09: Sudden Death

This podcast contains information and details relating to suicide. We urge anyone struggling with their emotions to contact Lifeline on thirteen eleven fourteen thirteen eleven fourteen or visit them at lifeline dot org dot au. A twenty four year old devoted mother of two fleeing a violent relationship as a mom, bags packed car, running, her daughters strapped into the backseat.

Mom told me that she needed to go back inside to grab something.

Panic.

Amy is dead, Sir aim his dead?

Eight confusion than about five minutes say sit n to suicide.

One hundred percent.

This is emersing.

What do you think is really the honest truth about Amy? The truth about Amy?

Episode nine.

I'm Liam Bartlett.

And I'm Alison Sandy.

Don't depend too much on anyone in the world, because even your shadow leaves.

You when you're in darkness.

I'll be the one person my daughters can depend on, no matter what.

It's a mummy daughter thing.

This comment was posted by Amy on Facebook on the twenty first of August twenty thirteen, less than a year before she died. Eight years later. Her daughters Tay and Maya made the following statements at her request.

I miss my mom so much every day and night. It makes me sad just to look at her picture in my room. Sometimes I would go to North Dandler after dropping my sister off at school on a hot day. On my mom's birthday, we would go to her favorite spot and celebrate it. We would even have a Wednesdie Night on Friday. We would eat popcorn and watch movies. It was really fine. We would also go fishing and camping. Mom was so funny and nice. We even have a fringe of penny.

Tree for her.

They were her favorite flower, especially the yellow ones. Even though her favorite color was pink, she still liked the yellow ones better. I do really miss my mom.

Mom was a very nice person. She had a lot of friends, such as Aaron, which we sometimes call Auntie Anne. I miss Mom, especially hearing her voice. If I could make a wish that would actually come true, it would be a wish to see my mom again. We always used to have a movie onesie night where we would wear onesies, sometimes matching ones. We would eat popcorn, watch movies, and take selfies. I remember once Mama had gave Hay a character eat at night and she fell asleep whilst

Indeed she does. Both Neya and Tay exude the kindness and warmth displayed by Amy in all the home movies we've seen. As a mum, I can really relate to her Facebook post about wanting to protect her children. It's instinctive when someone says the word maternal, you think of caring, nurturing, protecting. The was Amy even before her daughters were born, fostering a baby Joey, looking after her sister's and upon having her two girls, well, it just stepped up another level.

A knife out on her. Amy in one of those drunken states She never told me that, but I've heard that he has pulled a knife out on her. She was tiny, here's six foot, here's big. He's just got to push her away at one hand and she wouldn't be able to touch him.

You'll recall that. According to simmons police file, they note he may be carrying a knife. Rick and Amy saw a bit more of each other in the months preceding her death, both obtaining their firearms licenses together. He was interviewed by a member of the cold case investigation team, who reported the following.

He believed the trouble between miss Wensley and Simmons began when they moved into the Serpentine property. The Sunday before Miss Wensley died. She relayed an incident to him where Simmons allegedly put a knife to her throat. He states he didn't take what miss Wensley said seriously, telling interviewing officers he didn't remember the circumstances around why he Simmons put the knife to her throat and what happened after.

Again information corroborating evidence of domestic violence. For those of you who have also listened to the podcast The Lady Vanishes, you'll remember that authorities didn't believe Marian Barter had even gone missing, let alone met with our play. Likewise with Gwen Grover and shot in the dark, despite showing unabating devotion to her children and all of her choices being for their benefit, it proved incredibly difficult to change the minds of aor once they had already come to a conclusion,

What was your role in respect to Amy's death?

I was at the time attached to the forensics firearms unit. At that time it was physical evidence in firearms examination. We changed the name on a regular basis and mine was to attend the scene in company with another forensic firearms examiner. And we have a number of roles within our unit, the examination of firearms and ammunition firearms where they had been allegedly discharged at the scene. We can attend and record the scene itself. That may lend later

All right.

The date that you attended the scene, do you know how long after Amy's death? That was? Was at the weekend after Amy's death.

We attended the police station, munda Jong Police Station at eight thirty five on the twenty seventh of June. So I'm not exactly sure when the alleged incident occurred. From the IMS number, it says seventeen fifty on the twenty sixth, so it appears to be sometimes afterwards.

Yes, your attendance at the munda Jong police station. The purpose of that, I assume was to obtain to seize the firearms that have been collected by the local police.

First of all, it was to liaise with the detectives who were at Mundajong Police Station dealing with the incident. But at that locate there were a number of firearms that had been stored and so yes, as well as liaising with the detectives, it was to seize certain exhibits that were present at the police station.

And in our supplementary report there's some photographs of a firearms cabinet in which those firearms were seized. Is that the Mondejong Police station firearms cabinet.

Yes, those firearms come in for so they've been seized in the course of a warrant or something along those lines. The cupboard is to store the firearms prior to them being moved to a central storage depot.

Senior Constable in Skip goes on to point out that they weren't considered forensic exhibits and as such were left unsealed.

Did you seize any ammunition in that visit?

Not at that time.

No, At what point in time did you seize ammunition?

