Transcript of the Hearing 20 November 2013


           1                                    Wednesday, 20 November 2013

           2   (2.00 pm)

           3                      (Proceedings delayed)

           4   (2.05 pm)

           5   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Right, we'll have the jury in then,

           6       please.

           7                  (In the presence of the jury)

           8                   DR PHILIP SEAMAN (continued)

           9   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Thank you very much.  Very good to

          10       see you again, Dr Seaman.  Thank you very much for

          11       coming back.  You are still under the oath that you took

          12       yesterday and Mr Thomas has questions for you.

          13                Questions by MR THOMAS (continued)

          14   MR THOMAS:  Good afternoon, Dr Seaman.  If I can just

          15       continue with the questioning.

          16   A.  Yes.

          17   Q.  Yesterday afternoon, I think I left off when you had

          18       indicated that the distances that we're talking about

          19       for the gun to have ended up where it did end up -- it's

          20       over 20 metres, and I think you demonstrated visually by

          21       saying that it would be from where you were sitting to

          22       the end of this row, correct?

          23   A.  Yes, I think it was seven metres or so, 20 feet.

          24   Q.  Yes.

          25   A.  Yes.




           1   Q.  The jury have already felt the weight of the replica

           2       Bruni, which I have here (indicates).

           3           Nobody is saying that you can't throw a gun like

           4       this 20 feet; you understand that?  That's not what

           5       anybody is suggesting.  The issue is likelihood, without

           6       it being seen; you follow that, don't you?

           7   A.  Yes.

           8   Q.  All right.  When you did the demonstration yourself,

           9       I think you indicated that you did it -- you achieved it

          10       two ways, with an underhand movement and an overhand

          11       movement, correct?

          12   A.  Yes, as well as the wrist movement: three ways in fact.

          13   Q.  I'm not going to ask you to demonstrate again because

          14       you showed us yesterday, but in all three attempts,

          15       there was significant body movement from you or from

          16       your arm to get the weapon over the fence and in the

          17       area; would that be fair?

          18   A.  Certainly for the underhand and overarm movements, yes,

          19       somebody would, in my opinion, be able to view that arm

          20       movement, yes.

          21   Q.  Now, when you did your reconstruction, the one thing you

          22       didn't have were several police officers all standing

          23       around you with several -- or at least a couple of them

          24       with their eyes on the gun, looking at the gun to see

          25       where it went; you didn't have that, did you?




           1   A.  No, I understand from yesterday that there were in fact

           2       seven officers potentially viewing this incident but, of

           3       course, during my reconstruction test there was only my

           4       colleague and a few immediate people there.  I don't

           5       know if, in fact, they were looking at me anyway.

           6   Q.  Let's put that to one side and I might come back to

           7       V53's account.  I'll put it on the shelf and return to

           8       it later on.

           9           Can I ask you about some evidence that Mr Tomei gave

          10       during the course of this hearing because it touches

          11       upon your area of expertise.

          12           Now, I'm going to headline this "The bullets", okay?

          13   A.  Yes.

          14   Q.  The bullets: we know that one bullet ended up in the

          15       plastic bag in the minicab and the other bullet ended up

          16       in W42's radio.

          17   A.  Yes.

          18   Q.  So the issue for the jury, one of the bullets had

          19       a mushroom effect, very much a mushroom effect, and that

          20       was the bullet that was in the minicab, RES/1.

          21   A.  Yes.

          22   Q.  The other bullet had less of a mushroom -- it was

          23       damaged because it had ended up in the radio, correct?

          24   A.  The bullet in JMA/10, the radio, had also mushroomed

          25       but, because of it then penetrating the radio itself, it




           1       had become deformed and was no longer in the same shape

           2       as the bullet from the taxi.

           3   Q.  Right, okay.  Just to avoid any confusion, when I say

           4       the "mushroomed bullet", I'm referring to RES/1, okay --

           5   A.  Fine, yes.

           6   Q.  -- the one that was found in the plastic bag in the

           7       minicab.  All right.  Just help me with this: the

           8       mushroom bullet was the bullet that had a pattern on it

           9       which was very similar to the embossed pattern on the

          10       back of the t-shirt; have I understood that correctly?

          11   A.  Yes, that was my opinion.

          12   Q.  Am I right in thinking that it is your opinion that the

          13       likelihood is that the mushroom bullet was the bullet

          14       that passed through Mr Duggan's chest and came out on

          15       the lower left side of his back?

          16   A.  Very much so because the additional fibre work provided

          17       additional evidence to that view.

          18   Q.  I'm going to come to all the building blocks of why you

          19       come to that opinion, but I just want to make sure that

          20       you are saying that the mushroom bullet, the one that

          21       was in the cab, in the plastic bag, your opinion is that

          22       is the one that went through the chest; have

          23       I understood that correctly?

          24   A.  On the basis I couldn't find any other apparent surface

          25       that could have given rise to those impressions, yes.




           1   Q.  Right.  All right, can I put to you one or two matters

           2       that Mr Tomei has said in this court which need to be

           3       dealt with by you.  Okay?

           4   A.  Yes.

           5   Q.  Ribs, pigs' ribs, that's the next headline.

           6           One of the reasons that Mr Tomei gave for rejecting

           7       the suggestion that the mushroom bullet went through the

           8       chest was because he was saying he believes that a rib

           9       was nicked and therefore it would have caused

          10       a deflection; do you follow?

          11   A.  I do, yes.

          12   Q.  Have you understood that as being what Mr Tomei has been

          13       saying?

          14   A.  In part, yes.

          15   Q.  Right.  Can we just deal with that.  Did you conduct

          16       a series of experiments on pigs' ribs?

          17   A.  Yes, in conjunction with Professor Pounder, yes.

          18   Q.  Can I go through that with you, so we're absolutely

          19       crystal clear what your evidence is.

          20           When Professor Pounder gave his evidence -- this is

          21       on Day 31, 14 November, page 66, if anybody wants to

          22       follow -- he said this -- line 1, I'm reading from.

          23           "Answer: Yes, Dr Seaman and his colleague took

          24       a piece of pork with pig's rib in and, using the same

          25       type of weapon and the same type of ammunition, fired




           1       into the piece of pork with the pig's rib and struck

           2       three ribs.  One of them was almost a perfect replica of

           3       the injury to the rib seen in Mark Duggan.  The other

           4       two fully penetrated the ribs full on.

           5           "Question: Was there any deflection from any of

           6       those?

           7           "Answer: there was no deflection from the bullet

           8       which nicked the rib and produced the fracture, as seen

           9       in Mark Duggan.  There was some minor deflection from

          10       the other two bullets which struck the ribs full on."

          11           Is that right?

          12   A.  Yes, I think yesterday I demonstrated in that image of

          13       the very minor deflection with the pig skin and rib with

          14       the gelatin block behind, a minor deflection but that

          15       was for the shots that went through the rib totally.

          16       For the other one, it had no appreciable deflection from

          17       the line it was taking.

          18   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  The one we saw was the bullet going

          19       through the rib not just nicking it on the edge?

          20   A.  Yes, it went through.

          21   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Right, thank you.

          22   MR THOMAS:  So, you say, in relation to this whole thing

          23       about deflection and hitting the ribs, that if there was

          24       any deviation it would be very minor; have I understood

          25       that correctly?




           1   A.  Yes.

           2   Q.  From your experiments, far from casting any doubt on

           3       your belief, it supports the opinion that you're putting

           4       forward; have I understood that correctly?

           5   A.  Yes.

           6   Q.  But it doesn't stop there, does it, because you say --

           7       let's come onto the next building block, why you say

           8       that the mushroom bullet was a bullet that went through

           9       the chest.  Now, you touched upon fibres.  Help us with

          10       that, just so we're absolutely clear.

          11   A.  Well, on the bullet from the taxi, the mushroom bullet,

          12       in addition to the markings which I attributed to the

          13       stitching on the back of the t-shirt, there were also

          14       several fibre types and colours indistinguishable from

          15       those that comprised the actual garment and the logo,

          16       giving rise to additional evidence to suggest that that

          17       bullet had passed through the logo region of the

          18       t-shirt.

