Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Adam on May 24, 2017, 09:49:AM
-
Had the relatives ever been in trouble with the law before ?
Did the relatives know there was no other evidence which showed Sheila was the killer.
Did the relatives know about back splatter.
Did the relatives know there was no back splatter already on the rifle nozzle.
Did the relatives know that one of Sheila's shots was a contact shot.
Did the relatives know the rifle with the silencer on was too long for Sheila to shoot herself.
Did the relatives know where to get Sheila's blood.
If unable to get Sheila's blood, did the relatives know what blood type she was.
Did the relatives know who in the family had Sheila's blood type.
Did the relatives know how to expertly put Sheila's blood/blood type into the silencer. Creating the back splatter effect.
Did the relatives know when WHF was empty so they could go back and scratch the aga.
Did the relatives know how to scratch the aga to suggest a kitchen fight.
Did the relatives know that the crime scene photos did not already include pictures of the aga without the scratch's.
Did the relatives know where to get a strand of Nevill's hair.
Did the relatives know the risks in attempting this frame and the punishment if found.
Did the relatives know that each other could be completely trusted in a big crime committe
-
Had the relatives ever been in trouble with the law before ? Don't know
Do you?
Did the relatives know there was no other evidence which showed Sheila was the killer. None of us can answer that as we haven't seen all the evidence. And no I'm not talking about pii
Did the relatives know about back splatter. The silencer wasn't used
Did the relatives know there was no back splatter already on the rifle nozzle. Ditto
Did the relatives know that one of Sheila's shots was a contact shot. Who blooming knows the police seem to have told them a lot, you can't prove they didn't
Did the relatives know the rifle with the silencer on was too long for Sheila to shoot herself. Ditto regarding silence
Did the relatives know where to get Sheila's blood. It isn't Shielas blood imo
If unable to get Sheila's blood, did the relatives know what blood type she was. Ditto
Did the relatives know who in the family had Sheila's blood type. Ditto
Did the relatives know how to expertly put Sheila's blood/blood type into the silencer. Creating the back splatter effect. Ditto
Did the relatives know when WHF was empty so they could go back and scratch the aga. They did
That on the assumption the paint would match up
Did the relatives know how to scratch the aga to suggest a kitchen fight. I don't think
They needed to do that anyway
Did the relatives know that the crime scene photos did not already include pictures of the aga without the scratch's. They weren't there originally and probably didn't have think the police would have taken photos of the surround anyway
Did the relatives know where to get a strand of Nevill's hair. I expect off his comb or hairbrush would have done the tricky
Did the relatives know the risks in attempting this frame and the punishment if found. I think they truly believed he had done it and were prepared to take the risk of helping it along
Did the relatives know that each other could be completely trusted in a big crime committe of course the could, they were family jb wasn't in their eyes
-
Working from phone and on lunch so spelling a bit naff!
-
Working from phone and on lunch so spelling a bit naff!
Er! What exactly were you wanting to say, Notsure. All you've done is quote Adam's post and apologize for your spelling ??? ;D ;D ;D
-
Hi notsure
I was just about to answer Adam's questionnaire when I realised I was going to answer exactly the same as you. Do hope Adam lets me share with you and does not make me do it all again :)
-
Haha susan.
Jane I didn't type in a different colour in reply so you probably missed my
I ju
-
Haha susan.
Jane I didn't type in a different colour in reply so you probably missed my
I ju
Have just gone back for another look, Notsure. You're right. It's the same colour and has become part of the original quote.
-
Haha susan.
Jane I didn't type in a different colour in reply so you probably missed my
I ju
I've sorted out your post for you ;)
-
I've sorted out your post for you ;)
Thanks for that, Mystic One ;D
-
Thank you Notsure.
Well all the evidence shows Sheila did not commit the massacre. At the time this evidence had not been processed. The relatives would have been jumping the gun somewhat attempting to fabricate the silencer without knowing anything.
Unfortunately it was Sheila's blood. My question is did they have access to it. My view is the relatives did not have access to it. There is also no way they would know what Sheila's blood type was.
Don't know how saying "the silencer wasn't used" answers the questions about back splatter, the rifle lenght & the relatives expertly inserting blood. The evidence says the silencer was used. That will never change. The questions are asking if the relatives were able to fabricate the silencer.