There was no ammunition seized by me from the Senate, I understand it had already been seized. A number of items of ammunition seized and they had packaged some of them together. So I can't attest as to the continuity of where certain exhibit items of ammunition were taken from and what they were put in with in the same bag, or anything along those lines. I understand that some of them were separated out at a later date due to the fact that they were identified as being perhaps more

So if I showed you photographs of two cartridges, you couldn't tell me where they were stored, where they were taken, how they were what they were kept.

Is there is a record on the incident Management system of certain items that were stored together, and there seems to be entries on there as to where items were taken from from one exhibit, placed into another exhibit, and separated out. I didn't actually do that, so I can only attest to what's written on the IMS system, the incident management system, what actually occurred, where they were from originally, which bags they went into, and then who took them

So it seems nobody knows what ammunition is relevant to Amy's death. So it's not clear if it went missing or not. All we know is that WA police did go looking for it a day after Amy died.

So after you went to the Mondujon police station and you seize the firearms and you spoke to the detective in charge of what I assume is Operation Juhnde, what did you do next in relation to this investigation.

I don't know whether it was the detective who was in charge, but I believe it was Detective Dandly, if I've pronounced that incorrectly, I apologize, but I believe that he may have been taking on the role as physical

That attendance, what was the purpose of that attendance, knowing that it had been forensically cleaned in the interim.

I didn't actually enter inside the residence myself. My colleague, Senior Constable Meets did, along with Senior Sergeant Diamond and Detective Danderly, and I believe they made a preliminary what we call a preliminary forensic assessment, and that is to have a look at what's still in sitsu at the location, see whether there are any other forensic opportunities, and then potentially direct other units from there to attend and undertake

From there, it was the next task that you attended to mortuary and the forensic examination.

Myself and some of the colleagues of the other disciplines conducted a co analysis. Officers from BPA blood spatter pattern analysis. I believe there was senior Constable Walker from the fingerprint unit, and we did a co examination of the four ten shotgun that was seized and alleged to have been involved

And you noted in our report that there were relatively minor size differences between the firearm that was the reference firearm.

Yes, there were a couple of millimeters on some of the aspects of it, which I believe that in the grand scheme of things, when we got to the post mortem, it may not prove to be an issue at all because they were so minute.

So you attended the post mortem's, yeah, and I understand you undertook observations of the wound to the right side of Amy's head.

Is that right?

Yes?

I did.

What did you observe?

There are certain aspects of gunshot wounds, the characteristics that can perhaps tell us certain distances that the muzzle of the firearm was from the actual target itself from where the gunshot wound is. And some of those characteristics are deposition of soot. There didn't appear to be any noticeable deposition of soot, searing where the muzzle is too close as to see a flesh, and sometimes baking some of that soot as well. It can't be removed even when

Missus Tyler refers to a photo of the wound.

So that circular pattern where you've got a little white arrow pointing to that is the imprint effectively of the barrel being held against Amy's head.

Yes, that's correct. The mechanism for which that occurs is that there's a large amount of gas that enters the wound itself, and that can sometimes cause the wound to balloon back towards the actual muzzle of the firearm and cause an imprint as well.

So that's from the barrel where the cartridge didn't fire.

That's correct, Yes, And.

So that allows you to say with relative confidence that the muzzle of the fire arm was held close to, if not against, Amy's head.

That and the other characteristics the severe disruption to the head where a lot of gas has flowed into the actual brain itself, the skull itself, the characteristics of the defect in the skull being that there appeared to be no spread of the shot it was all going through in a solid column of shot rather than starting to diverge. Yes, that indicated the proximity was that it was in contact or incomplete contact.

And we've heard from the forensic pathologists this morning that she couldn't specify the angle at which the projectiles was traveling through the skull. Do you agree with that position or do you think the angle can be determined?

The best I could do at the time was to say, and now on review is to say that it's certainly from right to left across the face. As to whether it was slightly downwards, upwards, back forwards, nah, I can't make that assessment. From the severity of the disruption, it didn't allow us to make that sort of assessment.

Well, you agree with the general evidence seems to be it's largely horizontal.

Yes, there didn't appear to be any extremes.

You then participated in a scenario reconstruction while at the state mortuary.

I did. Yes. With regards to the reference firearm that we took with us, Yes.

What did that involve? What were you hoping to establish?

Well, at that point, we had characterized the fact that it was a contact wound, and so we placed the reference firearm in a position where it was touching the contact wound, and then we're able to show whether or not there we were to extend the hands of the deceased towards the trigger, and it was to give reference as to whether or not the hands were capable of reaching the trigger with the muzzle being in contact with

I understand that you observed an injury to Aimy's left hand while the post mortem was conducted.

Is that right?

Yes, that's correct.

What did you understand that injury to be? What were your observations?

He refers to a photo.

This wound was noticed before the body was washed, but it was also apparent after the body was washed, and there was this dark discoloration. Often when a firearm is in close proximity, as well as just searing the skin, as I mentioned previously, this soot can embed the actual flesh itself, and even after washing, you can't remove the embedded suit and so it was swabbed by Senior Constable Meeks.

So it would be if the hand was close to the head near the muzzle at the time it's fired.

Yes, that's correct, and that would again another reason why I've mentioned that it could be an incomplete contact wound is that is that that may have caused there to be a slight gap in between the actual head itself and the muzzle. One of those was how it can be over the muzzle at the time of discharge. Another one that we that I considered at the time was the foresight, which is the front side of the firearm itself.