          19   Q.  So far as you could see, Dr Seaman, was there any other

          20       explanation for those fibres?

          21   A.  None that I could think of, no.

          22   Q.  No.  But it doesn't stop there, does it?  Let's come to

          23       the bullet that ended up in the radio, JMA/10.

          24   A.  Yes.

          25   Q.  That bullet, you believed, penetrated the holster, the




           1       radio holster, correct --

           2   A.  Yes.

           3   Q.  -- and the radio itself?

           4   A.  Yes.

           5   Q.  What was the holster made of?

           6   A.  The holster in fact was made of cotton fibres.

           7   Q.  The radio, what was that made of: plastic, hardened

           8       plastic?

           9   A.  I haven't analysed it but it seemed to be a plastic and

          10       metallic construction like most electronic gadgets.

          11   Q.  Equipment.

          12   A.  Yes.

          13   Q.  Did that bullet -- this is JMA/10 -- have any patterning

          14       on it consistent with the t-shirt?

          15   A.  No, because of the severe deformity, there was no

          16       apparent features similar found on that bullet, no.

          17   Q.  Were there any fibres on it?

          18   A.  Yes, there were.

          19   Q.  What were the fibres consistent with?

          20   A.  There was a tuft of fibres trapped underneath one of the

          21       folded back leaves and when they were compared they

          22       matched or were indistinguishable from the pouch holding

          23       the radio.  They were different from any component of

          24       the logo on the t-shirt.

          25   Q.  Let's just pause there.  So if I've understood you




           1       correctly, the mushroom bullet had fibres consistent

           2       with the back of the t-shirt and the JMA/10 -- which I'm

           3       going to call the radio bullet -- had fibres consistent

           4       with the pouch on the radio.

           5   A.  That's correct.

           6   Q.  Well, just pausing there and asking yourself this

           7       question: all of this evidence, which I'm describing as

           8       building blocks, is it supporting or undermining your

           9       view as to which bullet went where?

          10   A.  I think it supports my view.

          11   Q.  I'm going to move on.  I want to come now to W42's

          12       position.  W42 is the police officer wearing the radio.

          13   A.  Yes.

          14   Q.  Right.  Now, yesterday -- I'm not asking for it to be

          15       put back up onto the screen, we will remember -- do you

          16       remember the plan and the positioning by the minicab as

          17       to where W42 had placed himself?

          18   A.  Yes.  He was positioned between that that Mr Duggan was

          19       identified by Mr Bell and the railings.

          20   Q.  Also the photograph that was shown -- if we have them

          21       there, we can put them up.  Yes, that's the one.  Let's

          22       just have a look at that.  Now, if you wouldn't mind

          23       just standing up a moment.

          24   A.  Yes.

          25   Q.  Before you had seen this photograph and the indication




           1       had been given to you as to where W42 had placed

           2       himself, where was your understanding that W42 was?  If

           3       you could just point.

           4   A.  Yes.  I would like to say that this position was

           5       interpreted by me from statements issued to me at the

           6       very first submission of this case --

           7   Q.  Understood.

           8   A.  -- and there was talk of W42 getting out of a vehicle

           9       somewhere here (indicates) and approaching this

          10       direction (indicates) and V53 was getting out of

          11       a vehicle at this end of the taxi (indicates) and at

          12       some point Mr Duggan in the middle.  I inferred or

          13       interpreted W42 to be somewhere around about here,

          14       possibly (indicates).

          15   Q.  Understood.  Not more to the railings, do you follow?

          16   A.  Yes.  I had no reason to know at what point at all

          17       across the pavement he was but from the description of

          18       getting out of the car, taking his weapon and moving

          19       forward, I didn't extrapolate it this far, I only got as

          20       far as there (indicates).

          21   Q.  You can sit down, thank you very much.

          22           If we show the plan, if it's there, you can see on

          23       the plan that W42 puts himself -- if we just make that

          24       a little bit bigger -- if you could just wiggle the

          25       mouse over where W42 says he was standing.




           1   MR UNDERWOOD:  He didn't.

           2   MR THOMAS:  He didn't, okay.

           3           In any event, the point is this, isn't it: can

           4       I just give you -- you weren't in court -- can I just

           5       tell you what V53 has said to this court?  He has said

           6       that when he fired the two shots, the one thing that

           7       remained constant was his position; do you follow?

           8   A.  I do, yes.

           9   Q.  Right.  So he's not saying that he's moving around,

          10       yes --

          11   A.  Yes.

          12   Q.  -- having to change his aim.  He remains constant.

          13       That's point number 1.

          14           Point number 2 is he says that he fires in

          15       relatively quick succession.  He says there's

          16       an appreciable gap between each shot, but they are quick

          17       shots; do you follow?

          18   A.  Yes, I do.

          19   Q.  Now, I just want to touch upon the point that you made

          20       yesterday.  If Mark Duggan is more or less in the same

          21       place, and that's V53's evidence -- right, V53's

          22       evidence is what is moving on Mark Duggan is his hand

          23       coming round; do you follow?

          24   A.  Yes.

          25   Q.  First shot, he sees the gun at the side, second shot, he




           1       sees the gun pointing towards him; are you with me?

           2   A.  Yes, I am.

           3   Q.  It's not Mark Duggan moving towards him or jumping from

           4       left to right.  If that is right, you would expect,

           5       would you not -- I'm going to come to the order of the

           6       shots in one moment -- you would expect, would you not,

           7       that W42, to be in the position that you have indicated,

           8       when you stood up and showed us the photograph, for one

           9       shot to end up in the radio and one shot to end up in

          10       the minicab; would that be fair?

          11   A.  I can't pass comment exactly where W42 would have been

          12       but, based on the shot that impacts the radio, if

          13       I extrapolate that to being the source of the shot

          14       through the arm, then, yes, he would be in relatively

          15       a direct position behind Mr Duggan.

          16   Q.  All right.  Can I move on.  I now want to touch upon

          17       Mark Duggan's positioning, all right?

          18   A.  Yes.

          19   Q.  Now, there is an issue that the jury will have to

          20       determine for themselves as to what position Mark Duggan

          21       was in when he was shot; do you follow?

          22   A.  Yes.

          23   Q.  You looked at the angle at which the chest shot entered,

          24       correct?

          25   A.  From the various data available to me, yes.




           1   Q.  Yes.  You used the trajectory rods, didn't you, into the

           2       mannequin?

           3   A.  Yes.

           4   Q.  There may be some variation in relation to the angle,

           5       yes?

           6   A.  Yes, there is.

           7   Q.  Yes.  But can we agree on this: the one thing that --

           8       I'm talking about the chest shot alone -- we can agree

           9       on, from your opinion evidence is that Mark Duggan was

          10       not more or less upright when he received the chest

          11       shot; would that be fair?

          12   A.  Yes.  Because of the downward movement and right to

          13       left, if we could see the image again --

          14   Q.  Yes, can we put the mannequin --

          15   A.  -- the firer would have to be in a lot higher position,

          16       which becomes impractical unless you're in a helicopter.

          17       So to get that trajectory, if one leans forward, that

          18       could be achieved from the same fixed firing position.

          19   Q.  We're just going to get that image up on the screen,

          20       just one second.

          21   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Is that CD030532?

          22   MR THOMAS:  Thank you very much, sir.

          23   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Well, it may be that that could be

          24       one.

          25   MR THOMAS:  Why don't we have CD30538 to start with, if we




           1       could just blow that up a little bit.

           2           I fully appreciate that what we're asking the jury

           3       to concentrate on at this point in time is the

           4       positioning of the torso, not the arms, yes?

           5   A.  Yes.

           6   Q.  So that's what we're concentrating on.  What we can see

           7       is Mark Duggan at the time -- according to the

           8       trajectory rods -- at the time that that first or second

           9       shot -- I'll come to the order in a moment -- struck

          10       him, he would have had to have been in that crouched

          11       forward position.

          12   A.  This particular image emphasises the excessive degree of

          13       leaning forward there would have had to be for the

          14       exiting missile to stay at a relative height consistent

          15       with striking the officer's radio.  There are other

          16       images that are less pronounced forward, which are more

          17       appropriate for the bullet to end up going into the

          18       taxi.

