The Silenced Rifle Did Not Fit Inside The Gun Cupboard

[Robittybob1]

I think you are right.  I was told long ago but have forgotten the exact reasoning.

My friend said they should be broken in two and stored with the barrel tip down so anyone can see there are no cartridges in the breech.

[guest7363]

I think you are right.  I was told long ago but have forgotten the exact reasoning.

Yes it says it here NGB

Always store guns muzzle down

When you put your gun back in your gun cabinet don’t put it butt down. Always store guns muzzle down.

The reason for this is that any oil or cleaning fluid left in the bores will run out onto the floor of your gun cabinet. If you put your gun butt down the oil will then trickle through the chamber, the firing pin holes, into the lock mechanism and finally onto the wood of the stock. Here it can soften the wood and damage the stock irreparably.

[guest7363]

My friend said they should be broken in two and stored with the barrel tip down so anyone can see there are no cartridges in the breech.

Yes that makes sense,  esp if others have access to your gun cupboard.

[ngb1066]

My friend said they should be broken in two and stored with the barrel tip down so anyone can see there are no cartridges in the breech.

That is a good idea but in practice it is not normally possible because there is no space in a gun cabinet for a broken shotgun.  Certainly if a shotgun is taken out of the gun cabinet it should be broken if it is not immediately going into a gunslip for carrying.

[ngb1066]

Yes it says it here NGB

Always store guns muzzle down

When you put your gun back in your gun cabinet don’t put it butt down. Always store guns muzzle down.

The reason for this is that any oil or cleaning fluid left in the bores will run out onto the floor of your gun cabinet. If you put your gun butt down the oil will then trickle through the chamber, the firing pin holes, into the lock mechanism and finally onto the wood of the stock. Here it can soften the wood and damage the stock irreparably.

Thank you RJ,  I have learned something there.  I knew it was good practice but did not know the reason.

[guest7363]

Thank you RJ,  I have learned something there.  I knew it was good practice but did not know the reason.

Thanks NGB, I think that’s the beauty of the forum, I’ve learnt vast amounts since I’ve been on here.

[guest7363]

Thank you RJ,  I have learned something there.  I knew it was good practice but did not know the reason.

I came across it by chance some while back, I think most always assumed the rifle had to be stored upright, similar to the photo in the gun cupboard, especially with sights and silencer attached, it could have been stored Horizontal or broken like Robbitybob has suggested, hencecstorage would have been relatively easy.  I do realise NGB since 1998 fire arms security changed to storage in a cabinet.  I don’t understand or cannot work out the storage of shotgun cartridges, if they need to be locked up or not, it says they don’t have the same conditions applied?

I don’t think the rifle casing/bag  on the farm would have been used an awful lot, only if they were going for shoots away from their own farm land.  Hence the fact when Jeremy said he was going to shoot the rabbits he never mentioned a cover or bag, when he left the rifle after coming back in a cover or bag was the last thing on his mind, even though the sights and silencer were off so to me it looks like it was normal practice.

[ngb1066]

I came across it by chance some while back, I think most always assumed the rifle had to be stored upright, similar to the photo in the gun cupboard, especially with sights and silencer attached, it could have been stored Horizontal or broken like Robbitybob has suggested, hencecstorage would have been relatively easy.  I do realise NGB since 1998 fire arms security changed to storage in a cabinet.  I don’t understand or cannot work out the storage of shotgun cartridges, if they need to be locked up or not, it says they don’t have the same conditions applied?

I don’t think the rifle casing/bag  on the farm would have been used an awful lot, only if they were going for shoots away from their own farm land.  Hence the fact when Jeremy said he was going to shoot the rabbits he never mentioned a cover or bag, when he left the rifle after coming back in a cover or bag was the last thing on his mind, even though the sights and silencer were off so to me it looks like it was normal practice.

Shotgun cartridges are not locked up but rifle ammunition must be stored in a safe.

I agree about the rifle case.

[guest7363]

To me the gun case is different to the gun cupboard.  So the gun with the silencer may not fit in the case, but it could fit into the cupboard OK.

