Spain - Sheila Barrero Fernandez, 22, Degaña, 25 Jan 2004

New Posts

Below we have four representations of the crime scene.

b1.png
b2.png
b3.png
b4.png
1,2 and 3 are vidcaps. From 4, this link.

None of the four images is a completely accurate representation of what occurred. Let's analyze one by one.

The first is a recreation made, several years later, by one of the detectives who investigated the case, using the vehicle of the victim. Although the detective thought the murderer was sitting in the back seat, when he did the simulation he did not sit completely. With his left hand around the headrest, simulating holding the victim by the neck or chest, and with his right hand simulates wield the gun.

The second image is a drawing that recreates more faithfully the position that detective wanted to simulate.

The third is a representation of the Guardia Civil, rather strange.

The fourth is a drawing appeared in the press.

In the first three images it shows how the shooting hand is the right, while on the fourth hand is not specified.

Based on available data, the fourth image is the most faithful representation of the possible trajectory of the bullet. Entry wound in the back of the head, almost in the middle, exit wound over the right eyebrow, and impact on the glass. Look at the discrepancy between the images 3 and 4 on where the bullet hits the glass. In the drawing of the Guardia Civil the path is from right to left, and the bullet hit the left edge of the glass, and we know that is not the case. The point where the bullet hits the glass is represented to a good approximation by image 4.

Assuming that the victim was sitting facing forward, the picture 4 would be a good representation of the path, with entry and exit points at the top and the impact on the glass. The problem is that is not possible. The seat and headrest make impossible for the picture 4 to be correct.

The Peugeot 205 is a small car, but it has pretty high seats in relation to the size of the car, and headrests are also quite long. Sheila whole head would be below the upper edge of the headrest. Try a shot from above the headrest would mean making it almost from the car roof, with an impossible angle. As it was a contact shot, it could only be made from the left or right side of the headrest.

If you sit in the back of a Peugeot 206, apart from noting the big difficulty in doing it if the front seat is not well advanced, which immediately catches the eye it is that you can see nothing. One can not see the driver, no part of her, if you are sitting just behind.

If the killer was sitting behind and shot with his right hand, he could just do it from the right side of the headrest. But he could not do as they show us the pictures 1 and 2, shooting with his right hand while holding the victim with the left. In such cases the hand is placed at such angle that the shot can just go to the left.

In image 3 the killer position is consistent with the trajectory of the bullet as shown, but we know that this trajectory is not correct. But look at the position of the victim, because it is the closest representation we have if the shot was made with the right hand. Moreover, it is the only position in which a right hand shot is possible.

The killer should be sitting farther from the center, almost directly behind the driver's seat, with his back on the rear seat. Sheila had to incline her body and her head forward and to the right, more than the picture 3 shows, at least until the middle of his head came into view of the killer on the right side of the headrest. That is, with the head inclined forward and to the right, but facing slightly to the left, as shows in Figure 3.

In that situation, a killer sitting right behind can extend his arm and after put the gun in contact with the head, shoot. The arm of the murderer would be in a position such that the trajectory of the bullet would be slightly to the right, or even straight. The angle of the bullet in the skull of the victim and the impact on the glass would be explained in this situation.

There is another possible scenario, but involves the left hand. It would be very similar to that shown in Figure 2 situation, but with hands changed. With his right hand holding Sheila and shooting with his left hand. Sheila would be facing forward, with her head separate a few inchs of the headrest. In that case the shot would be from the left side of the headrest and take path from left to right.

Those are the two options that I found. Perhaps may be some other, but involving very strange postures of the victim and the killer, and I think these are the two reasonable possibilities. With the data available it is not possible to choose for one or the other.

So, why is always represented the killer shooting with his right hand? I have the suspicion, although I have no proof, it's because the GSR were found on the right hand of Borja. It is also possible that none of the initial suspects without alibi was left-handed.

Anyway, would like to read your views about which of the two possibilities do you think is the most likely, and why.
 
I only just saw this, and it's midnight here, so I will look at it further later. My immediate reaction to the four images is that if the trajectories shown in image 4 are accurate, then the representations of a right-handed killer in the first three images would not produce those trajectories. I didn't realize that the headrests came up that high - that makes it even more awkward for the killer.
 
The only problem with image 4 is that the headrest makes the trajectory impossible. The following photos were taken by me in a Peugeot 206, nearly identical to that of the victim.

Pg1.jpgPg2.jpgPg3.jpg

The first is taken just behind the driver's seat, with the camera at eye level. Note that you can see almost nothing from that position.

