Here's an interesting question?

[cee-dee]

Stick with the story........ Let us suppose that 70 years ago a man was accidentally shot dead while out shooting Grey squirrels in a large wood with a group of other people.

An inquest decided it was an accident and that one of the group was the unfortunate shooter. There was no charges as it was deemed an accident.

Now, long after the death of the victims wife, some old diaries, notes and papers were read through by an interested party who was shocked to discover that the victims wife had detailed in her notes a few days before her death that she'd got away with killing her husband in revenge after discovering his infidelity.

The family were "of means" and lived on a large estate where "Hunt'n, shoot'n and fish'n" was the norm and they had a large selection of guns. The way the wife had "got away with it" was that she'd taken one of the .22 rifles and fired a bullet in to a water barrel, then taken that bullet and fitted it in to another .22 cartridge case after carefully pulling out its bullet. She'd then loaded one of their old "garden guns" with the doctored round and hid it in the woods.

When the party went squirrel shooting (at the wife' suggestion), she'd taken her own personal rifle and the party guests had taken the other .22 rifles. The garden gun was smooth bore, ie, not rifled. When she used the garden gun to shoot her husband, the fatal bullet was found to be rifled but didn't match the wife's rifle.

Now, 70 years ago, forensics were not as advanced as they are today so the fact that the rifling on the fatal bullet may have been a bit..... er.... scored(???) after being fired again in a smooth bore gun wouldn't have been noticed.

The question is....:-

After all that time, would the revellation result in re-opening the inquest or would the powers-that-be decide that there was no useful purpose in wasting time and effort in doing that as the murderer was long dead as was the person who'd wrongly been identified as the accidental shooter?

[cee-dee]

I don't know where you're trying to go but the round I've been talking about is the .22 short which has a muzzle velocity of around 500 ft/sec, far and away below the velocity of a .22 LR or a .22 LR HV.

There are many very high power rounds available in .22 but I've not mentioned or considered those and have concentrated on the .22 short so why other rounds and calibres are being thrown in, I just don't know?

[bankhaunter]

I have seen a video where a pistol was fired under the water, the bullet remain whole, appeared undamaged and clearly showed the rifling marks but it's diameter wasn't checked.

No I wouldn't rely on the bullet missing me, even gross inaccuracy doesn't mean it can't sometimes hit the target.

[cee-dee]

***BANG*** Got 'im.

[******lynda******]

That's the reason they test fire bullets under water. If a bullet enters the top of the water, the smallest ripple would affect it because it is hitting water then at an angle, depending on which it could ricochet in any direction. Not to say it can't be done successfully but it is a risky business.

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

I don't know where you're trying to go but the round I've been talking about is the .22 short which has a muzzle velocity of around 500 ft/sec, far and away below the velocity of a .22 LR or a .22 LR HV.

There are many very high power rounds available in .22 but I've not mentioned or considered those and have concentrated on the .22 short so why other rounds and calibres are being thrown in, I just don't know?

---

Not according to this site ??

http://www.chuckhawks.com/22_rimfire_cartridges.htm

"The common .22 rimfire Short cartridge dates from the period of the American Civil War. It was first used in a S&W pocket pistol introduced in 1857 and it is the oldest cartridge still being loaded today. The .22 Short is used mainly as an inexpensive, quiet round for practice by the recreational shooter. It is also used in pocket pistols and mini-revolvers, as well as in international and Olympic rapid-fire pistol competition. The Short is available in target, standard velocity and high velocity versions. There is also a .22 short blank for use in starting pistols

.

Bullets are lead (usually coated with grease or wax or copper plated), in round nose or hollow point styles. The standard velocity .22 short launches a 29 grain bullet at 1,045 fps with 70 ft. lbs. of energy from a 22" rifle barrel. As a hunting round, the high velocity hollow point Short is useful only for tiny pests like mice, rats and small birds. Stick with the Long Rifle cartridge for small game hunting."

[upthecreekyetagain]

Another question would also be whether or not a low velocity .22s would have enough energy to kill from a smooth bore gun?

[bankhaunter]

A two inch by 3 sixteenths aluminium rivet when placed in the muzzle and powered by a .22 blank with a bit of extra powder, will go sideways through one inch of wood if that's any guide.

Off topic, once when cycling round the right angle bend in the road outside Hampton Court, I noticed hundreds of .22 rounds scattered across the raod, they were the type used in fairground rifle ranges.

I picked up some, went to the copper at the gate to tell him about it but he seemed surprisingly unbothered.

[cee-dee]

As I asked, I don't know where you're trying to go with this line?

