Speaker 1: This podcast contains information and details relating to suicide. We
Speaker 1: urge anyone struggling with their emotions to contact Lifeline on
Speaker 1: thirteen eleven fourteen thirteen eleven fourteen or visit them at
Speaker 1: lifeline dot org dot au. A twenty four year old
Speaker 1: devoted mother of two fleeing a violent relationship as a mom,
Speaker 1: bags packed car, running, her daughters strapped into the backseat.
Speaker 2: Mom told me that she needed to go back inside
Speaker 2: to grab something.
Speaker 1: Panic.
Speaker 3: Amy is dead, Sir aim his dead?
Speaker 1: Eight confusion than about five minutes say sit n to suicide.
Speaker 4: One hundred percent.
Speaker 5: This is emersing.
Speaker 1: What do you think is really the honest truth about Amy?
Speaker 1: The truth about Amy?
Speaker 6: Episode nine.
Speaker 1: I'm Liam Bartlett.
Speaker 6: And I'm Alison Sandy.
Speaker 7: Don't depend too much on anyone in the world, because
Speaker 7: even your shadow leaves.
Speaker 6: You when you're in darkness.
Speaker 7: I'll be the one person my daughters can depend on,
Speaker 7: no matter what.
Speaker 8: It's a mummy daughter thing.
Speaker 1: This comment was posted by Amy on Facebook on the
Speaker 1: twenty first of August twenty thirteen, less than a year
Speaker 1: before she died. Eight years later. Her daughters Tay and
Speaker 1: Maya made the following statements at her request.
Speaker 9: I miss my mom so much every day and night.
Speaker 9: It makes me sad just to look at her picture
Speaker 9: in my room. Sometimes I would go to North Dandler
Speaker 9: after dropping my sister off at school on a hot day.
Speaker 9: On my mom's birthday, we would go to her favorite
Speaker 9: spot and celebrate it. We would even have a Wednesdie
Speaker 9: Night on Friday. We would eat popcorn and watch movies.
Speaker 9: It was really fine. We would also go fishing and camping.
Speaker 9: Mom was so funny and nice. We even have a
Speaker 9: fringe of penny.
Speaker 8: Tree for her.
Speaker 9: They were her favorite flower, especially the yellow ones. Even
Speaker 9: though her favorite color was pink, she still liked the
Speaker 9: yellow ones better. I do really miss my mom.
Speaker 2: Mom was a very nice person. She had a lot
Speaker 2: of friends, such as Aaron, which we sometimes call Auntie Anne.
Speaker 2: I miss Mom, especially hearing her voice. If I could
Speaker 2: make a wish that would actually come true, it would
Speaker 2: be a wish to see my mom again. We always
Speaker 2: used to have a movie onesie night where we would
Speaker 2: wear onesies, sometimes matching ones. We would eat popcorn, watch movies,
Speaker 2: and take selfies. I remember once Mama had gave Hay
Speaker 2: a character eat at night and she fell asleep whilst
Speaker 2: munching on the carrot. Mom had always loved animals. We
Speaker 2: used to live near Gramps. I think it was on
Speaker 2: some property and Mum had a little pig that she
Speaker 2: would always cuddle. I remember on the day Mom passed away,
Speaker 2: Mum and David had an argument and Mom was angry,
Speaker 2: so she rushed into the shed. I followed her, and
Speaker 2: she had walked past the pet lizards we used to
Speaker 2: have and accidentally pushed the enclosure over and it smashed everywhere.
Speaker 2: I think Mom was trying to look for something. I
Speaker 2: was in shock and a bit upset because our lizards
Speaker 2: had run away. I go tell David that Mum had
Speaker 2: done that, and he rushed in the shed and yelled
Speaker 2: at Mom. They had another and Mom told Tay and
Speaker 2: I to get in the car. So we waited in
Speaker 2: the car for Mum and she never came back out
Speaker 2: of the house. David then drove to the petrol station
Speaker 2: to fill the car up, and I think there was
Speaker 2: a cold thing because he had left his phone at
Speaker 2: the house, and then he bought a new phone and
Speaker 2: called someone I don't know who, I think it was Mum.
Speaker 2: Then David dropped us home at Pinjaa, Tay and I
Speaker 2: used to go to Grant's house and make pizza. Mom
Speaker 2: was so pretty. A lot of people think I look
Speaker 2: like Mom, and I agree.
Speaker 6: Indeed she does. Both Neya and Tay exude the kindness
Speaker 6: and warmth displayed by Amy in all the home movies
Speaker 6: we've seen. As a mum, I can really relate to
Speaker 6: her Facebook post about wanting to protect her children. It's
Speaker 6: instinctive when someone says the word maternal, you think of caring, nurturing, protecting.
Speaker 6: The was Amy even before her daughters were born, fostering
Speaker 6: a baby Joey, looking after her sister's and upon having
Speaker 6: her two girls, well, it just stepped up another level.
Speaker 6: Her life revolved around them. She never wanted them to
Speaker 6: feel the loneliness she felt. But it wasn't just about
Speaker 6: the girls having her to rely upon. She had them.
Speaker 6: They gave her strength and purpose. Amy would never have
Speaker 6: wanted them to go through this. You might recall that
Speaker 6: Naa was interviewed just after her mother's death. Because of
Speaker 6: her age, her testimony perhaps wasn't taken seriously, but it
Speaker 6: should have been. Naya's the only one to provide some
Speaker 6: insight about the critical moment when Amy had re entered
Speaker 6: the house to get something. She told them quite specifically
Speaker 6: that while waiting for for a mum in the car,
Speaker 6: Simmons used a black gun with a scope on it
Speaker 6: and shot at a tree, and then went back inside
Speaker 6: to the main bedroom where Amy was and placed the
Speaker 6: gun in the mirror wardrobe. The significance of this information
Speaker 6: just seems to have been completely ignored by the coroner.
Speaker 6: There's a few other facts worth mentioning which should have
Speaker 6: been given greater weight at the inquest. Firstly, the testimony
Speaker 6: from Robert Simmons saying he was surprised at how bad
Speaker 6: David's drink and drug problems had become, and how he
Speaker 6: had regretted allowing him so much expendable income, which obviously
Speaker 6: exacerbated the already volatile relationship he had with Amy. And
Speaker 6: you may recall us mentioning in an earlier episode that
Speaker 6: Nancy's husband, Rick Kirk, said, just four days before Amy died,
Speaker 6: she told him how David had held a knife to
Speaker 6: her throat. This is how Nancy tells it in her
Speaker 6: interview with Liam, who has pulled.
Speaker 10: A knife out on her. Amy in one of those
Speaker 10: drunken states She never told me that, but I've heard
Speaker 10: that he has pulled a knife out on her. She
Speaker 10: was tiny, here's six foot, here's big. He's just got
Speaker 10: to push her away at one hand and she wouldn't
Speaker 10: be able to touch him.
Speaker 6: You'll recall that. According to simmons police file, they note
Speaker 6: he may be carrying a knife. Rick and Amy saw
Speaker 6: a bit more of each other in the months preceding
Speaker 6: her death, both obtaining their firearms licenses together. He was
Speaker 6: interviewed by a member of the cold case investigation team,
Speaker 6: who reported the following.
Speaker 11: He believed the trouble between miss Wensley and Simmons began
Speaker 11: when they moved into the Serpentine property. The Sunday before
Speaker 11: Miss Wensley died. She relayed an incident to him where
Speaker 11: Simmons allegedly put a knife to her throat. He states
Speaker 11: he didn't take what miss Wensley said seriously, telling interviewing
Speaker 11: officers he didn't remember the circumstances around why he Simmons
Speaker 11: put the knife to her throat and what happened after.
Speaker 11: Miss Wensley advised him she was considering leaving the relationship,
Speaker 11: that she needed to be more independent, and that she
Speaker 11: hated to rely on getting money from Simmons.
Speaker 6: Again information corroborating evidence of domestic violence. For those of
Speaker 6: you who have also listened to the podcast The Lady Vanishes,
Speaker 6: you'll remember that authorities didn't believe Marian Barter had even
Speaker 6: gone missing, let alone met with our play. Likewise with
Speaker 6: Gwen Grover and shot in the dark, despite showing unabating
Speaker 6: devotion to her children and all of her choices being
Speaker 6: for their benefit, it proved incredibly difficult to change the
Speaker 6: minds of aor once they had already come to a conclusion,
Speaker 6: no matter how out of character it was. Inexplicably, these
Speaker 6: key decision makers always seemed to act like they know
Speaker 6: the person in question better than their friends and family,
Speaker 6: even though they never met them. So in this episode,
Speaker 6: we're going to return to the forensic facts, the circumstances
Speaker 6: at the time, and the pattern of behavior of key
Speaker 6: people involved, Starting with WA Police Senior Constable James Inskip.
Speaker 6: He specializes in ballistics and made four statements on Amy's
Speaker 6: case between twenty sixteen and twenty twenty one. This is
Speaker 6: what he told the inquest.
Speaker 12: What was your role in respect to Amy's death?
Speaker 8: I was at the time attached to the forensics firearms unit.
Speaker 8: At that time it was physical evidence in firearms examination.
Speaker 8: We changed the name on a regular basis and mine
Speaker 8: was to attend the scene in company with another forensic
Speaker 8: firearms examiner. And we have a number of roles within
Speaker 8: our unit, the examination of firearms and ammunition firearms where
Speaker 8: they had been allegedly discharged at the scene. We can
Speaker 8: attend and record the scene itself. That may lend later
Speaker 8: on to a reconstruction event. We may attend the post mortem.
Speaker 6: All right.
