Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: David1819 on April 07, 2018, 07:38:PM
-
I have always wondered what this circular part is.
-
Also note the possible graze wound below the lower gsw. Caused by?
-
Where would the smaller dots of blood have come from,and how ?
-
Do you mean the lighter smudge or the blob?
-
The tiny dots which look like moles----but aren't such.
-
The tiny dots which look like moles----but aren't such.
I've always assumed they were.
-
I've always assumed they were.
No,they're not moles Roch as judging by their colours they blend in with the surrounding blood,plus moles aren't so uniformed in the way the pic shows.
If there was another pic of Sheila you'd then see that there were no moles in that area.
-
Looking through my magnifier they look inflamed around the edges,especially the tiny one under her chin,but what would cause them I'm at a loss.
-
Had it been a shotgun that was discharged then I'd have said it was caused by shot.
-
Do you mean the lighter smudge or the blob?
This.
-
Would that smudge have been the rifle barrel as it slid from Sheila's grasp on the last/final shot ?
-
Question: What is the source of that particular photograph? Is it the agreed photograph at trial taken from police evidence, with an index number and linked to the record of negatives? That might seem like an obvious question, but establishing provenance is essential as these photographs can be doctored or tampered with, especially nowadays with digital technology.
Some observations [not all of these are pertinent to David's question]:
(i). The blood looks wet, fresh and very red, and though that might just be the effect of the camera flash, equally it could be that the photograph has been tampered with. Or it could indicate something more sinister.
(ii). Regarding the mark referred to by David, my first thought on seeing it was that it is a mirror mark of the upper entry wound, probably caused by Sheila's chin immediately falling forward after the second shot. Or could be where Bamber pointed the end of the gun before deciding to shoot her elsewhere in the neck. However, the mark in question has a ring of bruising around it consistent with a contact wound, so it might not be a mirror mark or a test mark. I don't believe it is caused by simple 'cold' contact with the muzzle end of the rifle or the end of the moderator, as the case may be.
(iii). Could in fact the fragmented bullet provide a clue as to a possible explanation? It could either be that the mark in question is an exit wound. That may also explain why no blood can be seen out of the 'wound', as sometimes less blood comes from exit wounds. Alternatively, maybe Sheila was shot three times rather than twice?
(iv). Were tests done of the blood found on Sheila?
-
Hang on....
Doesn't that bruising around the wounds on her throat mean that the moderator can't have been on the rifle when she was shot?
Of course, in fairness to the Crown, that doesn't mean that Bamber didn't shoot her, but it is in contradiction to the Crown's case theory and does represent reasonable doubt. Or am I wrong in my interpretation of the photo, or if right, overstepping the mark on its implications?
-
What I do see is a botched attempt at taking her own life. How painful and determined Sheila had been.
A life that quite possibly could have been saved had not hours been wasted outside the farmhouse that night.
-
Hang on....
Doesn't that bruising around the wounds on her throat mean that the moderator can't have been on the rifle when she was shot?
Of course, in fairness to the Crown, that doesn't mean that Bamber didn't shoot her, but it is in contradiction to the Crown's case theory and does represent reasonable doubt. Or am I wrong in my interpretation of the photo, or if right, overstepping the mark on its implications?
I think it's dried blood as remarked upon by Inspector Ivor Montgomery and Dr. Craig respectively. From what I've read the average time it takes for blood to dry is 60 minutes.
-
Has anyone noticed what I suggest is a 'graze' underneath the lower entry wound? It never gets mentioned on here.
-
I thought it was more a smudge,Roch ? Unless I'm looking at the wrong part of the pic.
-
I think it's dried blood as remarked upon by Inspector Ivor Montgomery and Dr. Craig respectively. From what I've read the average time it takes for blood to dry is 60 minutes.
I think that the 60 minutes of drying time would be dependant on a few factors,Steve.
-
I think it's dried blood as remarked upon by Inspector Ivor Montgomery and Dr. Craig respectively. From what I've read the average time it takes for blood to dry is 60 minutes.
Thanks. To be fair, it does distinctly look like bruising to me. I say that not to be biased, that's simply what I think. But I'll have to read up on the sources you have given.
It strikes me that Dr Craig had no special qualifications beyond those of a jobbing doctor. He was a local G.P., a station that commands respect of course, and he was highly-educated, but as a police surgeon his job was not that of a pathologist or other forensic examiner and his view about the forensic particulars can't necessarily be taken seriously. The same, much more so, applies to Inspector Montgomery.
