Author Topic: Police log contents, and position of bodies in photographs don't add up, CRIKEY.  (Read 31304 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
This is the same picture Lookout.






Even on the grainey one,the flash has highlighted what appears to be " wet blood ",whereas,if Sheila had been dead for a number of hours,there'd have been no " bounceback " from dried blood anyway.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33776





Even on the grainey one,the flash has highlighted what appears to be " wet blood ",whereas,if Sheila had been dead for a number of hours,there'd have been no " bounceback " from dried blood anyway.

Anything can be highlighted, Lookout.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076





Even on the grainey one,the flash has highlighted what appears to be " wet blood ",whereas,if Sheila had been dead for a number of hours,there'd have been no " bounceback " from dried blood anyway.

The picture in question is a picture of a picture. The light from the flash has reflected against the sheen on the photograph - not wet blood. The blood around her mouth is both oxidised and cracking. The mottled skin colour shows she has been dead for quite some time. 
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Police shot Sheila, police set the scene to make it look like Sheila had taken her own life, but the stage managing of her body by police, dropped a booboo, she had been shot by way of two different guns, but police stage managed her body with use of one of these two guns - hence why the had to switch the original badly fragmented bullet PV/20, with a whole test fired one...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Police shot Sheila, police set the scene to make it look like Sheila had taken her own life, but the stage managing of her body by police, dropped a booboo, she had been shot by way of two different guns, but police stage managed her body with use of one of these two guns - hence why the had to switch the original badly fragmented bullet PV/20, with a whole test fired one...

There is no evidence of Sheila's first shot being fired by a police weapon.  A 5.56mm jacketed bullet is a high powered bullet that does different damage than a low powered 22LR bullet.  Vanesis said the wound was consistent with a 22LR wound, Vanesis found not remains of a jacket in the wound, the Xray matched the exact shape of the 22LR fragment that Vanezis says he removed, the wound was a contact wound and Sheila's blood was found inside Nevill's moderator indicating the wepaon that was used to shoot her had Nevill's moderator attached, all 25 casings were fired by the Anschutz, police all insist no shots were fired while they were on scene, Sheial's stomach contents and state of rigor reveal she died before police arrived at the scene.

You have nothing at all to suggest police shot Sheila you simply made up the suggestion without regard to the evidence that exists in this case.   
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
What is more, the COLP investigators established that 2 samples of extreme importance were taken at the beginning of the original investigation (SC/688/85) which were not subsequently accounted for. One was a pair of paint samples (RC/1 and RC/2) taken at the scene on 8th August 1985, and handed to DS Davidson by Ron Cook, the other was a third blood sample taken from the body of Sheila Caffell during autopsy, on afternoon of 7th August 1985...
« Last Edit: June 19, 2015, 07:02:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
What is more, the COLP investigators established that 2 samples of extreme importance were taken at the beginning of the original investigation (SC/688/85) which were not subsequently accounted for. One was a pair of paint samples (RC/1 and RC/2) taken at the scene on 8th August 1985, and handed to DS Davidson by Ron Cook, the other was a third blood sample taken from the body of Sheila Caffell during autopsy, on afternoon of 7th August 1985...

Were these samples of paint from the aga, and blood from Sheila, used to deliberately to contaminate one of the family owned parker hale silencers?

Isn't the truth of the matter, that there is no evidence whatsoever to prove or to support the case for a silencer to have been fitted to the gun barrel which had fired the shot underneath Sheila's chin?

Did the police mistakenly contaminate the wrong parker hale sound moderater?

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
What is more, the COLP investigators established that 2 samples of extreme importance were taken at the beginning of the original investigation (SC/688/85) which were not subsequently accounted for. One was a pair of paint samples (RC/1 and RC/2) taken at the scene on 8th August 1985, and handed to DS Davidson by Ron Cook, the other was a third blood sample taken from the body of Sheila Caffell during autopsy, on afternoon of 7th August 1985...

There were no paint samples taken on August 8 this is just more nonsense you made up.  You made up such because you have nothing legitimate to raise.  Cook's exhibits bore the RWC prefix not RC which didn't exist and are thus made up by you.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2015, 03:32:PM by scipio_usmc »
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Were these samples of paint from the aga, and blood from Sheila, used to deliberately to contaminate one of the family owned parker hale silencers?

Isn't the truth of the matter, that there is no evidence whatsoever to prove or to support the case for a silencer to have been fitted to the gun barrel which had fired the shot underneath Sheila's chin?

Did the police mistakenly contaminate the wrong parker hale sound moderater?

The police didn't contaminate any moderator and the only moderator collected in connection with the case prior to the trial is the one Nevill purchased.
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Everyone contaminated that moderator. It was handled by DB and thrown into the boot of the car driven by SJ.
The case should NOT have been allowed to have continued using contaminated evidence !!
Even Douglas Hurd said there had been errors made. Imagine saying a thing like that with a case as big as it was. Shame on the lot of them.

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Everyone contaminated that moderator. It was handled by DB and thrown into the boot of the car driven by SJ.
The case should NOT have been allowed to have continued using contaminated evidence !!
Even Douglas Hurd said there had been errors made. Imagine saying a thing like that with a case as big as it was. Shame on the lot of them.

Contaminated it with what?  The defense needed to prove they contaminated it with the paint found on it and the blood found on it and inside of it in order to have the moderator evidence discounted.  Picking it up would not transfer the paint or blood to it, carrying it to Oak Farm and storing it there would not contaminate it with paint and the blood. At most they could contaminate it with their own prints and cause evidence that had been on it to be lost.  The police lost the hair that was on it which is the loss of evidence not contaminating it with additional evidence. 

