| Flowers in Gods Garden - Holly Wells
and Jessica Chapman - Documents |
25/11/03 - Soham Trial Transcript
Tuesday, 25 November 2003
SKY News
Richard Latham is the chief prosecutor; his colleague
on the prosecution team is Karim Khalil QC. Stephen Coward
QC is Ian Huntley's defence barrrister. Michael Hubbard
QC is Maxine Carr's defence lawyer. Mr Justice Moses is
the judge. Other witnesses and lawyers are introduced
as they appear.
Page 01 02
03
MR LATHAM
6137, my Lord, Dr Carey, please
(Nat
Carey, sworn)
Examined by MR LATHAM.
MR LATHAM
Mr Carey, your full name, please?
DR
NAT CAREY
Nathanial Roger Carey.
MR LATHAM
Dr Cary, can you tell us your qualifications, please?
DR NAT CAREY
MA in physiological sciences from University of Oxford,
Doctorate, Thesis in Medicine, Medical Practitioner for
University of London, Fellow of the Royal College of Pathologists
and Diploma in Medical Jurisprudence.
MR
LATHAM
you are here of course to deal with the evidence and knowledge,
having conducted the postmortems on both Jessica Chapman
and Holly Wells ?
DR NAT CAREY
that's correct, yes.
MR LATHAM
I think you were notified by the police of the finding
of the remains of the two humans in the area of Common
Drove, weren't you?
DR NAT CAREY
that's correct, my Lord. I shall be referring to my report
the evidence of fact on that report is based on a dictated
transcript I made at time. The conclusions of that report
were actually typed by myself.
MR LATHAM
I think as a result of that notification you went to the
Common Drove on Saturday, 17th August, didn't you?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, that's correct.
MR LATHAM
approximately what time did you get there? about 1.40
in the afternoon?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, that's right I was actually logged in at various
perimters and places within which (inaudible).
MR LATHAM
by then, the scene was very much in the charge of the
police?
DR NAT CAREY
that's correct.
MR LATHAM
did you go through the inner cordon to the point in the
ditch where the bodies were to be found?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes, I did.
MR LATHAM
and were they still in situ when you got there?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, they were.
MR LATHAM
as you understood it, had they been any way moved by anyone
up to the point of your arrival?
DR
NAT CAREY
no, the scene had been quite properly managed and had
been preserved intact.
MR LATHAM
Dr Carey, you will appreciate I do not want to go into
any more detail than is absolutely necessary about the
general appearance of what you were to find shortly after
1.40 that afternoon.
DR NAT CAREY
Yes, indeed.
MR LATHAM
the Jury is familiar with the ditch, if we can perhaps
imagine it, having walked up the track from the road,
so that the ditch is on our left-hand side?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
and there comes a point where we turn so we are facing
the ditch and the looking down to the ditch where in fact
a part of a branch was later found to have some human
hairs hanging from it?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
almost exactly the point below which the bodies were to
be found?
DR NAT CAREY
that's correct.
MR LATHAM
the Jury is familiar with that point; they have actually
seen the branch when they went on their view. I would
like you if you will please to have a look at a photograph.
Now, this may assist you. The photographer is standing,
I think, on the bank of, slightly down into the ditch,
looking at the area where the bodies were to be found,
he not?
DR NAT CAREY
that's correct.
MR LATHAM
the photographer is looking in which direction here -
towards the road or towards the airfield?
DR
NAT CAREY
I'm not sure what point in time that photograph was taken,
but I think it is towards the airfield. The blackening
there, you can orientate where the bodies were because
the blackening is where the fire was taking place.
MR LATHAM
indeed, I think the bodies were just the other side of
that trunk which has fallen across the ditch?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, Exactly.
MR LATHAM
Indeed, the bodies as I understand matters are still in
situ in this photograph?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, that would certainly make sense.
MR
LATHAM
are we therefore talking about the blackened area just
under or the other side of that trunk which itself was
slightly burned by fire?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, exactly.
MR LATHAM
were the bodies in relation to the ditch lying, as it
were, parallel with the ditch or at right angles to the
ditch?
DR NAT CAREY
they lay side by side; in other words, parallel to the
long axis of the ditch.
MR LATHAM
were the bodies on their side, back or front?
DR NAT CAREY
they were approximately on their backs but the knees were
bent somewhat towards the left-hand side.
MR
LATHAM
Were they both lying in the same direction?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, they were; in other words, both their heads were
in the same angles and the feet in the same angles.
MR LATHAM
can I ask you to look at the diagrams, please. From this
diagram we can see that we are, as it were, standing with
our backs to the Wangford Road?
DR NAT
CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
facing up towards the Lakenheath airbase, with the ditch
on our left-hand side of this diagram, aren't we?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, exactly.
MR LATHAM
both bodies lying with their heads facing towards the
airbase?
DR NAT CAREY
facing towards the Lakenheath airbase, exactly.
MR LATHAM
were the bodies in fact touching?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes, they were.
MR LATHAM
was the arm of one of the bodies in any way disposed?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, the arm of the furthest body - it was difficult,
you were looking into the ditch from what was defined
as a viewing area - initially the arm of the furthest
body lay beneath the arm of the nearer body.
Transcript edited by Sky News
MR LATHAM
I do not need to go into a great deal more detail. If
one imagines a line being drawn along the side of the
body, the side of an arm, what was the effect that you
had as a result of this?
DR NAT CAREY
I had an effect where the backs of both bodies, and this
includes the skin and the underlying muscle and other
soft tissue, had been preserved quite well over the backs
of both bodies, particularly the nearest body,
Transcript edited by Sky News
MR LATHAM
now, was there obvious evidence of fire damage to the
surrounding vegetation?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, there was.
MR LATHAM
We can see that in a photograph taken, as it were, back
up at ground level rather than ditch level, this being
in the area immediately but where the bodies were?
DR NAT CAREY
yes. I don't think either of these two photographs depict
fire damage terribly well in fact. The earlier view of
the bodies showed the blackening, that's perhaps the best
way of illustrating it.
MR LATHAM
as far as the bodies themselves were concerned, was there
evident fire damage to the bodies as they lay in the ditch?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, there was.