Another point - in the main picture, see the large blood splatter further down her nightdress? I raised above the question of whether the blood was tested, as that might not necessarily just be hers. Another point is how the blood could just be on one side of her nightdress if it was Bamber who shot her? Perhaps she was already lying down, but if we can assume she was standing when first shot, would the blood be patterned as shown in the photo?
Another question: Do we know if there was blood on the back of Sheila's nightdress?
-
Why would you ask such a question when the wound had been as far from her back as you could get ?
-
Has anyone noticed what I suggest is a 'graze' underneath the lower entry wound? It never gets mentioned on here.
Dr Vanezis mentions in his autopsy report that there were no other external injuries to the head/neck area. I do think we have to assume that Sheila was stripped and examined head to toe post-mortem for wounds, marks, bruises, abrasions, etc. One way to resolve it would be to see photographs of the autopsy. Are they available?
I'm assuming you are thinking along the lines of a struggle/altercation? That would explain it. Either that, or the graze could be explained by either rubbing of the muzzle end or some other part of the unmoderated rifle against her skin, or maybe even the discharge of the rifle?
-
I thought it was more a smudge,Roch ? Unless I'm looking at the wrong part of the pic.
It is the mark below and seemingly independent from the lower entry wound.
-
Why would you ask such a question when the wound had been as far from her back as you could get ?
Because, unlike you, I am not going round making assumptions. For one thing, any blood found on Sheila would not necessarily be her own blood and I am asking myself whether there was any other evidence on Sheila that might suggest she had been in a struggle with other people in the house.
-
Thanks. To be fair, it does distinctly look like bruising to me. I say that not to be biased, that's simply what I think. But I'll have to read up on the sources you have given.
It strikes me that Dr Craig had no special qualifications beyond those of a jobbing doctor. He was a local G.P., a station that commands respect of course, and he was highly-educated, but as a police surgeon his job was not that of a pathologist or other forensic examiner and his view about the forensic particulars can't necessarily be taken seriously. The same, much more so, applies to Inspector Montgomery.
Another point - in the main picture, see the large blood splatter further down her nightdress? I raised above the question of whether the blood was tested, as that might not necessarily just be hers. Another point is how the blood could just be on one side of her nightdress if it was Bamber who shot her? Perhaps she was already lying down, but if we can assume she was standing when first shot, would the blood be patterned as shown in the photo?
Another question: Do we know if there was blood on the back of Sheila's nightdress?
I'll quote from Carol Ann Lee's book as this is not my area of expertise:
Vanezis recorded in his initial notes: "Bloodstained palm print on nightdress matches bloodstains appear to have been transferred from r. hand..both hands not contaminated apart from bloodstains." But in court he declared that Sheila's hands were "completely free of blood and if she'd pressed against the nightdress I would have still seen some traces of blood on her palms." He explained that blood on her nightdress "appeared to have been transferred from her wrist" although "the palm of her hand was certainly not contaminated with blood, but there was spotting of blood associated and close to the wrist."
Asked to address the discrepancy today, Vanezis muses: "I'm not sure whether I said that after the blood had been washed from her hands." Regarding his courtroom statement about the stain on her nightdress, he reflects: "The smear in the blood on her neck wounds is obviously from putting her hand up to it. Her fingers could then have made the marks on her nightdress because there are three streaks forming the stain-two together and one slightly apart. The marks could be from her wrist, but the thickness of them definitely resembles fingers and she certainly has some blood on the side of her hand. There's also a line through the streaks where the material has folded, giving a slightly distorted pattern.". The blood trails evident on Sheila's lower right arm, together with substantial bloodstaining on the right side of the nightdress in the armpit area and below, reinforced the probability that she had raised her hand to her neck."
-
Because, unlike you, I am not going round making assumptions. For one thing, any blood found on Sheila would not necessarily be her own blood and I am asking myself whether there was any other evidence on Sheila that might suggest she had been in a struggle with other people in the house.
Well you might find common cause with Roch, who has argued this point. But I don't see it. I don't recall anyone saying there was any O Type blood on her nightie (Nevill was O, June was A) and the nightie itself was disposed of by Police in contravention of a court order in 1996.
-
Dr Vanezis mentions in his autopsy report that there were no other external injuries to the head/neck area.
