Sheila's hands

[Hartley]

hartley posts;

Yes, other injuries were caused by the rifle, so its not beyond the realms of possibility that the forearm wounds were caused in the same way.

bullet holes in victims agreed...though from what I have read they did not go as far as to claim that the rifle was used  to cause the  being struck of banged into something type head injuries . They hint and suggest but that is really as far as they dared go.

Think of how a rifle may be used to strike another person.  Swung when holding the stock/butt...will live a distinct linear line on the victim when the barrel end makes contact. As a swung weapon this way it would be very unwieldly and impractical.  Nothing really points to this .
Swung when holding the barrel...again the balance is wrong and the small diameter of the barrel makes this highly likely to cause injuries to the hands of the person swinging it.  Hard to swing but would make a big impact on the victim when struck.
Thrusting with stock/butt end...as per how they do it in war films ...more credible but helps if the vistim is already low to the ground.

If struck with the stock/butt end repeatedly ...it should show blood and/or hairs and skin fragments embedded into the butt and its wood and any gaps in the consrtruction of the butt. Especially so if the butt/stock becomes damaged in the process. Traces of this having occurred will be extremely difficult for anyone to remove.

It is possible Ralph was struck on the head with another object and not the .22 automatic rifle. If the forensic is not there to back it up ..then the claim looks rather hollow ..whoever was responsible.

Conversely if the rifle was dropped onto its butt onto a fairly clean surface to cause the stock/butt to be broken we would not expect to see blood/hairs or skin fragments .

If already used in attacking Ralph it may at that time have not been broken but could have later become broken when dropped in the act of commiting suicide.

Careful and honest and full reporting of the rifle is required to establish the most likely scenario for the rifles condition and whether some scenarios can be reasonably excluded or not.

Well all of that is theory and assumption and as such is meaningless.

Whilst perhaps not realistic in your mind, I could quite envisage the rifle stock end being used ad a bludgeon, particularly if you picture a two handed grasp on the weapon.

Likewise the dropping of the rifle when committing suicide comes across as ludicrous to me.

[paulg]

You'll have to hit someone very hard indeed in order to break a bit off the butt of a rifle. Anyway why would anyone in their right mind turn a loaded gun round in order to hit someone with a rifle but, with the barrel towards themselves?

How do you know it was loaded?

Could well have been unloaded, with killer getting ammo from kitchen?

Obviously Sheila didn't have pockets, so she needed to pop down to the kitchen a couple of times to get ammo.

[Hartley]

You'll have to hit someone very hard indeed in order to break a bit off the butt of a rifle. Anyway why would anyone in their right mind turn a loaded gun round in order to hit someone with a rifle but, with the barrel towards themselves?

Out of ammo perhaps?

[smiffy]

When the patholgist is saying rounded end  he is meaning the contact face of the object being used to strike is rounded.
Like the ball end on a ball pein hammer.
The picture is scaled so some of the closest bruises (and most the rest appear to be of less than half an inch diameter implying an object likely to have a smaller rounded head than a ball pein hammer.
 
An unattached silencer would be too big in my view to cause those bruised if they were caused by jabbing.  On the kitchen worktop near the phone are pencil /pen type racks.. and a couple seem to be on the worktop.  It is possible something like a bic pen with its top on or something a little larger could be credible objects to cause such bruises by jabbing . I lean towards Ralphs arm being gripped very tightly.
It it was gripping tightly the closest to camera bruises may fit with the gripping done over the pyjamame sleeve as the bruises here look smaller and less intense than the ones futher down the arm. Those futher down also incorporating the gouging by nails that is more likely on bare skin . The sleeve possibly having ridden up Ralphs arm.

[smiffy]

I am no gun expert but all the same do not feel a sporting rifle such as the claimed murder weapon would be anywhere near as strong as an old type military rifle as far as the stock/butt is concerned.
Military rifles being made in mind that the butt may need to be used as a bludgeoning weapon would be made far stronger.
A light sporting rifle will not be designed as strongly so be more likely to break if used to bludgeon or if dropped. (modern rubbish...if like many things...they dont make em like they used to...then build quality and material quality may be lacking).

fairs fair....tell it like it is..whether the point may support one theory or another or supports both.

[paulg]

When the patholgist is saying rounded end  he is meaning the contact face of the object being used to strike is rounded.
Like the ball end on a ball pein hammer.
The picture is scaled so some of the closest bruises (and most the rest appear to be of less than half an inch diameter implying an object likely to have a smaller rounded head than a ball pein hammer.
 
An unattached silencer would be too big in my view to cause those bruised if they were caused by jabbing.  On the kitchen worktop near the phone are pencil /pen type racks.. and a couple seem to be on the worktop.  It is possible something like a bic pen with its top on or something a little larger could be credible objects to cause such bruises by jabbing . I lean towards Ralphs arm being gripped very tightly.
It it was gripping tightly the closest to camera bruises may fit with the gripping done over the pyjamame sleeve as the bruises here look smaller and less intense than the ones futher down the arm. Those futher down also incorporating the gouging by nails that is more likely on bare skin . The sleeve possibly having ridden up Ralphs arm.