          19   Q.  Right.  Can we look, please, at the next photograph,

          20       which is 539, yes?

          21   A.  Yes.  That's the side view of the former picture.

          22   Q.  That's the side view of the former, okay.  If we just

          23       scroll through and just look at the next one, that's

          24       from the back, yes?

          25   A.  Yes.




           1   Q.  What we can see in this image, we can see that the

           2       trajectory is coming -- entering on the right and coming

           3       out on the left side, yes?

           4   A.  Yes.  It is to demonstrate the exiting bullet going to

           5       the left of this picture, which again, if W42 was stood

           6       behind, it seems to be veering away from him.

           7   Q.  Yes.  In fact, if we can just imagine we had W42's

           8       vantage point, looking at Mark Duggan from the rear, the

           9       taxi would be on the left, wouldn't it?

          10   A.  Trying to mimic by the wall of the corridor, yes.

          11   Q.  Yes, and if the open door of the taxi and the plastic

          12       bag -- we can see, can we not, how the bullet may well

          13       have ended up in the cab?

          14   A.  There is the potential, I think, for it to have ended up

          15       in the taxi in this means, yes.

          16   Q.  Can we just look at the next photo, please.  Again, the

          17       leaning forward motion.

          18   A.  Yes, not quite as much, I think, in this --

          19   Q.  Not quite as much but, again, would this be right: you

          20       would not describe that angle as more or less upright?

          21   A.  No, I wouldn't, not for the chest shot.

          22   Q.  Okay.  So can I come back then, so we have just looked

          23       at positioning, Mark Duggan's positioning.  My next

          24       topic that I want to come to is the arm bullet -- this

          25       is the arm injury -- and what Mark Duggan may have been




           1       doing with his arm at the time of that injury and

           2       whether or not the scientific evidence that you have

           3       looked at is consistent with the police officer's

           4       account; do you follow?

           5   A.  Yes.

           6   Q.  All right.  I need to demonstrate this to you, okay,

           7       because V53 gave a very graphic demonstration in

           8       relation to why he discharged the first shot and the

           9       second shot in court and I need to show you what he

          10       said.

          11           So, Mark Duggan has pivoted around, okay, so he's

          12       now facing the officer?

          13   A.  Yes.

          14   Q.  So if you can imagine W42 is behind:

          15           "Why did you fire the first shot?

          16           "I could see the gun and I could see the gun coming

          17       from this area (indicates) and it was close to the -- if

          18       I describe as the waistband area -- and when it became

          19       revealed, thought Mark Duggan was pulling the gun out."

          20           Pulling the gun on him, that's one way of putting

          21       it; do you follow?

          22   A.  Yes, I do.

          23   Q.  When the first shot is fired, according to the officer,

          24       which he says Mark Duggan is more or less upright, his

          25       evidence is that his belief is the first shot was the




           1       chest shot; do you follow?

           2   A.  Yes.

           3   Q.  Can I just explore that with you?  If Mark Duggan was

           4       upright, that would be inconsistent with that account,

           5       wouldn't it?

           6   A.  If the muzzle of the gun was parallel to the pavement

           7       and not facing downwards, yes.

           8   Q.  I want to just ask you about this: the second shot that

           9       the officer says is the shot that -- he says he hits the

          10       chest and that causes Mark Duggan to do this

          11       (indicates).  In other words, the shot forces the

          12       shoulder back like that (indicates).  So he does that

          13       (indicates) -- so he gets shot, he does that

          14       (indicates).

          15   A.  Yes.

          16   Q.  Do you follow?

          17   A.  Yes.

          18   Q.  Then he says he believes that is the arm shot.  Two

          19       questions.  The injury to the arm, in the position that

          20       I have just demonstrated to you, where the forearm is

          21       pointing towards you in that -- you can see what I'm

          22       demonstrating, yes?

          23   A.  Yes.

          24   Q.  Scientifically, when you looked at the injury in the

          25       chest (?), is that consistent?




           1   A.  I didn't look at the track or the injury to the arm or

           2       in fact the body, other than the photographic images.

           3       The arm injury particularly is one for a pathologist to

           4       comment upon.

           5   Q.  So we've heard the evidence of Professor Pounder on

           6       that.  You would defer to Professor Pounder, would you?

           7   A.  I'm led to believe that the arm shot enters the front

           8       aspect of the bicep and exits at the back and it's in

           9       a position such that -- I think this is where Mr Tomei

          10       and myself are in disagreement -- in that the bullet

          11       enters and exits the upper arm and then glances and

          12       strikes the side of the chest wall and carries on out

          13       the back.

          14           I don't know Mr Tomei's thinking but he makes

          15       reference to the mushroom bullet being a cause for the

          16       injury to the side of the chest wall.

          17   Q.  Do you accept that?

          18   A.  No.  Because it's counterintuitive.  If that missile has

          19       sufficient energy to go on and damage the radio and the

          20       holster, as in the simulated test through a short

          21       thickness of gelatin, with all the appropriate fabric

          22       coverings, then it seems strange why didn't it, if it

          23       was going more straight on, as it were, puncture the

          24       chest wall and it obviously didn't.

          25           So I think that's the difference between Mr Tomei




           1       and myself, because I'm supportive of the view that it

           2       enters/exits the arm and goes underneath glancing

           3       against the chest than Mr Tomei's view.

           4           In terms of where that arm actually was to create

           5       that combination of wounds, I do defer to medical

           6       opinion.

           7   Q.  Right, okay, we've heard from the pathologists on that

           8       so I will leave that there and just concentrate on the

           9       areas that you feel comfortable in giving opinions on.

          10   A.  Thank you.

          11   Q.  Can I ask you about a couple of things that Mr Tomei has

          12       thrown out for you to pick up, one being the way that

          13       you conducted your experiments.  I mentioned to him that

          14       you had conducted your experiments on the pigs and he

          15       said, well, it depends -- that your experiments might be

          16       affected, depending on the freshness of the pigs.

          17   A.  I don't understand the relevance or significance of that

          18       comment.

          19   Q.  All right.  The second thing that Mr Tomei said, in

          20       relation to the experiments that you conducted, and

          21       I want to -- this next headline is "Physics", okay.

          22           Correct me if I am wrong, but one of the

          23       justifications in relation to why you believe RES/1, the

          24       mushroom bullet, was the one that went through the chest

          25       and JMA/10 is the bullet that went into the radio, is to




           1       do with physics in a way.  Because the chest, when the

           2       bullet entered Mr Duggan's chest, we can see that these

           3       bullets mushroom and the more mass the bullet has to

           4       pass through, it decreases the energy of the bullet, it

           5       slows the bullet down, correct?

           6   A.  Yes.

           7   Q.  That's what I mean by the physics of it, whereas in the

           8       arm, the arm was relatively narrow, less mass to go

           9       through and, therefore, there would be more energy in

          10       that bullet that went through the arm than the one that

          11       went through the chest; is that right?

          12   A.  Yes.

          13   Q.  Therefore, you say that, because of just basic

          14       physics -- this is one of the building blocks -- the

          15       bullet that went through the arm had sufficient energy

          16       to create the damage to the radio --

          17   A.  That's my opinion, yes.

          18   Q.  -- not the other way round, with the RES/1, the mushroom

          19       bullet?

          20   A.  No, and laboratory tests indicate that it has very

          21       little residual energy after passing through that

          22       thickness of composite reconstructive material.

          23   Q.  Right, well, can I now ask you to deal with one of the

          24       things Mr Tomei threw up which is that it depends on the

          25       type of gelatin that was used.




           1   A.  Again, I think we discussed yesterday that the compound

           2       I used is commercially available, it's accepted

           3       widespread in forensic ballistic terms, as a duplicate

           4       surrogate material, as best we can get.  But there are

           5       limitations with it.  But in fact there is absolutely

           6       nothing wrong with the use of that material and

           7       I followed the manufacturer's instructions accordingly.

           8   Q.  All right.

           9   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  He seemed to think there was

          10       something about boiling it up and cooling it down, is

          11       that something that used to happen with gelatin.

          12   A.  That was the old style method, yes, and this compound

          13       comes with all the guarantees from the company that it

          14       is comparable to that former style of gelatin.