Ms. Tyler wants to know if the gun residue could have been.

Lost there were paper bags on the deceased hands.

Yes, the coroner follows up.

All right, and that's what you need to have on there in order to try and preserve any gunshot residue. Is that right?

Yes, yes, I can't. The loss of gunshot residue from surfaces is it's quite easy, So it doesn't mean it's not necessarily going to be lost from that surface. I believe the bags could be then sampled as well if there was any concern that they're lost from.

There, and I believe that was done in this case.

Yes, it would certainly aid in the preservation, certainly more than if the hand was just loose in the body bag and had the potential to cross contaminate from another part of the body.

I suppose, I'm asking, we've got a scenario where she's actually sitting on one hand, which might have been the logical hand that she would have used to pull the trigger if she's self harmed, and whether or not if you took samples then and there, you could actually have a chance of seeing whether there's gunshot residue on the hands if you took the sample at the time she's at the scene, as opposed to once she's been bagged up and moved.

The matter is referred to another expert, University of Wa forensic scientist, doctor Carrie Pitts, who will get to later, but Senior Constable in Skip confirms that his tests were done to the best of his ability with the remaining evidence, but he was unable to verify whether the cartridges examined were the same as those removed from the rifle by Robert Simmons.

So it was the assumption that if that was the cartridge, and again there was, we can't place the continuity of where that cartridge came from in the scene where it was put. It was supplied to us. If that was the cartridge that was discharged, then that would that assumption could be made that the orientation of the firearm was such well when you consider the actual gunshot wound itself and the imprint of the second barrel, that it was in that orientation as in per Fig. Twenty two.

In Skip discusses helping Professor Ackland with his reconstructions undertaken ten times, which he describes as limited.

I think there were limitations in respect of the calculations that he made. There there was a point where he makes a comment that he believes that the wind trajectory is slightly downwards. I can't make that opinion myself.

However, he acknowledges several times in his evidence that many of the matters he's raising concern about are outside his expertise, But he does go on to say this.

From the evidence, the physical evidence that I was able to examine, I cannot exclude the possibility of self inflicted injury. However, I cannot exclude the possibility that it wasn't either, So unfortunately it's not I can't make a definitive answer as to whether it was self inflected. I certainly cannot exclude it.

But one of the problems with her having with Amy having shot herself is where her right hand has ended up at the end, isn't it?

Yes, I think there are too many factors to ascertain whether or not the firearm being in contact with the hand and vice versa, how that could have caused a hand to be in a certain position. So I'm not so sure I can comment as to whether or not

All right, So looking at that from what, from your knowledge and from your area of expertise, you couldn't really say one way or the other whether it was more consistent with a self inflicted injury or injury inflicted by someone else.

No, And then incredibly, counsel assisting the family, Peter Ward asks in skip if he's ever seen David Simmons, who he has to explain was Amy Wensley's former partner Simmons.

No, you'll have to remind me I haven't seen pictures of mister Simmons, of his frame. You're aware that he's an experienced shooter.

Yes, I'm not a qualified medical professional or a biomechanics person. And so to say this specific person was able to do this, that, and the other. I certainly could say I could do it, but you have to take it on a case by case, individual basis.

The reason I raised this senior constable the average figure of the standing knuckle height for an average male is approximately close to the seated eye height of a FEMA. So the question arises, and you may be able to comment on this, but whether typically somebody who is an experienced shooter would be able to hold a gun in that position such that their knuckle height is roughly at Amy Wensley's eye height.

I think it would be more their physical stature, whether or not they can support up to two point eight nine kilos in a certain position that you're suggesting. Certainly I could tell you I could do it. If you came up, then you can try and see whether you can do it, but it will be on an individual, case case basis.

In Skip says he's six foot two. Remember he's already determined the trajectory was right to left. Amy was right handed, shot in her right temple while her right hand was found under her right thigh.

So the question is, why won't any test done to see if David Simmons could do it. Yes, they need his consent, but surely it's in his interest too if it means they could rule him out.

Instead. They're bouncing back and forth between the impossible and the implausible Amy's right hand, which doesn't have any gun residue on it, or her left hand, which in order to use she would have had to have stretched her arm across her body to hold up an almost three killer firearm to her right temple.

This soon becomes a moot point after forensic pathologists doctor Carri Pitts gives her opinion that the gun residue particles on her left thumb actually indicate it was near the muzzle of the gun when it went off.

It was more consistent with an impact with the polyethylene, which obviously was in the vicinity of the discharge, so it certainly would be consistent with being near the discharge and at the muzzle.

So they have to go back to her right hand, prompting this question from council assisting WA Police Naomi Eagling.

So not finding GSR or particles consistent with GSR or characteristic on the right hand, but finding them on the left. If the firing of the shotgun was done by the right hand, and then the right hand after the firing of the shotgun went under the body. That could there's other possibilities, but that could in its own case result in no GSR being found on the right hand.

Yes, I can't exclude that possibility.

Whereas if the left hand was against the muzzle as it was fired, that might explain why it was and also then exposed after death as the dust particle settles sitting on the lap, that would make it more likely to have the GSR on it.

Yes, it was an open area as well as being near the muzzle end of the actual firearm.