I agree, if there was a problem it could have been layed flat, I don’t think Neville would have set a gun cupboard up under the stairs if it caused a problem, he had other places he could have used.  Jeremy never said it didn’t fit in his statement, he said he didn’t know.  If he had not known the silencer on the rifle did not fit under the cupboard stairs he would have said “That he had to unscrew it every time he used it to put it back”. Because at the same time he remembers  he has to unscrew it to fit in the gun case.  It’s not something you would forget having to do regularly. 

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1144.0;attach=5851

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1144.0;attach=5852;image

 

[guest7363]

Were we told how many were smudged? DI Cook told us there was one print lifted from Jeremy Bamber's right forefinger on the butt and one from Sheila's right-hand ring finger. (Blood Relations Chapter 27)

The weapon was also examined for fingerprints. A print from the appellant's right forefinger was found on the breech end of the barrel, above the stock and pointing across the gun and Sheila Caffell's right ring fingerprint was found on the right side of the butt, pointing downwards. There were three further finger marks on the rifle, each of insufficient detail for identification purposes.

[Robittybob1]

I agree, if there was a problem it could have been layed flat, I don’t think Neville would have set a gun cupboard up under the stairs if it caused a problem, he had other places he could have used.  Jeremy never said it didn’t fit in his statement, he said he didn’t know.  If he had not known the silencer on the rifle did not fit under the cupboard stairs he would have said “That he had to unscrew it every time he used it to put it back”. Because at the same time he remembers  he has to unscrew it to fit in the gun case.  It’s not something you would forget having to do regularly. 

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1144.0;attach=5851

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1144.0;attach=5852;image

Unscrewing a silencer is hardly a big issue.   Taking off the telescopic sights probably was as they would need resighting after that.

[guest7363]

Unscrewing a silencer is hardly a big issue.   Taking off the telescopic sights probably was as they would need resighting after that.

Granted, but you would remember if you needed to do it every time it went back in the cupboard if it wouldn’t fit?  Taking the sights off would have needed a screw driver I would think.

[guest29835]

Yes its on here. Mike has uploaded it all onto this forum.

I've already looked at the following:

(i). Ronald Cook's witness statements, in which he explains that Jeremy's print was found on the barrel of the rifle and Sheila's on the stock.

(ii). Ronald Cook's examination-in-chief at the 1986 trial [note: the cross-examination is not uploaded to the Forum, as far as I can see].

(iii). Ronald Cook's fingerprint examination records and notes, and a diagram of where the fingerprints were found on the rifle.

As far as I can tell, D.I. Cook makes no mention of smudged prints anywhere.  Can you please tell me where I will find reference to these smudged prints and the location of them on the rifle?

[guest29835]

I've already looked at the following:

(i). Ronald Cook's witness statements, in which he explains that Jeremy's print was found on the barrel of the rifle and Sheila's on the stock.

(ii). Ronald Cook's examination-in-chief at the 1986 trial [note: the cross-examination is not uploaded to the Forum, as far as I can see].

(iii). Ronald Cook's fingerprint examination records and notes, and a diagram of where the fingerprints were found on the rifle.

As far as I can tell, D.I. Cook makes no mention of smudged prints anywhere.  Can you please tell me where I will find reference to these smudged prints and the location of them on the rifle?

Another thing is that I have found mention on the Forum of Julie Mugford saying that Matthew Macdonald's glove came off in a struggle with Nevill, but unless I am mistaken, I can't see any reference to it in Julie's statements or her diary.  Where does that come from?

[JackieD]

I've already looked at the following:

(i). Ronald Cook's witness statements, in which he explains that Jeremy's print was found on the barrel of the rifle and Sheila's on the stock.

(ii). Ronald Cook's examination-in-chief at the 1986 trial [note: the cross-examination is not uploaded to the Forum, as far as I can see].

(iii). Ronald Cook's fingerprint examination records and notes, and a diagram of where the fingerprints were found on the rifle.

As far as I can tell, D.I. Cook makes no mention of smudged prints anywhere.  Can you please tell me where I will find reference to these smudged prints and the location of them on the rifle?

Fake Justice should be able to tell you exactly where this information is or Hartley