I Have Eyes To Look...And A Brain To See And Think

[Erik Narramore]

Much of what is said about the condition of Sheila at the scene is not true.  We know it is not true because we have the photographs and we each have eyes to see for ourselves.

(i). Sheila's hands were not perfectly clean.  BThe observations of the men on the scene are disproved by the crime scene photographs.

(ii). Sheila's nails were undamaged and seemed well-manicured.  So what?  You can handle a rifle, cartridges and a magazine without damaging your nails.

(iii). How can Sheila's fingertips be clean if she's lying on the floor in blood having been shot by Jeremy or shot herself? As for lead dust and powder, this is not always be easily observable to the naked eye, especially if she washed herself.

(iv). There was no cartridge lubricant on her hands, but it's beeswax.  It's sticky and she was using her fingers.

(v). You can see from the photographs that DC Hammersley's observations about Sheila were wrong.  But let's assume Sheila was as clean as the officers say.  Has it occurred to the guilt camp that this could be interpreted the other way and be seen as support for the theory that she washed herself?

[Erik Narramore]

One thing that this case teaches you more than any other is that you can never assume that what 'everybody knows' is actually true.

Everybody says she had 'long' to 'very long nails', but the photographs of her body do not show this.  Look for yourself.

In any case, why must long nails be an obstacle to loading bullet cartridges, if she wanted to load cartridges?  I can see why they may make it more difficult, but it doesn't make it impossible.

Why would she have broken nails if fighting Nevill?  Women with long nails (assuming Sheila did have long nails) can fight without breaking their nails.

It's also never considered how Sheila having long nails (if she did) would be an additional advantage for her over Nevill.  Other advantages would be the fact she is a woman and his daughter, making him more reluctant to tackle her, and the fact she was much smaller and lighter than Nevill and probably fleeter of foot than he.

But why assume she had to fight with Nevill anyway?

On the matter of grease, I assume this is referring to the beeswax, which is used on Eley ammunition as bullet lubricant.

The defence case theory was that Sheila washed herself.  This was supported by an eminent pathologist who gave the opinion that a murder-suicider may ritually wash herself.  We have the hand swab tests on the Forum and David has commented on this and said that the results do not preclude Sheila having handled and used ammunition and a rifle, but in practical terms, I am not convinced she would have got much beeswax on her hands or that a swab test would detect this to any great extent.

She was picking up the cartridges and placing them immediately in a magazine. Wouldn't the wax residue stick to her fingers, rather than palms?  Were the fingers swabbed and tested?  Isn't it likely that she would probably wipe the beeswax off her fingers of her own accord, perhaps still leaving some traces on her fingers, but possibly not enough to be detected?

[Erik Narramore]

If Sheila is the killer, how did Nevill get beaten so badly

With the butt of the rifle.  How else?  And why not with her nails too?  Women can inflict injuries on men.

How and why did Nevill ring Jeremy after being shot four times?

He could have phoned Jeremy before Sheila started shooting.

Sheila could not have overcome Nevill

Nevill would be conflicted in his mind because it's his daughter and she's a young woman and mother.  If Sheila can escape from him and run for the stairs, she would then fire back at him as he chases her and cause him to run back towards the kitchen.

Sheila's nightie had no pockets.  It's convenient there was ammunition available for re-loading.

Why must indicate prior planning on the part of the killer?  The magazine was loaded.  She had seen Jeremy leave the gun out in the back corridor.  There was ammunition in the kitchen.  It was opportunistic - if she was the killer.

Sheila must have known Nevill would chase her downstairs

And Jeremy would know that too?  Instead of just killing Nevill in bed?  That problem you identify there is surely more for a Jeremy scenario.  In a Sheila scenario, she would shoot Nevill on the stairs as he is chasing her.  They then return to the kitchen as Nevill wishes to draw her back there rather than allow her upstairs; and he thinks he can tackle her in the kitchen, but he underestimates her and he is already wounded.  She kills him and still has cartridges left in the magazine, so simply goes upstairs and fires until she realises the magazine is empty, then remembers the ammunition in the kitchen and returns downstairs to reload.

[Erik Narramore]

A hitman did it for Jeremy

Would a hitman kill two infant boys?  Mothers can and do kill their children.

When Brett Collins recently said he thinks this is how Jeremy arranged the assassination of his entire family, Brett was in effect telling us he doubts Jeremy's guilt.

The shots were too accurate

All the shots are at close quarters, so it would not be difficult for Sheila to be 100% accurate.  A child could do it.  Contrary to what was claimed by the relatives, Sheila had been on a shooting holiday with them and used a gun.  She had been brought up on the farm and must have observed Jeremy and Nevill using guns, giving her general familiarity with them.

Malcolm Fletcher is wrong to claim that the killer had 100% accuracy.  In fact, there was at least one spent bullet, maybe more that were never found.