MR LATHAM
as the bodies lay in the ditch was there any other vegetation
around them which seemed to be in any way part of any
fire, if you understand what I mean, constituent elements
of a fire?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, vegetation both around and to the sides of the bodies
showed scorching. .
MR LATHAM
had there been, as far you could see, any vegetation placed
on or near the bodies?
DR NAT CAREY
no, this was not in my view a pyre that had been built
with the aim of destroying the bodies, the vegetation
that happened to have been burnt seems to me what you
would find adjacent to bodies in the ditch.
MR LATHAM
I think the scene was somewhat problematic, not least
of all because of failing light and indeed the weather,
is that correct?
DR NAT CAREY
that's correct. Whilst I was there in fact there was some
rain - quite heavy rain, and to some extent this was helpful
because it allowed one to see how the level of the ditch
varied.
Transcript edited by Sky News
MR LATHAM
Can I deal with the level of the water in the ditch. when
you first got there was there any water in the ditch around
the bodies?
DR NAT CAREY
no, there wasn't.
MR LATHAM
As it rained as the afternoon progressed, what happened?
DR NAT CAREY
the level quite rapidly came up.....
Transcript edited by Sky News
MR
LATHAM
so the bodies became surrounded by water?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes and I think this provides some insight into the preservation
of the backs of the bodies versus the fronts.
Transcript edited by Sky News
MR LATHAM
was a decision made in relation to the bodies as the afternoon
of that Saturday progressed?
DR NAT
CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
what was that?
DR NAT CAREY
the decision was made to recover evidence progressively
from those bodies in situ and then ultimately to lift
them out into what was a tented area near to the ditch.
MR LATHAM
did you in fact remove the bodies from the ditch on the
Saturday?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, I did. thinking of the time I first saw the video,
was the evening before on the 17th, but on the 18th there
was a full scene examination and removal of the bodies.
The postmortem examinations that took place at Addenbrooks
Hospital afterwards were in the early hours or ran into
the early hours of the following day. Or Sunday, I'm not
sure which the 17th or 18th was, forgive me.
MR LATHAM
in any event, once the work on the scene had progressed,
did there come a time when both bodies were removed from
the ditch?
DR NAT CAREY
that's correct.
MR LATHAM
and they were taken off for a postmortem examination.
now, at the time they were both unidentified, I think,
weren't they?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
and you simply identified them as the further and nearer
bodies?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, exactly.
MR LATHAM
at a later stage it was possible to establish which was
Jessica Chapman and which was Holly Wells, was it not?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, that's right there was in fact early putative identification
because we had a forensic or dentologist, tooth expert
actually present in the mortuary so we had a very strong
indication that firstly these were the two bodies of the
missing girls, Holly and Jessica and secondly which was
which.
MR LATHAM
I think that was later confirmed by DNA examination itself?
DR NAT CAREY
indeed, but from an investigation point of view one would
obviously want to confirm things as well as could be done
as soon as possible.
MR LATHAM
what I would like to do is start with your first postmortem
which turned out to be a postmortem on the body of Jessica
Chapman, didn't it?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, that's correct.
MR LATHAM
that was the body which had been nearer to the viewing
area, closer in other words to the track side of the ditch?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, exactly.
MR LATHAM
this was the body of a decomposing female of approximately
ten years of age?
DR NAT CAREY
Exactly.
MR LATHAM
As you describe was there still tissue and skin on the
lower part of the body but essentially the whole of the
top half having gone?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, there was skin over the backs of the bodies, the
skin of the face and neck had largely decomposed.
MR LATHAM
were you able to recover some head hair?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes I had also taken hair adjacent to the bodies at my
examination.
MR LATHAM
which smelt of accelerants?
DR NAT CAREY
indeed it had an aroma, a thick smell that suggested to
me there might not have been accelerant and when you see
that sort of fire you would immediately think there had
been use of accelerant. By accelerant I mean an aromatic
substance such as petrol or the like.
MR
LATHAM
was there much of the neck and lower face available for
you to examine for the purposes of forming conclusion?
DR NAT CAREY
no there wasn't, with some difficulty I managed to identify,
however, an important structure in the neck which is the
voice box and that was identified. There are structures
within that called cartiledge which is a gristly material
and there is also a thin bone called the hyoid bone amongst
the composition that involved the neck I was able to identify
these structures.
MR LATHAM
looking at that area did you look at adjacent connectivety
to see if there was any evidence of tissue damage that
was not concerned with decomposition?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes I did.
MR LATHAM
could a find any?
DR NAT CAREY
I couldn't but obviously the circumstance I was in my
interpretation would be severely limited by the degree
of decomposition.
MR LATHAM
did you look at the entire bone structure of this body?
DR NAT CAREY
yes I did.
MR LATHAM
could you find any damage to any of the bone structure?
DR NAT CAREY
no, I couldn't, and damage I would be looking for would
be signs of fracturing such as with blunt force or violence
of some sort, and another sign would be evidence of sharp
injury, if there had been a sharp weapon used it might
actually cause a cut to bone, for instance if someone
is stabbed in the chest you may get cuts on ribs.
MR LATHAM
could you find any visible or identifiable damage to the
skeleton of this child?
DR NAT CAREY
no, I couldn't.
MR LATHAM
did you turn to an internal examination of this body insofar
as you were able?
DR NAT CAREY
Yes.
MR LATHAM
was again your task considerably restricted by the state
of the body?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, that's right .
MR LATHAM
did you manage to identify the stomach area?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
and to remove a quantity of stomach content?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, I did.
MR LATHAM
a child particularly of this type of age are you always
interested in the genital area of the child?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, clearly that would involve any part of any postmortem
examination, one would be particularly concerned in these
circumstances to confirm or refute the possibility of
sexual assault.
MR LATHAM
was your task severely limited in this case?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, it was. I was simply unable to confirm or refute
the possibility of sexual assault from the physical findings
because of the decomposition.
MR LATHAM
of the internal organs of this body?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
turning to the head and the skull, was there any evidence
of either facial or general head fracture?
DR
NAT CAREY
no, there wasn't, so again this indicates that there wasn't
severe blunt force, trauma, at a level of force where
you might expect that to occur.