Speaker 12: The date that you attended the scene, do you know
Speaker 12: how long after Amy's death? That was? Was at the
Speaker 12: weekend after Amy's death.
Speaker 8: We attended the police station, munda Jong Police Station at
Speaker 8: eight thirty five on the twenty seventh of June. So
Speaker 8: I'm not exactly sure when the alleged incident occurred. From
Speaker 8: the IMS number, it says seventeen fifty on the twenty sixth,
Speaker 8: so it appears to be sometimes afterwards.
Speaker 12: Yes, your attendance at the munda Jong police station. The
Speaker 12: purpose of that, I assume was to obtain to seize
Speaker 12: the firearms that have been collected by the local police.
Speaker 8: First of all, it was to liaise with the detectives
Speaker 8: who were at Mundajong Police Station dealing with the incident.
Speaker 8: But at that locate there were a number of firearms
Speaker 8: that had been stored and so yes, as well as
Speaker 8: liaising with the detectives, it was to seize certain exhibits
Speaker 8: that were present at the police station.
Speaker 12: And in our supplementary report there's some photographs of a
Speaker 12: firearms cabinet in which those firearms were seized. Is that
Speaker 12: the Mondejong Police station firearms cabinet.
Speaker 8: Yes, those firearms come in for so they've been seized
Speaker 8: in the course of a warrant or something along those lines.
Speaker 8: The cupboard is to store the firearms prior to them
Speaker 8: being moved to a central storage depot.
Speaker 1: Senior Constable in Skip goes on to point out that
Speaker 1: they weren't considered forensic exhibits and as such were left unsealed.
Speaker 12: Did you seize any ammunition in that visit?
Speaker 8: Not at that time.
Speaker 12: No, At what point in time did you seize ammunition?
Speaker 8: There was no ammunition seized by me from the Senate,
Speaker 8: I understand it had already been seized. A number of
Speaker 8: items of ammunition seized and they had packaged some of
Speaker 8: them together. So I can't attest as to the continuity
Speaker 8: of where certain exhibit items of ammunition were taken from
Speaker 8: and what they were put in with in the same bag,
Speaker 8: or anything along those lines. I understand that some of
Speaker 8: them were separated out at a later date due to
Speaker 8: the fact that they were identified as being perhaps more
Speaker 8: pertinent to the investigation. But yes, I can't attest to
Speaker 8: how or when they were seized, what they were put
Speaker 8: in with, or anything along those lines from the scene.
Speaker 12: So if I showed you photographs of two cartridges, you
Speaker 12: couldn't tell me where they were stored, where they were taken,
Speaker 12: how they were what they were kept.
Speaker 8: Is there is a record on the incident Management system
Speaker 8: of certain items that were stored together, and there seems
Speaker 8: to be entries on there as to where items were
Speaker 8: taken from from one exhibit, placed into another exhibit, and
Speaker 8: separated out. I didn't actually do that, so I can
Speaker 8: only attest to what's written on the IMS system, the
Speaker 8: incident management system, what actually occurred, where they were from originally,
Speaker 8: which bags they went into, and then who took them
Speaker 8: out and put them where. I can't attest to that.
Speaker 8: I can only tell you the point that they were transferred
Speaker 8: to the forensics Register and we took possession of them,
Speaker 8: perhaps for an examination.
Speaker 1: So it seems nobody knows what ammunition is relevant to
Speaker 1: Amy's death. So it's not clear if it went missing
Speaker 1: or not. All we know is that WA police did
Speaker 1: go looking for it a day after Amy died.
Speaker 12: So after you went to the Mondujon police station and
Speaker 12: you seize the firearms and you spoke to the detective
Speaker 12: in charge of what I assume is Operation Juhnde, what
Speaker 12: did you do next in relation to this investigation.
Speaker 8: I don't know whether it was the detective who was
Speaker 8: in charge, but I believe it was Detective Dandly, if
Speaker 8: I've pronounced that incorrectly, I apologize, but I believe that
Speaker 8: he may have been taking on the role as physical
Speaker 8: material manager. They gave us information in respect to what
Speaker 8: had been alleged to have occurred, what it had occurred,
Speaker 8: what police actions had been taken up to that point,
Speaker 8: where perhaps exhibits were and I think they pro I
Speaker 8: did my colleague, Senior Constable meets with a disk of
Speaker 8: some photographs that he later transferred to the forensics register.
Speaker 8: Obviously there was information that those firearms were in the
Speaker 8: they were seized in the firearms cabinet, so they were
Speaker 8: subsequently seized, and then after that point we attended the
Speaker 8: location where the alleged incident had occurred.
Speaker 12: That attendance, what was the purpose of that attendance, knowing
Speaker 12: that it had been forensically cleaned in the interim.
Speaker 8: I didn't actually enter inside the residence myself. My colleague,
Speaker 8: Senior Constable Meets did, along with Senior Sergeant Diamond and
Speaker 8: Detective Danderly, and I believe they made a preliminary what
Speaker 8: we call a preliminary forensic assessment, and that is to
Speaker 8: have a look at what's still in sitsu at the location,
Speaker 8: see whether there are any other forensic opportunities, and then
Speaker 8: potentially direct other units from there to attend and undertake
Speaker 8: certain examinations if there were those forensic opportunities still available.
Speaker 8: So they then exited the premises and I made a
Speaker 8: brief summation on the forensics register as to what they
Speaker 8: had told me they had seen inside.
Speaker 12: From there, it was the next task that you attended
Speaker 12: to mortuary and the forensic examination.
Speaker 8: Myself and some of the colleagues of the other disciplines
Speaker 8: conducted a co analysis. Officers from BPA blood spatter pattern analysis.
Speaker 8: I believe there was senior Constable Walker from the fingerprint unit,
Speaker 8: and we did a co examination of the four ten
Speaker 8: shotgun that was seized and alleged to have been involved
Speaker 8: in the incident, and so we undertook the examination. I
Speaker 8: made measurements and documented that firearm further, and I attended
Speaker 8: our reference library and selected this firearm which had similar characteristics,
Speaker 8: to take to the post mortem in order to use
Speaker 8: it in any potential reconstruction event that we might do
Speaker 8: during the post mortem.
Speaker 12: And you noted in our report that there were relatively
Speaker 12: minor size differences between the firearm that was the reference firearm.
Speaker 8: Yes, there were a couple of millimeters on some of
Speaker 8: the aspects of it, which I believe that in the
Speaker 8: grand scheme of things, when we got to the post mortem,
Speaker 8: it may not prove to be an issue at all
Speaker 8: because they were so minute.
Speaker 12: So you attended the post mortem's, yeah, and I understand
Speaker 12: you undertook observations of the wound to the right side
Speaker 12: of Amy's head.
Speaker 13: Is that right?
Speaker 1: Yes?
Speaker 8: I did.
Speaker 13: What did you observe?
Speaker 8: There are certain aspects of gunshot wounds, the characteristics that
Speaker 8: can perhaps tell us certain distances that the muzzle of
Speaker 8: the firearm was from the actual target itself from where
Speaker 8: the gunshot wound is. And some of those characteristics are
Speaker 8: deposition of soot. There didn't appear to be any noticeable
Speaker 8: deposition of soot, searing where the muzzle is too close
Speaker 8: as to see a flesh, and sometimes baking some of
Speaker 8: that soot as well. It can't be removed even when
Speaker 8: white clean. There's also characteristics of a muzzle imprint, so
Speaker 8: the muzzle of the firearm leaving an imprint if it's
Speaker 8: in such close proximity to the skin. There's also the
Speaker 8: possibility that we look for unburnt propellant particles, which again
Speaker 8: can give us an indication of distance. So those are
Speaker 8: the characteristics that we looked at, as well as a
Speaker 8: potential trajectory front on shot that may have passed through
Speaker 8: the head. There was significant disruption to the head and
Speaker 8: therefore we were limit in regards to the trajectory that
Speaker 8: we could assess. But the characteristics that I did observe,
Speaker 8: especially the imprint of the second non firing barrel on
Speaker 8: the skin and the absence of a great deal of
Speaker 8: soot and the actual lack of spread of the shot
Speaker 8: from the skull. I was able to determine that the
Speaker 8: firearm had been in contact with or incomplete contact with
Speaker 8: the head, So a slight gap against a temple at
Speaker 8: the time of discharge.
Speaker 1: Missus Tyler refers to a photo of the wound.
Speaker 12: So that circular pattern where you've got a little white
Speaker 12: arrow pointing to that is the imprint effectively of the
Speaker 12: barrel being held against Amy's head.
Speaker 8: Yes, that's correct. The mechanism for which that occurs is
Speaker 8: that there's a large amount of gas that enters the
Speaker 8: wound itself, and that can sometimes cause the wound to
Speaker 8: balloon back towards the actual muzzle of the firearm and
Speaker 8: cause an imprint as well.
Speaker 12: So that's from the barrel where the cartridge didn't fire.
Speaker 8: That's correct, Yes, And.
Speaker 12: So that allows you to say with relative confidence that
Speaker 12: the muzzle of the fire arm was held close to,
Speaker 12: if not against, Amy's head.
Speaker 8: That and the other characteristics the severe disruption to the
Speaker 8: head where a lot of gas has flowed into the
Speaker 8: actual brain itself, the skull itself, the characteristics of the
Speaker 8: defect in the skull being that there appeared to be
Speaker 8: no spread of the shot it was all going through
Speaker 8: in a solid column of shot rather than starting to diverge. Yes,
Speaker 8: that indicated the proximity was that it was in contact
Speaker 8: or incomplete contact.