MS Eagling doesn't bother to question David Simmons when he appears on the last day of the inquest. And now we move to forensic pathologist Dr Jody White, who at the time of the inquest in twenty twenty one had sixteen years experience. She didn't perform the autopsy, and there's no reason given as to why Dr Amy Spark, who did, wasn't here to answer the questions herself. Instead, Doctor White is asked about her colleagues report.

Could you please state your full name for.

The court, Doctor Jody Nicole White.

Okay, and I understand that you didn't conduct the post mortem in this matter, but that you're in a position to speak to the report completed by a past colleague of yours, doctor Spark.

Is that right, Yes, that's correct, Okay.

A post mortem examination was undertaken on the first and second of July twenty fourteen on miss Wensley.

Yes, that's correct, all right.

And that report contains a view regarding doctor Sparks's view of the cause of death in this case.

Is that right?

Yes, you've reviewed that report. Do you agree with the conclusions of doctor Spark in that death?

Yes?

I agree with her cause of death.

Is there any aspect of that report that you would amend or change in your evidence today? No.

She goes on to explain that the shotgun injury to the head was the cause of death, and there was scattered soft tissue injuries including bruising around the right wrist, mild chest and spinal deformities, and air within the right chest cavity.

All right, Can you speak any further to those injuries? Can you age the bruise? Can you give evidence as to how it was formed?

So?

Aging?

I will tackle aging first. Aging of bruises is quite difficult.

It's a bit like we all see with our bruises. They start off darker red and eventually get black and fade to a sort of yellowy color. You see it on yourselves.

Exactly, that's right, but it can be quite difficult in different people, and according to the size of the bruise, and so there are a lot of different factors around that which make it difficult just to the naked eye. Another way we can do it is we can sample the bruise and look under the microscope. But again that won't give you a definite time, so our skill in aging bruises, unfortunately, is quite limited.

Well, all the bruises is that doctor spark noted on Amy's body microscopically analyzed.

No, she only examined four of them, one on the right thigh, the left buttck, and the two knees. She also sampled the gunshot injury margin, so three of them showed fresh bruising. I think the ones on the knees it was the left knee, I would have to check. The notes didn't show any bruising, and the gunshot injury site. She took a number of tissue samples from that that showed heat effect to the tissues, which is.

Expect that's consistent with the firer. Yes, as a forensic pathologist, are you able to speak to how an injury might have been inflicted or a bruise.

So a bruise is a blunt force type of injury. So you have bruises, tears, and abrasions, and they're your blunt force injury. So they're due to the part of the body being struck with something. So you can get them when you fall onto the floor or when you knock yourself, or you can get them when you're struck by something.

Okay, I'm thinking. Doctor Spark noted in her at that in terms of forensic procedures undertaken in her presence, a light colored hair was located between Amy's thumb and index finger. Is that correct?

Yes, that's right.

They refer to some of the technicalities of the testing and then move on to the location of the gunshot wound.

So it's in the right temple, just lateral two and slightly above the eye, so the lateral margin is about fifty millimeters above and behind the middle aspect for the right external auditory metis, which is the hole in your ear and about one hundred and fifty five centimeters above the right heel upwards, so you know from standing height how high that particular injury is, and then goes on to talk about injuries associated with that like searing and

Can you tell whether that was in a downward angle or an upward angle based on that entree not with any ac no. I understand that Doctor Spark also observed a number of injuries to the deceased's head and neck. Is it your view that those injuries were simply consistent with the force of the gunshot being inflicted or was there other underlying cause of any type of injury to the head and neck.

The injuries described around the head and neck would be consistent with the gunshot injury.

Doctor Spark then went on to examine Amy's upper limbs. My understanding is that on the left index finger there was a laceration on the thumb side of the front left index finger with surrounding black sooting.

Is that correct?

Yes, that's right, but you can't speak as to whether that was holding the firing end of the weapon or simply in close proximity to the firing end of the weapon.

In the literature, there are injuries to that area described when the firearm end is held, particularly to that part sort of of the whibbing over the knuckle, So it could be consistent with the left hand actually the end of the whippen.

And of course that doesn't speak to whether it has been held to support a self inflicted firing or an attempt to move a firearm away from her.

That's right.

Yes, Just to clarify here, we're talking about the area the bullet comes out, not the trigger here.

Okay.

Was there anything observed on the right hand of the deceased.

Well, from the pictures and the notes, there is a bruise to the rest. Yes, there was a small bruise to the middle of the forearm, and I think there was a small mark on the thumb as well.

Was there any blood staining or blood spatter observed on the.

Right hand, I don't think so.

No.

No.

Doctor Spark then examined the lower limbs, and you've spoken about the bruises that were examined. We know that Amy was a relatively slight woman one hundred and sixty three centimeters tall in terms of average. Is that accurate? Yes, that's right, And we know that she was involved in a traffic crash in March of twenty thirteen, sorry in January twenty thirteen that resulted in her wearing a halo

The injuries at post mortem were to the upper spine, so it would depend on where the injury was and how bad it was and how well it had healed. It probably would have been obvious on imaging like X ray or CT or if the spine had been removed and retained for examination by doctor Fabian, she might have noted it. But unless you're aware of it being there, perhaps, yes.

The coroner probes for more detail on it.

Unless you're looking for it, you probably wouldn't.

Yes, amaze it, Yes, that's right. And the spinal column wasn't exposed. Only the soft issues of the front of the neck were examined.