It seems you are saying the relatives were prepared to take the risk that the crime scene photos did not include the aga. That was a big risk. If they already had Sheila's blood they didn't need to take it.
-
The replies received on both forums clearly shows that the relatives & Stan Jones could not work independently of each other.
Stan Jones would need the relatives to lie in their WS's and say they found the silencer with hair, paint & blood in.
The relatives would need Stan Jones to get Sheila's blood & crime scene information.
It's very surprising that law abiding citizens and a policeman with no previous corruption history would both suddenly become so devious. Especially as all the other evidence being processed was showing Sheila did not commit the massacre.
-
I've sorted out your post for you ;)
I used to like rectifying other people's posts. :))
-
There is another option to the relatives and Stan Jones working together to frame Bamber.
That is that the relatives found the silencer with blood & paint in, and passed it to Stan Jones. It was then passed for testing. Unlikely I know.
-
Thank you Notsure.
Well all the evidence shows Sheila did not commit the massacre. At the time this evidence had not been processed. The relatives would have been jumping the gun somewhat attempting to fabricate the silencer without knowing anything.
Unfortunately it was Sheila's blood. My question is did they have access to it. My view is the relatives did not have access to it. There is also no way they would know what Sheila's blood type was.
You have been shown evidence that the relatives had access to her blood. I provided you the transcript.
The police also had access to Sheila's blood.
-PV/12
-PV/13
-PV/16
Were all liquid samples of Sheila's blood that were kept in the police evidence fridge.
-
You have been shown evidence that the relatives had access to her blood. I provided you the transcript.
The police also had access to Sheila's blood.
-PV/12
-PV/13
-PV/16
Were all liquid samples of Sheila's blood that were kept in the police evidence fridge.
What evidence that the relatives had access to Sheila's blood ?
Well sending me lots of PV's does not mean the police had stored Sheila's blood.
Not sure why the police would store it. But it is more likely the police would have Sheila's blood than the relatives. Which is why I said it had to be a joint effort. Providing the police had Sheila's blood in a fridge. Was it next to the Semi skimmed milk ?
-
I used to like rectifying other people's posts. :))
Happy memories, Roch. ;)
-
What evidence that the relatives had access to Sheila's blood ?
Well sending me lots of PV's does not mean the police had stored Sheila's blood.
Not sure why the police would store it. But it is more likely the police would have Sheila's blood than the relatives. Which is why I said it had to be a joint effort. Providing the police had Sheila's blood in a fridge. Was it next to the Semi skimmed milk ?
No allegedly in her bloodstained knickers soaking in the bucket.
-
No allegedly in her bloodstained knickers soaking in the bucket.
;D
-
Happy memories, Roch. ;)
It was all about brackets Maggie. Brackets were everything. 8)
-
It was all about brackets Maggie. Brackets were everything. 8)
;D ;D ;D
-
Well sending me lots of PV's does not mean the police had stored Sheila's blood.
I'm afraid it does Adam. That's why you need to dig a little deeper than a book written 23 years ago.
-
I'm afraid it does Adam. That's why you need to dig a little deeper than a book written 23 years ago.
What's Wilkes's book got to do with this ?
Great. I've always wanted to see a document that the police had stored Sheila's blood.
I assume Steve was right and you are referring to soaked blood in a bucket. Therefore the claim the relatives had access to Sheila's blood has been dismissed.
The relatives must have asked Stan Jones for Sheila's blood.
The other option is Stan Jones fabricated a silencer himself and asked the relatives to create false WS's and say they found the silencer.
Either way the relatives & Stan Jones had to work together. Which makes the frame even more unlikely.
-
As mentioned, there is always the chance the relatives found the silencer with paint & Sheila's blood on. But as also mentioned, unlikely.
-
I assume Steve was right and you are referring to soaked blood in a bucket. Therefore the claim the relatives had access to Sheila's blood has been dismissed.
The knickers were covered in Sheila's menstrual blood. So they indeed had access to her blood.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8033.msg394832.html#msg394832 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8033.msg394832.html#msg394832)
Four ballistics experts have testified that the wounds to Sheila where contact wounds caused by the threaded end of the rifle. Not the smooth and wider silencer. Thus the blood getting inside the silencer via being shot is ruled out.