Speaker 12: And we've heard from the forensic pathologists this morning that
Speaker 12: she couldn't specify the angle at which the projectiles was
Speaker 12: traveling through the skull. Do you agree with that position
Speaker 12: or do you think the angle can be determined?
Speaker 8: The best I could do at the time was to say,
Speaker 8: and now on review is to say that it's certainly
Speaker 8: from right to left across the face. As to whether
Speaker 8: it was slightly downwards, upwards, back forwards, nah, I can't
Speaker 8: make that assessment. From the severity of the disruption, it
Speaker 8: didn't allow us to make that sort of assessment.
Speaker 14: Well, you agree with the general evidence seems to be
Speaker 14: it's largely horizontal.
Speaker 8: Yes, there didn't appear to be any extremes.
Speaker 12: You then participated in a scenario reconstruction while at the
Speaker 12: state mortuary.
Speaker 8: I did. Yes. With regards to the reference firearm that
Speaker 8: we took with us, Yes.
Speaker 12: What did that involve? What were you hoping to establish?
Speaker 8: Well, at that point, we had characterized the fact that
Speaker 8: it was a contact wound, and so we placed the
Speaker 8: reference firearm in a position where it was touching the
Speaker 8: contact wound, and then we're able to show whether or
Speaker 8: not there we were to extend the hands of the
Speaker 8: deceased towards the trigger, and it was to give reference
Speaker 8: as to whether or not the hands were capable of
Speaker 8: reaching the trigger with the muzzle being in contact with
Speaker 8: the temple. It's sometimes the case that we may find
Speaker 8: that the distance that we've assessed means that we can
Speaker 8: exclude the potential for somebody to have self inflicted a
Speaker 8: gunshot injury by not being able to reach the trigger.
Speaker 12: I understand that you observed an injury to Aimy's left
Speaker 12: hand while the post mortem was conducted.
Speaker 13: Is that right?
Speaker 8: Yes, that's correct.
Speaker 12: What did you understand that injury to be? What were
Speaker 12: your observations?
Speaker 1: He refers to a photo.
Speaker 8: This wound was noticed before the body was washed, but
Speaker 8: it was also apparent after the body was washed, and
Speaker 8: there was this dark discoloration. Often when a firearm is
Speaker 8: in close proximity, as well as just searing the skin,
Speaker 8: as I mentioned previously, this soot can embed the actual
Speaker 8: flesh itself, and even after washing, you can't remove the
Speaker 8: embedded suit and so it was swabbed by Senior Constable Meeks.
Speaker 8: It's purported described in literature that an injury such as
Speaker 8: this can occur when the portion of skin in that
Speaker 8: area is actually over the muzzle of the firearm, slightly
Speaker 8: over the muzzle of the firearm, so that when the
Speaker 8: shot and the word exit the muzzle, they can contact
Speaker 8: the skin and cause an injury such as this, where
Speaker 8: the soot can be possibly impregnated as well as causing
Speaker 8: the grayish type of injury.
Speaker 14: So it would be if the hand was close to
Speaker 14: the head near the muzzle at the time it's fired.
Speaker 8: Yes, that's correct, and that would again another reason why
Speaker 8: I've mentioned that it could be an incomplete contact wound
Speaker 8: is that is that that may have caused there to
Speaker 8: be a slight gap in between the actual head itself
Speaker 8: and the muzzle. One of those was how it can
Speaker 8: be over the muzzle at the time of discharge. Another
Speaker 8: one that we that I considered at the time was
Speaker 8: the foresight, which is the front side of the firearm itself.
Speaker 8: It's in the proximity of the end of the muzzle,
Speaker 8: and during the discharge of a four to ten there
Speaker 8: is a certain injury as well So those are the
Speaker 8: two things that I've highlighted as potential for causing injury.
Speaker 1: Ms. Tyler wants to know if the gun residue could
Speaker 1: have been.
Speaker 12: Lost there were paper bags on the deceased hands.
Speaker 1: Yes, the coroner follows up.
Speaker 14: All right, and that's what you need to have on
Speaker 14: there in order to try and preserve any gunshot residue.
Speaker 14: Is that right?
Speaker 8: Yes, yes, I can't. The loss of gunshot residue from
Speaker 8: surfaces is it's quite easy, So it doesn't mean it's
Speaker 8: not necessarily going to be lost from that surface. I
Speaker 8: believe the bags could be then sampled as well if
Speaker 8: there was any concern that they're lost from.
Speaker 14: There, and I believe that was done in this case.
Speaker 8: Yes, it would certainly aid in the preservation, certainly more
Speaker 8: than if the hand was just loose in the body
Speaker 8: bag and had the potential to cross contaminate from another
Speaker 8: part of the body.
Speaker 14: I suppose, I'm asking, we've got a scenario where she's
Speaker 14: actually sitting on one hand, which might have been the
Speaker 14: logical hand that she would have used to pull the
Speaker 14: trigger if she's self harmed, and whether or not if
Speaker 14: you took samples then and there, you could actually have
Speaker 14: a chance of seeing whether there's gunshot residue on the
Speaker 14: hands if you took the sample at the time she's
Speaker 14: at the scene, as opposed to once she's been bagged
Speaker 14: up and moved.
Speaker 1: The matter is referred to another expert, University of Wa
Speaker 1: forensic scientist, doctor Carrie Pitts, who will get to later,
Speaker 1: but Senior Constable in Skip confirms that his tests were
Speaker 1: done to the best of his ability with the remaining evidence,
Speaker 1: but he was unable to verify whether the cartridges examined
Speaker 1: were the same as those removed from the rifle by
Speaker 1: Robert Simmons.
Speaker 8: So it was the assumption that if that was the cartridge,
Speaker 8: and again there was, we can't place the continuity of
Speaker 8: where that cartridge came from in the scene where it
Speaker 8: was put. It was supplied to us. If that was
Speaker 8: the cartridge that was discharged, then that would that assumption
Speaker 8: could be made that the orientation of the firearm was
Speaker 8: such well when you consider the actual gunshot wound itself
Speaker 8: and the imprint of the second barrel, that it was
Speaker 8: in that orientation as in per Fig. Twenty two.
Speaker 1: In Skip discusses helping Professor Ackland with his reconstructions undertaken
Speaker 1: ten times, which he describes as limited.
Speaker 8: I think there were limitations in respect of the calculations
Speaker 8: that he made. There there was a point where he
Speaker 8: makes a comment that he believes that the wind trajectory
Speaker 8: is slightly downwards. I can't make that opinion myself.
Speaker 1: However, he acknowledges several times in his evidence that many
Speaker 1: of the matters he's raising concern about are outside his expertise,
Speaker 1: But he does go on to say this.
Speaker 8: From the evidence, the physical evidence that I was able
Speaker 8: to examine, I cannot exclude the possibility of self inflicted injury. However,
Speaker 8: I cannot exclude the possibility that it wasn't either, So
Speaker 8: unfortunately it's not I can't make a definitive answer as
Speaker 8: to whether it was self inflected. I certainly cannot exclude it.
Speaker 14: But one of the problems with her having with Amy
Speaker 14: having shot herself is where her right hand has ended
Speaker 14: up at the end, isn't it?
Speaker 8: Yes, I think there are too many factors to ascertain
Speaker 8: whether or not the firearm being in contact with the
Speaker 8: hand and vice versa, how that could have caused a
Speaker 8: hand to be in a certain position. So I'm not
Speaker 8: so sure I can comment as to whether or not
Speaker 8: I certainly cannot exclude it from occurring. From the firearms
Speaker 8: point of view, I've seen some instances where a firearm
Speaker 8: has been used from a distance from a person, but
Speaker 8: that person wasn't incapacitated at the time, And that's another
Speaker 8: thing you would have to discuss with the forensics pathologist
Speaker 8: whether there was a complete incapacitation or whether there wasn't.
Speaker 8: And to end consideration as to whether a hand could
Speaker 8: have been there.
Speaker 14: All right, So looking at that from what, from your
Speaker 14: knowledge and from your area of expertise, you couldn't really
Speaker 14: say one way or the other whether it was more
Speaker 14: consistent with a self inflicted injury or injury inflicted by
Speaker 14: someone else.
Speaker 1: No, And then incredibly, counsel assisting the family, Peter Ward
Speaker 1: asks in skip if he's ever seen David Simmons, who
Speaker 1: he has to explain was Amy Wensley's former partner Simmons.
Speaker 15: No, you'll have to remind me I haven't seen pictures
Speaker 15: of mister Simmons, of his frame. You're aware that he's
Speaker 15: an experienced shooter.
Speaker 8: Yes, I'm not a qualified medical professional or a biomechanics person.
Speaker 8: And so to say this specific person was able to
Speaker 8: do this, that, and the other. I certainly could say
Speaker 8: I could do it, but you have to take it
Speaker 8: on a case by case, individual basis.
Speaker 15: The reason I raised this senior constable the average figure
Speaker 15: of the standing knuckle height for an average male is
Speaker 15: approximately close to the seated eye height of a FEMA.
Speaker 15: So the question arises, and you may be able to
Speaker 15: comment on this, but whether typically somebody who is an
Speaker 15: experienced shooter would be able to hold a gun in
Speaker 15: that position such that their knuckle height is roughly at
Speaker 15: Amy Wensley's eye height.
Speaker 8: I think it would be more their physical stature, whether
Speaker 8: or not they can support up to two point eight
Speaker 8: nine kilos in a certain position that you're suggesting. Certainly
Speaker 8: I could tell you I could do it. If you
Speaker 8: came up, then you can try and see whether you
Speaker 8: can do it, but it will be on an individual,
Speaker 8: case case basis.