Now, this is a pretty big oversight. Post mortem was conducted several days after Amy's death, when they were supposed to be exploring something other than suicide. Yet her spinal injury and what deficiencies that would have posed in holding a heavy shotgun at an awkward angle and shooting herself supposedly through the right temple were not explored. They move on, okay.

The final page of her report, doctor Spark provided a five point summary of her findings that was effectively the shotgun injury to the head, scattered soft tissue injuries, a mild chest, and spinal deformity.

Just on that point.

Was that simply some degree of scoliosis or were there some other issues?

Yes, so, Amy has described some scoliosis of the thoracic spine and pectus excavetant, which just means your breastplate is slightly depressed. But they're both congenital in nature, and so they're not related to the injury.

Is that something that would in your general experience or can you speak to whether that's something that would limit movement in any way.

I wouldn't think so, but yes, I can't speak to it definitively.

Here they're talking just about the scoliosis, as they can't comment on the injury because that wasn't examined.

I understand that the police officers that attended requested that doctor Spark undertake some measurements of the deceased's arm.

Is that right? Yes, that's right.

And I understand that you've seen some of the photographs that were taken by the police in the course of the post mortem that related to an exhibit firearm being placed within the grip of the deceased to see whether she could reach.

Yes, I've seen those photos.

In terms of those photos being taken, is there anything different about the way that the human body would react post mortem as opposed to when alive that might make those photographs exploring the issue of reach more or less reliable.

The only thing would be if missus Winsley still had rigor, which would make her stiffer, more difficult to move.

So it would be my.

Understanding that if the rigor had passed, which is likely to have passed because it usually passes after a couple of days, and Amy hasn't made any comment about it being present, and yes, so it would just be the same.

I would imagine just a reminder hear as it's a bit confusing, Doctor White is referring to doctor Amy Spark, the forensic pathologist who performed the autopsy.

I suppose in that context though, it's what the body is capable of, but wouldn't necessarily reflect. I mean, for example, I've got a very stiff neck on one side. What would have been very uncomfortable for me to do in life. You wouldn't necessarily have that reflected in a body doing the same thing, because there's no discomfort or anything of that nature.

That's right in that regard. How we perhaps might just move an arm across. If you're reaching for something like a cup, you actually might move your trunk to actually get it. So there are a lot of factors that would play on that rather than just moving an arm across or back.

So really it's just looking at whether it's physically possible with the length of the arm in relation to the torso and that sort of thing, without any reflection upon what's comfortable for a person or natural or full biomechanical movement.

If I put it that.

Way, exactly you're on and in term of with those females, whether that's a suicide or a homicide isn't necessarily the conclusion you're considering at the time. You're just looking at the cause of death as opposed to the manner of death. Is that right?

That's right?

Yes.

So, in short, the forensic pathologist can't make a determination about whether Amy could have killed herself or not. That was a job for the biomechanical experts, of which both said it's much more likely someone else pulled the trigger. The coroner then explores whether the position of her body could have changed, after establishing that rigor mortis takes three to six hours to take effect and at least four people pushed the door open with Amy on the other

The injury itself is was non survivable, but there's often in these cases there is a period where the person is still alive for a variable number of minutes afterwards.

That's what I was going to ask if he has seen, if he's hearing some sounds and seeing some bubbling, how long would that be likely to last with that kind of injury. How long after the injury is inflicted would you expect that to occur?

I would say less than minutes.

All right, So that would be consistent with mister Price coming across her within minutes of the shotgun injury being inflicted on her. Is that right?

Yes?

The blood spatter expert can provide more details about the position Amy was in when she died. After examining the gun used to kill Amy Wensley, the clothes she was wearing, and photos from the scene, Sergeant Brett mccantz made the following findings in a report.

The injury to the head of Wensley was inflicted in the master bedroom, behind the door where she was located. The head of Wensley was approximately seventy centimeters above floor level and facing the general direction of the door to the master bedroom at the time of the injury infliction. The blood stains and the blood stain patterns observed on Wensley, the northwest wall carpet and the black jeans indicate she was in the sitting position as located at the time

At the inquest, he explains how the blood spatter indicates the trajectory of the Bulletrorzontal because it was in line with her head.

There is nothing to suggest that there is a spatter going up towards the ceiling or going down towards the floor. It's in a fairly neutral plane.

It's worth noting here. Contrary to what he said just after Amy died in twenty fourteen, David Simmons' father testified at the inquest that the blood spatter went all the way up to the ceiling. This is refuted by Sergeant McCants.

It's more of a horizontal plane rather than anything going up or down.

All of the facts reported by forensics were taken into account by biomechanical experts Professor Timothy Ackland and doctor Thomas Gibson, who were also questioned at the inquest. So, just to clarify, biomechanics is the science of the movement of a living body, including how muscles, bones, tendons, and ligaments work together to provide movement. We start with Professor Ackland, who is being asked by counsel assisting Sarah Tyler about the recoil of the shotgun.

Just in terms of clarity about the trajectory of the projective the analysis that you undertook, I think refers to the shotgun barrel being oriented horizontally or in near contact with the deceased's right temple. But then there's a mention that the barrel was slightly angled to the coronal plane such that the butt was slightly posterior to the deceased temple. Yes, so my understanding is that That means the gun was angled in your view slightly back.