MR LATHAM
did that include such facial tissue as remained?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, the facial skeleton remained so it was possible to
exclude fracture of the face, but much of the soft tissue
of the face which one would use to asses signs of bruising
had decomposed.
MR LATHAM
you had the skin surface and underlying tissue of the
back of the body as you explained. Were there any injuries
to be found on the back of the body?
DR
NAT CAREY
No, this included the back of the trunk and strips of
fairly well preserved tissue on limbs.
MR
LATHAM
were you in a position to say yes or no in relation to
any bruising or surface damage on the tissue of the front
of the body or over the entirety of the front of the body?
DR NAT CAREY
no, I wasn't.
MR LATHAM
a pathologist is always asked to certify a cause of death.
Were you able to certify in a positive fashion a cause
of death in relation to this first body?
DR
NAT CAREY
no, I wasn't. The cause which I gave which remains the
case, was unascertainable due to decomposition.
MR LATHAM
I am going to revert to such conclusions you can come
to in due course, Dr Carey, but I think your conclusions
will be very much the same in relation to each of the
two bodies. I would like to turn to the second body, if
I may, that of Holly Wells. was the condition of this
body the same as the other body or better or worse?
DR NAT CAREY
no, there was a greater degree of decomposition of this
body.
MR LATHAM
which made (inaudible)?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, it was pretty difficult with the first one but it
was even more difficult with the second one, that's correct.
MR LATHAM
can I take you, was the appearance therefore very much
the same although even less visible to you?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, exactly there was still intact skin and muscle over
the----.
MR LATHAM
the intact skin there was over the back of the body was
there any evidence of tissue damage such as bruising and
the like?
DR NAT CAREY
no, there wasn't.
MR LATHAM
again excluding the head for a minute, was there any skeletal
damage?
DR NAT CAREY
no there wasn't, in other words no fractures, no cuts
in bones such as would arise through use of sharp weapons.
MR LATHAM
I think the internal organs were largely lost to you,
is that correct?
DR NAT CAREY
that's correct, yes.
MR LATHAM
but, again you were able to obtain a small amount of stomach
content?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, I was, the stomach had decomposed so it was opened.
I was still able to retrieve some the stomach contents.
MR LATHAM
may I turn to the head and neck in relation to facial
tissues were you in the same position as you were with
the first body?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
did you however identify the neck structures and were
you able to conduct a similar exercise as with the first
body in looking at the bone and cartilage of the neck?
DR NAT CAREY
yes I was, except in this body the cartilage, the gristly
part of the voice box, had decomposed more, one small
structure of one of the pieces of cartilage had actually-,
was missing, whether it was missing through decomposition
or whether it had been fractured in life it would not
be possible to say.
MR LATHAM
was there any evidence of (inaudible) bone fracture in
this body you could find?
DR NAT CAREY
No, there was not any positive evidence of fracturing
in terms of the material present.
MR
LATHAM
does the same apply in relation to internal and external
genitalia as you have described with the other body?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, although decomposition here was more severe than
in the other body. .
MR LATHAM
may I turn to the head and the skull? did you find damage
to the skull of Holly Wells?
DR NAT
CAREY
Yes.
MR LATHAM
would you describe that, please, and go into this aspect
in a little detail, please?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, indeed. There was a small amount of what appeared
to be brownish blood on the inner aspect of the skull,
so looking at it from inside, beneath the membrane that
lines the skull bone, called the dura, this was present
in two areas, one towards the top of the head and the
other towards the left-hand side of the back of the head.
The one on top of the head, there was also a very small,
short skull fracture but this was only present on the
inside of the skull bone.
MR LATHAM
can I interrupt you there so you can describe the nature
of the skull bone for the jury?
MR JUSTICE
MOSES
which page are you on?
MR LATHAM
my Lord, page 6147, the second ring binder. perhaps using
your hands to give us an understanding of how the skull
bones in fact made you look at it in section?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, the skull bone consists of three layers. There is
a plate of bone on the outside and a plate of bone on
the inside which is solid dense bone and there is a layer
of slightly spongier bone between the two. The fracture
that was present in this case only involved the inner
plate of bone which is called the inner table of the skull.
MR LATHAM
so the surface, if we think of the skull as a structure,
the whole of the surface is made up of, as it were, the
three parts?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, indeed.
MR LATHAM
how large was this fracture?
DR NAT
CAREY
this was short, only one centimetre in length, two and
a half centimeters to the inch, so you could see rather
less than half an inch.
MR LATHAM
that's on the higher or lower area - haemorrhaging inside?
DR NAT CAREY
that's the higher area - haemorrhaging seen from inside.
MR LATHAM
Was there any fracture round the other area of them carrying
down towards the back of the skull?
DR
NAT CAREY
no, there was not.
DR NAT CAREY
Did you have the cause of the small amount of haemorrhaging
within the skull at that point and the half inch or less
fracture on the inner table of the skull and possible
causation?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, I did.
MR LATHAM
what was your conclusion?
DR NAT CAREY
I felt that most likely explanation both for the two areas
of bleeding and for the skull fracture was that this was
an effect of the fire; this is a well-recognised effect
of fire on the head. it gets termed heat haematoma in
relation to the collections of brownish blood and it is
something I would expect to see quite commonly in people
who are found dead following fires, whether they were
alive at the start of the fire or not.
MR
LATHAM
so it was caused by the heat of the fire?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes, now the fracture is on the inner aspect of the skull
which to me would make it very unlikely to be the result
of the stress of an impact, you would generally expect
fracturing through the full thickness of the skull or
perhaps the outer table only.
MR LATHAM
that's when you are applying force from the outside?
DR NAT CAREY
if there was some sort of blunt force, but it remains
the case I cannot absolutely exclude the theoretical possibility
that this or part of this pattern of bleeding and skull
fracturing occured in life.
MR LATHAM
again, in relation to Holly Wells in the formal section
of any postmortem report cause of death, what was your
conclusion?
DR NAT CAREY
exactly the same I gave cause of death unascertainable
due to decomposition.
MR LATHAM
have you have been given details of the----.
DR NAT CAREY
Yes.
MR LATHAM
and indeed seen a photograph of both girls in life to
give you an idea of their weight and size?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes, I have.