          15   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  It doesn't matter what temperature

          16       it is?

          17   A.  No, and in fact one of the recommendations for this

          18       particular block is it can be used at ambient

          19       temperature and does not have to be in a specific

          20       temperature range.

          21   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Thank you very much.  That's what

          22       you said to us yesterday, thank you.

          23   MR THOMAS:  Nearly finished, just one more matter, just bear

          24       with me one second.  (Pause)

          25           Just one final matter if I may, and it just relates




           1       to your experience with this type of ammunition, where

           2       it's hollowed and it mushrooms.  Can you just help us:

           3       is this ammunition that you're familiar with?

           4   A.  It's one brand of many types of hollow point ammunition.

           5       In my case work experience over the last ten years or

           6       so, I have experience in different calibres and

           7       particular manufacturers' types.  Some bullets come with

           8       what they call soft point, which is the metal casing but

           9       the lead is just exposed at the front.  Others come as

          10       either all lead with a hole, to allow that peeling back,

          11       or some come with a metal collar and the lead with the

          12       hole in the front, as in this particular case.  I have

          13       to say, on this particular incident, it was the first

          14       occasion I had an opportunity to see the type of

          15       ammunition used by the Met.

          16   Q.  I see.  But you conducted experiments with it?

          17   A.  I did, in the laboratory, and the principles of this

          18       type of ammunition are no different than other brands of

          19       manufacturers of similar hollow point ammunition.

          20   MR THOMAS:  Thank you very much.  That's all I ask.

          21   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Thank you, Mr Thomas.

          22           Right, I think I've got Mr Keith.

          23   MR KEITH:  No, thank you, sir.

          24   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Mr Stern?

          25                      Questions by MR STERN




           1   MR STERN:  Dr Seaman, can we just try to clarify the two

           2       principal points that you've obviously spent a lot of

           3       time and trouble in elucidating for all of us here.  If

           4       I can put it, I hope, simply: the bullet RES/1, which is

           5       the bullet, you say, was fired by V53, went through the

           6       right side of the chest of Mr Duggan, and came out the

           7       back of the left, and went into the minicab and into the

           8       carrier bag.

           9   A.  Yes, that's where I'm led to believe it was found and

          10       how it got there, yes.

          11   Q.  Obviously that's for other people to say but we are just

          12       talking about that bullet --

          13   A.  That's the route for RES/1.

          14   Q.  -- that's your opinion in relation to that?

          15   A.  Yes.

          16   Q.  So far as JMA/10 is concerned, it is your opinion that

          17       that was a shot from V53 that went through the right

          18       arm, in the way that you have described, of Mr Duggan

          19       and ended up in W42's radio, which was on his left side,

          20       which was behind -- directly behind Mr Duggan or

          21       thereabouts.

          22   A.  Yes.

          23   Q.  The trajectory pictures that you have put in your

          24       report, and indeed we've looked at today, and indeed

          25       yesterday, did you take into account the thoracotomy?




           1   A.  Yes.  In calculating the positions to create the damage

           2       to the surrogate jacket and in placing it on the

           3       mannequin, a certain height from the floor, I was aware

           4       of this difference of opinion and so, yes, that was

           5       considered.

           6   Q.  Right.  Because, as I understand it, what you have put

           7       in your notes is that the measurements are in accordance

           8       with those from the postmortem.

           9   A.  Yes, I think in some of the documentation I had there

          10       was some revised detail as well, which I bundled

          11       together as counting from postmortem results.

          12   Q.  What is the measurement that you have actually used,

          13       just so we're clear about that?

          14   A.  Around about 144 for the chest injury, if I can just

          15       refer to the notes.  (Pause)

          16   Q.  The entry wound being 144?

          17   A.  Yes, in that order anyway.  Bear with me a second.

          18   Q.  No hurry.

          19   A.  (Pause)

          20           It was necessary because the jacket wasn't the same

          21       size either, so there was a slight correction factor for

          22       that to make it comparable.

          23   Q.  Sorry, when you say it wasn't the same size?

          24   A.  The reproduction -- the purchased garment, the surrogate

          25       garment, wasn't the same size as the jacket worn by




           1       Mr Duggan.  It was the same brand, et cetera, but just

           2       a size different, as I recall.

           3   Q.  As I understand it, Mr Duggan's jacket was a large.

           4   A.  Yes, and I think this jacket was -- (Pause)

           5           Medium, I think.

           6   Q.  Right.  So is it a medium that we can see in this

           7       picture, the one that we've been looking at?

           8   A.  Yes, yes.

           9   Q.  So the surrogate jacket is the wrong size?

          10   A.  I gather there was a lot of difficulty in finding --

          11   Q.  I'm not interested -- I don't mean to be rude but I am

          12       not that interested in the difficulties but, just so we

          13       understand the science, it's the wrong size?

          14   A.  I would have to get the label out, the notes don't make

          15       it clear, but the table of corrected values here are

          16       because of that issue, I recall.  That said, the

          17       correction factor for the appropriate size has been

          18       done.

          19   Q.  Yes, but what I'm asking you is the picture that we see

          20       and that we've been working on -- thank you very much,

          21       that one there -- shows a medium jacket not a large; is

          22       that correct?

          23   A.  As I say, I would like to look at the label in there,

          24       the notes don't actually say the label details on it.

          25       If it was possible to look at that garment I could be




           1       more clear.

           2   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Where is the garment?  Is it back in

           3       Warrington or --

           4   A.  No, sir, it's with the IPCC, I believe.  It was returned

           5       several weeks ago.

           6   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  I'm sure it can be tracked down and

           7       we'll find that out.  But do we all agree what the size

           8       of jacket -- Dr Seaman, is that right -- that Mark

           9       Duggan was wearing at the time was labelled as large, so

          10       that once we have learned about the other one we can

          11       compare?

          12   MR STERN:  Thank you very much.

          13   A.  Yes, yes.

          14   MR STERN:  That's information I've got from behind.

          15   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Let's make sure --

          16   MR STERN:  Obviously, I don't know.

          17   A.  Yes.

          18   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  You say yes?

          19   A.  Yes.

          20   MR GLASSON:  Is it Dr Seaman's understanding that both the

          21       surrogate and the original garments were returned?

          22   A.  Yes, they were.

          23   MR GLASSON:  We'll check on that.

          24   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Thank you, Mr Glasson, thank you

          25       very much.




           1   MR STERN:  I'm very grateful, thank you very much.

           2   A.  144, to answer your original question.

           3   MR STERN:  Thank you very much, 144.

           4   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  That's the measurement from heel --

           5   A.  To wound.

           6   MR STERN:  To the entry wound.

           7   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  As given to you from the pathologist

           8       as the body was supine.

           9   A.  Yes, sir.

          10   MR STERN:  Was that given to you by the pathologist that

          11       measurement, the 144, or was that something you worked

          12       out yourself?

          13   A.  It's in one of the various communiques and details of

          14       statements and things I have received throughout the

          15       case.  I have several folders down there.

          16   Q.  So if it were that the entry wound was 136, or

          17       thereabouts, that obviously would reduce the angle?

          18   A.  Sorry, sir, could you --

          19   Q.  If it were 136, the entry, that would obviously reduce

          20       the angle?

          21   A.  Yes.

          22   Q.  Yes.  Can I just ask you about this: obviously you have

          23       an expertise, you're a scientist?

          24   A.  Yes.

          25   Q.  You're not a medical doctor, just so we understand the




           1       position?

           2   A.  No, not at all, no.

           3   Q.  We've heard from Professor Clasper, who's an orthopaedic

           4       surgeon -- do you know Professor Clasper?

           5   A.  No.

           6   Q.  He's an orthopaedic surgeon and also a Colonel in the

           7       army, so he has the guns and -- I was going to say guns

           8       and roses -- body, bones as well.

           9   A.  I understand that.

          10   Q.  I just want to ask you about this: he was asked this

          11       question:

          12           "So do you warn us to exercise real care in relation

          13       to those trajectory diagrams."