Is that right?

That's right.

While there was concern that Amy's body and the gun had been moved before photographs were taken, it's believed her head had not.

The deceased head would have basically been in the same position it would have been moved after the gun was fired, and that head was essentially upright, leaning into the corner of the alcove, and that the blood spatter was directly adjacent to a left side of her head and down

We have heard evidence from a forensic pathologist and evidence from blood spatter.

Experts in the course of this inquest.

They maintain their view that the firearm was held horizontally, but they've My understanding of both of their evidence is that they couldn't speak to any angle of the shotgun given the severity of the damage to the deceased skull. Would that information change your perspective in terms of this matter in any way?

No, the coroner interjects.

Would you defer to the opinion of a forensic pathologist in terms of the injuries and what you can ready from them in terms of their expertise?

Absolutely, all right, thank you.

In your first report, is it correct that you were considering simply the scenario mentioned in Senior Constable in Skips ballistics report, which is that Amy held the gun and fired it with her left hand.

So, just to clarify here, initially wa police thought that Amy must have shot herself with her left hand because it was the only one with gun residue on it and she was sitting on her right hand.

Yes, there were a couple of scenarios suggested by the attending police that she may have lent a cross and the butt onto the edge of the bed or onto the floor in order to stop that recoil, and simply used her left hand alone. So I was looking at that considering that I was also considering whether the left hand was used in some combination with the right hand holding the barrel of the gun at the right temple.

Okay, and what were your conclusions in respect of your first report?

So my conclusions were that the notion that miss Wensley leant over with the butt of the gun on the bed and used her left arm to push the trigger, not pull the trigger to push the trigger would have resulted in a blood spatter in a completely different position, so it was inconsistent with the other evidence around, including blood particles on her left hand and shotgun residue on

The use of the left hand alone. Yes, what were your conclusions in relation to the suggestion that she held the muzzle with her left hand and pulled the trigger with the right hand.

So it was my conclusion that if she had taken her own life, it would be more consistent with the evidence that she would hold the gun with her left hand close to the temple and her right hand fired the gun. But there are problems with that as well

Fired, couldn't have moved independently.

Independently from the second report, we found that the hand, if the right hand was indeed used, it fell in a position that was quite a yeal away from her trunk, but any jerky might have pulled it back in, so that is certainly a possibility. I posited that on the basis of the other two scenarios, plus the possibility of shooting herself with her right hand on the trigger, we're

And that was the description given by Gareth Price when he sat correct, when he gave evidence that he discovered the body. Is that right?

That's correct?

The coroner interjects again.

Sorry, just before we move on from that, we did have a I think it was one of the ballistics experts the other day, Either that or one of the forensic wales I can't remember, which gave some evidence to suggest that they thought it was possible that there was a different force applying to the firearm because her finger would have been well, thumb or fingers would have been in the trigger and arm up, and so although the firearm might move back because of the recoil, there would

So if the left hand was holding this trigger out here?

No, sorry, if it's the right hand. So if the left hand is here and the right hand is here, if she shoots the shotgun, the suggestion was the hand could still be in the trigger or through the guard and pulling it down as her hand falls, because you know, the body becomes lifeless and it moves down. Instead of it going that way, it could pull down that way.

Yes, I understand the suggestion, but I don't agree with the suggestion.

Okay, so I'm saying we're assuming it's the right hand, is all.

Okay, Yes, So if the right hand pushes, there is recoil which is significant going that way. Now I understand then that the gun might have fallen down, but it's going to fall down in my view because of the sort of massive amount of damage done to her brain, that she would have just fallen down in that particular plane, not brought it around to the front as described by a price. So yes, it can be pulled down or

All right, so sideways, So it wouldn't necessarily I suppose, in the sense it might reduce the distance it moves away from the body, but it would fall down on an angle to the side of her body rather than centrally to the front of her body.

Yes, that's correct, okay, all right.

Just to clarify, would the movement of the body from the force of the projectile moving the body towards the wall have any impact on that also?

Now, once the gun has been discharged, because it was discharged at her head level. Her shoulder was already up against the wall, so the head would have gone in the opposite direction, but it wouldn't have affected the velocity of the gun going in that direction.

The Karna explains that when looking at the photographs of Amy's body, her left leg is up against the door, close to the wall, but according to Garett's recollection, it was actually slightly more central to the middle of the door when he came in.

Although it's just perhaps from the perspective the photograph is taken, it looks more to the left. Would that change your view at all?

If the left leg was slightly more central to the door, It wouldn't change my eventual outcome, but it may change the question surrounding whether her torso was moved.

Yes, okay, well her head had moved perhaps.

Then, moving on to your second report, you were approached by the cold case homicide squad when they were undertaking a review of Amy's case.

Is that right?

That's correct. There were seven scenarios are presented in that report. At the same time the police were interested in videoing the scenarios, they were taking measurements of the whole surrounding, and at my request they would also take photographs.

Did you have any concerns about preparing a scenario's reconstruction in this case? Were there limitations in terms of scenarios that you were developing.

Yes, there are always limitations in preparing scenarios. One tries to mitigate against any potential bias on behalf of a model that we employed to come and represent the deceased and try to put together the various parts of the evidence in order to set up the scenario as accurately as possible.

Were you satisfied that the model was consistent enough with Amy's dimensions to be an appropriate model.