MR LATHAM
within the medical records of these two ten year olds
is there in fact any medical history of any firstly significant
previous injury?
DR NAT CAREY
one of them sustained a dog bite to the ear but other
than that there wasn't any significant history of injury.
In fact the other had sustained a stubbed toe in the past.
MR LATHAM
Apart from injury did any of these girls have any medical
history of illness, significant illness prior to their
deaths?
DR NAT CAREY
no they didn't, their medical records included developmental
and growth assessments included the usual vaccinations
that people have and the usual ailments people go to the
general practitioner for of minor, described as such like
respiratory tract infections. These were two fit, healthy
young girls.
MR LATHAM
we have heard evidence that both girls were not of the
couch potato type, they were both interested in sport
and were leading an active life?
DR
NAT CAREY
Yes, indeed and that illustrates that they were capable
of achieving exercise tolerance, in other words their
body systems functioned well when greater demand was put
on them.
MR LATHAM
looking at that additional information, namely the medical
history of each of the two girls and adding to it the
information you were able to glean from the postmortems
you conducted, could you say anything about death by natural
causes?
DR NAT CAREY
I think that can be excluded as a possible contribution
to the death of either girl.
MR LATHAM
I think you have been given not only the medical record
of both these girls, but a number of other, as it were,
pieces of information which have been gleaned either about
the two bodies or about their general background, haven't
you?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
my Lord I am moving on to the conclusion section. I have
dealt with conclusion 1 and I'm moving on to page 6148
to conclusion 2. I think you have seen a copy of the toxicology
report of a Doctor Taylor?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
Who has analysed samples from the bodies of both girls
for a particular purpose, hasn't he?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
can you just help the Jury as they won't be hearing from
Dr Taylor, of the purpose of doing such an analysis and
what a toxicology report in fact means?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes. it was clearly very important in this case as it
is in many forensic cases, to determine whether or not
either of the deceased had had (inaudible) in the circumstances
of their death, or secondly whether any drug substance
might have contributed to their death and obviously we
were somewhat limited in what sort of samples could be
taken because of the decomposition. There was no blood,
there was no urine, two common samples that would be used
for these toxicological investigation. However, there
was well preserved buttock muscle, muscle if handled correctly
can have reasonable toxicology done in it after extracts
had been made, and there was also the stomach contents
that I have already referred to. Essentially the conclusions
of all the analysis that were carried out was that there
were no drug substances detected.
MR
LATHAM
can I just, for the purposes of completeness, mention
one drug of which some of the Jurors may have heard, a
sedative drug called----.
MR COWARD
my Lord I'm not sure to what extent this is appropriate.
It is in a sense speculation in order to knock down speculation.
MR JUSTICE MOSES
you want to refer to GHB?
MR LATHAM
my Lord whether or not that can be traced.
MR
JUSTICE MOSES
that just leaves it in the air if you do that because
there is no evidence for it. so I think not.
MR LATHAM
damage to the skull of Holly Wells?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
was there insofar as you were able to do any work during
the postmortem any obvious underlying injury in relation
to that fracture of the skull which you have been describing
and attributing to heat damage?
DR NAT
CAREY
there was the brown-ish blood that was associated with
it, but there was no obvious mass of bleeding inside either
of the skulls in relation to the decomposed brain, but
the assessment of that was limited.
MR
LATHAM
you have mentioned the ability to find the high (inaudible)
bone in both cases?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
and in particular in relation to Jessica to look at the
cartilage structure of the throat?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
what is the significance, if any, please explain to the
Jury, of there being fractures to the high and the deeper
muscle
DR NAT CAREY
in the skin of the face you would commonly, in compression
of the neck, see the changes of asphyxia or get little
tiny blemishes in the upper facial skin, little blood
spots called petechiae, and these particularly occur in
the linings of the eyes.
MR LATHAM
in this case of course you did not have the opportunity----
DR NAT CAREY
I didn't have the opportunity.
MR LATHAM
----to look for such evidence?
DR NAT
CAREY
It would have, in a sense, been helpful if there had been
fracturing. I would have able to say this was evidence
of compression of the neck. The lack of fracturing however
is not evidence against compression of the neck. The evidence
is therefore neutral on that point.
MR
LATHAM
that deals with compression of the neck if a ligature
had been placed right round the neck. You told us the
back of the bodies was obviously much better preserved.
You put that down to the immersion in water of the front
of the bodies. If a ligature had gone right round the
neck would that necessarily have left any mark at the
back of the neck which might have assisted you or not?
DR NAT CAREY
the back of the neck in terms of both bodies was not well
preserved, it was the back of the trunk and in any case
I think, because the neck structures are much firmer at
the back, you can get a ligature having compressed and
not really see much on the skin at the back of the neck
- the most dramatic change is usually seen over the front
MR LATHAM
you are aware the clothing attributed to both girls at
the time of their disappearance and deaths was later recovered
by the police?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
you have told us that when looking at the skeletons of
both girls you did not find any damage or in particular
any nicking to any part of the bone structure which might
be attributed to a sharp object penetrating the body?
DR NAT CAREY
Exactly.
MR LATHAM
The Jury have seen photographs of the clothing which has
been cut in a manner designed to remove clothing, but
apart from that cutting no evidence of other penetration
of the clothing by a sharp object?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes indeed, so one could use that clothing in a sense,
a way that makes a much better assessment of what might
have penetrated the surface of the skin as far- that is
front of the bodies were concerned than the bodies themselves,
so as we have the clothing, and that there is no obvious
evidence of sharp wounds such as stab wounds to the clothing,
provided that clothing worn the time could reasonably
conclude. There had not been any penetrating injury through
that clothing. obviously the clothing had been cut up
to the (inaudible) I suppose stab wounds to clothing could
become incorporated and some of the clothing was burnt
and so one might not see damage, but on the basis of what
we have, there was no obvious sharp injury other than
that attributable to cutting of the clothing.
MR LATHAM
the evidence is as well that there was no blood to be
found on the clothing albeit the clothing was wet when
recovered?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
and again had been subjected to some fire damage. Does
that assist you now, knowing the clothing has no blood
in it?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, traces of blood would normally remain if the clothing
simply becomes damp afterwards or wet, and I would be
very surprised if there had been some severe blood letting
injury to either of the deceased if the clothing, then
having been cut off at a fairly early stage, had not shown
any evidence of bleeding.