          14           The ones you've shown us.  He said:

          15           "I would warn people to exercise great care when

          16       looking at wounds and looking at tracts and stating

          17       where things came from, particularly when there's

          18       confounding factors like the bone being struck.  It's

          19       easier with the arm because the wounds are small and

          20       less things were hit.  The chest, I think it's

          21       potentially dangerous to make too much into the tract."

          22           He went on to explain it.  Do you agree with that?

          23   A.  In part.  I think we demonstrated that just nicking the

          24       rib didn't significantly alter any trajectory of the

          25       missile through the gelatin.




           1   Q.  Sorry, with great respect, can I correct you?  You

           2       demonstrated on a piece of meat, you did not demonstrate

           3       it in relation to each and every individual who may have

           4       that situation, did you?

           5   A.  No, likewise I didn't have the ability to attend the

           6       postmortem and see the damage first hand.  But that

           7       said, it is true to say that these trajectory images

           8       should be taken with caution.  They are merely to

           9       demonstrate the potential route the missile may have

          10       taken.  I don't believe that the wound or the bullet

          11       entering the chest and exiting the back would have been

          12       significantly put off line by the limited damage that

          13       I'm led to believe happened to the rib.

          14   Q.  On what basis is that your conclusion; what expertise do

          15       you have to come to that conclusion?

          16   A.  Well, I've been to many postmortems where injuries have

          17       been sustained and bullets have struck bone, rib and

          18       other tissues, and in the main, yes, it's true to say

          19       a bullet can enter at one position and exit somewhere

          20       differently, or be lodged in a different part of the

          21       body, but that is often with -- in my experience, which

          22       is limited, I accept that in comparison with

          23       Dr Clasper --

          24   Q.  Professor Clasper.

          25   A.  -- Professor Clasper, I do apologise -- the amount of




           1       deviation can vary and can be minimal.

           2   Q.  So does it come to this, that based on your personal

           3       experience of postmortems you have been to, that this is

           4       your conclusion?

           5   A.  It's not purely --

           6   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  I think you used the word

           7       "personal".  I think that is expertise, attending

           8       postmortems.

           9   MR STERN:  Sorry, when I say "personal", I mean as you

          10       personally have attended as an expert, I don't mean that

          11       you personally attended because you wanted to be there.

          12   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Downplaying the expertise that one

          13       gets from attending postmortems?

          14   MR STERN:  No, not at all.

          15   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Anyway, you attended postmortems and

          16       you have observed this, then Mr Stern was going to

          17       challenge your expertise on that.  You tell us what you

          18       feel about this, Dr Seaman.

          19   A.  I put it to Mr Stern that I have significant -- I regard

          20       as significant experience of attending postmortems and

          21       an awareness of the damage that can be caused from

          22       bullets to the human body.

          23           I also utilise the information supplied to me in

          24       terms of measurements, corrected as well because of

          25       an artifact that came about, in trying to demonstrate to




           1       the court, with the mannequin, the potential routes the

           2       bullets could have taken through Mr Duggan.

           3   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  When you come to the 45 degrees,

           4       just help me and the jury, the 45 degrees, 90 degrees

           5       to 0, are you 45 degrees down from the horizontal or how

           6       do you measure your degrees?  Because Professor Clasper

           7       was talking not 45 degrees but between 30 and 60.

           8   A.  Yes, and in fact I wouldn't advocate as far as 45,

           9       necessarily.

          10   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  You are talking about from the

          11       horizontal, are you?

          12   A.  Yes.  If that's horizontal downwards 30 degrees

          13       (indicates).  So it's that angle there, 45, we can

          14       imagine a square, and the line up the middle and any

          15       point thereon it gets bigger.  But it's from the

          16       horizontal downwards would be the angle.

          17   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  As Mr Stern was putting to you, if

          18       it's not 144 above heel but less, and that, he said,

          19       increases the angle, we're talking about obviously

          20       making it steeper.

          21   A.  Yes.  Because if you're at that starting point up here

          22       (indicates), it would have to go like that (indicates).

          23   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  So if it goes down there it goes

          24       down even steeper.  Yes, thank you.

          25           Yes, Mr Stern?




           1   MR STERN:  Thank you, sir.  So coming back to Professor

           2       Clasper's comment that it's potentially dangerous, do

           3       you agree or you don't agree, just so we have your

           4       evidence?

           5   A.  I wouldn't use the word dangerous.  I think it would

           6       have to be considered and be aware of the limitations of

           7       such trajectory tracts.

           8   Q.  What about, I think as you have just been asked, the

           9       possibility of the angle being between 30 and

          10       60 degrees?

          11   A.  Yes.  Using straightforward entry and exit points, as it

          12       were, not the third dimension of anything in between,

          13       only on Monday of this week did I try with a colleague,

          14       in the same corridor, to look at the entry and exits,

          15       bearing in mind the ground rises slightly at the crime

          16       scene, and we estimated that to be about a 1 in 8 slope.

          17           So over a particular distance, using a laser pen, we

          18       looked at where the impact point would be by presenting

          19       the body downwards and upright, and the measurements are

          20       in agreement with if one is upright, of the approximate

          21       height and injury position to Mr Duggan's arm and the

          22       position of W42 behind, that is quite consistent with

          23       the natural progression onwards, and in order to get the

          24       injury here (indicates), exiting the back, at an angle

          25       of approximately 30 to 45, then you have to lean forward




           1       slightly, but not excessively so like we saw before,

           2       almost in half.

           3   Q.  Right.  Indeed, for the arm shot that went into the

           4       radio, it would not have to be the top of Mr Duggan that

           5       was bent forward, it could be his legs that could be

           6       lowered because it's a horizontal shot, isn't it?

           7   A.  Yes.  Any factor to lower his height maybe.

           8   Q.  Yes, anything to lower his height.  So we should not be

           9       misled by the mannequins that you have helpfully drawn

          10       to our attention?

          11   A.  No, and I think that the major thing that can be

          12       misleading is using the term "upright".  Is it actually

          13       upright or is there some degree of lean forward versus

          14       an obvious degree of lean forward.  I think that word is

          15       quite misleading as well.

          16   Q.  Well, that's very helpful.

          17           Can I ask you now, please, about the blood.

          18       I wonder if we could have the picture up, I know we've

          19       got -- the one with the rings.  Thank you very much.

          20       Yes, that's very helpful.

          21           Obviously, we have two rings there and if we have

          22       any more experts we are in danger to returning to the

          23       London Olympics, aren't we?  Obviously this is not

          24       a precise fixed point, is it?

          25   A.  No, it's not.




           1   Q.  Just so we're clear about that.  Have you taken into

           2       account a blood spot that was on the front part of the

           3       vehicle?

           4   A.  I'm aware there was one just onto the front passenger

           5       door, yes.

           6   Q.  I just wanted to be clear -- I'm not suggesting that

           7       your marker is wrong, but I want to be clear that you

           8       have taken that into account in putting your marker

           9       where you have.

          10   A.  I have and I am not saying my marker is definitively

          11       correct.  I just feel that the original one could be

          12       moved slightly rearwards of the car, in my opinion to

          13       better fit the distribution of the door.

          14   Q.  That's perfectly fair enough, all right.  Thank you very

          15       much.

          16           The next matter that I want to ask you about,

          17       please, is the jacket.  Could you just help us -- I know

          18       you are not a gunshot residue expert, so I won't ask you

          19       about that, but just try to help us with the way in

          20       which it was folded.  I wonder if I can impose on you

          21       again to stand up because I want to understand the

          22       picture of it.  If you could just show us --

          23   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  What do you want -- we're waiting

          24       for your instructions, Mr Stern.

          25   MR STERN:  I do beg your pardon.  The hole, as you




           1       understand it, where it actually was on the jacket?

           2   A.  According to Mr Tomei's notes, and I didn't see any

           3       chemical test to indicate firearm discharge or lead

           4       impression work, but it was approximately, I think, from

           5       memory, about 18 centimetres up from the end and about

           6       two or three centimetres in from the hem.  So it went

           7       in, according to Mr Tomei, and I would have been in some

           8       agreement, in here (indicates).

           9   Q.  When you say here?

          10   A.  Sorry, the inside.

          11   Q.  The lower one or the upper one that you're holding

          12       there?

          13   A.  The inside of the left front, about 17 centimetres up

          14       and a certain distance across from the fastening edge.

