Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Getting that pesky blood out of the barrel.

I might later post the number of posts from Taylor, Stockdale and Trevor arsew.pe showing how they got the blood out of the rifle - they lied about it. They claimed it wasn't even there, they deny the evidence of notes relating to the finding of extensive blood inside the barrel because they know it destroys their case on which they justify calling Joe Karam a liar and which 'allows' them (in their own minds) to continue to persecute David Bain. But for now I'll simply post the question the Judge asked on the matter, and the answer he was given. The Judge did refer to the blood inside the barrel (a fact not contested by the Crown) because it can be assumed he understood the absolute importance of it, or indeed if it could 'survive' an explosion of gunpowder, heat and the velocity of a slightly oversized projectile bearing over it at speed and with full contact.

questions from the court: 3653 -54

Q. One of those Mr Ross, I take it that if there's blood in the barrel it would have to be from the last firing of the rifle that it was vacuumed in?
A. It is far more likely sir because of the movement of the gases, the bullet is designed that it fits very, very snugly into the barrel so any biological material would largely be removed, so it really comes down to the final shot.


The pattern and the science doesn't change, either does the direction = Robin the killer.

4 comments:

  1. Goodness, Mike and Ralph found it far easier to remove than even that. They removed every trace of blood by simply saying it wasn't there.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bloody magicians. I've bet they've said it about their own brains, and that could be the answer.

    ReplyDelete
  3. well now, what have we here? Mr Stupidsleuth conceding that there may have been blood in the barrel!

    He doesn't let his record for stupidity slip, however: he goes on to suggest that this blood could have come from any of the other previous shots. And he says - quite rightly - that a close-contact shot doesn't prove suicide. No, it doesn't, on its own, but it sure is a big piece of the jigsaw that, when it's put together correctly, shows the picture of suicide beyond reasonable doubt.

    Now he's retreated to his comfort zone of the glasses, being too stupid to see what he is doing there in the centre of his tangled web.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yes, after all this time, one of the patrons of the hate-sites admits to there having possibly been blood in the rifle. Problem for him is that it's not a possibilty but a recorded fact. Of course uncontested evidence was given that the blood couldn't have come from the earlier shots, so stupidslueth needs to find an answer for Robin's 'apparent' passivity at the time of his death and deal with the question of vacuming of the blood into the barrel. I'll give him a clue: tight contact shot, one edge of the silencer not making full contact = suicide. Blood going wrong way on right shoe = Robin family killer.

    ReplyDelete