-
No allegedly in her bloodstained knickers soaking in the bucket.
"SOAKING" being the operative word. How many parts blood to water would there have been by the time the knickers were extricated from the pail. If she's rinsed surplus away prior to soaking it reduces blood content still further.
-
"SOAKING" being the operative word. How many parts blood to water would there have been by the time the knickers were extricated from the pail. If she's rinsed surplus away prior to soaking it reduces blood content still further.
Ive heard of a quote "its like getting blood out of a stone" conspiracy thearists have invented a new one, "its like getting blood out of washed knickers" :-[
-
Ive heard of a quote "its like getting blood out of a stone" conspiracy thearists have invented a new one, "its like getting blood out of washed knickers" :-[
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D WONDERFUL, Justice!!!!!!!
-
Ive heard of a quote "its like getting blood out of a stone" conspiracy thearists have invented a new one, "its like getting blood out of washed knickers" :-[
Very good. ;D
-
David knows there was no chance of the relatives asking Stan Jones to bring Sheila's blood to Oak Farm for them. Or of the relatives asking Stan Jones to give them crime scene information and photos, although these questions were not answered by him.
The above means they did not fabricate the silencer which is a big breakthrough. Which is why David is still pursuing that the relatives got Sheila's blood from a soaking bucket of clothes & created the back splatter effect inside the silencer.
Didn't AE mention the bucket in her WS ? Strange thing to do if she used it's contents to fabricate evidence.
-
David knows there was no chance of the relatives asking Stan Jones to bring Sheila's blood to Oak Farm for them. Or of the relatives asking Stan Jones to give them crime scene information and photos, although these questions were not answered.
The above means they did not fabricate the silencer which is a big breakthrough. Which is why David is still pursuing that the relatives got Sheila's blood from a soaking bucket of clothes & created the back splatter effect inside the silencer.
Didn't AE mention the bucket in her WS ? Strange thing to do if she used it's contents to fabricate evidence.
Hello Adam
what a silly notion blood being taken from a bucket of soaking clothes. IMO the silencer was not used and I suspect the blood was from a rabbit not Sheila.
-
Hello Adam
what a silly notion blood being taken from a bucket of soaking clothes. IMO the silencer was not used and I suspect the blood was from a rabbit not Sheila.
It was identified as human blood Susan.
-
It was identified as human blood Susan.
Hi Hartley
sorry about that I thought I had read later it was identified as rabbit's blood must be another of my pipe dreams :)) :)) :)) Thanks for putting me right.
-
Hi Hartley
sorry about that I thought I had read later it was identified as rabbit's blood must be another of my pipe dreams :)) :)) :)) Thanks for putting me right.
Rabbit's blood ???
It was Sheila's blood.
The relatives did not fabricate the silencer. They had no access to -
Sheila's blood.
Crime scene pictures of the kitchen.
How to insert into a silencer.
Crime scene information on -
Blood on/off the rifle end
Who received contact shots.
Rifle lenght.
Sheila's arm lenght.
Other evidence pointing towards guilt or innocence.
-
Rabbit's blood ???
It was Sheila's blood.
The relatives did not fabricate the silencer. They had no access to -
Sheila's blood.
Crime scene pictures of the kitchen.
How to insert into a silencer.
Crime scene information on -
Blood on/off the rifle end
Who received contact shots.
Rifle lenght.
Sheila's arm lenght.
Other evidence pointing towards guilt or innocence.
Adam hahaha rabbits blood indeed what am I like. I never said the relatives fabricated the blood in the silencer I have always thought the silencer was not used.
-
Adam hahaha rabbits blood indeed what am I like. I never said the relatives fabricated the blood in the silencer I have always thought the silencer was not used.
How did Sheila's blood and the aga paint get on it if the relatives didn't put it there ?
-
How did Sheila's blood and the aga paint get on it if the relatives didn't put it there ?
Adam you sound as if you think the relatives engineered evidence with regard to blood and paint on the silencer you must think the silencer was not used then along with me I knew you would come round to my way of thinking.
-
Adam you sound as if you think the relatives engineered evidence with regard to blood and paint on the silencer you must think the silencer was not used then along with me I knew you would come round to my way of thinking.