MR LATHAM
given that there is no evidence of skeletal injury, what
evidence there is does not indicate any penetrative injury
of either body for the reasons you just outlined. If you
exclude, as you told us you do, natural causes as being
the reason for the death of this girl, either girl, what
do you thereafter look to, Dr Carey, as a means by which
these girls or either of them met their deaths?
DR NAT CAREY
one comes to the conclusion that although it is not possible
to give any precise cause of death, that death must have
involved the action of one or more third parties, because
in simple terms, ten year old girls simply don't die suddenly
together.
MR LATHAM
and if one is excluding poisoning, some sort of stabbing
injury, some major trauma caused by blunt force what are
we left with Dr Carey?
DR NAT CAREY
in broad terms you are left with modes of death that involve
interference with the mechanics of breathing.
MR LATHAM
could you please go through, if you will, the mechanisms
which can be it? Some of them are obviously self evident,
but ways in which the mechanism of breathing can be stopped?
?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, the most obvious ways are through compression of
the neck. This can be through use of hands in the classical
manner of strangulation, one or both hands, a struggle,
some change in position, quite dramatic bruising often
seen on the inside. Manual compression of the neck may
however be more localised the crook of an open hand compressing
the neck, particularly if the head is in some way supported
from behind either lying down or up against a wall. The
neck maybe compressed in an arm lock where the neck is
held in the crook of an elbow, and either the crook of
the elbow or the forearm compresses the neck. finally
the neck may be compressed through use of some sort of
ligature, this may be something very thin like wire of
some thing and soft like fabric or towelling and that
really deals with compression of the neck. clearly it
would not be possible to positively diagnose any of those
to distinguish between them.
MR LATHAM
in this case?
DR NAT CAREY
in either case, yes. in terms of other means of interfering
with the mechanics of breathing, there is smothering of
some sort, whether through use of fabric, pillows, a hand
or hands over the nose and mouth.
MR
LATHAM
of course is that to be nose and mouth at the same time,
I take it, to prevent breathing?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes, unless there is some obstruction of the nose due
to an injury or some other reason, that's correct.
MR LATHAM
I think in your report you do touch upon the issue of
the time of death in the light of the admissions? I need
not go into that in any detail at all Dr Carey and I think
in any event in terms of the condition of the bodies you
find it difficult to be precise about time of death, don't
you?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, exactly.
MR LATHAM
for obvious reasons. Can I ask you about one topic please,
rigor mortis?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
Would you help the Jury please with what it is and when
it arises and what results from it?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes, for muscles to remain relaxed we have to have little
energy stores within the muscles themselves. When you
die those energy stores are gradually diminished so the
muscle eventually goes into contraction in a fixed state.
That takes a number of hours to develop. Then lasts for
a number of hours and ultimately wears off because the
decomposition process causes the muscles to go flacid
again. Therefore you can determine, not with any great
degree of accuracy, roughly when someone may have died
from the presence or absence of rigor mortis.
MR LATHAM
I would like to look at that from two points of view if
I may. firstly, the possibility of these two girls having
died in a house or at a location and then being put in
the boot of a motor car, particularly a fairly small motor
car?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
what can you say about someone wanting to do that or trying
to do that and rigor mortis?
DR NAT
CAREY
it would be much easier if they were not in rigor mortis,
in other words if the bodies were flaccid rather than
stiff or rigid, although I would have to say rigor mortis
can be broken and in children it would not be that difficult
to break the rigor mortis.
MR LATHAM
I have asked you about that. the other aspect I would
like help with is how the bodies were disposed in the
ditch in relation to indications of rigor mortis?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, certainly the position in which they were in gave
me the impression that they had been laid out there, in
effect, they weren't all bundled up, intermingled in strange
position as they might be in the boot, they lay essentially
side by side. In order to do that, having been transported
there, again it would be a lot easier to approximately
lie them down side by side if they were not in rigor mortis.
MR LATHAM
I asked you about the one arm underneath the body of the
other right at the beginning of your description of how
they were disposed in the ditch, Dr Carey?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
was there some damage to that arm which, as it were, was
shielded by the other body?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, this was fire damage and this was Holly Wells' arm.
MR LATHAM
so Holly Wells' arm was underneath Jessica Chapman's body
when you found the two bodies but the arm was fire damaged
across its top surface?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
what did that suggest to you?
DR NAT
CAREY
that it clearly had been in a different position at the
time the fire was burning.
MR LATHAM
because if it had been where you found it and there had
been a fire over the surface of the bodies, what----?
DR NAT CAREY
everything upper most should have remained burnt roughly
in the position unless something moved the bodies.
MR LATHAM
you told us if you were there, indeed, if the bodies were
still in situ in the ditch, the rain began to fill the
ditch with water?
DR NAT CAREY
Exactly.
MR LATHAM
What therefore would you say about the precise position
of those bodies in the ditch as you found them, given
your actual knowledge of what happened in the ditch when
it rained during the middle of August?
DR
NAT CAREY
the precise positions they were found in may well not
relate to exactly how they were when they were left after
the fire, because they may in effect have floated somewhat
into slightly different positions. However in broad terms
their positions clearly corresponded to the surrounding
fire damage so if they moved at all, passively, they had
not moved very much but this could well explain the positioning
of the hand beneath the other body. .
MR
LATHAM
I think during the postmortem you recovered a large number
of exhibits; I asked you about the stomach contents?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
and indeed you have summarised to the Jury the finding
of those stomach contents in relation to the meals it
is known the two girls consumed on the Sunday late afternoon?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
I'm not going to go through the many exhibits you seized,
Dr Carey, I simply want to make mention of five, yes?
DR NAT CAREY
yes. I should say a good proportion of those exhibits
were actually taken from the scene from the bodies as
they lay in situ and lots from the tent area.