Speaker 1: In Skip says he's six foot two. Remember he's already
Speaker 1: determined the trajectory was right to left. Amy was right handed,
Speaker 1: shot in her right temple while her right hand was
Speaker 1: found under her right thigh.
Speaker 6: So the question is, why won't any test done to
Speaker 6: see if David Simmons could do it. Yes, they need
Speaker 6: his consent, but surely it's in his interest too if
Speaker 6: it means they could rule him out.
Speaker 1: Instead. They're bouncing back and forth between the impossible and
Speaker 1: the implausible Amy's right hand, which doesn't have any gun
Speaker 1: residue on it, or her left hand, which in order
Speaker 1: to use she would have had to have stretched her
Speaker 1: arm across her body to hold up an almost three
Speaker 1: killer firearm to her right temple.
Speaker 6: This soon becomes a moot point after forensic pathologists doctor
Speaker 6: Carri Pitts gives her opinion that the gun residue particles
Speaker 6: on her left thumb actually indicate it was near the
Speaker 6: muzzle of the gun when it went off.
Speaker 7: It was more consistent with an impact with the polyethylene,
Speaker 7: which obviously was in the vicinity of the discharge, so
Speaker 7: it certainly would be consistent with being near the discharge
Speaker 7: and at the muzzle.
Speaker 1: So they have to go back to her right hand,
Speaker 1: prompting this question from council assisting WA Police Naomi Eagling.
Speaker 16: So not finding GSR or particles consistent with GSR or
Speaker 16: characteristic on the right hand, but finding them on the left.
Speaker 16: If the firing of the shotgun was done by the
Speaker 16: right hand, and then the right hand after the firing
Speaker 16: of the shotgun went under the body. That could there's
Speaker 16: other possibilities, but that could in its own case result
Speaker 16: in no GSR being found on the right hand.
Speaker 7: Yes, I can't exclude that possibility.
Speaker 16: Whereas if the left hand was against the muzzle as
Speaker 16: it was fired, that might explain why it was and
Speaker 16: also then exposed after death as the dust particle settles
Speaker 16: sitting on the lap, that would make it more likely
Speaker 16: to have the GSR on it.
Speaker 7: Yes, it was an open area as well as being
Speaker 7: near the muzzle end of the actual firearm.
Speaker 1: MS Eagling doesn't bother to question David Simmons when he
Speaker 1: appears on the last day of the inquest. And now
Speaker 1: we move to forensic pathologist Dr Jody White, who at
Speaker 1: the time of the inquest in twenty twenty one had
Speaker 1: sixteen years experience. She didn't perform the autopsy, and there's
Speaker 1: no reason given as to why Dr Amy Spark, who did,
Speaker 1: wasn't here to answer the questions herself. Instead, Doctor White
Speaker 1: is asked about her colleagues report.
Speaker 12: Could you please state your full name for.
Speaker 17: The court, Doctor Jody Nicole White.
Speaker 12: Okay, and I understand that you didn't conduct the post
Speaker 12: mortem in this matter, but that you're in a position
Speaker 12: to speak to the report completed by a past colleague
Speaker 12: of yours, doctor Spark.
Speaker 13: Is that right, Yes, that's correct, Okay.
Speaker 12: A post mortem examination was undertaken on the first and
Speaker 12: second of July twenty fourteen on miss Wensley.
Speaker 13: Yes, that's correct, all right.
Speaker 12: And that report contains a view regarding doctor Sparks's view
Speaker 12: of the cause of death in this case.
Speaker 6: Is that right?
Speaker 12: Yes, you've reviewed that report. Do you agree with the
Speaker 12: conclusions of doctor Spark in that death?
Speaker 6: Yes?
Speaker 17: I agree with her cause of death.
Speaker 12: Is there any aspect of that report that you would
Speaker 12: amend or change in your evidence today? No.
Speaker 1: She goes on to explain that the shotgun injury to
Speaker 1: the head was the cause of death, and there was
Speaker 1: scattered soft tissue injuries including bruising around the right wrist,
Speaker 1: mild chest and spinal deformities, and air within the right
Speaker 1: chest cavity.
Speaker 12: All right, Can you speak any further to those injuries?
Speaker 12: Can you age the bruise? Can you give evidence as
Speaker 12: to how it was formed?
Speaker 9: So?
Speaker 13: Aging?
Speaker 17: I will tackle aging first. Aging of bruises is quite difficult.
Speaker 12: It's a bit like we all see with our bruises.
Speaker 12: They start off darker red and eventually get black and
Speaker 12: fade to a sort of yellowy color. You see it
Speaker 12: on yourselves.
Speaker 17: Exactly, that's right, but it can be quite difficult in
Speaker 17: different people, and according to the size of the bruise,
Speaker 17: and so there are a lot of different factors around
Speaker 17: that which make it difficult just to the naked eye.
Speaker 17: Another way we can do it is we can sample
Speaker 17: the bruise and look under the microscope. But again that
Speaker 17: won't give you a definite time, so our skill in
Speaker 17: aging bruises, unfortunately, is quite limited.
Speaker 12: Well, all the bruises is that doctor spark noted on
Speaker 12: Amy's body microscopically analyzed.
Speaker 17: No, she only examined four of them, one on the
Speaker 17: right thigh, the left buttck, and the two knees. She
Speaker 17: also sampled the gunshot injury margin, so three of them
Speaker 17: showed fresh bruising. I think the ones on the knees
Speaker 17: it was the left knee, I would have to check.
Speaker 17: The notes didn't show any bruising, and the gunshot injury site.
Speaker 17: She took a number of tissue samples from that that
Speaker 17: showed heat effect to the tissues, which is.
Speaker 12: Expect that's consistent with the firer. Yes, as a forensic pathologist,
Speaker 12: are you able to speak to how an injury might
Speaker 12: have been inflicted or a bruise.
Speaker 17: So a bruise is a blunt force type of injury.
Speaker 17: So you have bruises, tears, and abrasions, and they're your
Speaker 17: blunt force injury. So they're due to the part of
Speaker 17: the body being struck with something. So you can get
Speaker 17: them when you fall onto the floor or when you
Speaker 17: knock yourself, or you can get them when you're struck
Speaker 17: by something.
Speaker 12: Okay, I'm thinking. Doctor Spark noted in her at that
Speaker 12: in terms of forensic procedures undertaken in her presence, a
Speaker 12: light colored hair was located between Amy's thumb and index finger.
Speaker 12: Is that correct?
Speaker 13: Yes, that's right.
Speaker 1: They refer to some of the technicalities of the testing
Speaker 1: and then move on to the location of the gunshot wound.
Speaker 17: So it's in the right temple, just lateral two and
Speaker 17: slightly above the eye, so the lateral margin is about
Speaker 17: fifty millimeters above and behind the middle aspect for the
Speaker 17: right external auditory metis, which is the hole in your
Speaker 17: ear and about one hundred and fifty five centimeters above
Speaker 17: the right heel upwards, so you know from standing height
Speaker 17: how high that particular injury is, and then goes on
Speaker 17: to talk about injuries associated with that like searing and
Speaker 17: darkening of the margin around the wound, the fracturing of
Speaker 17: the skull, and the other tears and bruising over the
Speaker 17: face and skullp.
Speaker 12: Can you tell whether that was in a downward angle
Speaker 12: or an upward angle based on that entree not with
Speaker 12: any ac no. I understand that Doctor Spark also observed
Speaker 12: a number of injuries to the deceased's head and neck.
Speaker 12: Is it your view that those injuries were simply consistent
Speaker 12: with the force of the gunshot being inflicted or was
Speaker 12: there other underlying cause of any type of injury to
Speaker 12: the head and neck.
Speaker 17: The injuries described around the head and neck would be
Speaker 17: consistent with the gunshot injury.
Speaker 12: Doctor Spark then went on to examine Amy's upper limbs.
Speaker 12: My understanding is that on the left index finger there
Speaker 12: was a laceration on the thumb side of the front
Speaker 12: left index finger with surrounding black sooting.
Speaker 13: Is that correct?
Speaker 12: Yes, that's right, but you can't speak as to whether
Speaker 12: that was holding the firing end of the weapon or
Speaker 12: simply in close proximity to the firing end of the weapon.
Speaker 17: In the literature, there are injuries to that area described
Speaker 17: when the firearm end is held, particularly to that part
Speaker 17: sort of of the whibbing over the knuckle, So it
Speaker 17: could be consistent with the left hand actually the end
Speaker 17: of the whippen.
Speaker 12: And of course that doesn't speak to whether it has
Speaker 12: been held to support a self inflicted firing or an
Speaker 12: attempt to move a firearm away from her.
Speaker 13: That's right.
Speaker 1: Yes, Just to clarify here, we're talking about the area
Speaker 1: the bullet comes out, not the trigger here.
Speaker 13: Okay.
Speaker 12: Was there anything observed on the right hand of the deceased.
Speaker 17: Well, from the pictures and the notes, there is a
Speaker 17: bruise to the rest. Yes, there was a small bruise
Speaker 17: to the middle of the forearm, and I think there
Speaker 17: was a small mark on the thumb as well.
Speaker 12: Was there any blood staining or blood spatter observed on the.
Speaker 13: Right hand, I don't think so.
Speaker 6: No.
Speaker 11: No.