I do think we have to assume that Sheila was stripped and examined head to toe post-mortem for wounds, marks, bruises, abrasions, etc. One way to resolve it would be to see photographs of the autopsy. Are they available?
I'm assuming you are thinking along the lines of a struggle/altercation? That would explain it. Either that, or the graze be explained by either rubbing of the muzzle end or some other part of the unmoderated rifle against her skin or even the discharge of the rifle?
Good post. The PM photos are not available for public viewing but I think JB has some if not all. I don't know what the quality of PM photos is like. However, if this particular mark is a graze, I would expect it to be visible after the area had been cleansed. Some of the smaller cuts elsewhere may be less visible after cleansing.
-
I'll quote from Carol Ann Lee's book as this is not my area of expertise:
Vanezis recorded in his initial notes: "Bloodstained palm print on nightdress matches bloodstains appear to have been transferred from r. hand..both hands not contaminated apart from bloodstains." But in court he declared that Sheila's hands were "completely free of blood and if she'd pressed against the nightdress I would have still seen some traces of blood on her palms." He explained that blood on her nightdress "appeared to have been transferred from her wrist" although "the palm of her hand was certainly not contaminated with blood, but there was spotting of blood associated and close to the wrist."
Asked to address the discrepancy today, Vanezis muses: "I'm not sure whether I said that after the blood had been washed from her hands." Regarding his courtroom statement about the stain on her nightdress, he reflects: "The smear in the blood on her neck wounds is obviously from putting her hand up to it. Her fingers could then have made the marks on her nightdress because there are three streaks forming the stain-two together and one slightly apart. The marks could be from her wrist, but the thickness of them definitely resembles fingers and she certainly has some blood on the side of her hand. There's also a line through the streaks where the material has folded, giving a slightly distorted pattern.". The blood trails evident on Sheila's lower right arm, together with substantial bloodstaining on the right side of the nightdress in the armpit area and below, reinforced the probability that she had raised her hand to her neck."
Thanks. This, and the autopsy report, makes it unclear whether any tests were done on the blood found on Sheila. It would appear that the pathologist and the police have simply assumed it was her blood and have smoothed over that assumption.
That said, you have to balance that with what the autopsy report mentions about the loci of the blood stains: re-reading it, it does seem that the blood was only on the front of her nightdress. I think that in itself does point to Jeremy Bamber as the killer. Not that I am coming to any conclusions, but if Sheila was the killer, you would think that, at the least, there would be a struggle with Nevill, with the probability that her nightdress would reflect this: it would be torn, have Nevill's blood on it, the signs would surely be obvious.
I think Jeremy, if he is innocent, has a big problem here. Are pro-Bamber posters asking me to believe that Sheila shot everybody, and in addition to the Rivlin/Trezeon case theory that she calmly replaced the moderator back in the gun cupboard [must keep the place tidy!], she then had the presence of mind to strip down to her nightdress, put the forensically-incriminating clothing in the washer in order to frame Jeremy, then waited while the clothes washed, then maybe put the wet clothes away somewhere to dry inconspicuously as she killed herself while dressed in her nightdress?
This is not a conclusion, however. I am neutral and I'm willing to find holes in this. Something that Jeremy does have going for him is that the pattern of the blood stains on Sheila does not seem very consistent with the idea that Jeremy shot her.
-
Well you might find common cause with Roch, who has argued this point. But I don't see it. I don't recall anyone saying there was any O Type blood on her nightie (Nevill was O, June was A) and the nightie itself was disposed of by Police in contravention of a court order in 1996.
As I have mentioned above, it looks to me (based on what I have read so far) that the blood on her nightdress was not tested. If true, then that crucial omission has been smoothed-over by the pathologist and the police in their various reports and statements.
If key evidence like the nightdress has been disposed of, then that is grim news.
-
Thanks. This, and the autopsy report, makes it unclear whether any tests were done on the blood found on Sheila. It would appear that the pathologist and the police have simply assumed it was her blood and have smoothed over that assumption.
That said, you have to balance that with what the autopsy report mentions about the loci of the blood stains: re-reading it, it does seem that the blood was only on the front of her nightdress. I think that in itself does point to Jeremy Bamber as the killer. Not that I am coming to any conclusions, but if Sheila was the killer, you would think that, at the least, there would be a struggle with Nevill, with the probability that her nightdress would reflect this: it would be torn, have Nevill's blood on it, the signs would surely be obvious.