MR LATHAM
my Lord, if the Jury goes to the series of admissions
we produced yesterday, when looking at the clothing worn
by Jessica Chapman to page 3, we see in the middle of
the page the following items were seized from the deposition
site and are correctly identified, items belonging to
Holly Wells there were two items, they have your initials
against them, Dr Carey, a love necklace and a neck necklace
with a cord neck chain missing. I think those were two
items you seized in RBC 15 and 41, isn't it?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
I think a hair braid, in RBC1, was removed by you from
Jessica Chapman, is that correct?
DR
NAT CAREY
I recorded RBC 1, a necklace; it may well have been determined
to be a hair braid, yes.
MR LATHAM
I think in RBC23, you found part of a pocket sort of material
from a pocket lining?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, I found that beneath the furthest body, which was
Holly.
MR LATHAM
thank you very much, Dr Carey, will you wait there, please.
MR COWARD
my Lord, I am confident we will be finished in any event
before the allotted time, my client would be grateful
for a very short break.
MR JUSTICE MOSES
very well. Five minutes
(Short adjournment)
MR LATHAM
my Lord, may I correct one thing. It is my fault. I led
Dr Carey on it, and it is simply to do with dates. Dr
Carey I think the position is this on 17th August,
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
DR
NAT CAREY
that's exactly it. We made a plan based on doing, amongst
other things, a video recording of the scene, a planning.
MR LATHAM
You went down into the ditch on the----?
DR
NAT CAREY
18th.
MR COWARD
the Sunday, the bodies were removed during the course
of the Sunday, and your postmortems ran into Sunday night
and into the early hours of Monday morning?
DR NAT CAREY
exactly.
MR COWARD
one preliminary matter to get it out of the way, were
you told how long it takes for rigor mortis to begin?
DR NAT CAREY
I don't think, I said a few hours and it is certainly
very variable.
MR COWARD
it is not an exact science, is it?
DR
NAT CAREY
not by any means.
MR COWARD
we are talking hours rather than minutes?
DR
NAT CAREY
absolutely.
MR COWARD
once rigor mortis has come into effect it lasts hours
and then relaxes as decomposition takes place?
DR NAT CAREY
it is a general rule, most things do not follow general
rules but as could be said in forensic text books, it
would take 12 hours to come on, last about 12 hours and
take another twelve hours to aware off.
MR
COWARD
in fact round figures the children died past half past
six on Sunday 4th August, Mr Huntley took them to the
deposition site that night, and was back at Soham at around
about half past ten, it may well be that rigor mortis
would have had no effect at the time he was deposting
them at the site?
DR NAT CAREY
exactly.
MR COWARD
thank you. in most cases you deal with when you carry
out your post-mortem, you are in a position to say by
looking at positive things that you find, that this death
has been caused by a gun, or a knife or a blunt instrument,
aren't you?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR COWARD
There are not, was there, a penetrating gun shot wound,
penetrating knife injuries you can track through the bodies
reaching vital organs?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR COWARD
there are evidence of fractures in a place or bruising
in the area where the implement has struck, sometimes
both?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, although of course we only know that those things
matter. It would sound obvious to anyone in this room
but puncture of your heart and release of your blood would
matter. we only know it matters from previous cases and
through the development of medical science over many years
that if you do lose your blood volume, that will kill
you and so the application of finding a body with a stab
wound with loss of blood would then be able to reason
that was why they died.
MR COWARD
that would be a positive process going on to you that
is expert?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR LATHAM
no doubt we can think of other examples of how people
die, I think you mentioned already fire, where it is obvious
from your examination of the body that the person was
alive before the fire started and it was the fire that
killed them?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR COWARD
when we turn our attention to the facts of this particular
case, we are in a very different situation, aren't we,?
DR NAT CAREY
yes it is not that uncommon a situation but it is very
different to the very obvious causes of death, yes. yes.
MR LATHAM
The way you have been able to help the Jury this afternoon
is by pointing out to them what it is not?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes.
MR COWARD
and you have carefully gone through your examination of
the two bodies to say that there is no evidence of heavy
implement, of shooting, of stabbing it just isn't there,
is it?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, there is an absence of evidence, but that's not necessarily
evidence of absence in relation to some factors, for instance
stabbing wouldn't by any means always involve cuts to
bone and therefore the absence of cuts to bone in this
case does not absolutely exclude it by any means.
MR COWARD
in the particular circumstances of this case?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR COWARD
unless any cut injury caused by stabbing was in part of
the body the flesh remained, you would have no evidence
if it missed the bone?
DR NAT CAREY
Exactly.
MR LATHAM
Do having excluded for practical purposes other possibilities,
because there is no positive evidence to support them,
you with your expertise, are left with the fact that two
healthy girls are dead?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR COWARD
and somehow they must have died?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes and somehow they must have died in a fairly narrow
time.
MR COWARD
and they must have died in ways which have left no positive
trace on the body to assist you?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes, left no positive trace on the bodies in the condition
they were in to assist me, exactly.
MR
COWARD
so by excluding a number of possibilities you come down
by this process of elimination - I'm not critical of the
technique at all - to the other possibilities that could
account for these unnatural deaths?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes. we are agreed that they are unnatural, yes.
MR COWARD
in going through that process, you have at particular
points stressed that there was no evidence of something
which might have given an explanation for the death. What
the I have in mind is strangulation as a possibility.
You have indicated to the Jury that although it is a real
live possibility, there is no physical evidence on either
of the bodies which positively supports it?
DR NAT CAREY
that's true, but in the state they were in, as I hope
I made clear , I wouldn't really expect to necessarily
find anything.
MR COWARD
one of the clues you sometimes find is damage to the hioid
bone in the upper neck don't you?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes in fact when they have done studies looking at how
much do emergency you get to the hyoid bone versus thyroid
cartilage, which this voice box itself in most cases of
compression to the neck, the commonest damage is to the
thyroid Cartledge and the hyoid bone is relatively less
common compared to that.
MR COWARD
so in the case of each girl, no positive evidence from
those structures in the neck to suggest it did happen,
but you make the point and rightly, that in all cases
of death by strangulation you don't necessarily get broken
bones?
DR NAT CAREY
that's correct, particularly in children and young adults
where it is all very pliable, and therefore can be compressed
but not show signs.
