Who Killed Sheila Caffell? Part One: The Photograph

[Luminous Wanderer]

Who Killed Sheila Caffell?
Part One: The Photograph

1. The questions

The killing of Sheila Caffell is the crux of this case because, logically, the killer of Sheila is the killer of the others as well. 

If Sheila killed herself, then she was also the murderer.

If Jeremy killed Sheila, then Jeremy killed the other four too.

2. The photograph

The infamous photograph of poor Sheila, in her nightdress, lying shot and dead is the subject-matter of this thread. 

In examining the photograph, we can surmise a contradiction in that there is evidence that affirms Bamber’s guilt and also evidence that potentially puts the safety of his conviction into question.  Here I will not come to any firm conclusions.  I am neutral, remember.  Instead, I will outline the questions to be asked.

3. The provenance of the photograph

As explained on the other thread, first we must ask ourselves whether the evidence we have is reliable.

What is the source of that particular photograph?  Is it the agreed photograph at trial taken from police evidence, with an index number and linked to the record of negatives?  That might seem like an obvious question, but establishing provenance is essential as these photographs can be doctored or tampered with, especially nowadays with digital technology.

4. Points affirming Bamber's culpability

The evidence affirming Bamber’s culpability is the fact that we can see from both the photograph and also the autopsy report that there were no recorded signs of struggle evident.  That does require that we place faith in the recorded findings, but in that regard we have no choice.

That being the case, to believe Jeremy Bamber, we would have to accept that a disorganised affective-disordered psychotic would run amok and then, before killing herself, calmly:

(i). replace the moderator in the gun cupboard; and,

(ii). dispose of the incriminating clothes and put on a clean nightdress.

Point (i) above is extremely unlikely, but in fairness to Bamber, he need not worry about that as there is also the possibility that there was no moderator in the first place.  So let's lean in Bamber's favour and dismiss (i).

It is point (ii) that causes Bamber the real problem.  We can accept that Sheila may have cleaned herself up before committing suicide – even the staunchest anti-Bamber poster could accept this.  That is not where we find the difficulty.  Where the difficulty arises is in the fact that we have no recorded factual or forensic signature of the disposal of the incriminating clothes.  Such a ‘signature’ might be wet clothes found somewhere nearby, or burnt clothes in the Aga, or clothes in the washing machine.  Where is the signature?

There is also a second major problem with (ii).  Why would Sheila bother with disposal at all?  She’s cleaned herself up and put on a clean nightdress, and she now wants to kill herself.  Why does she need to dispose of or clean the clothes?  Why would she be concerned with the prospect of incrimination when she will shortly be dead?

Pro-Bamber supporters will say that none of this matters as Sheila needn't have struggled with Nevill, who was already shot and weak - but that makes no sense.  From a purely common-sensical perspective, there must have been a struggle with Nevill, if not with June as well.  We can allow that Sheila in a deranged state and with the advantage of the gun, could have overcome Nevill - again, I do not see that as controversial.  The difficulty Bamber has is in the obvious point that at any time, Nevill could have pulled at Sheila's clothes, clawed and scratched at her, tore her clothes, etc., and Sheila may have ended up with Nevill's blood on her.  This, then, leads Bamber back to the problem of (ii) above and the need for a solution.

5. Points that may potentially cast doubt over the safety of the conviction

Then there are the points arising from the photograph that may potentially cast doubt over the safety of Bamber’s conviction.  We must be clear that none of what follows proves Bamber is innocent.  We can't do that. There is no evidence to exonerate him.  Rather, what these points may potentially tell us is that there could be a realistic basis for arguing that his conviction is legally unsafe.

The points to consider are as follows:

5.1. The gunshot wounds do not appear to have come from a moderated rifle.  They don’t look at all consistent with the use of a moderator.  This is for two reasons:

5.1.1.    First, the ring of bruising around the wounds.   Unlike the muzzle end of the rifle itself, the end of the moderator is knurled and could not produce bruising.

5.1.2.    Second, the wound pattern in each case looks nothing at all like what would be expected for a contact wound or near-contact wound from a moderator, but is consistent with an unmoderated rifle. 

Again, let me emphasise: these points do not prove Bamber is innocent, as he could still have shot Sheila without the moderator, but they do throw the Crown’s case theory into doubt and, if supported by expert opinion, would definitely result in the quashing of the conviction. 