          15       As it goes in here (indicates), it exits the normal

          16       outer surface and re-enters just adjacent to the pocket.

          17       It then exits here (indicates), further inside the front

          18       left fastening.

          19   Q.  All right.  As I understand it, there are two holes on

          20       the inside part of the jacket.

          21   A.  Yes.  One there and one there (indicates).

          22   Q.  Right.

          23   A.  But this one here is the entry point.  It exits here and

          24       re-enters, exits -- that's as I infer Mr Tomei's notes.

          25       But when I get the jacket it is severely damaged and




           1       it's been round several examinations.

           2   Q.  All right.  So that's not from your own analysis, that's

           3       interpreting Mr Tomei.

           4   A.  Yes.  If I have understood the damage I've seen.

           5   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  That's what he said to us, looking

           6       at the gunshot residues around the holes as well.  Have

           7       a seat, Dr Seaman.

           8   MR STERN:  Yes, thank you.

           9           Now, the effect of that, however it came about, over

          10       the right side, up across the right chest wound, is that

          11       if the right arm was across the body, that would, or

          12       could, conceal the right arm.  If you held it with your

          13       left and the right arm was across, that would obviously

          14       conceal the right arm?

          15   A.  In front or behind the jacket, sir?

          16   Q.  In the way that you have it, behind the jacket.

          17   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Now, you want him to fold his jacket

          18       up again?

          19   A.  If I do that (indicates) it brings the lower left front

          20       of the jacket up to the right chest.

          21   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Over the bottom 17 centimetres.

          22   MR STERN:  Obviously you have a proper jacket, rather than

          23       a puffa jacket, which is larger, but that's essentially

          24       what it comes to.

          25   A.  (Indicates) Yes, or it might be held like this all the




           1       time and, as one is holding it, it's naturally folded

           2       it's raised up and the arm is underneath there and it's

           3       almost in that position anyway.

           4   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  As one of the members of the jury

           5       have asked, when you did your test, did you consider the

           6       left hand coming up, perhaps being used to throw the

           7       gun?

           8   A.  As a reason for bringing the left front of the jacket up

           9       here?

          10   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Yes.

          11   A.  Not in the mannequin reconstructions but at the throwing

          12       tests, obviously my colleague is left-handed, I was

          13       right-handed, and if you have an open garment, the

          14       potential is there for it to be snagged in that arc

          15       movement.  So it's possible.

          16   MR STERN:  Obviously there are a number of possibilities and

          17       I know that you had a number put to you.  But if the gun

          18       were in the right hand and being concealed by the jacket

          19       or the arm being concealed by the jacket, obviously that

          20       would reduce the amount of time that anyone could see

          21       the arm in a throwing motion.

          22   A.  Yes, it would certainly cover that first movement one

          23       would imagine, yes.

          24   Q.  As I understand it, the test that you carried out did

          25       not assist you in addressing the sequence of the shots.




           1   A.  No, not at all.

           2   Q.  You've been asked about tests in relation to a theory,

           3       by Mr Mansfield yesterday, that a police officer put

           4       a gun at a location where it ended up; do you remember

           5       being asked that yesterday?

           6   A.  I think there was some discussion about that series of

           7       questions, yes.

           8   Q.  You may remember that there was a time when I got

           9       a little aerated (?).

          10           Can I ask you about this because you said that you

          11       were never asked to carry out any tests or experiments

          12       in that regard.

          13   A.  As in placing a gun in a sock under a tree, no.

          14   Q.  I think Mr Mansfield put it to you fairly and squarely

          15       in relation to that, that you hadn't carried out any

          16       tests which could show that and you said, effectively,

          17       that you hadn't.

          18   A.  No.

          19   Q.  No.  When was the first time that you heard that theory?

          20   A.  Certainly yesterday in its fullest form.  I think the

          21       concerns from the point I was asked to get involved in

          22       this case was one of trying to clarify how the gun ended

          23       up where it did --

          24   Q.  Exactly.

          25   A.  -- because there was nobody to view it.




           1   Q.  I'm sorry.  Because even a month before this Inquest

           2       started, on 13 August, you carried out this throwing

           3       exercise that we'll come onto in a moment?

           4   A.  Yes.

           5   Q.  Present there were people, I think, from the Inquest

           6       team --

           7   A.  Yes, there was.

           8   Q.  -- the solicitors representing Mark Duggan --

           9   A.  Yes, they were.

          10   Q.  -- nobody representing the firearms officers was there.

          11   A.  This is beyond my organisation, sir, I wasn't involved

          12       in the organising of it.

          13   Q.  Well, no.  But there was nobody there --

          14   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  It was early in the morning, was it

          15       not?

          16   A.  Very early, sir, about 5.30 am.

          17   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  5.30 it had to be done.

          18   MR STERN:  Obviously, some made it at 5.30, and had I been

          19       invited I'm sure I would have made it.  Mr Mansfield

          20       apologised for not being there but we weren't invited or

          21       informed, is what I think I am being told.

          22           What it comes to is this, is it not: that, in

          23       relation to this exercise you were being asked, with

          24       those people present, to carry out various experiments

          25       of how far you could throw -- you -- could throw the




           1       gun.

           2   A.  Yes.  It was left to me to design and try and

           3       accommodate various mechanisms to throw the gun to get

           4       it to its end point, yes.

           5   Q.  Yes.  It really tells us what someone of your age,

           6       strength and skill may be able to do.

           7   A.  Yes.

           8   Q.  It doesn't tell us anymore than that, does it?

           9   A.  No, not at all.

          10   Q.  I want to just try to understand the locations from

          11       which you threw this gun.

          12   A.  Yes.

          13   Q.  First of all, as I understand it, you threw it from out

          14       of the sunshine roof -- sunroof?

          15   A.  Yes.  At that point in time, I wasn't quite convinced or

          16       aware whether or not the sunroof of the taxi was open or

          17       closed at the time, so whilst it was there, we took

          18       an opportunity to see if it was possible to throw

          19       through the sunroof.

          20   Q.  And it was possible?

          21   A.  Yes.

          22   Q.  Next, as I understand it, you threw it just literally

          23       stepping out of the vehicle?

          24   A.  That was one of the positions it was thrown from, yes.

          25   Q.  Did you get any nearer to where it ended up from that or




           1       not, that was the nearest point?

           2   A.  Yes.  Except being stood on the pavement adjacent to the

           3       taxi.

           4   Q.  What does adjacent to it mean -- I know what "adjacent"

           5       means --

           6   A.  Body width away from the car.

           7   Q.  That's the nearest you got to the railings or the point

           8       where it ended up?

           9   A.  Yes, I had no information to indicate that Mr Duggan

          10       would have been any further across the pavement than

          11       being adjacent to the car.

          12   Q.  Right.  As I say, there were limited individuals there.

          13       So one of the things is you were never asked to throw

          14       it, or to try to throw it, from the point at which you

          15       now see where W42 was, or thereabouts?

          16   A.  In terms of from bonnet to tailgate of the vehicle, no,

          17       but I think the distance away from the taxi is

          18       comparable to the test site conducted.

          19   Q.  No, sorry, maybe I didn't put it clearly.  The point at

          20       where W42 is -- you have seen it on the circle -- where

          21       he's standing in the middle of the pavement --

          22   A.  Oh, yes.

          23   Q.  -- you did not conduct any throwing experiment from

          24       there?

          25   A.  From that position, no.




           1   Q.  It follows, does it not, you conducted no throwing

           2       experiment nearer the railings where the first aid was

           3       carried out?

           4   A.  No, I didn't.

           5   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Did you -- asks one of the jury,

           6       inventively -- think about throwing the gun through the

           7       railings?

           8   A.  Not intentionally.  One of the throws that failed,

           9       because I cannot be 100 per cent accurate every time, in

          10       fact, unfortunately, did strike one of the railings and

          11       bounce back.  So there's a degree of fortuitous,

          12       successful or good aim maybe, to go between the

          13       railings, but I didn't purposely set out to do that, no.