The other two images are taken moving a little to the right every time. One could be the position of the killer if he shot with his right hand, but this victim would have to move to the right to make a good target.

A left hand shot fits better, I think.

This is de Peugeot 206 of Sheila, the day after the murder. Realize the very narrow space in the back.

BackCar1.jpg
FrontCar1.jpg
(Vidcaps)
 
The whole moving and placing of the body, the scarf, the car parked at a somewhat romantic spot -reminds me of a wanna-be gangster type who may be a film buff and is trying to replicate something they may have seen in a movie, jmo for now.
The victim is moved around like a mannequin or a stage prop, speaking of props, often theaters, film houses ect. have pistols that shoot blanks.
There does seem to be a somewhat feminine feel to the murder, a sense of the dramatic, not only women are feminine....

On a separate note, the possibility of pregnancy is there, not an actual one, but a fake one, sometimes told to men to keep them from another female.
 
Concerning cases with some similarities, but with no connection to this one.
Canadian case, unsolved, inexplicably,Sonia V."s body was moved into her own car, which was driven by perp and left in a public space. unlike this case, the victim's body was found elsewhere.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-Sonia-Varaschin-42-Orangeville-29-Aug-2010-3


Concerning staged crime scene, scroll about half way down, fwiw.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=eo...age&q=victim body found staged in car&f=false
 
I’ve been thinking about this case a lot, but am as perplexed (or even more perplexed) than before).

If that drawing is correct about where the bullet hit on the windshield, I think it’s very unlikely that the killer held the gun in his right hand. And with that high headrest, it would have been very awkward but, I suppose, possible.

Going back to the concept of means, motive, and opportunity....there seems to be no one with a strong motive. The only motive suggested is that of Borja’s relationship with Sheila being a threat to Borja’s ongoing relationship with a long-term girlfriend. But that seems weak.

As to means, Borja and the hunters are the only known (to us) people with easy access to guns.

As to opportunity, I wish we could see the call and text logs of everyone involved. Unless Sheila or someone else let Borja know when she was leaving for home, I don’t think Borja could have killed Sheila unless he lay in wait for hours for her.
 
I was making a timeline of the Saturday evening and Sunday morning activities, and something struck me as odd.

Two friends drove Sheila to her car. The two cars drive to C, stop for a chat, and part ways, with Sheila leaving for Degano.

Looking at the timeline, Sheila is with her friends from about 7-7:30. The two friends drive her to her car, presumably chatting along the way. There might be some time for a little more talk after they arrive at her car. Here’s what I find odd: The two cars drive to C, about 4 km way (please correct me if I’m wrong about this), a 5- or 6-minute drive, and they feel the need to stop and chat again.

One of the friends texts Sheila when he arrives home, asking her to text him when she arrives safely home. I would like to know if this friend was in the habit of doing this. It should have taken Sheila about a half hour to get home. When Sheila didn’t text him back after 45 minutes or an hour, did he try calling or texting her? He apparently didn’t call her family to ask if she had arrived. Did he go looking for her?

I’ve always wondered about the person whom Sheila presumably knows getting into the back seat rather than the passenger seat. But it doesn’t seem so odd if there were two people and one got into the passenger seat and the other into the back seat.

And why would the killer get into the car? If Sheila recognized him and rolled down her window, why wouldn’t the killer shoot her from where he stood outside the car? There would be much less chance of him leaving any evidence in the car.


With the loose time frame around Sheila leaving the larger group of friends, and how much time was spent here and there chatting, I don’t think it’s likely, but I think it would have been possible for these friends to kill Sheila, drive her car up the hilll to make it look like she had turned off to Degano, return home and text her. But there’s no apparent motive, no apparent means, and it doesn’t seem likely that two friends would conspire to do this. So, no known means or motive, but opportunity.

The other people with opportunity are the hunters. They were in the area. They had guns (though whether or not either of them had a handgun, we don’t know). No motive, though. Possible road rage?

Is it possible Sheila drive to Degano and visited someone there who killed her? The killer then drove her car back up the mountain to make it look like she had never made it to Degano.
 
Sorry, I promised a timeline with maps and I have not done it. I'll try to put it this weekend, or next week at the latest.

It just turned 12 years old.
 
I’ve been thinking about this case a lot, but am as perplexed (or even more perplexed) than before).

If that drawing is correct about where the bullet hit on the windshield, I think it’s very unlikely that the killer held the gun in his right hand. And with that high headrest, it would have been very awkward but, I suppose, possible.

Going back to the concept of means, motive, and opportunity....there seems to be no one with a strong motive. The only motive suggested is that of Borja’s relationship with Sheila being a threat to Borja’s ongoing relationship with a long-term girlfriend. But that seems weak.