5.2. If we accept the photograph at face value, then logically Sheila would have had to have taken at least the first shot from Bamber while standing up, before Bamber shot her again and then staged the body.  However, the blood splatter on the nightdress is not consistent with Sheila having been shot while standing.  It looks more like what you would expect if Sheila was on the floor and sitting up on her side, leaning slightly to her right.  Again, this doesn’t prove Bamber innocent, but does lend credence to suicide.  Given this evidence was known at trial, I doubt this point could form the basis of an argument that the conviction is unsafe in the legal sense, but as a stand-alone point, it does throw the general safety of the conviction into doubt.

5.3. In regard to each gunshot wound, the entry point and trajectory does, on the face of it [mine not being an expert opinion, bear in mind] suggest suicide.  It really doesn’t seem likely that Bamber would have been able to kill Sheila and execute the gunshots under her chin at the relevant angle.  Again, given this evidence was known at trial, this does not in itself affect the legal safety of Bamber's conviction and can only be regarded as a generally compelling point, not a ground of appeal.

6. Questions

Questions that I think arise from the above:

6.1. What was the expert view on the trajectory of the bullets into Sheila?  Was suicide ballistically possible?

6.2. Do we have a photo of the main bedroom showing the location of the two bodies, the loci of gunshot wounds to the two victims and the location of bullet fragments found?

6.3. Was expert evidence presented on blood splatter patterns?

[David1819]

4. Points affirming Bamber's culpability

The evidence affirming Bamber’s culpability is the fact that we can see from both the photograph and also the autopsy report that there were no recorded signs of struggle evident.  That does require that we place faith in the recorded findings, but in that regard we have no choice.

That being the case, to believe Jeremy Bamber, we would have to accept that a disorganised affective-disordered psychotic would run amok and then, before killing herself, calmly:

(i). replace the moderator in the gun cupboard; and,

(ii). dispose of the incriminating clothes and put on a clean nightdress.

Point (i) above is extremely unlikely, but in fairness to Bamber, he need not worry about that as there is also the possibility that there was no moderator in the first place.  So let's lean in Bamber's favour and dismiss (i).

It is point (ii) that causes Bamber the real problem.  We can accept that Sheila may have cleaned herself up before committing suicide – even the staunchest anti-Bamber poster could accept this.  That is not where we find the difficulty.  Where the difficulty arises is in the fact that we have no recorded factual or forensic signature of the disposal of the incriminating clothes.  Such a ‘signature’ might be wet clothes found somewhere nearby, or burnt clothes in the Aga, or clothes in the washing machine.  Where is the signature?

There is also a second major problem with (ii).  Why would Sheila bother with disposal at all?  She’s cleaned herself up and put on a clean nightdress, and she now wants to kill herself.  Why does she need to dispose of or clean the clothes?  Why would she be concerned with the prospect of incrimination when she will shortly be dead?

Point 4(ii) rests on the assumption that an old man already shot three times would damage Sheila's clothes.

Ive got into fights before. On one occasion I broke my hand but my clothes were undamaged. Only one time can I recall my clothes getting in state from a fight and that's because I ended up on the floor.

[Adam]

Point 4(ii) rests on the assumption that an old man already shot three times would damage Sheila's clothes.

Ive got into fights before. On one occasion I broke my hand but my clothes were undamaged. Only one time can I recall my clothes getting in state from a fight and that's because I ended up on the floor.

You've got into fights, lol.

You weren't even man enough to say you had changed stance. Then crept around focusing on posters who did have the courage to publically change stance.

[Luminous Wanderer]

Point 4(ii) rests on the assumption that an old man already shot three times would damage Sheila's clothes.

Yet we must accept that Nevill was able to make it back to the kitchen, meaning he was able to move around, yet we must also believe he would not have been able to do the instinctive and obvious thing: struggle with Sheila for the gun?

Ive got into fights before. On one occasion I broke my hand but my clothes were undamaged. Only one time can I recall my clothes getting in state from a fight and that's because I ended up on the floor.

I have got into many fights myself, too numerous to recall - including knife/razor fights inside prison.  I can only speak from experience and say that when somebody is fighting for their life, they are like a wild animal and formidable.  But even in a non-lethal situation, people have their clothes torn and get scratched in fights, you know that.  It's a matter of common knowledge. 