If you look properly at the CH ballistics pages you'll find short rounds with a quoted muzzle velocity of from just over 500 ft/sec, others of 600 odd ft/sec and 700odd ft/sec. There's even a LR with a MV of less that 900 ft/sec. At no time did I mention those VHV rounds with a MV of over 2000 ft/sec so I'm at a loss to understand your point in ignoring the very low power rounds about which my OP revolved.

The very low velocity short rounds I used were Ely (which were inherited), and depending on what I was doing, I used the standard LR, the HV LR and LR HV HP.

Before anyone asks, yes, I had a FC.

[upthecreekyetagain]

"Where am I going . . . "

Not sure - just think there are far too many problems with the scenarion you painted - starting first with firing into a water barrel without deforming the bullet - then Lady C recovering the bullet, removing the bullet from a live cartridge and fitting the projectile back into a rimfire casing - then firing that bullet from a smooth bore gun in such a way that it wont cause significant marks - and finally the said bullet, travelling by your own definition, at just 500fps in such a manner that there will be enough energy left to ensure a kill.

Just too many problems for it to be anything but a suggested plot for Midsomer Murders!

[cee-dee]

Oh I see. Well, you best try it eh?

It's a bullet recoverable intact for a start. Secondly it's relatively easy to remove a bullet from another live case and thirdly, it requires little effort to shove your recovered bullet in to the live case.

As to the marks on the bullet after firing it twice, the original firing being in a rifled barrel would leave the grooves in the bullet and although the outside diameter of the bullet might be marked in such a way as to obscure the marks there, the actual rifled marks wouldn't be destroyed.

As also previously mentioned, if the original firing was done with a 4-groove rifled barrel, the fact that Lady C was using a rifle with a 6-groove barrel would "eliminate" her as being responsible on first sight.

Remember, years back investigations were not thorough and many were taken at face value on the basis that "It's obvious what happened...."

Taking a more modern case, that of Jeremy Bamber, initially the investigation accepted that it was a murder-suicide and the cops had even moved the gun from where found and cops had trampled all over the crime scene...... It was only later they had second thoughts.....

Like I said to BH, would you stand there and let me have a shot at your head from 40 feet (or less?) with a LV short?

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

Like I said to BH, would you stand there and let me have a shot at your head from 40 feet (or less?) with a LV short?

---

No I wouldn't, nor would I stand there and let you throw a brick at me - neither likely to be fatal though 🙂

[cee-dee]

G'worn, be a devil, let me have a go.

[bankhaunter]

You can see the bullet fired underwater at 4.18 and it doesn't appear to be deformed in any way

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OubvTOHWTms

Found a few more forums mentioning the inaccuray of smoothbore .22s  but neither lack of accuracy or power rules out the murderer just getting lucky, it can't be said it would be impossible.

There was a mention of a gun where the bore actually opened out towards the muzzle and I di wonder if the rifling marks on the bullet would show evdence. perhaps a slight flattening, however that may have to be deliberately looked for which is unlikely.

[cee-dee]

I watched the video right through and I see they were in Alabama where guns (and BIG guns) are more freely available than here.

So.... we know a garden gun isn't going to be your most accurate weapon BUT..... if you're gonna try to kill someone and get away with it, the method outlined is likely to be successful at that point in time (eg, 70 years ago). Bear in mind that the actual range wasn't mentioned but as Lady C was a hunt'n, shoot'n, fish'n type, she was likely well aware of the gun's limitations and acted accordingly.

Now just why did she choose a garden gun? On the one hand she was trying to preserve some of the rifling from originally firing the bullet through a 4-groove barrel and by using a (possibly worn) smooth bore gun, she probably succeded in deflecting attention from herself when she was using her personalised, high quality 6-groove gun.

On the other hand, she probably thought it was easier to hide and retrieve for the shooting then hide after use. The type of gun would be the sort that was like a walking cane with a very simple detachable stock, some of which were "bent metal".

Those guns had a longer barrel that the short barrel (22- 24 inches) very poor quality ones and Lady C could easily hide it within the leaf and fern litter on the woodland floor.

Now, if you've ever been to the houses of "people of note", they had "the gun room" in which a number of all sorts of guns would be kept. The gun cabinets looked like bookcases but designed for guns, not books. Some had glazed doors, some had solid doors in front of the glazed doors and the cases were designed to store the guns, show them off and keep them clean rather than be secure. It was the room itself that was secure.

The best guns would be in those cases, the "rough" or old guns were often consigned to a more or less cupboad and a missing one wouldn't be noticed. Happy days when the FA Laws were not so strict.

[joamur_gosof]

Water barrels have a high velocity to damage ratio so I think thats a deffinate murder plot, A lucky guess attempt at best with a pellet .....phrrrt no plot just an accident whilst shooting squirrels. The verdict stands 🙂