          14   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  I think that I can say that we are

          15       going to let the jury have the replica gun on the view,

          16       you can throw it where you like.  I think the gun

          17       actually cost more money than the taxi but there we are,

          18       so any damage will be overlooked.  But certainly you can

          19       do what you like with it, if you wish.  (Pause)

          20   A.  Could I say a little bit more about the throwing

          21       experiments?

          22   MR STERN:  Please do.  I'm going to ask you a bit more about

          23       that in a moment.

          24   A.  The other two key areas that I considered that the gun

          25       could have been thrown from was both sitting on the rear




           1       seat looking forward in the taxi and leaning down to the

           2       right, grabbed the gun and then throw across the front

           3       of the person sat in that seat.  That was feasible, as

           4       was sitting facing the rear of the taxi and either

           5       leaning down momentarily with the left hand to pick the

           6       gun up or reaching down with the right and then almost

           7       on the back action throw out the open door.

           8           All of these are feasible, but of course they

           9       contradict the officer's statement of seeing the gun

          10       with Mr Duggan on the pavement.

          11   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  We understand that, yes.

          12   A.  Yes.

          13   MR STERN:  Yes.  But, as I say, you did not carry out any

          14       experiment in terms of being able to throw it from where

          15       W42 was on the middle of the pavement?

          16   A.  Not from that diagram, no.

          17   Q.  Nobody asked you to do that?

          18   A.  No.

          19   Q.  How many gos did you have at this throwing exercise, say

          20       from the pavement?  I don't need to know about the

          21       others, through the sunroof and all of that.

          22   A.  Bear with me a second.  (Pause)

          23           I conducted 16 throws in all and, in the region of

          24       four or five of those were from outside the taxi.

          25   Q.  Did you get it over every time or -- you said one hit




           1       the railings.

           2   A.  With the exception of that once that I was trying to

           3       throw it left-handed and I am not left-handed and I'm

           4       obviously excessively weak on the left side, so I did

           5       not succeed but that was the occasion it didn't go over.

           6   Q.  All right-handed throws you -- and like me, you are not

           7       as young as Mr Duggan -- were able to throw with your

           8       right hand, which is your normal hand, or hand of

           9       strength -- were able to throw it approximately seven to

          10       eight metres?

          11   A.  Yes, and this did involve a degree of thought to allow

          12       for the elevation, because throwing out of the taxi you

          13       would have to send it skywards momentarily to get over

          14       the rails.

          15   Q.  Yes.  Can I just ask you about the ones outside the

          16       taxi.  When you were outside the taxi, you did those --

          17       well you did them -- all the experiments as I understand

          18       it in three ways, as you told my learned friend

          19       Mr Thomas: one is overarm one is underarm and one is the

          20       frisbee, I think you called it?

          21   A.  Yes.

          22   Q.  Would you agree that the longer the distance that you

          23       throw something, the more opportunity there is for

          24       people to see it?  I suppose that's common sense rather

          25       than scientific.




           1   A.  Yes.  I think the longer the actual act of swinging the

           2       arm before release is greater chance of being seen, yes.

           3       Unless obstructed by other objects or people.

           4   Q.  Right.  Just give me a moment, please.  (Pause)

           5           Did you carry out any velocity tests?

           6   A.  No.  Not in terms of velocity as we would classify

           7       an air weapon, as in sending a missile across

           8       a chronograph, the only tests we conducted were ones of

           9       losing energy by firing through the ballistic jar.

          10   Q.  I'm sorry, I didn't make myself clear.  In terms of

          11       throwing the gun, did you find out how fast you would

          12       have to throw it to get the 20 feet or seven to eight

          13       metres?

          14   A.  No, those measurements weren't performed at all,

          15       I wouldn't have the equipment to be able to do that.

          16   Q.  No, right.

          17   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Your throws, when you're outside the

          18       cab were you always facing back towards the back of the

          19       cab?

          20   A.  I was, sir, yes.

          21   MR STERN:  You found no damage to the gun and it was your

          22       understanding that the gun functioned during tests?

          23   A.  According to the notes, again, by I think the scientist

          24       Mr Vaughan, and Mr Tomei might have reported the same.

          25   Q.  You worked on that basis presumably in carrying out --




           1   A.  Yes, I didn't test fire or examine thoroughly the actual

           2       recovered weapon, JMA/1, I believe.

           3   Q.  In relation to the fibres, you say -- and for anybody

           4       who wants the reference it's 29907 -- we don't need it

           5       up on screen, I'll just read it, if I may, it's only

           6       a short point -- there does not appear to have been any

           7       investigation of fibre transfer between the sock and

           8       Mr Duggan's t-shirt or the inner surface of the puffa

           9       jacket, the latter of which offers very little

          10       opportunity, you say, for transfer, given its colour and

          11       the nature of the fabric surface?

          12   A.  Yes.

          13   Q.  So there was, just so I'm clear about it, no examination

          14       or investigation of the fibre transfer between the

          15       sock -- by which you mean I presume the sock of the gun

          16       in the sock --

          17   A.  Yes.

          18   Q.  -- and the t-shirt that Mr Duggan was wearing, or indeed

          19       the inside of his puffa jacket, either side of the

          20       inside of his puffa jacket?

          21   A.  Yes.  That's what I was led to believe by the statements

          22       of Anna-Marie O'Connor.  I understand a lot of pockets

          23       were examined but when I came to look at the various

          24       tapings that were generated in her examinations

          25       I couldn't find any interior surface tapings.  There




           1       were tapings taken from the t-shirt, as we discussed

           2       yesterday, but none of those had undergone any further

           3       investigation by her and in her statement she does say

           4       that that will be subject to further requests, but not

           5       made of her at the time.

           6   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  But no tapings of the inside of the

           7       jacket?

           8   A.  Not that I found, sir, no.

           9   MR STERN:  I think I asked Ms Shaw about this but I wanted

          10       to be clear you didn't carry out anything either, so

          11       we're clear about that.

          12           In relation to the fibres from the box that was in

          13       the minicab --

          14   A.  Yes.

          15   Q.  -- the sock fibres, I'm talking about -- as I understand

          16       it, there was only one fibre from the sock that actually

          17       microscopically was the same as the sock?

          18   A.  No, if I can just correct that.

          19   Q.  Yes, please do.

          20   A.  Anna-Marie O'Connor recovered two fibres.  They were

          21       denoted on slide 1 fibres, number 5 and 6, which were

          22       black cotton, indistinguishable in microscopic and

          23       colour during her tests.

          24           In terms of cotton fibres, there is the potential to

          25       look at the dye and the extraction of that dye is very




           1       much limited by the size of the fibre and how much dye

           2       there might be there.

           3           Of the two fibres she reported, I considered only

           4       one was sufficiently long enough to try the dye analysis

           5       test.  In doing so, I did and the results of that showed

           6       no differences.

           7   Q.  Yes.  Thank you very much.  That's made it clear.  So is

           8       the position that there were two fibres, or likely to be

           9       two fibres, from the sock or can you not give a likely

          10       or not likely on it?

          11   A.  Well, it's not a question of not likely.  There are two

          12       fibres which are indistinguishable from the sock.

          13   Q.  I see.

          14   A.  Constituent fibres.

          15   Q.  So although we are told this is a shedable material, the

          16       only fibres that ended up in the box were two?

          17   A.  I understand only two were recovered during

          18       Ms O'Connor's examinations, yes.

          19   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  That were indistinguishable?

          20   A.  Yes.

          21   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  You, as a scientist, don't say they

          22       come from a sock because you can't?

          23   A.  No.

          24   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  You just say that they are

          25       indistinguishable from fibres that came from the sock.




           1   A.  Yes, the reason being that fibres of that colour and

           2       type are mass-produced and can appear in many garments

           3       of that -- whatever product they go in to make, but

           4       ultimately there will be differences in batch production

           5       at the factory and, therefore, one can distinguish

           6       batches but not necessarily a particular sock from

           7       another sock of the same batch.

           8   MR STERN:  All right.  So if I'm putting it more clearly and

           9       I hope I get this right, the position is that there were

          10       two fibres in the box that were indistinguishable from

          11       the sock which was covering the handgun.

          12   A.  Yes.

          13   MR STERN:  Thank you very much.

          14   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Thank you very much, Mr Stern.