If we can see that Sheila barely has a mark on her - and given that we must accept this evidence - it does raise the natural question of how she could have been in a struggle with Nevill.  Surely Nevill, even if shot, would have been trying to grab the gun off her, or at least force the barrel of the gun away from him or whichever target?  How could Sheila emerge from such a struggle without a mark on her and with her nightdress immaculate, looking like she's just had it ironed and creased?  Maybe she changed into the nightdress in order to commit suicide - I accept that's a serious possibility - but that being so, where is the 'signature' for this contingency?  Where are the wet clothes?  The clothes in the washing machine?  The burnt clothes in the Aga?  You will say there aren't any because the police weren't looking for that.  Perhaps, but we have to rely on the evidence that is available.

Nevill may or may not have been shot three times already before she even began to struggle with him.  I think that's extremely unlikely given the calibre of the rifle being used, but you can't establish that particular anyway, and even if he was already shot several times, the absence of any sign of struggle is still a ripe issue.  He wouldn't have given up without a fight and nobody will believe it. 

Personally, I do not believe this point is assailable by the pro-Bamber side and it's probably not wise to pursue it further.  I think if Jeremy Bamber's conviction is to be found unsafe, it will be using a different line of attack.  The reality is that even if we assume that Sheila could have left Nevill without so much as a scratch, mark or a hair out of place on her pretty head, it does not assist Jeremy.  The point is damning.

[Adam]

42.

The examination of Nevill Bamber's body also revealed 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 Mr Bamber having been struck with a long blunt object, possibly a gun.

-----------

There was also Nevill's broken watch. His arms were hit so hard by Bamber, his watch fell off. No fight 

The upturned furniture in the kitchen also highlights a fight. Both the ceiling light smashed & aga was scratched during the struggle for the now empty rifle.

I will now provide the  whole link to the above. Rather than leave it as an isolated extract, which David does.

[Adam]

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwiMn___7a3aAhUGKcAKHZkqA-gQFjAAegQIBxAB&usg=AOvVaw3_he1NUdt-LIv3JGVUZ6T9

[David1819]

Yet we must accept that Nevill was able to make it back to the kitchen, meaning he was able to move around, yet we must also believe he would not have been able to do the instinctive and obvious thing: struggle with Sheila for the gun?

I have got into many fights myself, too numerous to recall - including knife/razor fights inside prison.  I can only speak from experience and say that when somebody is fighting for their life, they are like a wild animal and formidable.  But even in a non-lethal situation, people have their clothes torn and get scratched in fights, you know that.  It's a matter of common knowledge. 

If we can see that Sheila barely has a mark on her - and given that we must accept this evidence - it does raise the natural question of how she could have been in a struggle with Nevill.  Surely Nevill, even if shot, would have been trying to grab the gun off her, or at least force the barrel of the gun away from him or whichever target?  How could Sheila emerge from such a struggle without a mark on her and with her nightdress immaculate, looking like she's just had it ironed and creased?  Maybe she changed into the nightdress in order to commit suicide - I accept that's a serious possibility - but that being so, where is the 'signature' for this contingency?  Where are the wet clothes?  The clothes in the washing machine?  The burnt clothes in the Aga?  You will say there aren't any because the police weren't looking for that.  Perhaps, but we have to rely on the evidence that is available.

Nevill may or may not have been shot three times already before she even began to struggle with him.  I think that's extremely unlikely given the calibre of the rifle being used, but you can't establish that particular anyway, and even if he was already shot several times, the absence of any sign of struggle is still a ripe issue.  He wouldn't have given up without a fight and nobody will believe it. 

Personally, I do not believe this point is assailable by the pro-Bamber side and it's probably not wise to pursue it further.  I think if Jeremy Bamber's conviction is to be found unsafe, it will be using a different line of attack.  The reality is that even if we assume that Sheila could have left Nevill without so much as a scratch, mark or a hair out of place on her pretty head, it does not assist Jeremy.  The point is damning.

Look at pathological evidence of Nevills injuries prior to entering the kitchen.

One arm had a cominuted fracture making it impossible to move. 



Two more shots to the chin/jaw that penetrated through into his neck.