There was no way for the moderator to be innocently contaminated with the paint and blood the only way for it to be contaminated would be by purposely spraying blood inside using some device and taking the moderator and intentionally scratching the mantle with it.  The defense has zero evidence that such intentional planting occurred though.

That leaves the defense is in a very unenviable position. 
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Lets approach this matter, on the basis that there was only ever just the one silencer, and that it had all these different exhibit references, (SBJ/1, SJ/1, DB/1, AE/1, CAE/1 and or DRB/1) and lab' item no.'s 22 and 23, in whatever permutation that occurred, 22 to 23, and back to 22. Lets imagine that this silencer had been sent to the lab' and examined by experts on all those / these different occasions (13th August, 30th August, and 20th September 1985). Lets pretend that it got fingerprinted by DS Davidson on 9th August 1985, and by DS Eastwood and DS Davidson on the 13th September 1985, and by Ronny Crook, on 15th and 23rd August 1985...

Now, consider the following:-

There was no documented records to show or prove that this silencer was ever placed into secure storage between 13th and 30th August 1985, no safeguards put into place to ensure that this silencer could not possibly be contaminated innocently or accidentally. No, Sir, instead what we had was Ronny Crook carrying this silencer around with him, inside his grubby coat pocket everywhere this scumbag went for the entire duration of that / this 18 day period. Crooky even returned to the crime scene on 14th August carrying that silencer around with him in his grubby disgusting coat pocket. it was not in any protective packaging, it was just tossed into his coat pocket inside which he had often plonked his contaminated grubby hands at one time or another whilst touching, moving and collecting exhibits at the scene. Lets not forget that Crooky admitted to moving Sheila's bloodstained right hand and her bloodied right arm when sheila's body was insitu, so that PC Bird could photograph the bloodied hand impression upon the front lower right hand side of her nightdress.

Don't overlook that Crooky did not wear any gloves when moving the rifle from Sheila's body and he having placed that blood stained rifle back at the bedroom window where WPC Jeapes had seen it resting prior to entry by police, into the farmhouse, was surely contaminated in one way or another by performing these and similar duties at the scene on 7th and 8th August 1985...

Lets put it this way, not even the keystone cops would be daft enough to carry what turns out to be arguably the most important exhibit in the entire investigation, around in their pockets for 18 continuous days and nights. Think about it, what a truly bizarre set of circumstances, why would a DI go to such lengths.  I have to say, that I do not for one minute believe that Ronny the Crook did, he is and was a lying scumbag, no police officer worth their own weight in corruption would have dared go to such lengths. Crooky, has definitely made up a story about the only silencer in the entire investigation not being placed into storage at all between 13th and 30th August 1985, but rather he chooses to take full responsibility for carting this sole silencer everywhere he goes during those / these 18 days and nights, until he finally sends it off under the guise of exhibit reference DB/1 to the lab' on 30th August 1985, under lab' item reference 23, without so much as any explanation how he came to change the exhibit reference, and the lab' item reference number, from SJ/1 (or whatever) lab' iten 22, on 13th August 1985, into exhibit reference DB/1, lab' item reference number 23, 18 days later, whilst all the while that / this lone silencer was being carted around like a badly reused durex, it was inside his coat pocket with his bogified handkerchief...

Give us all a break, the geezers having a laugh, isn't he?
« Last Edit: June 20, 2015, 01:40:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Contaminated it with what?  The defense needed to prove they contaminated it with the paint found on it and the blood found on it and inside of it in order to have the moderator evidence discounted.  Picking it up would not transfer the paint or blood to it, carrying it to Oak Farm and storing it there would not contaminate it with paint and the blood. At most they could contaminate it with their own prints and cause evidence that had been on it to be lost.  The police lost the hair that was on it which is the loss of evidence not contaminating it with additional evidence. 

There was no way for the moderator to be innocently contaminated with the paint and blood the only way for it to be contaminated would be by purposely spraying blood inside using some device and taking the moderator and intentionally scratching the mantle with it.  The defense has zero evidence that such intentional planting occurred though.

That leaves the defense is in a very unenviable position.






Contaminated because those who handled exhibits did so without gloves. Even swabs at the lab were deemed impaired after being mixed with someone else's.

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Contaminated because those who handled exhibits did so without gloves. Even swabs at the lab were deemed impaired after being mixed with someone else's.

Which at most would contaminate it with fingerprints as I noted to you already.  You need to prove they contaminated it with the blood and paint by simply picking it up and handling it which of course would not occur. There is no way for blood and paint from the mantle to innocently get on it from simple handling which is why Fletcher testified that the only way for the evidence to get there would be through committing the murders with the moderator on the weapon or intentional planting.  Innocent transfer was ruled out.

Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
I wonder how many other silencers he had in his pockets?

Perhaps, he could have produced them like a magician pulling rabbits out of a hat...

If the jury had heard about Crookys activities the silencer evidence would have been disregarded as an unreliable exhibit, upon which to place such a large amount of trust. Crooky even dismantled this / that silencer on the 29th August 1985, and even after he had done that / this, Crooky did not see any blood in the silencer before he immediately rebuilt it, and proceeded to put the rebuilt silencer at risk of being further contaminated when he screwed the uncontaminated silencer directly onto the barrel of the anshuzt rifle...

Why would Crooky have done that /this?
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...