Yes, I was, as far as I was told. She knew nothing, She had seen no photographs or evidence, and did not know the reason why we were setting up those scenarios.

Can I just ask before you go on, just because it's fresh in my mind and just to clarify for me. Obviously you're using a live model, not a person who has now suffered a catastrophic injury. Does that make a difference in terms of recreation? And I'm asking it sounds like a stupid question, but you're the expert, so can you tell me?

So?

No one could ever say that the person would react in exactly the same way as someone who suffered a catastrophic injury. So I was a great pains to say to the model, let's just let everything go loose and drop. But one cannot say it's going to be an exact replication.

Professor Acklam was asked if there was any possible scenario where Amy shot herself and she fell in a way where her right thigh ended up on top of her right hand.

The only possibility was born out in scenario too, that the right leg did indeed abduct to the floor, and then the subsequent openings might have then pushed the thigh over the top of her hand. That's what we were trying to work out and convince myself whether that was still possible. I've said in my report that I don't think it's possible.

You say, the evidence is highly consistent with the scenario that Amy was shot by another person.

Yes.

Are there any other limitations or concerns that you have about the nature of the experiment or the opinion that you've provided to the coroner that you think the coroner should be aware of.

No.

I think we've discussed all the limitations.

And just in terms of the information that you received. You were given photographs that were taken by police officers at the scene that weren't forensic photographs, they weren't to scale, weren't formally measured.

That's correct.

Would your opinions have been greatly assisted had you been provided full forensic photographs Yes, absolutely.

And forensic measurements and everything else in.

Most particularly in terms of the trajectory of the entry, exit wound, and blood spatter proper blood spatter analysis. Yes, I think that would help to make certain exactly the orientation of the gun prior to discharge or at discharge.

Would you have also been assisted by perhaps more detailed interviews with each of the witnesses about what they observed, if.

There was an opportunity to cross check against the various witness evidence. Yes, that would have been very useful.

Is there anything else that occurs to you that might have been useful to help you form a final view in terms of this case.

I think with those extra details I could have been guided better in the investigation process. But I still think there's an overwhelming view that there is inconsistency in the witness reports that needed to be addressed.

But those inconsistencies are not addressed. Moving on to doctor Gibson.

In terms of the questions that were put to Professor Ackland, the central issue really is how Amy's right hand came to be found to be wedged effectively underneath her butteck or underneath her thigh, depending on your view of the photographs. Can you give a biomedical explanation as to how that might have occurred?

No, apart from what was explored with Professor Ackland, I have no explanation for how that could have ended in that position unless she was already sitting on it.

In terms of the scenario put forward relating to the deceased holding the firearm, balancing the muzzle effectively with her left hand across her body, and pulling the trigger with her right hand. If that scenario had occurred, what is your view about the movement of the deceased body and hands as a result of the gun firing in that position? What do you say would be likely to occur if she.

Was able to do that?

And I think one of the things that Professor Ackland checked was whether she could physically actually support the gun in that position. Then I have no explanation of where her right hand ended.

Up in that case. Can you just taught me through the conclusions of your report and the responses that you would have today in terms of the three questions that were put to you, whether.

The gunshot wound was self inflicted and deliberate, Well, I don't see any reason to change what I wrote before. I don't think there has been any new evidence regarding that introduced. So I think it was unlikely the gunshot wound was self inflicted and deliberate.

You also found that it was unlikely that the gunshot wound was self inflicted and accidental, and.

Even less likely that it was self inflicted and accidental. So it's sort of almost by elimination that we end up with the final question. And in terms of the evidence that I have reviewed, the gun shot does appear to have been inflicted by someone shooting, and.

That view is not affected by the emergence of information that the door to the bedroom was opened on multiple occasions. We know that it was at least opened and closed by David Simmons, opened and closed twice by Gareth Price, opened and closed by Robert Simmons, opened by the first responding officer, Larry Blandford, and Miss Moore, opened again by Senior Constable Roberts, and opened again by Saint John Ambulance Service.

Ms Moore is comfortable Pip Dixon, who has since married and is still at wa police.

Would that affect your view of the scene and the conclusions that you can draw from the photographs that were taken, well.

Obviously it removes some of the certainty about the actual situation, and apart from that, I guess I can't say a great deal else.

The issue that the position of her right hand is unusual and you can't see a way to explain that allows for the scenario where she shot herself.

Is that right?

That is part of it, But there is still also the point of the actual blood spatter and the direction that the gun needed to be pointed at at the time it was discharged to produce the blood spatter, where it was and how that would have We obviously don't really know where the gun ended up following that, but the descriptions are probably I can't add more. Obviously, what has been said and was rehearsed in the simulations which were made doesn't seem an appropriate place for the gun

So there you have it. Amy's right hand could not have ended up under her right thigh or buttock if she had shot herself, and the laws of physics mean the gun should have flung back from the direction it was being shot from, which is the right not landing on her lap or in front of her. According to everyone who saw it, the shotgun was either in front of her or on her lap. Since starting this podcast, many people have reached out to us with information which

Yeah, I met Amy when I was working in a bar.

Ol recently caught up with him and had a chat.

I was working a night shift. I was about seven eight o'clock, so it wasn't too far away from closing time, and Amy and Rachel walked in and I think for remember they'd just come from the movies or they were going to the movies. And yes, it's the first time I'd seen them in a while, and it was great to great to catch up, especially with Amy.