MR COWARD
in other cases, you have had the experience no doubt of
being able to look at the neck structures and not only
do the bones help you form a view as to whether there
has been strangulation by whatever means, but also the
tissue and muscles surrounding that area may leave tell-tale
traces of what has been happening?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes, exactly but even in cases of that kind when you have
evidence of compression of the neck you always have to
ask the question did they die with it or of it because
of course they could have some other competing cause of
death present, and they have simply had their neck compressed
but not died of it, so even in a case of compression of
the neck where you have a preserved body you rely on the
absence of anything else having caused the death.
MR COWARD
yes. I follow that. in those cases where you are able
to do a full examination you can say, can you not, with
a degree of confidence, that a broken hyoid bone, a broken
cartilage in other area of the voice box or bruising itself
around the neck are indicators as to what has been happening?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR COWARD
was there any sufficient material left on either of the
girls in the structure and muscles in the neck area, to
give you any clue as to whether you would have found evidence
of bruising, had there been such?
DR
NAT CAREY
no, there was just nothing to assess that, no.
MR COWARD
you have not included in your list of possible causes
of death, drowning?
DR NAT CAREY
no, although I should have added it in the evidence-in-chief,
that would amount to interference with the mechanics of
breathing where you have some sort of obstruction. I agree
with you I have not formally stated it as such. One would
need to have circumstances in which drowning was both
possible and plausible.
MR COWARD
I will come to that in due course but in a case where
there has been a drowning and the body is still in a relatively
well preserved condition, are you, as an expert pathologist,
able to find signs within the body which assist you to
say this is drowning?
DR NAT CAREY
yes.
MR COWARD
what do you find?
DR NAT CAREY
well, slightly stepping back from that the most useful
indicator of drowning is simply a body removed from water
or circumstances in which water might have been involved,
and that's always a part in ascertaining the possibility
of drowning but in some circumstances it simply couldn't
be a possibility. having done that, there are a number
of postmortem findings, the lungs are often greatly expanding
in drowning cases and you will notice that as soon as
you open the body, the (inaudible) out of the nose and
mouth and it doesn't happen in many other conditions.
Those are quite strongly supported pieces of pathological
evidence and when you take that together with a finding
of someone in that is usually sufficient and you need
there not to be any other competing cause of death, you
then go on and the explore takes by doing toxicology to
investigate the circumstances in which drowning occurred
and you could also look for these little tiny organisms
called diatoms if they are present in the water, you drown
in, may then get taken by circulation from the lungs and
dissipate to other parts of the body you can actually
find the diatoms by examining post-mortem.
MR
COWARD
in a situation such as this, with bodies in the condition
in which they were when you found them, the sort of indicators
that you have spoken of are just absent, aren't they?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, exactly. I say I couldn't exclude drowning in either
case, though I would have to be given a possible plausible
circumstance in which drowning could have occurred.
MR COWARD
how long does it take for someone to die from drowning
, is there any agreed figure?
DR NAT
CAREY
it could be quite quick if you jump into very cold water
you can get a slightly different effect which gets called
dry drowning because the water doesn't enter the lungs
very much.
MR COWARD
dry drowning?
DR NAT CAREY
dry drowning. what is to happen there this sudden entry
of cold water into the back of the throat triggers a reflux
which leads to stoppage of the heart. In many cases the
drowning would be as everybody imagines, someone goes
under the water and if they weren't recovered quickly
they would undergo irreversible changes sometimes people
are rescued half-way through and you get what is called
near drowning, meaning they are resuscitated, they go
in terms of care perhaps 24, 48 hours.
MR
COWARD
is it the shock of going into cold water that causes dry
drowning, or the ingestion of very cold liquid or both?
DR NAT CAREY
probably both. We are talking about someone unexpectedly
falling off a pier in the winter and entering water that's
not much above zero for most of those sort of cases.
MR COWARD
the indicator that that is likely to have happened is
the absence of large quantities of water in the lungs
of someone who obviously is in water?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes, although this ends up a bit of a forensic myth, if
you like, because if in fact you drown in fresh water,
most of the water, although it goes in by your lungs,
goes into your circulation and gets taken away from the
lungs, and my experience in people who have drowned in
fenland, for instance, coming off the road driving motor
vehicles, suddenly entering the water, many of them have
not much in the way of waterlogging of the lungs.
MR COWARD
can I turn to strangulation in its various forms. Is it
possible, even in 2003, to give any firm indication as
a scientist of how long it takes to kill someone by strangulation?
DR NAT CAREY
the short answer to that is no, it is not possible, but
obviously one can set minimums and one can describe forensic
pointers towards a mounting period of time.
MR COWARD
I think some years ago wasn't a Home Office party set
up to investigate this very question and was unable to
to come out with any report at all?
DR
NAT CAREY
that may well have been the case. The sort of things one
can say are obviously not based on experimental work but
you can derive (inaudible) from non-fatal strangulation
and get an idea how much pressure has been applied, from
the changes in the skin of the face, for instance.
MR COWARD
almost by definition this is not something that is recorded,
is it?
DR NAT CAREY
no, but if brief compression of the neck and a substantial
likelihood in anyone, let alone in children of this age,
of causing sudden death, we would see an awful lot of
it. if you see kids in playgrounds, they will often grab
one another round the neck for brief moments, so it is
not such a powerful effect that it is inevitable that
if you grab someone briefly round the neck they will collapse
or even die.
MR COWARD
the mechanism of death in such case is the inability -
well, tell us?
DR NAT CAREY
if you die rapidly, and this would be in cases of compression
of the neck, but if you died rapidly, and there are rare
reports of people dropping dead perhaps within a couple
of seconds of having their neck gripped, what is thought
to happen there is a rather similar reflex to the reflex
that occurs when you enter cold water; you get a reflex
stoppage of your heart which arises because the fingers
perhaps on one side and the thumb on the other stimulate
little nerves round your carotid arteries and the stimulation
of those nerves gives rise ultimately to an impulse that
stops the heart. That's rare; I have never heard of it
in ten year-old children.
MR COWARD
when it happens, the onset of total collapse is quick?
DR NAT CAREY
yes. similarly if you, neck hold someone in the way I
have described in the crook of an arm, this used to be
used as a control and strength technique. By the law enforcement
agency around the world, it is not any longer because
it does carry risks, it is the so called sleeper hold
and people would often collapse within perhaps a few seconds
of having their neck compressed forcefully by that mechanism.
what is happening there the carotid arteries themselves
get flattened due to the strength of the compression and
this deprives the brain of blood and causes collapse.