As to means, Borja and the hunters are the only known (to us) people with easy access to guns.

But shotguns, not handguns. There are many hunters in the area.


As to opportunity, I wish we could see the call and text logs of everyone involved. Unless Sheila or someone else let Borja know when she was leaving for home, I don’t think Borja could have killed Sheila unless he lay in wait for hours for her.

It seems that Sheila does not send or receive calls that night.




I was making a timeline of the Saturday evening and Sunday morning activities, and something struck me as odd.

Two friends drove Sheila to her car. The two cars drive to C, stop for a chat, and part ways, with Sheila leaving for Degano.

The name is Degaña, but I am afraid that your keyboards do not have Ñ letter.

Looking at the timeline, Sheila is with her friends from about 7-7:30. The two friends drive her to her car, presumably chatting along the way. There might be some time for a little more talk after they arrive at her car. Here’s what I find odd: The two cars drive to C, about 4 km way (please correct me if I’m wrong about this), a 5- or 6-minute drive, and they feel the need to stop and chat again.

One of the friends texts Sheila when he arrives home, asking her to text him when she arrives safely home. I would like to know if this friend was in the habit of doing this. It should have taken Sheila about a half hour to get home. When Sheila didn’t text him back after 45 minutes or an hour, did he try calling or texting her? He apparently didn’t call her family to ask if she had arrived. Did he go looking for her?


I think these guy liked Sheila, like almost all of the group. But she was too much for them, and certainly did not dare to say her directly. The message was a way, a little naive, to show that he cared for her. I do not think he really expected a response, although he would have been very happy of get one.


I’ve always wondered about the person whom Sheila presumably knows getting into the back seat rather than the passenger seat. But it doesn’t seem so odd if there were two people and one got into the passenger seat and the other into the back seat.

And why would the killer get into the car? If Sheila recognized him and rolled down her window, why wouldn’t the killer shoot her from where he stood outside the car? There would be much less chance of him leaving any evidence in the car.


Good question

With the loose time frame around Sheila leaving the larger group of friends, and how much time was spent here and there chatting, I don’t think it’s likely, but I think it would have been possible for these friends to kill Sheila, drive her car up the hilll to make it look like she had turned off to Degano, return home and text her. But there’s no apparent motive, no apparent means, and it doesn’t seem likely that two friends would conspire to do this. So, no known means or motive, but opportunity.



It seems that the detectives tracked the time and place from where the text message was sent, and did not consider they may be the killers. Likely the message was sent between 08:05 and 08:10 a.m. They left the last pub about 07:45. No time to drive up, down and text. Yes, one of them could be up in the mountain killing her and the other at home sending the message. But we have not motive.


The other people with opportunity are the hunters. They were in the area. They had guns (though whether or not either of them had a handgun, we don’t know). No motive, though. Possible road rage?

I don´t see a road rage. Why get in the car?


Is it possible Sheila drive to Degano and visited someone there who killed her? The killer then drove her car back up the mountain to make it look like she had never made it to Degano.


There is no time. Look at the timeline and the Google Earth file in the next post.
 
Any chance Sheila gave someone she knew or perhaps, did not know well a drive home from the bar ?
Do any of the students at her school hitch-hike?
 
TIMELINE

07:00 She closed the Joe Team and went with her friends to a last pub for a nightcap.

07:45 Two friends accompanied Sheila to pick up her car.

07:52 The two cars left Villablino.

08:00 Sheila and her friends part ways at Caboalles bridge.

08:10 A stopped car was seen by two hunters in the middle of the road.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GOOGLE EARTH ARCHIVE

I have uploaded a Google Earth file. If anyone has doubts, do not hesitate to ask. If problems to download, ask me by private.

HERE IS THE ARCHIVE

(Changed the hosting. You can download without registration)

Red line: Route of Sheila
Yellow line: Route of two friends since separation
Blue marks: Houses of the two friends.

As we can see, between the separation at Caboalles bridge and when the car was spotted by two hunters, there is just enough time to go from one place to another. About ten minutes.
 
With such a tight timeline, where was the other car that supposedly forced Sheila's car to stop? It couldn't have been far as the driver of the car came back to move Sheila's car. So did the hunters see another car anywhere as they were driving up, or a car parked off the road as they proceeded ahead?

The hunters didn't report seeing the car for several months. Unless the hunter made a phone call shortly before or after spotting the stopped car to verify time and location (or if they had stopped for coffee or something prior to this and had a dated, timestamped receipt), it's hard for me to believe in the accuracy of the 8:10 time for the hunters spotting the car. With the hunters at various times saying the car was white and black, maybe it would be useful to discount the story altogether and consider scenarios where Sheila wasn't forced to stop in the middle of the road.
 