          15           Mr Butt?

          16   MR BUTT:  No, thank you sir.

          17   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Mr Glasson?

          18   MR GLASSON:  No, thank you, sir.

          19   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Mr Underwood?

          20   MR UNDERWOOD:  Nothing arising out of that, thank you very

          21       much.

          22   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  I have no further questions for

          23       Dr Seaman either.  Thank you very much Dr Seaman for

          24       coming back to assist the jury.

          25   MR GLASSON:  I wonder whether, before Dr Seaman is released,




           1       the jackets are being brought to court and so it may be

           2       that they are here in the next ten minutes or so, so

           3       Dr Seaman can look at those.

           4   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  If they are, I was just going to say

           5       "Right, members of the jury, thank you very much" and

           6       pull the proceedings to an end, but perhaps what we

           7       could do is not do that and just have a short ten-minute

           8       break and then if they are found and Dr Seaman can have

           9       a look at them, then we can just have a few thoughts

          10       from him on that.

          11           Thank you, Mr Glasson.

          12           So, members of the jury, I wonder perhaps if you

          13       could leave us just for a short time and, if there isn't

          14       anything to be done, we'll send a message out but

          15       otherwise we'll ask you to come back when the jacket is

          16       found.

          22   (3.20 pm)

          23                         (A short break)

          24   (3.38 pm)

          25   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Right thank you.  We'll have the




           1       jury back in then, please.

           2                  (In the presence of the jury)

           3   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Thank you very much, members of the

           4       jury, for waiting.

           5           What's the position now, Mr Underwood?

           6   MR UNDERWOOD:  I'm very grateful to the IPCC.  They have

           7       brought the replica jacket back down and Dr Seaman has

           8       had a look at it and I just have a couple of questions

           9       for him arising out of that.

          10   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Where is it?  Is it somewhere in the

          11       court?

          12   MR UNDERWOOD:  I've lost it again.

          13   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  It's sitting over in the corner.

          14       Shall we have the replica out?  I know the original is

          15       not being produced.  Let's just have it.  (Handed)

          16                Further questions by MR UNDERWOOD

          17   MR UNDERWOOD:  Doctor, would you mind getting it out and

          18       just confirming that that's the jacket you used for the

          19       mannequin test?

          20   A.  That's the garment (indicates).

          21   Q.  Is that the jacket you used for the tests?

          22   A.  It is, yes.

          23   Q.  While we are here, perhaps we could look at where the

          24       bullet holes are.

          25   A.  It might be easier if I put it on.




           1   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Yes, put it on.

           2   MR UNDERWOOD:  I thought the stand-up part had finished!

           3   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Right.

           4   MR UNDERWOOD:  The bullet holes are where, or the equivalent

           5       of the bullet holes?

           6   A.  Entry in the side of the flap (indicates), it exits

           7       there (indicates), re-enters there (indicates) and exits

           8       there, and that would be up here (indicates).

           9   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Right up there?

          10   MR UNDERWOOD:  Perhaps we could make that an exhibit?

          11   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  I think it should be actually,

          12       I think in the circumstances.  It has not had any

          13       forensic testing other than the holes and rods attached

          14       to it?

          15   A.  No.

          16   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  So it's not difficult for anyone to

          17       handle it.

          18   MR UNDERWOOD:  No chemicals are there on that?

          19   A.  No, nothing at all, just Sellotape to cover up the

          20       holes, to stop the feathers coming out.

          21   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  You made the holes for the

          22       trajectory demonstration.  That's how it goes up in that

          23       way, as we can see?

          24   A.  In doing so it does twist the jacket round somewhat so

          25       the normal right side of the jacket goes over to the




           1       left as a feature of swivelling around.

           2   MR UNDERWOOD:  Have you found the label showing the size on

           3       it?

           4   A.  I have.  It's a reversible garment, so you can wear it

           5       with the green side outermost and red lining if you

           6       wanted.  It is in the pocket, concealed, and I can only

           7       apologise to the court for misleading.  It is a large,

           8       which is the same size as purported in Mr Tomei's

           9       statement.  What was causing me a little bit of

          10       confusion was I found nothing in his notes to indicate

          11       that and I think in my mind during the examination,

          12       because of the damage to the other jacket, Mr Duggan's

          13       jacket, it appeared larger, so I do apologise.

          14           The measurements I used on the dummy for these rods

          15       were purely to accommodate the thoracotomy so

          16       I apologise for any inconvenience.

          17   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  That's a large and the one worn by

          18       Mark Duggan was also a large?

          19   A.  As reported by Mr Tomei.

          20   MR UNDERWOOD:  So when you told us earlier on that you made

          21       some allowances in your figures, those, as you just

          22       said, were allowances only for the thoracotomy?

          23   A.  Thoracotomy and the fact of it going on our dummy as

          24       well, which is not the same size as Mr Duggan.

          25   MR UNDERWOOD:  Thank you very much.




           1   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Let's see if anybody has something?

           2                      Questions by MR STRAW

           3   MR STRAW:  Dr Seaman, could you keep the jacket on, please.

           4   A.  Yes, certainly.

           5   Q.  Do you mind again demonstrating how the jacket was with

           6       those two bullet holes?

           7   A.  (Indicates).

           8   Q.  Could you again, perhaps with your left hand, take that

           9       up over to the right hole on the chest where that would

          10       have been?

          11   A.  Leaning forwards (indicates).

          12   Q.  What may help even more, in fact, is if you could be

          13       given the gun.  Could the replica please be given to

          14       Dr Seaman?  I'm sorry to ask you to do this, it's very

          15       helpful with that jacket.

          16   A.  It is, unfortunately I'm a little bit more portly than

          17       Mr Duggan, I think.

          18   Q.  With one hand, please, with the firearm could you point

          19       it out forwards towards -- say, I'll be V53, if you

          20       could point that out towards me, please.

          21   A.  (Indicates).

          22   Q.  Then with the other hand, your left hand, could you try

          23       to put that back over the right hole over the -- above

          24       the nipple on the chest?

          25   A.  (Indicates).




           1   Q.  So if I'm in front of you I can see the gun, can't I?

           2   A.  Yes, I would imagine so.

           3   MR STRAW:  Thank you very much.

           4   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Put that back.  Let's just see if

           5       there's any -- anything arising out of that?  No.

           6           You may now take the jacket off.  You weren't

           7       expecting to demonstrate that but anyway, thank you.

           8       It's very useful.  I'm very pleased we found that and

           9       the members of the jury were able to see that.

          10    Questions from THE ASSISTANT CORONER on behalf of THE JURY

          11   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  Whilst I have you here, the jury did

          12       ask me just to clarify with you, did you actually --

          13       when you were doing the test with the gun, you did it

          14       with that replica, did it have a sock on it or anything

          15       like that or any other covering, or just as it was?

          16   A.  No, I purchased a pack of socks of a similar type to

          17       that that was on the gun in this case.  They were the

          18       sort of sports sock that finish at the top of the shoe,

          19       not a full ankle sock that goes up the leg, and they

          20       were placed on over, as far as around here (indicates).

          21       You could have stretched it further all the way round,

          22       but I felt that was probably prudent for the purposes --

          23   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  I'm pleased I asked you that because

          24       I didn't understand.  So you did have a sock over it and

          25       obviously we will have a sock available if the jury need




           1       one in due course next week or the week after.  So thank

           2       you very much.

           3           All right, Dr Seaman if you just remain there.

           4       I think that probably concludes work for the jury for

           5       today; is that right, Mr Underwood?

           6   MR UNDERWOOD:  Yes.

           7   THE ASSISTANT CORONER:  In which case, I will ask the jury

           8       to leave us and be ready for 10.30 tomorrow morning,

           9       please.





          10   (3.49 pm)

          11       (the Inquest adjourned until 10.30 am on Thursday,

          12                        21 November 2013)

               DR PHILIP SEAMAN (continued) .........................1
                   Questions by MR THOMAS (continued) ...............1
                   Questions by MR STERN ...........................22
                   Further questions by MR UNDERWOOD ...............51
                   Questions by MR STRAW ...........................54
                   Questions from THE ASSISTANT CORONER on .........55
          19       behalf of THE JURY