may have noticed this but heyho maybe she made a mistake. :-\
She described the blood inside the hole as match stick head sized. The blood outside of it was even smaller that is why the lab was unable to successfully type test it.
They didn't notice the blood until they very carefully studied it at Oak Farm. Why would Jeremy carefully study it when he didn't appreciate the significance the blood could have? If it had a significant amount of blood on the outside that you would clean just because a ton of blood would be obvious to be related to the killings.
Why would he care about a hair? How do you know the hair wasn't in the closet and didn't get attached to it after being put in the closet? I am sure the house and closets had Nevill's hair around I don't see how a hair means squat it could get attached before, during or after the murder. If it was Jeremy's gun located at Jeremy's house and had Nevill's hair on it that would be more significant.
-
She described the blood inside the hole as match stick head sized. The blood outside of it was even smaller that is why the lab was unable to successfully type test it.
They didn't notice the blood until they very carefully studied it at Oak Farm. Why would Jeremy carefully study it when he didn't appreciate the significance the blood could have? If it had a significant amount of blood on the outside that you would clean just because a ton of blood would be obvious to be related to the killings.
Why would he care about a hair? How do you know the hair wasn't in the closet and didn't get attached to it after being put in the closet? I am sure the house and closets had Nevill's hair around I don't see how a hair means squat it could get attached before, during or after the murder. If it was Jeremy's gun located at Jeremy's house and had Nevill's hair on it that would be more significant.
I know all about it and the hair could have been anything even a cat hair but whatever you say she did state it was a blob of blood like a blob of jam..... you believe the whole sorry story and I don't at best AE was a bad witness.
-
I know all about it and the hair could have been anything even a cat hair but whatever you say she did state it was a blob of blood like a blob of jam..... you believe the whole sorry story and I don't at best AE was a bad witness.
She said that the blood inside was a blob. She didn't say anything about a blob on the outside. The outside had very little blood on it which means either it was cleaned off but cleaned ineptly or so little blood adhered to it that Jeremy didn't notice it and didn't bother to clean it.
The lab found little blood on the outside, so little that their type testing failed. Not only did the lab note the blood in the opening that Ann called a blob and test it to determine whether it was human, after such Lincoln still found enough blood on the inside opening to successfully type test it. This blood would only be noticed though if you actually looked inside the hole. Why would Jeremy do that? All he cared about was making sure the outside wasn't covered in blood so that when looking through the closet someone would not see it covered in blood and figure out that so much blood means it must have been used in the murders. The family didn't take it because they noticed blood they took it because they felt police should have the moderator, scope and bullets. It was after carefully studying it later that the blood was noticed.
-
She said that the blood inside was a blob. She didn't say anything about a blob on the outside. The outside had very little blood on it which means either it was cleaned off but cleaned ineptly or so little blood adhered to it that Jeremy didn't notice it and didn't bother to clean it.
The lab found little blood on the outside, so little that their type testing failed. Not only did the lab note the blood in the opening that Ann called a blob and test it to determine whether it was human, after such Lincoln still found enough blood on the inside opening to successfully type test it. This blood would only be noticed though if you actually looked inside the hole. Why would Jeremy do that? All he cared about was making sure the outside wasn't covered in blood so that when looking through the closet someone would not see it covered in blood and figure out that so much blood means it must have been used in the murders. The family didn't take it because they noticed blood they took it because they felt police should have the moderator, scope and bullets. It was after carefully studying it later that the blood was noticed.
She described the blob as being like a blob of jam how could she have seen it if it was inside the moderator? Personally, I don't believe she saw anything but was told about it and that was her interpretation of how she imagined it...... but there is a possibility that I am mistaken and I'm sure you will tell me I am, why I am, if I should be etc. etc.
-
She described the blob of jam how could . She have seen it if it was inside the moderator? Personally, I don't believe she saw anything but was told about it and that was her interpretation of how she imagined it.
The inside of the opening has a lip. That lip is threaded and acts as a shelf. On this "shelf" was the blood she saw. The "blob" she saw sitting on this shelf was removed by the lab on Aug 13 and used to test whether it was human blood or something else. It was determined to be human blood. On this same "shelf" Lincoln removed enough blood traces to successfully type test it and he determined it to be group A. If there was no blood there then the lab would not have gotten a positive test for blood and Lincoln would not have found traces of group A blood there. He said the amount of blood remaining there exceeded the amount on the baffles. That is not at all surprising since physics results in the largest particles of blood traveling not far while the smaller particles of blood would be able to travel several inches deep. This results in the quantity of blood found deep being less.
Since a moderator is open on both sides light can get inside the back while you are looking at the front so long as you hold it in a manner other than looking at the ground. Obviously holding it up to the light or a window with light coming in is the best. Doing this enabled the family to see the blood inside. They also saw the blood on the face of the moderator when looking at the opening because the face is the aspect containing the opening. Normally you just see the outside wall.
-
The inside of the opening has a lip. That lip is threaded and acts as a shelf. On this "shelf" was the blood she saw. The "blob" she saw sitting on this shelf was removed by the lab on Aug 13 and used to test whether it was human blood or something else. It was determined to be human blood. On this same "shelf" Lincoln removed enough blood traces to successfully type test it and he determined it to be group A. If there was no blood there then the lab would not have gotten a positive test for blood and Lincoln would not have found traces of group A blood there. He said the amount of blood remaining there exceeded the amount on the baffles. That is not at all surprising since physics results in the largest particles of blood traveling not far while the smaller particles of blood would be able to travel several inches deep. This results in the quantity of blood found deep being less.