It's ok, now the relatives have been ruled out, you can still support Bamber.
This will have to be on the basis that Stan Jones fabricated the silencer. Which several people have accused him of doing.
-
It's ok, now the relatives have been ruled out, you can still support Bamber.
This will have to be on the basis that Stan Jones fabricated the silencer. Which several people have accused him of doing.
Adam thank you I will still support Jeremy Bamber because I feel he is innocent and was wrongly convicted. It is not for me to say who fabricated the silencer somebody did as I feel it was not used who would murder their entire family then go to the trouble to put the silencer back in its box and open a deep cupboard and put it to the back (Vidvic told me the cupboard was very deep) it does not make sense if Jeremy had carried out the murders he would want out of WHF as fast as and if Sheila why not take the silencer off the rifle place it near to where she was and shoot herself with the rifle it would not matter to Sheila if people knew she had used a siilencer what difference Adam.
-
Adam thank you I will still support Jeremy Bamber because I feel he is innocent and was wrongly convicted. It is not for me to say who fabricated the silencer somebody did as I feel it was not used who would murder their entire family then go to the trouble to put the silencer back in its box and open a deep cupboard and put it to the back (Vidvic told me the cupboard was very deep) it does not make sense if Jeremy had carried out the murders he would want out of WHF as fast as and if Sheila why not take the silencer off the rifle place it near to where she was and shoot herself with the rifle it would not matter to Sheila if people knew she had used a siilencer what difference Adam.
You need to say who fabricated the silencer. And then justify it by saying how. Rather than just say I believe Bamber is innocent but can't explain the silencer evidence.
As I said, ruling out the relatives, which you have to do, means you can join Mike & others in accusing Stan Jones.
-
You need to say who fabricated the silencer. And then justify it by saying how. Rather than just say I believe Bamber is innocent but can't explain the silencer evidence.
As I said, ruling out the relatives, which you have to do, means you can join Mike & others in accusing Stan Jones.
Adam sorry I will not join others and accuse anyone of anything I don't know and to be honest neither do you. I have always thought and said IMO the silencer was not used all I did was apply logic as to why it was not used. I believe Sheila murdered her family then herself for anyone to beable to murder two wee boys when they were peaceful in their beds had to be mentally disturbed and I don't think JB was for all his bad points which I have always put down to him being silly immature and arrogant but not a murderer.This is of course my opinion which is my right to have one :)
-
Adam sorry I will not join others and accuse anyone of anything I don't know and to be honest neither do you. I have always thought and said IMO the silencer was not used all I did was apply logic as to why it was not used. I believe Sheila murdered her family then herself for anyone to beable to murder two wee boys when they were peaceful in their beds had to be mentally disturbed and I don't think JB was for all his bad points which I have always put down to him being silly immature and arrogant but not a murderer.This is of course my opinion which is my right to have one :)
You need to address or undermine the evidence. Just saying you believe the silencer was not used is not enough.
The paint and blood evidence shows the silencer was used.
Either Stan Jones fabricated the silencer and asked the relatives to lie in their WS's & say they found it. This serious accusation needs to be comprehensivly supported.
Or Bamber committed the massacre. Which is already supported with a mountain of other evidence.
-
You need to address or undermine the evidence. Just saying you believe the silencer was not used is not enough.
The paint and blood evidence shows the silencer was used.
Either Stan Jones fabricated the silencer and asked the relatives to lie in their WS's & say they found it. This serious accusation needs to be comprehensivly supported.
Or Bamber committed the massacre. Which is already supported with a mountain of other evidence.
Adam what mountain of evidence exists that Bamber murdered his family he was convicted on the silencer evidence and Julie's evidence and I believe none of it.
-
Adam what mountain of evidence exists that Bamber murdered his family he was convicted on the silencer evidence and Julie's evidence and I believe none of it.
I've directed you to the library several times. There is also a mountain of circumstantial evidence. One alive suspect with several motives, an opportunity & no alibi. Together with a witness.
Back to the silencer. Do you believe Stan Jones fabricated it & asked the relatived to lie in their WS's. Or that Bamber committed the massacre ?
It has to be one or the other ?
-
Adam what mountain of evidence exists that Bamber murdered his family he was convicted on the silencer evidence and Julie's evidence and I believe none of it.