Speaker 12: Doctor Spark then examined the lower limbs, and you've spoken
Speaker 12: about the bruises that were examined. We know that Amy
Speaker 12: was a relatively slight woman one hundred and sixty three
Speaker 12: centimeters tall in terms of average. Is that accurate? Yes,
Speaker 12: that's right, And we know that she was involved in
Speaker 12: a traffic crash in March of twenty thirteen, sorry in
Speaker 12: January twenty thirteen that resulted in her wearing a halo
Speaker 12: device for three months to treat a spinal fracture. In
Speaker 12: the course of the post mortem examination, had there been
Speaker 12: a spinal fracture that had then headed, would you expect
Speaker 12: to still be able to observe the evidence of that
Speaker 12: injury in a spinal examination or with the overarching bullet
Speaker 12: wound eliminate that type of evidence.
Speaker 17: The injuries at post mortem were to the upper spine,
Speaker 17: so it would depend on where the injury was and
Speaker 17: how bad it was and how well it had healed.
Speaker 17: It probably would have been obvious on imaging like X
Speaker 17: ray or CT or if the spine had been removed
Speaker 17: and retained for examination by doctor Fabian, she might have
Speaker 17: noted it. But unless you're aware of it being there, perhaps, yes.
Speaker 1: The coroner probes for more detail on it.
Speaker 14: Unless you're looking for it, you probably wouldn't.
Speaker 17: Yes, amaze it, Yes, that's right. And the spinal column
Speaker 17: wasn't exposed. Only the soft issues of the front of
Speaker 17: the neck were examined.
Speaker 1: Now, this is a pretty big oversight. Post mortem was
Speaker 1: conducted several days after Amy's death, when they were supposed
Speaker 1: to be exploring something other than suicide. Yet her spinal
Speaker 1: injury and what deficiencies that would have posed in holding
Speaker 1: a heavy shotgun at an awkward angle and shooting herself
Speaker 1: supposedly through the right temple were not explored. They move on, okay.
Speaker 12: The final page of her report, doctor Spark provided a
Speaker 12: five point summary of her findings that was effectively the
Speaker 12: shotgun injury to the head, scattered soft tissue injuries, a
Speaker 12: mild chest, and spinal deformity.
Speaker 13: Just on that point.
Speaker 12: Was that simply some degree of scoliosis or were there
Speaker 12: some other issues?
Speaker 17: Yes, so, Amy has described some scoliosis of the thoracic
Speaker 17: spine and pectus excavetant, which just means your breastplate is
Speaker 17: slightly depressed. But they're both congenital in nature, and so
Speaker 17: they're not related to the injury.
Speaker 12: Is that something that would in your general experience or
Speaker 12: can you speak to whether that's something that would limit
Speaker 12: movement in any way.
Speaker 17: I wouldn't think so, but yes, I can't speak to
Speaker 17: it definitively.
Speaker 1: Here they're talking just about the scoliosis, as they can't
Speaker 1: comment on the injury because that wasn't examined.
Speaker 12: I understand that the police officers that attended requested that
Speaker 12: doctor Spark undertake some measurements of the deceased's arm.
Speaker 13: Is that right? Yes, that's right.
Speaker 12: And I understand that you've seen some of the photographs
Speaker 12: that were taken by the police in the course of
Speaker 12: the post mortem that related to an exhibit firearm being
Speaker 12: placed within the grip of the deceased to see whether
Speaker 12: she could reach.
Speaker 17: Yes, I've seen those photos.
Speaker 12: In terms of those photos being taken, is there anything
Speaker 12: different about the way that the human body would react
Speaker 12: post mortem as opposed to when alive that might make
Speaker 12: those photographs exploring the issue of reach more or less reliable.
Speaker 17: The only thing would be if missus Winsley still had rigor,
Speaker 17: which would make her stiffer, more difficult to move.
Speaker 13: So it would be my.
Speaker 17: Understanding that if the rigor had passed, which is likely
Speaker 17: to have passed because it usually passes after a couple
Speaker 17: of days, and Amy hasn't made any comment about it
Speaker 17: being present, and yes, so it would just be the same.
Speaker 6: I would imagine just a reminder hear as it's a
Speaker 6: bit confusing, Doctor White is referring to doctor Amy Spark,
Speaker 6: the forensic pathologist who performed the autopsy.
Speaker 14: I suppose in that context though, it's what the body
Speaker 14: is capable of, but wouldn't necessarily reflect. I mean, for example,
Speaker 14: I've got a very stiff neck on one side. What
Speaker 14: would have been very uncomfortable for me to do in life.
Speaker 14: You wouldn't necessarily have that reflected in a body doing
Speaker 14: the same thing, because there's no discomfort or anything of
Speaker 14: that nature.
Speaker 17: That's right in that regard. How we perhaps might just
Speaker 17: move an arm across. If you're reaching for something like
Speaker 17: a cup, you actually might move your trunk to actually
Speaker 17: get it. So there are a lot of factors that
Speaker 17: would play on that rather than just moving an arm
Speaker 17: across or back.
Speaker 14: So really it's just looking at whether it's physically possible
Speaker 14: with the length of the arm in relation to the
Speaker 14: torso and that sort of thing, without any reflection upon
Speaker 14: what's comfortable for a person or natural or full biomechanical movement.
Speaker 13: If I put it that.
Speaker 14: Way, exactly you're on and in term of with those females,
Speaker 14: whether that's a suicide or a homicide isn't necessarily the
Speaker 14: conclusion you're considering at the time. You're just looking at
Speaker 14: the cause of death as opposed to the manner of death.
Speaker 14: Is that right?
Speaker 17: That's right?
Speaker 13: Yes.
Speaker 1: So, in short, the forensic pathologist can't make a determination
Speaker 1: about whether Amy could have killed herself or not. That
Speaker 1: was a job for the biomechanical experts, of which both
Speaker 1: said it's much more likely someone else pulled the trigger.
Speaker 1: The coroner then explores whether the position of her body
Speaker 1: could have changed, after establishing that rigor mortis takes three
Speaker 1: to six hours to take effect and at least four
Speaker 1: people pushed the door open with Amy on the other
Speaker 1: side to get into the room during that time. Now,
Speaker 1: Dr White confirms it could have moved, and then responds
Speaker 1: to questions about Amy possibly still being alive in response
Speaker 1: to Gareth Price saying as part of his evidence that
Speaker 1: she was making noises.
Speaker 17: The injury itself is was non survivable, but there's often
Speaker 17: in these cases there is a period where the person
Speaker 17: is still alive for a variable number of minutes afterwards.
Speaker 14: That's what I was going to ask if he has seen,
Speaker 14: if he's hearing some sounds and seeing some bubbling, how
Speaker 14: long would that be likely to last with that kind
Speaker 14: of injury. How long after the injury is inflicted would
Speaker 14: you expect that to occur?
Speaker 17: I would say less than minutes.
Speaker 14: All right, So that would be consistent with mister Price
Speaker 14: coming across her within minutes of the shotgun injury being
Speaker 14: inflicted on her. Is that right?
Speaker 6: Yes?
Speaker 1: The blood spatter expert can provide more details about the
Speaker 1: position Amy was in when she died. After examining the
Speaker 1: gun used to kill Amy Wensley, the clothes she was wearing,
Speaker 1: and photos from the scene, Sergeant Brett mccantz made the
Speaker 1: following findings in a report.
Speaker 5: The injury to the head of Wensley was inflicted in
Speaker 5: the master bedroom, behind the door where she was located.
Speaker 5: The head of Wensley was approximately seventy centimeters above floor
Speaker 5: level and facing the general direction of the door to
Speaker 5: the master bedroom at the time of the injury infliction.
Speaker 5: The blood stains and the blood stain patterns observed on Wensley,
Speaker 5: the northwest wall carpet and the black jeans indicate she
Speaker 5: was in the sitting position as located at the time
Speaker 5: of the injury infliction. Wensley has not moved or been
Speaker 5: moved from this location post injury infliction. The locking mechanism
Speaker 5: of the Boito fourteen shotgun has been opened post injury
Speaker 5: infliction to Wensley, exposing the breach and barrel chamber surfaces.
Speaker 5: This is allowed either a blood stained surface or blood
Speaker 5: traveling through the air in the form of droplets to
Speaker 5: come into contact with these surfaces. The exact mechanism responsible
Speaker 5: cannot be determined. The muzzle end of the Boito fourteen
Speaker 5: shotgun has come into contact with a liquid blood sauce.
Speaker 5: The only blood sources within the premises are Wensley or
Speaker 5: the blood saturated carpet in the master bedroom.
Speaker 1: At the inquest, he explains how the blood spatter indicates
Speaker 1: the trajectory of the Bulletrorzontal because it was in line
Speaker 1: with her head.
Speaker 18: There is nothing to suggest that there is a spatter
Speaker 18: going up towards the ceiling or going down towards the floor.
Speaker 18: It's in a fairly neutral plane.
Speaker 1: It's worth noting here. Contrary to what he said just
Speaker 1: after Amy died in twenty fourteen, David Simmons' father testified
Speaker 1: at the inquest that the blood spatter went all the
Speaker 1: way up to the ceiling. This is refuted by Sergeant McCants.
Speaker 18: It's more of a horizontal plane rather than anything going
Speaker 18: up or down.
Speaker 6: All of the facts reported by forensics were taken into
Speaker 6: account by biomechanical experts Professor Timothy Ackland and doctor Thomas Gibson,
Speaker 6: who were also questioned at the inquest. So, just to clarify,
Speaker 6: biomechanics is the science of the movement of a living body,
Speaker 6: including how muscles, bones, tendons, and ligaments work together to
Speaker 6: provide movement. We start with Professor Ackland, who is being
Speaker 6: asked by counsel assisting Sarah Tyler about the recoil of
Speaker 6: the shotgun.