Since a moderator is open on both sides light can get inside the back while you are looking at the front so long as you hold it in a manner other than looking at the ground. Obviously holding it up to the light or a window with light coming in is the best. Doing this enabled the family to see the blood inside. They also saw the blood on the face of the moderator when looking at the opening because the face is the aspect containing the opening. Normally you just see the outside wall.
possibly but that is not what she said she saw. We shall agree to differ.
-
possibly but that is not what she said she saw. We shall agree to differ.
She said she saw a blob right inside the opening which means on the threaded lip. Other family members likewise said they saw what looked like blood inside the opening on the threaded lip. The lab saw what they were referring to, tested it and said it was indeed human blood. Defense expert Lincoln found traces of blood left in that same exact spot and determined it was group A blood.
Saying there was no blood there fails the best a Jeremy supporter can do is allege the blood was planted or allege it was June's like the defense claimed at trial. Denying there was blood there fails miserably.
-
wich makes it all the stranger that jeremy dident clean it.
-
A " blob " of blood wouldn't have stayed long unless it had been a clot.
-
you still think he might might clean it anyway.
i mean if he doesnt get rid of it becouse the relatives will miss it you would think he would clean it up so they wouldent be suspicious when they did see it.
-
you still think he might might clean it anyway.
i mean if he doesnt get rid of it becouse the relatives will miss it you would think he would clean it up so they wouldent be suspicious when they did see it.
I agree nugs, it's very strange not to give it a clean it wouldn't have taken long.
-
if hes not geting rid of it becouse they might miss it then he must expect them to find it at some time so it would be completly crazy to leave blood on it.
-
I agree nugs, it's very strange not to give it a clean it wouldn't have taken long.
If it was SO minute that it couldn't be seen unless it was studied very closely -minutely, even!!!- he probably wouldn't have bothered if it wasn't IMMEDIATELY obvious.
-
well if it was that minute how did the relatives notice it.
-
well if it was that minute how did the relatives notice it.
Because they WERE studying it minutely.
-
but what made them study it.
if there was nothing visble to the eye why would they.
-
If it was SO minute that it couldn't be seen unless it was studied very closely -minutely, even!!!- he probably wouldn't have bothered if it wasn't IMMEDIATELY obvious.
Apparently not but it's difficult to understand. AE tells us about the jelly like blob and the attached hair. I can only think that AE is the worst witness ever or she didn't actually ever see it and put her own spin on the idea of it :-\
-
if the silencer looks as it has allways looked they have no reason to study it or even notice it.
-
but what made them study it.
if there was nothing visble to the eye why would they.
Perhaps you should ask them, Nugs.
-
but what made them study it.
if there was nothing visble to the eye why would they.
For starters the fact that the moderator and scope were always left on the gun and used with the gun so his claim he found the gun without them was not in the least bit credible.
-
they wouldn't of known what Neville did with his guns they dident live there.
-
Apparently not but it's difficult to understand. AE tells us about the jelly like blob and the attached hair. I can only think that AE is the worst witness ever or she didn't actually ever see it and put her own spin on the idea of it :-\
Maggie, you may have a point. In her eagerness to make them see how important it might be, she may well have exaggerated its' size, a trait often adopted by others.
-
if there was nothing visble to the naked it contradicts the relatives cliams about finding it.
if there was then it begs the qustion of why jeremy dident clean it.
-
if there was nothing visble to the naked it contradicts the relatives cliams about finding it.
if there was then it begs the qustion of why jeremy dident clean it.
He must have known it would throw suspicion on him if recovered. I can only surmise it was either one of his innumerable practical jokes which went awry or a person or persons unknown planted it there for Police to peruse.
-
Maggie, you may have a point. In her eagerness to make them see how important it might be, she may well have exaggerated its' size, a trait often adopted by others.
She may have, or she may never have seen it therefore her imaginary 'blob' didn't exist and we know it couldn't have existed as she described it because the blood would have dried, turned dark brown and disintegrated. I can accept there may have been a small drop of blood inside the moderator but I cannot accept what AE described.
-
if there was nothing visble to the naked it contradicts the relatives cliams about finding it.
if there was then it begs the qustion of why jeremy dident clean it.
I'm certain he would have if:-
A) He saw it
B) He took time to study it minutely
C) It was in the form Ann describes it
D) It was ever there.
-
or her wanted to get caught but then if he wanted to be cought i doubt if he would of protested his innocence for god knows how long.
-
they wouldn't of known what Neville did with his guns they dident live there.
AP found the gun in the closet with the scope and moderator attached. He put it away in the same manner. Nevill would have zero reason to ever remove the scope. They knew about weapons and thus knew that if you remove a scope you must re-zero it. You only remove a scope if you are putting a weapon away for long term storage. There was no reason to even remove the scope during cleaning. The barrel of the weapon could be removed without any need to remove the scope.
The moderator would be removed for cleaning but would be reattached. There was no reason to use the weapon without both. There was every reason to use both. The only exception to this rule is that the scope would not be used for close quarter shooting. But there was no reason for any close quarter shooting except the murders.
The fact Jeremy removed the scope is very damning because the only reason he would remove it would be in anticipation of the murders. But even worse he lied saying the weapon could not fit int he closet with the scope and moderator attached. AP refuted this lie and police checked and found AP to be accurate. Jeremy then changed his story and claimed it could not fit in its case with them attached and that they put it in its case. This was an even bigger lie- Nevill didn't by any hard plastic case for it like AP had for his weapon.
Why did he lie and say the weapon didn't fit unless the scope and moderator were removed? These lies were to provide a reason for the scope and moderator to be removed because there was no legitimate reason.