That's the problem. Adam just says 'there is a mountain in the library' and hopes you don't look -
(https://davidbcapes.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/empty-shelves-at-princess-marina-library.jpg)
Because there is nothing there.
-
Hello Adam
what a silly notion blood being taken from a bucket of soaking clothes. IMO the silencer was not used and I suspect the blood was from a rabbit not Sheila.
Blood from a rabbit? I think you got your silly notions mixed up. ^-^
-
That's the problem. Adam just says 'there is a mountain in the library' and hopes you don't look -
(https://davidbcapes.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/empty-shelves-at-princess-marina-library.jpg)
Because there is nothing there.
I wouldn't call 50+ pieces empty. But keep fire fighting.
Where did you deliver you're 'make believe' palm print/forensic evidence breakthrough from/to in you're 'make believe' meeting with Bamber's legal advisors ? Oh yes, you wouldn't tell me.
-
It's ok, now the relatives have been ruled out, you can still support Bamber.
You are in denial.
-
Blood from a rabbit? I think you got your silly notions mixed up. ^-^
Hahaha David you don't want to hear about my other silly notions you will go into total shock :)) :)) :)) I did read about a mixture of AK something forgot the rest but it did mention rabbit will try and find it then you will think I am so clever ;)
-
Hahaha David you don't want to hear about my other silly notions you will go into total shock :)) :)) :)) I did read about a mixture of AK something forgot the rest but it did mention rabbit will try and find it then you will think I am so clever ;)
Do you believe Stan Jones managed to fabricate a silencer, & then asked the relatives to lie in their WS's and say they found it ?
If you won't commit to this, I'll have to assume you believe Bamber used the silencer.
Just saying you believe is innocent & not offerring any supportong evidence is not enough.
-
I wouldn't call 50+ pieces empty. But keep fire fighting.
Where did you deliver you're 'make believe' palm print/forensic evidence breakthrough from/to in you're 'make believe' meeting with Bamber's legal advisors ? Oh yes, you wouldn't tell me.
How many pieces exactly? It seems to change depending on the day.
Only 100+ pieces. But since when was that enough for supporters ?
30 pieces of forensic evidence incriminating Bamber. Eighteen link Bamber directly to the scene.
28 pieces of forensic evidence.
200 pieces of forensic and circumstantial evidence.
33 forensic points which link Bamber to the crime.
-
How many pieces exactly? It seems to change depending on the day.
The last count, there were 42 threads. Several of them mention more than one piece.
So I've generously said 50+ to you and recently Lookout. Only one piece is needed for a conviction. But good to know there are 49+ more.
But at least you've got you're 'forensic evidence breakthrough'.
-
Hahaha David you don't want to hear about my other silly notions you will go into total shock :)) :)) :)) I did read about a mixture of AK something forgot the rest but it did mention rabbit will try and find it then you will think I am so clever ;)
David AK-1 Enzyme in humans is also found in rabbits and game which would have been used with the silencer on the rifle have you got a clue where I am coming from I don't hahaha
-
Do you believe Stan Jones managed to fabricate a silencer, & then asked the relatives to lie in their WS's and say they found it ?
If you won't commit to this, I'll have to assume you believe Bamber used the silencer.
Just saying you believe is innocent & not offerring any supportong evidence is not enough.
Adam I understand the relatives found the silencer at the back of the cupboard (wonder what they were looking for searching cupboards) in a house not belonging to them hey presto they found a silencer and put it in the boot of their car (unprotected) think it had one grey hair and a flake of blood on it took it home then at sometime gave it to EP but lost the hair in transit. What happened next I can guess but wont do I may be wrong but it was never used in the murders anyhow so why are we talking about it ::)
-
Adam I understand the relatives found the silencer at the back of the cupboard (wonder what they were looking for searching cupboards) in a house not belonging to them hey presto they found a silencer and put it in the boot of their car (unprotected) think it had one grey hair and a flake of blood on it took it home then at sometime gave it to EP but lost the hair in transit. What happened next I can guess but wont do I may be wrong but it was never used in the murders anyhow so why are we talking about it ::)
The evidence says it was used in the murders. It had Sheila's blood and the aga paint on.