What about the possibility of two individuals involved. One pulls the trigger and moves the car while the other follows to pick the first back up?
 
mom2six said:
What about the possibility of two individuals involved. One pulls the trigger and moves the car while the other follows to pick the first back up?
Click to expand...

It is a very logical option, but because it does not fit with the motive provided by investigators, was set aside. The sister of the victim, although she believes in the guilt of Borja, thinks that there were a sexual motive and that he did not act alone. Her motive does not seem strong, neither.
 
Kip said:
With such a tight timeline, where was the other car that supposedly forced Sheila's car to stop? It couldn't have been far as the driver of the car came back to move Sheila's car. So did the hunters see another car anywhere as they were driving up, or a car parked off the road as they proceeded ahead?

The hunters didn't report seeing the car for several months. Unless the hunter made a phone call shortly before or after spotting the stopped car to verify time and location (or if they had stopped for coffee or something prior to this and had a dated, timestamped receipt), it's hard for me to believe in the accuracy of the 8:10 time for the hunters spotting the car. With the hunters at various times saying the car was white and black, maybe it would be useful to discount the story altogether and consider scenarios where Sheila wasn't forced to stop in the middle of the road.
Click to expand...

It seems that the hunters received a phone call when they were going through Villager de Laciana. With that call, the text message sent by the friend of Sheila, and their statements, the detectives calculated that when they received the call, Sheila was on the bridge of Caboalles, saying goodbye to her friends. The hunters were about three minutes behind Sheila.

There is some confusion on what was seen by the hunters. According to one version, they saw only one car stopped in the middle of the road. According to another version, they saw two cars stopped, one behind the other. I think they just saw one, even though people who have talked to the detectives and have seen the summary documents have told me that there were two cars.

I they saw two cars, it is still more puzzling. Do you realize why?
 
mom2six said:
What about the possibility of two individuals involved. One pulls the trigger and moves the car while the other follows to pick the first back up?
Click to expand...

Yes, it seems very odd that if Sheila stopped for someone she knew, that that person would sit in the back rather than in the passenger seat...much more likely that someone got in the passenger seat and another individual in the back seat.
 
Muy Curioso said:
It seems that the hunters received a phone call when they were going through Villager de Laciana. With that call, the text message sent by the friend of Sheila, and their statements, the detectives calculated that when they received the call, Sheila was on the bridge of Caboalles, saying goodbye to her friends. The hunters were about three minutes behind Sheila.

There is some confusion on what was seen by the hunters. According to one version, they saw only one car stopped in the middle of the road. According to another version, they saw two cars stopped, one behind the other. I think they just saw one, even though people who have talked to the detectives and have seen the summary documents have told me that there were two cars.

I they saw two cars, it is still more puzzling. Do you realize why?
Click to expand...

Thank you for the information verifying the timing of the hunters. I went back and read your initial summary. There was no mention of the hunters seeing anyone in the car(s). Were the windows in Sheila's car tinted?

How far was it from the pass where the hunters saw the car in the road to the spot where Sheila's car was found?

Two cars more puzzling? I'm not sure why. Let me try to think this through.

If there were two cars in the road, either Sheila had just then been killed - or the killer(s) were in the car with her and Sheila was not afraid of them but had not yet been shot.

If there was one car in the road, it was likely the killer(s) car, with Sheila's car having been moved. But wouldn't this imply that there was only one person involved? If there had been two people involved, one would have driven Sheila's car and the other would have driven their car. It seems very risky for the killer to leave his car in the road.

What am I missing that you're seeing?
 
On youtube, there is a program about Sheila that aired around the 8th anniversary of her murder. It's in Spanish. I can't understand very much of it, but it's interesting to see where Sheila worked, the road she drove on, and where her car was found. The first part is background on the case; then there's a long interview with (I think) her mother.

[video=youtube;oSDCeIxQAw4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSDCeIxQAw4[/video]
 
You have a good view of the area in the street view of google maps. It has not changed much over the years. I have a lot better documentary than this , but it is not online. If someone wants it, we have to see how I send it. They are 1.62 GB.

If you want to identify someone talking in this documentary, or to translate some specific part, tell me minute and seconds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 184 more.
Total: 3,270 (members: 185, guests: 3,085)

Online statistics

Members online
185
Guests online
3,084
Total visitors
3,269
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,504
Messages
17,970,058
Members
228,788
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top