What did you end up talking about?

Amy was talking about how my daughter's birthday was coming up, and so she was going to go shopping the next day, and she was talking about how so she was to be shopping for presents for her, and that was really her big plan for the next day. And then it was, yeah, just everything. She was full of life and was sort of thinking about what she's things she was going to do, and just it was almost like she had a full plan of activities for the week.

And what about Rachel?

I can't I can't recall too much of a conversation with Rachel.

So Amy was kind of the was the social butterfly? I suppose of.

The absolutely yes.

So did you know that she was in a relationship with David Simmons at this time?

No, I still wasn't aware, so she.

Didn't mention him.

No, she didn't.

Have you learned anything since then about their relationship?

Obviously, you know in the last ten years, I have hearing the stories and read about it.

So when did you find out what had happened to Amy?

Two days after I had seen her, and it was just absolute shock to be told that she'd committed suicide. I mean, no one talks about their plans for the rest of the week and the next day to then go and do that well in my opinion anyway.

And so that was kind of the talk of the town at the time.

Especially with all amongst all of our customers and the staff that knew her at the business.

And didn't seem suicidal when you saw her.

Definitely not, definitely not. I meant most suicides never seemed suicidal. But you know, in my experience of having lost people to their friends of mine have killed themselves in the past, there are signs, but they certainly don't talk about what their plans are for the very next day. If they're planning to end it, they normally become evasive or they

So then from there have you just been, like everyone else, surprised that this has gone on so long.

Absolutely surprised and shocked and horrified. I mean, it's really an indictment on the Western Australian Police. I mean my experience of them is that you know, they don't actually really do any policing. They just take the easy way out because it's a lot of they can't be bothered and you know it's a lot of anger with it too. At worst, is incomfidence. At best, it's thays were lazy.

What you're saying is it's not an isolated incident.

Absolutely not.

And that's my experience of being out that way for over ten years is that you know the police there's don't There's a few out there that try to do the right thing and try to do the work, but most of the older, jaded officers just really couldn't give a shit.

So after that, have you seen any of the people? Have you seen Rachel? Have you seen David? Have you seen Gareth?

I haven't seen Rachel since that night where I last saw Amy. I have seen David.

How does he appear?

Cocky?

Arrogant?

He will come in and have a great northern mid strength stubby and he'll play some bits in the TB. Yeah, he doesn't hang around very long. There's a few people there that if they walked in and saw him there, they probably wouldn't take it too well.

What do you mean by that.

There's a few people that really loved Amy and really dislike him. So yeah, I'm pretty certain that there'd be an issue if they walked in and they saw him there. So this boy doesn't stay very long, I think.

Have you heard about other incidents, like, for example, you might be aware that he's up what he did nine months for assaulting a public office that was Larry, that was one of the officers on scene. But also he's up again for another assault in the public officer and things like that. Are you aware of his violence or violent Oh?

Yeah, we definitely hear about it. I mean it's a very small, tiny community, so people do talk. And this is you know, when someone's at a history of violence and then they're still able to be wandering around, it's another indictment on our system.

Isn't it.

What about drug use, Well, you.

Can tell by looking at him, you know, I mean working in this trade, you know, with bars and alcohol, you learn to pick who the addicts are based on the way they look, their behavioral mannerisms and speech, the way they speak and carry themselves, and it's quite obvious that he's got an issue there.

So what would you like to see happen for Ami? Now?

Well, I think what her family and all of the friends and everyone that knew her, what they need is justice. We need the you know, the police commissioner and the w A police need to step up and get on with their job and you know, get their job done. They're just trying to say a face of the moment, they're sort of hoping, oh, for doing nothing, it will go away if we just you know, stay quiet, you know, this will go away, And it's like, no, it's not going to go away.

Yeah. Yeah, It's kind of sad, isn't it. Michael says he will never forget how positive and engaging Amy was, and if police detectives had taken the time to talk to anyone who really knew her, they wouldn't have been so quick to jump to conclusions.

And I think that's why some people gravitated towards her, because she was such a friendly, happy, bubbly person, like you could be having the worst day ever and she'd walk in and all of a sudden She'd make everyone feel welcome and good. She was just one of those people to be around. It was a positive experience. I think that's pretty why all the customers loved her and all the stuff. Everyone just you know, she was just so much fun to be around. She had a very

To have around.

Michael, I want to thank you so much.

It's railing to help. What happened to her, It's just atrocious. It should not happen to anyone. And this is also where the politicians should stand up as well.

In the next episode, is there any possibility Amy killed herself? We hear from an internationally renowned crime reconstruction expert who takes us through the evidence from scratch.

There's enough evidence in this case to move forward.

And the good Cop, Australia's most famous detective, Ron idols He weighs in on what he thinks about what happened to Amy and the way her investigation was handled.

So lisser you see.

So desm.

Re both the nasty until me.

Too.

If you knew Amy and have information, any information about her death, we'd love to hear from you. Just email us at The Truth about Amy at seven dot com dot au. That's s E v E N The Truth about Amy at seven dot com dot Au, or visit our website sevennews dot com dot Au forward slash the Truth about Amy. You can also send us an anonymous tip at www dot the Truth about Amy dot com.