Speaker 12: Just in terms of clarity about the trajectory of the
Speaker 12: projective the analysis that you undertook, I think refers to
Speaker 12: the shotgun barrel being oriented horizontally or in near contact
Speaker 12: with the deceased's right temple. But then there's a mention
Speaker 12: that the barrel was slightly angled to the coronal plane
Speaker 12: such that the butt was slightly posterior to the deceased temple. Yes,
Speaker 12: so my understanding is that That means the gun was
Speaker 12: angled in your view slightly back.
Speaker 13: Is that right?
Speaker 1: That's right.
Speaker 6: While there was concern that Amy's body and the gun
Speaker 6: had been moved before photographs were taken, it's believed her
Speaker 6: head had not.
Speaker 19: The deceased head would have basically been in the same
Speaker 19: position it would have been moved after the gun was fired,
Speaker 19: and that head was essentially upright, leaning into the corner
Speaker 19: of the alcove, and that the blood spatter was directly
Speaker 19: adjacent to a left side of her head and down
Speaker 19: towards the shoulder. The other thing, too, is I had
Speaker 19: images of the decease, and the images clearly showed an
Speaker 19: entry wound on the right side of the temple and
Speaker 19: a sort of exit exiting to the left side in
Speaker 19: a sort of horizontal or slightly downward and slightly forward orientation.
Speaker 19: Now I'm no expert in that, but if we go
Speaker 19: back to the first Newtonian laws, we know that after
Speaker 19: discharge the pellets, the gas, any other material, the wadding,
Speaker 19: and any of the biological material will go in that
Speaker 19: same direction as well. Okas so on that basis, it
Speaker 19: was my opinion that the shotgun was held early horizontally
Speaker 19: slightly behind and maybe slightly raised because of what I
Speaker 19: could see as the trajectory of the pellets.
Speaker 12: We have heard evidence from a forensic pathologist and evidence
Speaker 12: from blood spatter.
Speaker 13: Experts in the course of this inquest.
Speaker 12: They maintain their view that the firearm was held horizontally,
Speaker 12: but they've My understanding of both of their evidence is
Speaker 12: that they couldn't speak to any angle of the shotgun
Speaker 12: given the severity of the damage to the deceased skull.
Speaker 12: Would that information change your perspective in terms of this
Speaker 12: matter in any way?
Speaker 6: No, the coroner interjects.
Speaker 14: Would you defer to the opinion of a forensic pathologist
Speaker 14: in terms of the injuries and what you can ready
Speaker 14: from them in terms of their expertise?
Speaker 19: Absolutely, all right, thank you.
Speaker 12: In your first report, is it correct that you were
Speaker 12: considering simply the scenario mentioned in Senior Constable in Skips
Speaker 12: ballistics report, which is that Amy held the gun and
Speaker 12: fired it with her left hand.
Speaker 6: So, just to clarify here, initially wa police thought that
Speaker 6: Amy must have shot herself with her left hand because
Speaker 6: it was the only one with gun residue on it
Speaker 6: and she was sitting on her right hand.
Speaker 19: Yes, there were a couple of scenarios suggested by the
Speaker 19: attending police that she may have lent a cross and
Speaker 19: the butt onto the edge of the bed or onto
Speaker 19: the floor in order to stop that recoil, and simply
Speaker 19: used her left hand alone. So I was looking at
Speaker 19: that considering that I was also considering whether the left
Speaker 19: hand was used in some combination with the right hand
Speaker 19: holding the barrel of the gun at the right temple.
Speaker 12: Okay, and what were your conclusions in respect of your
Speaker 12: first report?
Speaker 19: So my conclusions were that the notion that miss Wensley
Speaker 19: leant over with the butt of the gun on the
Speaker 19: bed and used her left arm to push the trigger,
Speaker 19: not pull the trigger to push the trigger would have
Speaker 19: resulted in a blood spatter in a completely different position,
Speaker 19: so it was inconsistent with the other evidence around, including
Speaker 19: blood particles on her left hand and shotgun residue on
Speaker 19: her left hand. The other conclusion related to the premise
Speaker 19: that she did not lean over, but in fact held
Speaker 19: the gun with her left or fired the gun with
Speaker 19: her left hand in a more upright position. Hence that's
Speaker 19: the way she would have finished up in the position
Speaker 19: shown in one of my figures. Various problems with that,
Speaker 19: Why would she use her left hand, Why would she
Speaker 19: go into such an awkward posture with her left hand,
Speaker 19: Why would she not use the right hand, Why would
Speaker 19: the right hand not be involved. There's still issues to
Speaker 19: do with there's blood on the left hand and there
Speaker 19: was shotgun residue on the left hand. I did perform
Speaker 19: an analysis to determine that she would have had she
Speaker 19: could possibly had the strength to hold the gun in
Speaker 19: that position with one hand, but the other parts of
Speaker 19: the evidence doesn't fish I can, and my conclusion was
Speaker 19: that it was inconsistent with the other evidence.
Speaker 12: The use of the left hand alone. Yes, what were
Speaker 12: your conclusions in relation to the suggestion that she held
Speaker 12: the muzzle with her left hand and pulled the trigger
Speaker 12: with the right hand.
Speaker 19: So it was my conclusion that if she had taken
Speaker 19: her own life, it would be more consistent with the
Speaker 19: evidence that she would hold the gun with her left
Speaker 19: hand close to the temple and her right hand fired
Speaker 19: the gun. But there are problems with that as well
Speaker 19: because of the position of her right hand afterwards. And
Speaker 19: I agree with the advice of one of those documents
Speaker 19: that I read in that the deceased would have suffered
Speaker 19: an immediate and catastrophic damage, such that she could not
Speaker 19: have moved after the gun had been.
Speaker 12: Fired, couldn't have moved independently.
Speaker 19: Independently from the second report, we found that the hand,
Speaker 19: if the right hand was indeed used, it fell in
Speaker 19: a position that was quite a yeal away from her trunk,
Speaker 19: but any jerky might have pulled it back in, so
Speaker 19: that is certainly a possibility. I posited that on the
Speaker 19: basis of the other two scenarios, plus the possibility of
Speaker 19: shooting herself with her right hand on the trigger, we're
Speaker 19: inconsistent with the evidence. I was also concerned about where
Speaker 19: the witnesses discovered the shotgun, and my evidence, particularly in
Speaker 19: the second report, is that if she had shot herself
Speaker 19: with a horizontally aligned shotgun, the shotgun would have, by
Speaker 19: Newton's third law, gone in the opposite direction. It would
Speaker 19: not landed on her with the button near her feet
Speaker 19: and pointing towards her head.
Speaker 12: And that was the description given by Gareth Price when
Speaker 12: he sat correct, when he gave evidence that he discovered
Speaker 12: the body. Is that right?
Speaker 19: That's correct?
Speaker 6: The coroner interjects again.
Speaker 14: Sorry, just before we move on from that, we did
Speaker 14: have a I think it was one of the ballistics
Speaker 14: experts the other day, Either that or one of the
Speaker 14: forensic wales I can't remember, which gave some evidence to
Speaker 14: suggest that they thought it was possible that there was
Speaker 14: a different force applying to the firearm because her finger
Speaker 14: would have been well, thumb or fingers would have been
Speaker 14: in the trigger and arm up, and so although the
Speaker 14: firearm might move back because of the recoil, there would
Speaker 14: also be a force exerted by the arm falling down
Speaker 14: and gravity drawing it down that might have altered the movement,
Speaker 14: so it wouldn't necessarily fly backwards because the hand might
Speaker 14: be in it and pulling it down. I'd dispute that,
Speaker 14: all right, Can you explain why?
Speaker 19: So if the left hand was holding this trigger out here?
Speaker 14: No, sorry, if it's the right hand. So if the
Speaker 14: left hand is here and the right hand is here,
Speaker 14: if she shoots the shotgun, the suggestion was the hand
Speaker 14: could still be in the trigger or through the guard
Speaker 14: and pulling it down as her hand falls, because you know,
Speaker 14: the body becomes lifeless and it moves down. Instead of
Speaker 14: it going that way, it could pull down that way.
Speaker 19: Yes, I understand the suggestion, but I don't agree with
Speaker 19: the suggestion.
Speaker 14: Okay, so I'm saying we're assuming it's the right hand,
Speaker 14: is all.
Speaker 19: Okay, Yes, So if the right hand pushes, there is
Speaker 19: recoil which is significant going that way. Now I understand
Speaker 19: then that the gun might have fallen down, but it's
Speaker 19: going to fall down in my view because of the
Speaker 19: sort of massive amount of damage done to her brain,
Speaker 19: that she would have just fallen down in that particular plane,
Speaker 19: not brought it around to the front as described by
Speaker 19: a price. So yes, it can be pulled down or
Speaker 19: it can fall down. She would have lost grip with
Speaker 19: her left hand immediately, but it would have ended up
Speaker 19: in my view, out to the side.
Speaker 14: All right, so sideways, So it wouldn't necessarily I suppose,
Speaker 14: in the sense it might reduce the distance it moves
Speaker 14: away from the body, but it would fall down on
Speaker 14: an angle to the side of her body rather than
Speaker 14: centrally to the front of her body.
Speaker 19: Yes, that's correct, okay, all right.
Speaker 12: Just to clarify, would the movement of the body from
Speaker 12: the force of the projectile moving the body towards the
Speaker 12: wall have any impact on that also?
Speaker 19: Now, once the gun has been discharged, because it was
Speaker 19: discharged at her head level. Her shoulder was already up
Speaker 19: against the wall, so the head would have gone in
Speaker 19: the opposite direction, but it wouldn't have affected the velocity
Speaker 19: of the gun going in that direction.
