Problems With The Scratch Marks

[Erik Narramore]

The prosecution say it happened in a struggle, but I don't see how it could have.  I think that GER is wrong and it's also not good enough, as one or two people have said above, to suggest it must have happened before the incident.  If Sheila deliberately put those scratches there at some point beforehand, June must have noticed and Jeremy must have known about it and would speak up.  That's before we get into how the brim of the silencer could make those scratches and collect the paint traces in the knurled ribbon.  Is that possible?  And what would Sheila be doing with the silencer in the first place?  And does that then lend credence to Jeremy's original defence at the 1986 trial?

As a first step, I would say somebody needs to take a look at the same model of Parker Hale silencer and then think about how the scenario claimed by the Crown could be tested in a reliable and scientific way.  You'd probably need to start by scratching a painted surface with it similar to the aga surround of that time, to see how the scratching occurs and where the paint goes.  If that's consistent with the prosecution theory, then maybe stage a reconstruction to see if the silencer could have impacted the surround and made those scratches while flat to the surface.

Are there experts who undertake such tests?

[Erik Narramore]

It was Essex CID's idea to examine the aga surround, not Ann Eaton's.  The story is that Stan Jones noticed that the aga surround paint colour seemed to match the paint on the silencer.  They then went to examine the aga surround.  I believe those present were D.S. Jones,. D.I. Cook, D.I. Miller and Ann Eaton.

Of those four, I think we'd both probably agree we have two likely and obvious suspects, Stan and Ann, but given that police already had custody of the silencer, how can it be Ann Eaton?  Are you saying you think she put the paint on the silencer before Peter Eaton handed it over to Stan, and this tipped off Stan?  That ties Stan in on it as well.  Or are you saying that Ann assumed the police would notice the similarity, and if they did not, she planned to tell Stan, and maybe did tell him?

Another explanation would be that there was more than one silencer.

Having looked at a couple more GERs, I'm thoroughly confused.  It does very much look like Essex Police/FSS had possession of at least two different silencers.  I've found a GER for a different model of silencer with it stated that there is no red paint.  It could be that this is an updated GER compiled after examination and removal of the paint, but it looks like a different silencer and it has a different exhibit reference.

Second, there's the problem of explaining how the paint got on the silencer.  I am virtually certain that the silencer in the GER posted in this thread could not have made those marks in a struggle, or at all (though this would have to be verified in testing).  I am also close to certain that the paint could not have got into the knurled ribbon at the muzzle end of the silencer due to a struggle.  For this to happen, it would require the silenced rifle to be held flat to the aga surround and pivoted around in order to make two or three separate scratches. The paint traces could not have fallen into the knurled ribbon from the brim of the open end if the silencer is flat to the surface.  The threaded muzzle end of the silencer nearest to the knurled ribbon could not have made the scratches and collected the paint in the knurling as the brim is downward from the knurled ribbon when the silencer is threaded.