You are just going to say the silencer wasn't used. But not justify this stance by showing how Stan Jones managed to fabricate it & convince the relatives to lie in their WS's.
-
The evidence says it was used in the murders. It had Sheila's blood and the aga paint on.
You are just going to say the silencer wasn't used. But not justify this stance by showing how Stan Jones managed to fabricate it & convince the relatives to lie in their WS's.
Adam I will not say anything about Stan Jones and the fabrication of the silencer I know nothing about it. Sorry.
-
Adam I will not say anything about Stan Jones and the fabrication of the silencer I know nothing about it. Sorry.
It's a pity so many supporters won't discuss the evidence.
JackieD just says Bamber is innocent because Julie identified the twins. Last week refusing to answer any questions after making the serious accusation that the relatives fabricated the silencer.
Nugs & Lookout refuse to say how Bamber committed the massacre or answer any questions while Roch just says the.police hid evidence.
Lucy says Bamber is innocent because AE gave BC Nevill's wallet while Buddy says Bamber should have 'lobbed Julie overboard'.
I thought you might be supporting Bamber as you could show how all the evidence was incorrect. But was wrong.
-
It's a pity so many supporters won't discuss the evidence.
JackieD just says Bamber is innocent because Julie identified the twins. Last week refusing to answer any questions after making the serious accusation that the relatives fabricated the silencer.
Nugs & Lookout refuse to say how Bamber committed the massacre or answer any questions while Roch just says the.police hid evidence.
Lucy says Bamber is innocent because AE gave BC Nevill's wallet while Buddy says Bamber should have 'lobbed Julie overboard'.
I thought you might be supporting Bamber as you could show how all the evidence was incorrect. But was wrong.
Adam you convince me Bamber is guilty I am saying Sheila is guilty
-
Adam you convince me Bamber is guilty I am saying Sheila is guilty
I'm not trying to convince you.
Just asking if you believe Stan Jones fabricated the silencer. As the evidence at trial was it had Sheila's blood & the aga paint on.
You just say you 'know nothing about it'.
-
I'm not trying to convince you.
Just asking if you believe Stan Jones fabricated the silencer. As the evidence at trial was it had Sheila's blood & the aga paint on.
You just say you 'know nothing about it'.
Adam the same man who told Bill about the suicide note fabricated the silencer with blood and paint from the Ada.
-
Adam the same man who told Bill about the suicide note fabricated the silencer with blood and paint from the Ada.
Really ? Hopefully Bill will reveal who this was.
At the moment he has just said "a man told me".
-
Really ? Hopefully Bill will reveal who this was.
At the moment he has just said "a man told me".
Adam wonder who this man is? I hate a mystery and I go all out to solve it. Did you read my post on the AK-l enzyme same in humans as rabbits :)) can be on a rifle that was used for shooting game etc .,
-
Really ? Hopefully Bill will reveal who this was.
At the moment he has just said "a man told me".
I think he was just being mildly facetious Adam.
-
Really ? Hopefully Bill will reveal who this was.
At the moment he has just said "a man told me".
Don't underestimate Bill,Adam.
-
From the clip here Jeremy says he can't envisage Sheila taking the sound moderator from the gun cupboard. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/the-jeremy-bamber-files-exclusive-audio-191151
I'm sure sparks would fly if he finally admitted to the killings without ever using it.
-
From the clip here Jeremy says he can't envisage Sheila taking the sound moderator from the gun cupboard. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/the-jeremy-bamber-files-exclusive-audio-191151
I'm sure sparks would fly if he finally admitted to the killings without ever using it.
The silencer was most probably on the rifle when Bamber arrived for supper. As noticed a few days earlier by AP.
If it wasn't, Bamber had the opportinity to insert it while simultaneously fully loading the rifle. Under the guise that he had seen rabbits.
It's common sense to use an available silencer when attempting a silent 2am massacre.
-
I have been studying this information for a while now, I think this is proof no one put any blood inside the silencer, it was inside and they didn't know it was in there. The silencer had originally been sent for contact traces and then was sent back again for further tests regarding laser and super glue fumes testing, it was sent again for further tests after 10 to 12 days and that is when the blood inside was discovered.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=728.0;attach=3168
If the police or family had any involvement placing blood inside this would have come to light much earlier and it would not have been found by chance.