Speaker 6: The Karna explains that when looking at the photographs of
Speaker 6: Amy's body, her left leg is up against the door,
Speaker 6: close to the wall, but according to Garett's recollection, it
Speaker 6: was actually slightly more central to the middle of the
Speaker 6: door when he came in.
Speaker 14: Although it's just perhaps from the perspective the photograph is taken,
Speaker 14: it looks more to the left. Would that change your
Speaker 14: view at all?
Speaker 19: If the left leg was slightly more central to the door,
Speaker 19: It wouldn't change my eventual outcome, but it may change
Speaker 19: the question surrounding whether her torso was moved.
Speaker 13: Yes, okay, well her head had moved perhaps.
Speaker 12: Then, moving on to your second report, you were approached
Speaker 12: by the cold case homicide squad when they were undertaking
Speaker 12: a review of Amy's case.
Speaker 13: Is that right?
Speaker 19: That's correct. There were seven scenarios are presented in that report.
Speaker 19: At the same time the police were interested in videoing
Speaker 19: the scenarios, they were taking measurements of the whole surrounding,
Speaker 19: and at my request they would also take photographs.
Speaker 12: Did you have any concerns about preparing a scenario's reconstruction
Speaker 12: in this case? Were there limitations in terms of scenarios
Speaker 12: that you were developing.
Speaker 19: Yes, there are always limitations in preparing scenarios. One tries
Speaker 19: to mitigate against any potential bias on behalf of a
Speaker 19: model that we employed to come and represent the deceased
Speaker 19: and try to put together the various parts of the
Speaker 19: evidence in order to set up the scenario as accurately
Speaker 19: as possible.
Speaker 12: Were you satisfied that the model was consistent enough with
Speaker 12: Amy's dimensions to be an appropriate model.
Speaker 19: Yes, I was, as far as I was told. She
Speaker 19: knew nothing, She had seen no photographs or evidence, and
Speaker 19: did not know the reason why we were setting up
Speaker 19: those scenarios.
Speaker 14: Can I just ask before you go on, just because
Speaker 14: it's fresh in my mind and just to clarify for me.
Speaker 14: Obviously you're using a live model, not a person who
Speaker 14: has now suffered a catastrophic injury. Does that make a
Speaker 14: difference in terms of recreation? And I'm asking it sounds
Speaker 14: like a stupid question, but you're the expert, so can
Speaker 14: you tell me?
Speaker 1: So?
Speaker 19: No one could ever say that the person would react
Speaker 19: in exactly the same way as someone who suffered a
Speaker 19: catastrophic injury. So I was a great pains to say
Speaker 19: to the model, let's just let everything go loose and drop.
Speaker 19: But one cannot say it's going to be an exact replication.
Speaker 6: Professor Acklam was asked if there was any possible scenario
Speaker 6: where Amy shot herself and she fell in a way
Speaker 6: where her right thigh ended up on top of her
Speaker 6: right hand.
Speaker 19: The only possibility was born out in scenario too, that
Speaker 19: the right leg did indeed abduct to the floor, and
Speaker 19: then the subsequent openings might have then pushed the thigh
Speaker 19: over the top of her hand. That's what we were
Speaker 19: trying to work out and convince myself whether that was
Speaker 19: still possible. I've said in my report that I don't
Speaker 19: think it's possible.
Speaker 12: You say, the evidence is highly consistent with the scenario
Speaker 12: that Amy was shot by another person.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 12: Are there any other limitations or concerns that you have
Speaker 12: about the nature of the experiment or the opinion that
Speaker 12: you've provided to the coroner that you think the coroner
Speaker 12: should be aware of.
Speaker 9: No.
Speaker 19: I think we've discussed all the limitations.
Speaker 12: And just in terms of the information that you received.
Speaker 12: You were given photographs that were taken by police officers
Speaker 12: at the scene that weren't forensic photographs, they weren't to scale,
Speaker 12: weren't formally measured.
Speaker 19: That's correct.
Speaker 12: Would your opinions have been greatly assisted had you been
Speaker 12: provided full forensic photographs Yes, absolutely.
Speaker 14: And forensic measurements and everything else in.
Speaker 19: Most particularly in terms of the trajectory of the entry,
Speaker 19: exit wound, and blood spatter proper blood spatter analysis. Yes,
Speaker 19: I think that would help to make certain exactly the
Speaker 19: orientation of the gun prior to discharge or at discharge.
Speaker 12: Would you have also been assisted by perhaps more detailed
Speaker 12: interviews with each of the witnesses about what they observed, if.
Speaker 19: There was an opportunity to cross check against the various
Speaker 19: witness evidence. Yes, that would have been very useful.
Speaker 12: Is there anything else that occurs to you that might
Speaker 12: have been useful to help you form a final view
Speaker 12: in terms of this case.
Speaker 19: I think with those extra details I could have been
Speaker 19: guided better in the investigation process. But I still think
Speaker 19: there's an overwhelming view that there is inconsistency in the
Speaker 19: witness reports that needed to be addressed.
Speaker 6: But those inconsistencies are not addressed. Moving on to doctor Gibson.
Speaker 12: In terms of the questions that were put to Professor Ackland,
Speaker 12: the central issue really is how Amy's right hand came
Speaker 12: to be found to be wedged effectively underneath her butteck
Speaker 12: or underneath her thigh, depending on your view of the photographs.
Speaker 12: Can you give a biomedical explanation as to how that
Speaker 12: might have occurred?
Speaker 4: No, apart from what was explored with Professor Ackland, I
Speaker 4: have no explanation for how that could have ended in
Speaker 4: that position unless she was already sitting on it.
Speaker 12: In terms of the scenario put forward relating to the
Speaker 12: deceased holding the firearm, balancing the muzzle effectively with her
Speaker 12: left hand across her body, and pulling the trigger with
Speaker 12: her right hand. If that scenario had occurred, what is
Speaker 12: your view about the movement of the deceased body and
Speaker 12: hands as a result of the gun firing in that position?
Speaker 12: What do you say would be likely to occur if she.
Speaker 1: Was able to do that?
Speaker 4: And I think one of the things that Professor Ackland
Speaker 4: checked was whether she could physically actually support the gun
Speaker 4: in that position. Then I have no explanation of where
Speaker 4: her right hand ended.
Speaker 12: Up in that case. Can you just taught me through
Speaker 12: the conclusions of your report and the responses that you
Speaker 12: would have today in terms of the three questions that
Speaker 12: were put to you, whether.
Speaker 4: The gunshot wound was self inflicted and deliberate, Well, I
Speaker 4: don't see any reason to change what I wrote before.
Speaker 4: I don't think there has been any new evidence regarding
Speaker 4: that introduced. So I think it was unlikely the gunshot
Speaker 4: wound was self inflicted and deliberate.
Speaker 12: You also found that it was unlikely that the gunshot
Speaker 12: wound was self inflicted and accidental, and.
Speaker 4: Even less likely that it was self inflicted and accidental.
Speaker 4: So it's sort of almost by elimination that we end
Speaker 4: up with the final question. And in terms of the
Speaker 4: evidence that I have reviewed, the gun shot does appear
Speaker 4: to have been inflicted by someone shooting, and.
Speaker 12: That view is not affected by the emergence of information
Speaker 12: that the door to the bedroom was opened on multiple occasions.
Speaker 12: We know that it was at least opened and closed
Speaker 12: by David Simmons, opened and closed twice by Gareth Price,
Speaker 12: opened and closed by Robert Simmons, opened by the first
Speaker 12: responding officer, Larry Blandford, and Miss Moore, opened again by
Speaker 12: Senior Constable Roberts, and opened again by Saint John Ambulance Service.
Speaker 6: Ms Moore is comfortable Pip Dixon, who has since married
Speaker 6: and is still at wa police.
Speaker 12: Would that affect your view of the scene and the
Speaker 12: conclusions that you can draw from the photographs that were taken, well.
Speaker 4: Obviously it removes some of the certainty about the actual situation,
Speaker 4: and apart from that, I guess I can't say a
Speaker 4: great deal else.
Speaker 12: The issue that the position of her right hand is
Speaker 12: unusual and you can't see a way to explain that
Speaker 12: allows for the scenario where she shot herself.
Speaker 13: Is that right?
Speaker 4: That is part of it, But there is still also
Speaker 4: the point of the actual blood spatter and the direction
Speaker 4: that the gun needed to be pointed at at the
Speaker 4: time it was discharged to produce the blood spatter, where
Speaker 4: it was and how that would have We obviously don't
Speaker 4: really know where the gun ended up following that, but
Speaker 4: the descriptions are probably I can't add more. Obviously, what
Speaker 4: has been said and was rehearsed in the simulations which
Speaker 4: were made doesn't seem an appropriate place for the gun
Speaker 4: to have ended up. And finally, there is a thing
Speaker 4: of where the hand ended up, and it seems that
Speaker 4: it would have been very difficult for it to end
Speaker 4: up in that position given the circumstances.
Speaker 1: So there you have it. Amy's right hand could not
Speaker 1: have ended up under her right thigh or buttock if
Speaker 1: she had shot herself, and the laws of physics mean
Speaker 1: the gun should have flung back from the direction it
Speaker 1: was being shot from, which is the right not landing
Speaker 1: on her lap or in front of her. According to
Speaker 1: everyone who saw it, the shotgun was either in front
Speaker 1: of her or on her lap. Since starting this podcast,
Speaker 1: many people have reached out to us with information which
Speaker 1: we're still examining. One of those people include Michael Facing,
Speaker 1: Amy's former boss when she worked in hospitality. He saw
Speaker 1: Amy less than twenty four hours before she died.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I met Amy when I was working in a bar.
