Problems With The Silencer Evidence: How Did The Blood Get There?

[Erik Narramore]

I believe all family members involved in the case had their blood taken by the police.  Off-hand I can't remember specifically who, but it probably included Robert Boutflour.  This happened at some point in 1986 in the run-up to the trial.  There is a document concerning it.  I will dig it out of my records at some point but it is on the Forum.

These tests could have been carried out due to suspicions on the part of the police that family members may have planted the silencer evidence.

As for whether family members could have known Sheila's blood group, we know that Sheila was in direct correspondence with Peter and Ann Eaton and she knew David Boutflour quite well.  I do agree with you that it would be rather strange for them to know her blood group, but it is not an impossibility and remember also that Sheila had contact with doctors and either Sheila or June could have let slip the information in mundane conversations with family members.  At the end of the day, they all knew each other so the possibility that they knew Sheila's blood group cannot be ruled out, even though I agree it's strange.

Also, remember that the family were close to the police investigation and so it is not out-of-the-question that very early on somebody told them Sheila's blood group or they learned it or even overheard it.

Furthermore, it is possible that somebody planted the blood in the silencer without giving any thought to blood analysis, simply in the belief that any sort of human blood found in the silencer would be incriminating, while at the same time working on the assumption that the police would be unable to match the blood to a particular person.  Remember, this was before the days when DNA was used routinely in criminal investigation - that technology was still in its infancy in 1985/86 and not widespread practice, so people like the Boutflours and Eatons, and probably most police officers and forensic scientists, would have no knowledge of it.

My tentative conclusion is that the blood pattern in the silencer is consistent with the blood having been deliberately put there by somebody.  I also conclude that the silencer could not have caused the scratches on the aga.  None of this is to say that the silencer evidence was fabricated.  I just don't know that.

[Erik Narramore]

It is rumoured that Robert Boutflour, Jnr., had his DNA taken by police.

If so, it must have been in the run-up to the 2002 appeal, so it will have come under Operation Stokenchurch.  The 1986 trial and the subsequent Bamber Inquiry (circa 1991) were too early, I believe, for the police to be switched-on to the relevance of DNA, though the technology was around and in limited use.

[Erik Narramore]

As I stated above, if a relative or relatives did plant blood in the silencer, they may not have cared about the blood group or other forensics.  The objective may have been simply to plant blood in the silencer that was recognisably human.  The import of doing so may not have been fully appreciated and the evidence may have been then interpreted against Jeremy.  That two of the people involved supposedly have the same blood group is not a coincidence - it's statistically quite likely.

[Erik Narramore]

I believe that the blood distribution inside the silencer was consistent with it having been planted there - not the same thing.  I also started a thread on the topic in which I gave a full explanation of how that could have been done, right down to how the blood would be dripped on the silencer and the method used and the order of steps taken.

I have not said the blood was planted in the silencer, because:

(i). That could be libellous.
(ii). I don't know for sure it was planted.
(iii). To prove it would require consultation with a blood expert who also has expertise in forensic ballistics and fluid dynamics and can comment on things such as tension dynamics in the context of blood that has entered a silencer through reverse suction under tremendous force (a type of back spatter known as drawback).

You can also come to the firm view that the silencer was planted, but nevertheless maintain that Jeremy was still guilty.  The two things are not necessarily mutually-exclusive.

[Erik Narramore]

How much did Ann Eaton know about guns?  Did she ever use a rifle?  Could she take a silencer apart on her own?

We know exactly what contaminating the silencer with blood would involve, because we have the FSS findings.  It would require somebody to take the baffles out, drip blood on the outside of the baffles, let the blood dry, then re-thread the baffles into the silencer.  This would take at least a few minutes.  Where did she do this?

My view is that, if - if - the silencer was contaminated, it was Robert and David, without Ann's knowledge or involvement, it was done at Robert's house, and Robert used his own blood.  I don't believe they could have trusted Ann to keep quiet about it.  It was something they could never discuss again, even between themselves, and would have to take to their graves.