The significance of how the logs at the scene were created...

[lookout]

I think that is what is being implied but all this being the case, I really don't understand why these issues were not hammered home at the trial.

There would have been a marked difference to the wounds if the rifle had been fired from any distance anyway. As it stood,the wounds were made from very close quarters,as in contact shots.

[mike tesko]

Thanks Roch, I've already found something interesting;

"Of Crucial importance is a bloodstain close to the end of the Ansultz barrel near to the foresight.

The distance between the end of the barrel and the position of the bloodstain upon it coincides exactly  with the distance between the two wounds inflicted upon Sheila Caffell’s neck and chin.

Moreover, if the barrel had been positioned so the bloodstain next to the end of the barrel overlaid the non-fatal neck wound so that blood oozing from it contaminated the barrel, it transpires that the position of the fatal shot falls exactly at the point where the end of the barrel would finish.
Additionally, the angle between the neck wound and the chin wound corresponds with the precise angle which the gun must have been held in at the time the fatal chin wound had been inflicted"

A silencer not fitted to barrel of gun at time fatal shot under the chin inflicted...

[Roch]

Thanks Roch, I've already found something interesting;

"Of Crucial importance is a bloodstain close to the end of the Ansultz barrel near to the foresight.

The distance between the end of the barrel and the position of the bloodstain upon it coincides exactly  with the distance between the two wounds inflicted upon Sheila Caffell’s neck and chin.

Moreover, if the barrel had been positioned so the bloodstain next to the end of the barrel overlaid the non-fatal neck wound so that blood oozing from it contaminated the barrel, it transpires that the position of the fatal shot falls exactly at the point where the end of the barrel would finish.
Additionally, the angle between the neck wound and the chin wound corresponds with the precise angle which the gun must have been held in at the time the fatal chin wound had been inflicted"

A silencer not fitted to barrel of gun at time fatal shot under the chin inflicted...

As per the recent experts reports, for which the CCRC have not managed to budge (but don't particularly care).

[mike tesko]

As per the recent experts reports, for which the CCRC have not managed to budge (but don't particularly care).

At the 2002 appeal, once it was accepted that Essex police had destroyed all the ballistics evidence in the case, by October 1996, without bothering to consult the court of appeal, or those representing Jeremy Bambers interests, the court of appeal agreed to look favourably at any ground submitted on his behalf at appeal. However, no such ground was put forward at that time, because there was insufficient time to present an argument worthy of causing the judges to change the conviction based on ballistic evidence, alone...

However, all that has now changed with the opportunity to draw attention to the courts dispensation given back in 2002, to the effect that it would look favourably at any ground submitted to the court involving arguments relating to ballistics matters. In this respect, the disposal of the batch of crime scene ammunition if but for the fact the police destroyed it all in 1996, could have been examined by the experts in Arizona to see if either bullet (PV/19 and PV/20) had been fired through a silencer? Linked to this are handwritten notes made by the prosecutions ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher, concluding that it was not possible to tell if any of the 25 crime scene bullets had been fired through a silencer, which becomes even more significant, in view of the pending judicial hearing held next Thursday before two high court judges. Perhaps Simon McKay will seek to draw inference from the 2002 appeal, and the conclusions arrived at by Malcolm Fletcher to the effect that he was unable to confirm that any of the two bullets (PV/19 and PV/20) had been fired through a silencer - consistent with the recent ARIZONA test conclusions, that a rifles barrel minus a silencer was used to inflict the wound under Sheila's chin...

[mike tesko]

At the 2002 appeal, once it was accepted that Essex police had destroyed all the ballistics evidence in the case, by October 1996, without bothering to consult the court of appeal, or those representing Jeremy Bambers interests, the court of appeal agreed to look favourably at any ground submitted on his behalf at appeal. However, no such ground was put forward at that time, because there was insufficient time to present an argument worthy of causing the judges to change the conviction based on ballistic evidence, alone...

However, all that has now changed with the opportunity to draw attention to the courts dispensation given back in 2002, to the effect that it would look favourably at any ground submitted to the court involving arguments relating to ballistics matters. In this respect, the disposal of the batch of crime scene ammunition if but for the fact the police destroyed it all in 1996, could have been examined by the experts in Arizona to see if either bullet (PV/19 and PV/20) had been fired through a silencer? Linked to this are handwritten notes made by the prosecutions ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher, concluding that it was not possible to tell if any of the 25 crime scene bullets had been fired through a silencer, which becomes even more significant, in view of the pending judicial hearing held next Thursday before two high court judges. Perhaps Simon McKay will seek to draw inference from the 2002 appeal, and the conclusions arrived at by Malcolm Fletcher to the effect that he was unable to confirm that any of the two bullets (PV/19 and PV/20) had been fired through a silencer - consistent with the recent ARIZONA test conclusions, that a rifles barrel minus a silencer was used to inflict the wound under Sheila's chin...

I say, all hands to the pumps, and go for it...

[boheme]

Er...

Once Ralph is toppled over, his pyjama bottoms fell around his ankles, er, er, er, exposing his bottom and genitals, so if the police can't tell the difference between a dead male, and a dead female, by reference to this, then what chance did they ever stand of solving who killed who? Next, at 7:42am a  message is passed for the police surgeon, and coroners officer to be contacted about discovery of two bodies, and by 7:45am Control room (Linda) is contacting DS Davidson (SOC) at his home address, requesting him to come into the office because police are dealing with a incident at WHF involving a murder and a suicide..

.... Good point !
How can one dead body, be mistaken as the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female, and turn out to be a murder, and a suicide?

[boheme]

So where did '3 bodies upstairs' come from then?

I guess the copper had a problem with his maths .... !

[mike tesko]

Thanks Roch, I've already found something interesting;

"Of Crucial importance is a bloodstain close to the end of the Ansultz barrel near to the foresight.

The distance between the end of the barrel and the position of the bloodstain upon it coincides exactly  with the distance between the two wounds inflicted upon Sheila Caffell’s neck and chin.

Moreover, if the barrel had been positioned so the bloodstain next to the end of the barrel overlaid the non-fatal neck wound so that blood oozing from it contaminated the barrel, it transpires that the position of the fatal shot falls exactly at the point where the end of the barrel would finish.
Additionally, the angle between the neck wound and the chin wound corresponds with the precise angle which the gun must have been held in at the time the fatal chin wound had been inflicted"

Rifle diagram, photo' showing gap, between both bullet entry wounds on Sheila's neck, and images of the guns barrel:-