Speaker 1: Ol recently caught up with him and had a chat.
Speaker 3: I was working a night shift. I was about seven
Speaker 3: eight o'clock, so it wasn't too far away from closing time,
Speaker 3: and Amy and Rachel walked in and I think for
Speaker 3: remember they'd just come from the movies or they were
Speaker 3: going to the movies. And yes, it's the first time
Speaker 3: I'd seen them in a while, and it was great
Speaker 3: to great to catch up, especially with Amy.
Speaker 6: What did you end up talking about?
Speaker 3: Amy was talking about how my daughter's birthday was coming up,
Speaker 3: and so she was going to go shopping the next day,
Speaker 3: and she was talking about how so she was to
Speaker 3: be shopping for presents for her, and that was really
Speaker 3: her big plan for the next day. And then it was, yeah,
Speaker 3: just everything. She was full of life and was sort
Speaker 3: of thinking about what she's things she was going to do,
Speaker 3: and just it was almost like she had a full
Speaker 3: plan of activities for the week.
Speaker 6: And what about Rachel?
Speaker 3: I can't I can't recall too much of a conversation
Speaker 3: with Rachel.
Speaker 6: So Amy was kind of the was the social butterfly?
Speaker 6: I suppose of.
Speaker 3: The absolutely yes.
Speaker 6: So did you know that she was in a relationship
Speaker 6: with David Simmons at this time?
Speaker 3: No, I still wasn't aware, so she.
Speaker 6: Didn't mention him.
Speaker 10: No, she didn't.
Speaker 6: Have you learned anything since then about their relationship?
Speaker 3: Obviously, you know in the last ten years, I have
Speaker 3: hearing the stories and read about it.
Speaker 6: So when did you find out what had happened to Amy?
Speaker 3: Two days after I had seen her, and it was
Speaker 3: just absolute shock to be told that she'd committed suicide.
Speaker 3: I mean, no one talks about their plans for the
Speaker 3: rest of the week and the next day to then
Speaker 3: go and do that well in my opinion anyway.
Speaker 6: And so that was kind of the talk of the
Speaker 6: town at the time.
Speaker 3: Especially with all amongst all of our customers and the
Speaker 3: staff that knew her at the business.
Speaker 6: And didn't seem suicidal when you saw her.
Speaker 3: Definitely not, definitely not. I meant most suicides never seemed suicidal.
Speaker 3: But you know, in my experience of having lost people
Speaker 3: to their friends of mine have killed themselves in the past,
Speaker 3: there are signs, but they certainly don't talk about what
Speaker 3: their plans are for the very next day. If they're
Speaker 3: planning to end it, they normally become evasive or they
Speaker 3: give non committal answers. Whereas Amy was being very detailed. No,
Speaker 3: she was excited about going shopping, she couldn't wait for
Speaker 3: the birthday party, all these things though, and then just
Speaker 3: the love for those girls, there is absolutely no way
Speaker 3: in the world should leave them.
Speaker 6: So then from there have you just been, like everyone else,
Speaker 6: surprised that this has gone on so long.
Speaker 3: Absolutely surprised and shocked and horrified. I mean, it's really
Speaker 3: an indictment on the Western Australian Police. I mean my
Speaker 3: experience of them is that you know, they don't actually
Speaker 3: really do any policing. They just take the easy way
Speaker 3: out because it's a lot of they can't be bothered
Speaker 3: and you know it's a lot of anger with it too.
Speaker 3: At worst, is incomfidence. At best, it's thays were lazy.
Speaker 6: What you're saying is it's not an isolated incident.
Speaker 9: Absolutely not.
Speaker 3: And that's my experience of being out that way for
Speaker 3: over ten years is that you know the police there's
Speaker 3: don't There's a few out there that try to do
Speaker 3: the right thing and try to do the work, but
Speaker 3: most of the older, jaded officers just really couldn't give
Speaker 3: a shit.
Speaker 6: So after that, have you seen any of the people?
Speaker 6: Have you seen Rachel? Have you seen David? Have you
Speaker 6: seen Gareth?
Speaker 3: I haven't seen Rachel since that night where I last
Speaker 3: saw Amy. I have seen David.
Speaker 6: How does he appear?
Speaker 7: Cocky?
Speaker 1: Arrogant?
Speaker 3: He will come in and have a great northern mid
Speaker 3: strength stubby and he'll play some bits in the TB. Yeah,
Speaker 3: he doesn't hang around very long. There's a few people
Speaker 3: there that if they walked in and saw him there,
Speaker 3: they probably wouldn't take it too well.
Speaker 6: What do you mean by that.
Speaker 3: There's a few people that really loved Amy and really
Speaker 3: dislike him. So yeah, I'm pretty certain that there'd be
Speaker 3: an issue if they walked in and they saw him there.
Speaker 3: So this boy doesn't stay very long, I think.
Speaker 6: Have you heard about other incidents, like, for example, you
Speaker 6: might be aware that he's up what he did nine
Speaker 6: months for assaulting a public office that was Larry, that
Speaker 6: was one of the officers on scene. But also he's
Speaker 6: up again for another assault in the public officer and
Speaker 6: things like that. Are you aware of his violence or
Speaker 6: violent Oh?
Speaker 3: Yeah, we definitely hear about it. I mean it's a
Speaker 3: very small, tiny community, so people do talk. And this
Speaker 3: is you know, when someone's at a history of violence
Speaker 3: and then they're still able to be wandering around, it's
Speaker 3: another indictment on our system.
Speaker 9: Isn't it.
Speaker 6: What about drug use, Well, you.
Speaker 3: Can tell by looking at him, you know, I mean
Speaker 3: working in this trade, you know, with bars and alcohol,
Speaker 3: you learn to pick who the addicts are based on
Speaker 3: the way they look, their behavioral mannerisms and speech, the
Speaker 3: way they speak and carry themselves, and it's quite obvious
Speaker 3: that he's got an issue there.
Speaker 6: So what would you like to see happen for Ami? Now?
Speaker 3: Well, I think what her family and all of the
Speaker 3: friends and everyone that knew her, what they need is justice.
Speaker 3: We need the you know, the police commissioner and the
Speaker 3: w A police need to step up and get on
Speaker 3: with their job and you know, get their job done.
Speaker 3: They're just trying to say a face of the moment,
Speaker 3: they're sort of hoping, oh, for doing nothing, it will
Speaker 3: go away if we just you know, stay quiet, you know,
Speaker 3: this will go away, And it's like, no, it's not
Speaker 3: going to go away.
Speaker 6: Yeah. Yeah, It's kind of sad, isn't it. Michael says
Speaker 6: he will never forget how positive and engaging Amy was,
Speaker 6: and if police detectives had taken the time to talk
Speaker 6: to anyone who really knew her, they wouldn't have been
Speaker 6: so quick to jump to conclusions.
Speaker 3: And I think that's why some people gravitated towards her,
Speaker 3: because she was such a friendly, happy, bubbly person, like
Speaker 3: you could be having the worst day ever and she'd
Speaker 3: walk in and all of a sudden She'd make everyone
Speaker 3: feel welcome and good. She was just one of those
Speaker 3: people to be around. It was a positive experience. I
Speaker 3: think that's pretty why all the customers loved her and
Speaker 3: all the stuff. Everyone just you know, she was just
Speaker 3: so much fun to be around. She had a very
Speaker 3: quick sense of humor. She had no filter over so
Speaker 3: she literally would say anything that came to her head,
Speaker 3: and I think just made her just a fun person
Speaker 3: to be around. And that's just when you stuck working
Speaker 3: twelve hour shifts for people, they're the ones you want.
Speaker 1: To have around.
Speaker 6: Michael, I want to thank you so much.
Speaker 3: It's railing to help. What happened to her, It's just atrocious.
Speaker 3: It should not happen to anyone. And this is also
Speaker 3: where the politicians should stand up as well.
Speaker 1: In the next episode, is there any possibility Amy killed herself?
Speaker 1: We hear from an internationally renowned crime reconstruction expert who
Speaker 1: takes us through the evidence from scratch.
Speaker 15: There's enough evidence in this case to move forward.
Speaker 1: And the good Cop, Australia's most famous detective, Ron idols
Speaker 1: He weighs in on what he thinks about what happened
Speaker 1: to Amy and the way her investigation was handled.
Speaker 2: So lisser you see.
Speaker 3: So desm.
Speaker 1: Re both the nasty until me.
Speaker 9: Too.
Speaker 1: If you knew Amy and have information, any information about
Speaker 1: her death, we'd love to hear from you. Just email
Speaker 1: us at The Truth about Amy at seven dot com
Speaker 1: dot au. That's s E v E N The Truth
Speaker 1: about Amy at seven dot com dot Au, or visit
Speaker 1: our website sevennews dot com dot Au forward slash the
Speaker 1: Truth about Amy. You can also send us an anonymous
Speaker 1: tip at www dot the Truth about Amy dot com.
Speaker 1: If you're on Facebook or Instagram, you can follow us
Speaker 1: to see photos and updates relevant to the case, but
Speaker 1: for legal reasons, unfortunately you won't be able to make
Speaker 1: any comments. And remember, if you like what you're hearing,
Speaker 1: don't forget to subscribe. Please rate and review our series
Speaker 1: because it really helps new listeners to find us. Presenter
Speaker 1: and executive producer Alison Sandy, Presenter and investigative journalist Liam Bartlett,
Speaker 1: Sound design Mark Wright, Assistant producer Cassie Woodward, Graphics Jason Blandford,
Speaker 1: and special thanks to Tim Clark and Brian Seymour. This
Speaker 1: is a seven News production