It doesn't necessarily cause death, but obviously in rare
instances it has, which is why it is not used.
MR COWARD
I think as well Doctor that those who engage in martial
arts are specifically told which areas of the neck they
should avoid, aren't they, for exactly this reason?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, the various holds one sees, for instance in judo
or anything else, illustrate it is actually possible to
safely compress someone's neck if you are mindful of the
welfare as you do it, and let go after a period of time
or if you have an inkling they are getting into trouble.
I'm not aware of any death for instance during Judo in
this country but there might be the odd one.
MR COWARD
smothering - in many cases of smothering do you find evidence
around the nose and mouth of the compression which has
caused it?
DR NAT CAREY
you often would. I would associate smothering deaths really
with the very old and the very young in particular, because
they may be impaired in their ability to fight back. smothering
if you are not sedated in anyone who is fit and young
would be very difficult to achieve without the infliction
of bruising around the nose and mouth and probably other
signs of retrained injury.
MR COWARD
and may it also involve signs which may be distinctive
of upon the assailant, of the victim striking out to try
to prevent the process being completed?
DR
NAT CAREY
yes the assailant maybe scratched, that may happen with
any ways of interference of breathing, many assailants
who compress necks will end up with scratches on their
hands or forearms, mainly scratches from the person being
strangled as the hand comes up to try and the-----.
MR COWARD
it is perhaps a natural human reaction if someone has
their hands around your throat you try to get the hands
off your throat don't you?
DR NAT CAREY
yes, exactly.
MR COWARD
I'm going to put to you, I will put the whole incident
and break it into pieces, my client's case of what actually
happened on 4th August of last year. At the material time,
Holly Wells had a nose bleed and because it wouldn't stop
she, Jessica and the defendant Mr Huntley went up to the
bathroom at number 5 College Close. Holly sat on the edge
of the bath at the tap end, which is the end furthest
from the door, and next to the bath is a wash basin. Jessica
sat on the other end of the bath nearer to the door.
Mr Huntley was getting pieces of tissue or toilet paper,
putting them under the cold tap to cool them, handing
them to Holly and on his terms, getting the wet tissue
to give to Holly, he slipped, and it seems that he may
well have banged into her as she is sitting on the edge
of the bath and she went backwards. He has no recollection
of a bang, but he does remember a splash. When Holly went
in the bath, which had roughly 18 inches of water in it,
because Mr Huntley was going to wash the dog, Jessica
stood up and started screaming, "You pushed her,
you pushed her!" and he then turned towards Jessica
and, either with one hand or two, he is not sure, put
his hands out towards Jessica, his memory is over her
mouth, to stop her screaming.
For how long he was in that position he can't say. But
he was then conscious that Jessica was no longer supporting
herself on her feet. He let go and she went to the ground.
He then turned round to the bath and Holly was lying in
the bath apparently dead. He lifted Holly out of the bath,
put her on the floor, looked for signs of breathing, and
found none. He turned his attention to Jessica, looked
for signs of breathing and found none. That's the whole
account, as I put to you. So far as the----
MR JUSTICE MOSES
can I interrupt, we are half past four; you said we would
finish comfortably, I do not want to rush you - it is
obviously an important cross-examination - do you want
to do it this evening or tomorrow?
MR
COWARD
my Lord, this is the last topic I propose to deal with,
if it is all right by the Jury, it would certainly help
Dr Carey.
MR LATHAM
my Lord, will I indicate I would re-examine tomorrow morning
in any event?
MR JUSTICE MOSES
this is rather an important stage, I think.
MR COWARD
it will give Dr Carey a chance to ponder what I have suggested
before I come back. .
MR JUSTICE MOSES
thank you very much. ladies and gentlemen we'll break
there. you can appreciate this is a significant part of
the evidence. one thing I think I ought to make clear
I hope you will, as much as you can, put the case out
of your mind until you start again tomorrow but one thing
I must make clear, that is of course counsel's questions
be they from prosecution counsel or defence counsel are
not evidence. The evidence is what you hear from the witnesses.
yes, thank you?
DR NAT CAREY
my Lord I wish to ask you one point on that matter. .
MR JUSTICE MOSES
who do you want to ask?
DR NAT CAREY
you, my Lord for advice. I'm slightly concerned this is
the first I have heard of a quite detailed scenario and
I would normally ideally want a written account of the
scenario. It is going over it rather on the hoof, otherwise.
And secondly I might consider such a scenario, had it
been put earlier, by discussing with the forensic scientists
involved in the examination of the bathroom, the ceiling,
the clothing and this sort of thing, because I don't think
I can give it fair credit otherwise.
MR
JUSTICE MOSES
two things. firstly you would like what has been put to
you in writing?
DR NAT CAREY
indeed, my Lord.
MR JUSTICE MOSES
secondly, you would like the opportunity to discuss it
overnight?
DR NAT CAREY
with others, otherwise I feel----.
MR
JUSTICE MOSES
any objection to any of those things. Apart from pressing
a red button on Sky News which I hope none of you have
been doing, how can this witness get hold of a written
copy of that last question.
MR LATHAM
my Lord we have written down a pretty good note.
MR JUSTICE MOSES
somebody has written it down?
DR NAT
CAREY
sorry for that unusual ----.
MR JUSTICE
MOSES
no no, as long as you make a careful note of what you
are asking people and who you ask, so we know exactly,
so it is transparent what you discussed overnight, you
may do so.
DR NAT CAREY
thank you, my Lord.
MR JUSTICE MOSES
remember the warning I gave you. Half past ten.
Hearing adjourned - will resume tomorrow
Page 01
02 03 |
| Contact : bernard.omahoney@bernardomahoney.com |
|
|
| Flowers in Gods Garden |
|
| Paul Pearson |
|
| Rosie Palmer |
|
| Sophie Hook |
|
| Sarah Payne |
|
| Victoria Climbie |
|
| Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman |
- Documents
- Audio
|
| The Yorkshire Ripper |
- Video
|
|