He is already in a fatal condition. With just a little time left to live.

[David1819]

Nevill may or may not have been shot three times already before she even began to struggle with him.  I think that's extremely unlikely given the calibre of the rifle being used, but you can't establish that particular anyway, and even if he was already shot several times, the absence of any sign of struggle is still a ripe issue.  He wouldn't have given up without a fight and nobody will believe it. 

Yes it can. There were only three shell casings found in the kitchen. But thirteen shell casings found upstairs (excluding the twins room). Nevill was shot a total of 7 times. Four of them where shots to the head. Its a process of elimiation whereby the other three shots to the arm and jaw must have been inflicted upstairs otherwise it would be impossible for Neville to get himself to that location where he was found.

[Steve_uk]

Yes it can. There were only three shell casings found in the kitchen. But thirteen shell casings found upstairs (excluding the twins room). Nevill was shot a total of 7 times. Four of them where shots to the head. Its a process of elimiation whereby the other three shots to the arm and jaw must have been inflicted upstairs otherwise it would be impossible for Neville to get himself to that location where he was found.

It's a stretch to say Nevill reached the telephone only to summon Jeremy, even if he did know the number by heart, then race back upstairs to be shot. It's my belief in the few seconds he did have in the kitchen alone he hid his watch under the rug then returning to face Jeremy managed to get a grip on the weapon, raising it enough to smash the lampshade before finally succumbing to the last three shots, slumping in the chair in the process.

[Adam]

It's a stretch to say Nevill reached the telephone only to summon Jeremy, even if he did know the number by heart, then race back upstairs to be shot. It's my belief in the few seconds he did have in the kitchen alone he hid his watch under the rug then returning to face Jeremy managed to get a grip on the weapon, raising it enough to smash the lampshade before finally succumbing to the last three shots, slumping in the chair in the process.

Why would he hide his watch ?

I thought the watch was smashed. Nevill's forearms had defensive bruises from when Bamber was hitting him with the rifle. This is when the watch smashed and fell off & rifle butt broke.

[Adam]

34.

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

[Adam]

249.

We have considered the potential impact that Action 94 might have had on the jury. We think it is wholly unrealistic to suggest that the jury might have been persuaded by it that there had not been a violent struggle in the kitchen. Even if one discounts the evidence of the overturned stools and chairs and the broken sugar bowl, there was sufficient other evidence to suggest a violent struggle.

Mr Bamber's body lay across an overturned chair that can have had nothing to do with the actions of the TFG, the light fitting was broken, there were the injuries apart from the shot wounds to Mr Bamber, there was the piece broken off the rifle stock, there were score marks under the mantelpiece where it had been struck by the sound moderator attached to the rifle.

And there was Mr Bamber's watch lying damaged under a rug on the other side of the room.

[Steve_uk]

Why would he hide his watch ?

I thought the watch was smashed. Nevill's forearms had defensive bruises from when Bamber was hitting him with the rifle. This is when the watch smashed and fell off & rifle butt broke.

As a clue to who the perpetrator was. My guess is that it had got round the pub that Jeremy had stolen two Cartier watches on his trip to New Zealand.

[maggie]

As a clue to who the perpetrator was. My guess is that it had got round the pub that Jeremy had stolen two Cartier watches on his trip to New Zealand.

OR the watch was knocked off the worktop or table possibly when Nevill stumbled trying to defend himself.  Cannot see how he could have put up much of a fight with the dreadful injuries he had sustained.

[Steve_uk]

249.

We have considered the potential impact that Action 94 might have had on the jury. We think it is wholly unrealistic to suggest that the jury might have been persuaded by it that there had not been a violent struggle in the kitchen. Even if one discounts the evidence of the overturned stools and chairs and the broken sugar bowl, there was sufficient other evidence to suggest a violent struggle.

Mr Bamber's body lay across an overturned chair that can have had nothing to do with the actions of the TFG, the light fitting was broken, there were the injuries apart from the shot wounds to Mr Bamber, there was the piece broken off the rifle stock, there were score marks under the mantelpiece where it had been struck by the sound moderator attached to the rifle.

And there was Mr Bamber's watch lying damaged under a rug on the other side of the room.

Given the number of Police who traipsed the area it could have got scrunched underfoot.