The bruising may be from fingers, but just carried out a simple experiment with my kids, that makes me think not.

The spacing of the bruises are quite far apart, and do not match a finger pattern. Both kids when asked to grip tightly and pull my arm, placed their fingers close together, which is what most would do to apply force to an object.

[Hartley]

I am no gun expert but all the same do not feel a sporting rifle such as the claimed murder weapon would be anywhere near as strong as an old type military rifle as far as the stock/butt is concerned.
Military rifles being made in mind that the butt may need to be used as a bludgeoning weapon would be made far stronger.
A light sporting rifle will not be designed as strongly so be more likely to break if used to bludgeon or if dropped. (modern rubbish...if like many things...they dont make em like they used to...then build quality and material quality may be lacking).

fairs fair....tell it like it is..whether the point may support one theory or another or supports both.

Apart from a loose trigger the Anshulz 525 is often described as superb build quality, in fact most Anshulz products are, they are high end items.

However that's all irrelevant, the stock was damaged, how that occurred we don't know.

[paulg]

When the patholgist is saying rounded end  he is meaning the contact face of the object being used to strike is rounded.
Like the ball end on a ball pein hammer.
The picture is scaled so some of the closest bruises (and most the rest appear to be of less than half an inch diameter implying an object likely to have a smaller rounded head than a ball pein hammer.
 
An unattached silencer would be too big in my view to cause those bruised if they were caused by jabbing.  On the kitchen worktop near the phone are pencil /pen type racks.. and a couple seem to be on the worktop.  It is possible something like a bic pen with its top on or something a little larger could be credible objects to cause such bruises by jabbing . I lean towards Ralphs arm being gripped very tightly.
It it was gripping tightly the closest to camera bruises may fit with the gripping done over the pyjamame sleeve as the bruises here look smaller and less intense than the ones futher down the arm. Those futher down also incorporating the gouging by nails that is more likely on bare skin . The sleeve possibly having ridden up Ralphs arm.

The bruising may be from fingers, but just carried out a simple experiment with my kids, that makes me think not.

The spacing of the bruises are quite far apart, and do not match a finger pattern. Both kids when asked to grip tightly and pull my arm, placed their fingers close together, which is what most would do to apply force to an object.

Mind you, i just tried this myself, and come up with something different.

Can i smite myself?

[smiffy]

permission granted  pmsl

[smiffy]

from an online source;

4. Fingertip/pad bruises

Where an assailant has forcefully gripped a person, for example around the neck (e.g. during attempted manual strangulation) or arms etc, one may see small discoid or ovoid bruises in a cluster. These may be discrete, but are often blurred or may 'merge' with one another, due to the dynamic nature of assaults and struggles with an assailant.

[Kaldin]

Nevill’s body also had black eyes and a broken nose, linear bruising to the cheeks, lacerations to the head, linear type bruising to the right forearm, bruising to the left wrist and forearm and three circular burn type marks to the back. The linear marks were consistent with Nevill having been struck with a long blunt object, possibly a gun.

Subsequent searches of this room revealed Nevill’s blood stained wristwatch under a rug and a piece of broken butt from the rifle on the floor.

The rifle stock was found to be damaged, with a piece of wood missing. The broken piece of wood found on the floor in the kitchen was the missing part of the stock.

What do they mean by "linear"?

[grahameb]

You'll have to hit someone very hard indeed in order to break a bit off the butt of a rifle. Anyway why would anyone in their right mind turn a loaded gun round in order to hit someone with a rifle but, with the barrel towards themselves?

Out of ammo perhaps?

Yes, or stupid? one of the two. That of course depends if someone is used to handling rifles or not. But of course I deliberately didn't mention sheila Caffell and you picked up on that.

[Kaldin]

I think the wood broke off when the gun struck a piece of furniture. It would have to be very flimsy to have broken when it struck a person.

[lebaleb]

You'll have to hit someone very hard indeed in order to break a bit off the butt of a rifle. Anyway why would anyone in their right mind turn a loaded gun round in order to hit someone with a rifle but, with the barrel towards themselves?

It's possible Shiela wasn't in her right mind. I'm sure I read something about a poker somewhere to.

[sandy]

From the defence's submission to the CCRC in June 2004.

Even to a medically untrained eye the photograph of the right arm of Ralph Neville Bamber shows finger nail marks consistent with the assailant/attacker having gripped the deceased and having lacerated the skin with finger nail marks.

The finger nails of Sheila Caffell were examined. A post mortem photograph of her hands was indeed made available and formed part of the “Jury Bundle.” The said finger nails of Sheila Caffell were too long to have caused the laceration/indentation marks on the arm of Ralph Neville Bamber and the singer mark on the arm of June Bamber.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:GBoXf__1A4QJ:www.studiolegaleinternazionale.com/downloads/bamber/BAMBERCCRC_addendum_06_06_2004.doc+bamber+2002+appeal&cd=57&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk


There we have it from the horses mouth sort of speak. Sheila definitely didn't gouge either Nevill or June's arms.