Re: Guardian article 27/02/26

[Cambridgecutie]

Put it another way. In 1985/6 and before, there was no DNA testing at all and the only tests which could be carried out on blood was blood grouping.

As the blood could match 8% of the population, what was the point of it in any case?

It forms the crux of the case!  The blood group results were able to differentiate between SC's blood results and the other victims' results.  The results as a stand alone represented SC's blood groups only made up the so-called flake supposedly found inside the silencer!

[lookout]

I know there is already a reference to this on another thread but it justifies a separate thread.  It is well worth reading.  I believe there is more to come.
http.s://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/ng-interactive/2026/feb/27/the-silencer-and-the-white-house-farm-murders-is-this-the-evidence-that-could-free-jeremy-bamber

A brilliant read---not before time should this information be repeated. Now perhaps someone with more than half a brain will see the apparent difference regarding the usage of a silencer or in this case, not.
Thankyou for this NGB. I'd just happened to turn to this case for any further news and hey-presto. To my mind it should be his " get out of jail free " card !

[BarefootDanC]

It forms the crux of the case!  The blood group results were able to differentiate between SC's blood results and the other victims' results.  The results as a stand alone represented SC's blood groups only made up the so-called flake supposedly found inside the silencer!

Indeed, but (before DNA) why was there ever a point in blood grouping it never actually identified who it came from?

[Cambridgecutie]

Indeed, but (before DNA) why was there ever a point in blood grouping it never actually identified who it came from?

Because it reduces the pool of suspects and either implicates or absolves. 

Blood grouping uses the same method as DNA, gel elctrophoresis to weigh molecules in enzymes and proteins, and was the precursor to DNA.  Prior to grouping ABO/antigens were used. 

In the WHF case, the blood evidence, taken at face value, is very strong circumstantial evidence against JB. It has always been my belief that until this is demolished JB's conviction will stand.

[snow66!]

Because it reduces the pool of suspects and either implicates or absolves. 

Blood grouping uses the same method as DNA, gel elctrophoresis to weigh molecules in enzymes and proteins, and was the precursor to DNA.  Prior to grouping ABO/antigens were used. 

In the WHF case, the blood evidence, taken at face value, is very strong circumstantial evidence against JB. It has always been my belief that until this is demolished JB's conviction will stand.

Well if you have the ability to demolish the blood evidence with your superior brain power, now would probably be a good time to do so, Cutie!
We're counting on you young lady!

[BarefootDanC]

Because it reduces the pool of suspects and either implicates or absolves. 

Blood grouping uses the same method as DNA, gel elctrophoresis to weigh molecules in enzymes and proteins, and was the precursor to DNA.  Prior to grouping ABO/antigens were used. 

In the WHF case, the blood evidence, taken at face value, is very strong circumstantial evidence against JB. It has always been my belief that until this is demolished JB's conviction will stand.

But how can it if the blood could have belonged to a percentage of the population - in every single case?

[BarefootDanC]

Well if you have the ability to demolish the blood evidence with your superior brain power, now would probably be a good time to do so, Cutie!
We're counting on you young lady!

Don't you think this would have happened already, given how much work Bamber supporters have done on the silencer evidence over last 40+ years?

[snow66!]

Don't you think this would have happened already, given how much work Bamber supporters have done on the silencer evidence over last 40+ years?

Ha ha! True, Dan!
Its just that i've been told certain things about Cutie's intentions to free Bamber!

[Cambridgecutie]

Well if you have the ability to demolish the blood evidence with your superior brain power, now would probably be a good time to do so, Cutie!
We're counting on you young lady!

I don't have any superior brain power just common sense. 

[Cambridgecutie]

But how can it if the blood could have belonged to a percentage of the population - in every single case?

Are you having a laugh?  In itself blood grouping and/or blood type isn't capable of convicting anyone but it can assist implicate or absolve along with other evidence either circumstantial or direct. 

Example: Man with ginger hair seen breaking into garden shed around 3am.  At 3.15am the police stop a man walking in the vicinity carrying a lawn mower.  Man, with ginger hair, says he found lawn mower down an alley and thought it had been dumped so decided to take it home.  Police instruct a forensic search of the shed.  It appears the perp cut themself breaking in leaving blood on the lock.

A:  Blood group and/or type does not match man with ginger hair carrying lawn mower.  Useful to defence.

B:  Blood group and/or type does match man with ginger hair carrying lawn mower.  Useful to prosecution.

Even DNA evidence in itself is not enough for a conviction without other cicumstantial or direct evidence.

[Cambridgecutie]

Don't you think this would have happened already, given how much work Bamber supporters have done on the silencer evidence over last 40+ years?

It has not happened already.  There are many aspects to the so-called silencer evidence and it has not been collectively de-bunked.  To date it has all been very piece meal and mixed up with a lot of utter nonsense that is either totally irrelevant or totally wrong as in factually wrong. 

[BarefootDanC]

It has not happened already.  There are many aspects to the so-called silencer evidence and it has not been collectively de-bunked.  To date it has all been very piece meal and mixed up with a lot of utter nonsense that is either totally irrelevant or totally wrong as in factually wrong.

A lot of research took place on the silencer in the run up to the trial and the 2002 appeal.

[Cambridgecutie]

A lot of research took place on the silencer in the run up to the trial and the 2002 appeal.

You are either totally clueless or totally disingenous.  I am not going to waste my time identifying all the e's and o's in my arsenal save I will highlight the following for you from the 2002 appeal hearing, section 14, last two paras:

On 8 September 1986, Dr Lincoln again went to the laboratory and this time met and discussed the matter with Mr Hayward. As a result of this meeting, Dr Lincoln appreciated that the blood tested all came from a single flake trapped under the first or second baffle. In a letter to the defence solicitors, Dr Lincoln said that Mr Hayward “used this single flake to produce a solution from which he was able to determine the groups”. He said that this meant that the possible explanation he had earlier suggested as to a combination of more than one persons blood no longer applied.

In one respect Dr Lincoln was in error. Whether that error was from something said by Mr Hayward or simply from an assumption made by Dr Lincoln cannot now be ascertained and matters not. The error was to suggest that the whole of the blood flake was dissolved and the resulting solution was used for all the tests. In fact what had happened was that the flake had been divided into a number of parts and each part had then been used for a separate group test. Thus the tests were not done on liquid drawn from the same solution made from the whole flake but on separate solutions each made from distinct parts of the flake. We have no means of knowing whether correction of this error would in any way have altered Dr Lincoln’s view.