The family have been victimised on here very unfairly and all they did was clear a gun cupboard out on authority of Mr Cock and come across this evidence.
-
Being able to put a silencer on the rifle was one of my 8 reasons given why Bamber chose this as the murder weapon. After two posters claimed Bamber would not have chosen this rifle.
This was described yesterday as a 'straw man' reason.
When I asked what weapon Bamber should have used instead, I was firstly asked to find proof that he had said Bamber used the wrong weapon. Once I quoted his post that Bamber used a 'totally inappropriate weapon', I was just told Bamber didn't commit the massacre.
-
I have been studying this information for a while now, I think this is proof no one put any blood inside the silencer, it was inside and they didn't know it was in there. The silencer had originally been sent for contact traces and then was sent back again for further tests regarding laser and super glue fumes testing, it was sent again for further tests after 10 to 12 days and that is when the blood inside was discovered.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=728.0;attach=3168
If the police or family had any involvement placing blood inside this would have come to light much earlier and it would not have been found by chance.
The family have been victimised on here very unfairly and all they did was clear a gun cupboard out on authority of Mr Cock and come across this evidence.
The blood was 'discovered' in mid September.
The contact wounds were created by the rifle with no silencer attached.
34. The evidence of Dr Fowler is set out in a more substantial report. That report has been peer reviewed by Dr Dragovich, who is Chief Medical Examiner in Oakland County, Michigan and Dr Marcella Fierro, who is the retired Chief Medical Examiner to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Both have qualifications as forensic pathologists. In his careful report, Dr Fowler makes clear that he has reviewed the evidence, which was available in relation to the wounds. He concluded that the abrasions found were consistent with those of a rifle without a silencer, that there were no distinctive marks on the body which showed that a silencer had been attached, and the residue was consistent with contact wounds.
-
The blood was 'discovered' in mid September.
The contact wounds were created by the rifle with no silencer attached.
34. The evidence of Dr Fowler is set out in a more substantial report. That report has been peer reviewed by Dr Dragovich, who is Chief Medical Examiner in Oakland County, Michigan and Dr Marcella Fierro, who is the retired Chief Medical Examiner to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Both have qualifications as forensic pathologists. In his careful report, Dr Fowler makes clear that he has reviewed the evidence, which was available in relation to the wounds. He concluded that the abrasions found were consistent with those of a rifle without a silencer, that there were no distinctive marks on the body which showed that a silencer had been attached, and the residue was consistent with contact wounds.
A couple of things on this David.
For whatever reason these expert opinions weren't considered substantial enough to make the CCRC send the case back to appeal. Getting one expert to trump another on opinion alone doesn't seem to be accepted too often by the CCRC, although I must admit I don't know their views on it as their report dismissing the application has not been made public.
The second point, looking in isolation at the wording of the extract that you posted, it appears that the view is given that there is no evidence suggesting a silencer was fitted. Fine, but it doesn't offer a view that there is evidence that a silencer wasn't fitted. I think that is an important distinction.
-
The blood was 'discovered' in mid September.
The contact wounds were created by the rifle with no silencer attached.
34. The evidence of Dr Fowler is set out in a more substantial report. That report has been peer reviewed by Dr Dragovich, who is Chief Medical Examiner in Oakland County, Michigan and Dr Marcella Fierro, who is the retired Chief Medical Examiner to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Both have qualifications as forensic pathologists. In his careful report, Dr Fowler makes clear that he has reviewed the evidence, which was available in relation to the wounds. He concluded that the abrasions found were consistent with those of a rifle without a silencer, that there were no distinctive marks on the body which showed that a silencer had been attached, and the residue was consistent with contact wounds.
David you are missing my point, the relatives have been accused of putting blood inside the silencer, it was found by chance and not by planned finding, if you read the article this is a police spokesman talking without pre planned questions so it was an off the cuff answer to a reporter.
-
According to the 1991 COLP enquiry there were two silencers. One which had been found at the scene was heavily bloodstained and bore the DNA of a male akin/loci to Neville's,not Sheila's or Jeremy's.
This was found when officers had first entered after the tragedy.
-
I've sorted out your post for you ;)
thank you zoso only just noticed this sorry.