I think Jeremy, if he is innocent, has a big problem here. Are pro-Bamber posters asking me to believe that Sheila shot everybody, and in addition to the Rivlin/Trezeon case theory that she calmly replaced the moderator back in the gun cupboard [must keep the place tidy!], she then had the presence of mind to strip down to her nightdress, put the forensically-incriminating clothing in the washer in order to frame Jeremy, then waited while the clothes washed, then maybe put the wet clothes away somewhere to dry inconspicuously as she killed herself while dressed in her nightdress?
This is not a conclusion, however. I am neutral and I'm willing to find holes in this. Something that Jeremy does have going for him is that the pattern of the blood stains on Sheila does not seem very consistent with the idea that Jeremy shot her.
What joy to be able to agree. She could have burnt her clothes in the Aga though, since no inventory of her suitcase was undertaken upon arrival.
-
What joy to be able to agree. She could have burnt her clothes in the Aga though, since no inventory of her suitcase was undertaken upon arrival.
Yes, but wouldn't that be obvious to anybody who arrived on the scene later? Surely that would be reported somewhere in the documents?
It's also difficult to believe Sheila could have thought things through like this if it was a murder-suicide scenario. She was, presumably, a disorganised affective psychotic running amok: the idea of sophisticated planning is inimical to such a mindset.
-
Yes, but wouldn't that be obvious to anybody who arrived on the scene later? Surely that would be reported somewhere in the documents?
It's also difficult to believe Sheila could have thought things through like this if it was a murder-suicide scenario. She was, presumably, a disorganised affective psychotic running amok: the idea of sophisticated planning is inimical to such a mindset.
Yes it depends on your opinion or knowledge of the psychosis involved. Lookout may have something to say on the subject.
-
Yes it depends on your opinion or knowledge of the psychosis involved. Lookout may have something to say on the subject.
Having reflected on it a bit more, maybe should would have cleaned herself up, but it does leave open the question of the incriminating clothes. There had to be some signature of disposal, they can't be just made to disappear by magic.
I am looking at this from the point-of-view of an appeal. I doubt the judges would accept an assertion based on Sheila's likely state of mind in a hypothetical that she did it, and that being the case, the lack of traces of a struggle on the nightdress looks incriminating for Bamber.
-
Yes it depends on your opinion or knowledge of the psychosis involved. Lookout may have something to say on the subject.
Which is why I had doubts about JB having been the killer in the first place. I know how strong sick women are during a psychotic episode---------even medicated ones. The "voices " that they hear are very real to them,as are the hallucinations,etc that they experience.
-
Having reflected on it a bit more, maybe should would have cleaned herself up, but it does leave open the question of the incriminating clothes. There had to be some signature of disposal, they can't be just made to disappear by magic.
I am looking at this from the point-of-view of an appeal. I doubt the judges would accept an assertion based on Sheila's likely state of mind in a hypothetical that she did it, and that being the case, the lack of traces of a struggle on the nightdress looks incriminating for Bamber.
There was no struggle. Or at the very most it was a one-sided "struggle"
Here is why.
Nevil being unable to use his left arm after being shot upstairs.
(https://s29.postimg.org/42sygpzzb/ventrial.jpg)
Nevil only having a short time left to live after being shot upstairs.
(https://s17.postimg.org/94zrr6tsf/fatal.jpg)
Pathologist not surprised about Sheila inflicting the injuries the Nevil.
(https://s26.postimg.org/d1h2p0sdl/45vnz.jpg)
Most of the mess caused by the police.
(https://s29.postimg.org/906j1u1yf/DICook1991.jpg)
Scratch marks created at a later date.
https://streamable.com/qnr5d (https://streamable.com/qnr5d)
-
JB would not have left WHF unscathed if it had been him as the murderer. At the least,his father would definitely have left his mark on him in some way but because it had been a woman,Sheila,Nevill would have been less likely to have landed out.
Judging by the many reports of JB having had his father in tears and not being the perfect son etc, you'd have thought that Nevill would have been well prepared for any eventuality that occurred involving JB ??
At well over 6ft and a well-built man it's rather surprising that Nevill,who'd been in the forces and well versed with " the enemy " wasn't on his guard ? Such as the removal of all guns and secured in a tightly locked cupboard/cabinet for a start.