10: The Impossible

A world-renowned crime scene reconstruction expert does his own analysis as to whether it’s possible Amy could have taken her own life. And we reveal what happened to the detectives who botched the handling of Amy’s case from the start.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
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

(00:29):
devoted mother of two fleeing a violent relationship as a
bags packed car running her daughters strapped into the backseat.

Speaker 2 (00:45):
Mom told me that she needed to go back inside
to grab something.

Speaker 1 (00:50):
Panic.

Speaker 3 (00:51):
I Amy is dead, Sir aim his dead?

Speaker 1 (00:53):
Eight confusion World.

Speaker 4 (00:54):
About five minutes they sit not to suicide.

Speaker 5 (00:56):
One hundred percent.

Speaker 6 (00:58):
This is emergency.

Speaker 1 (01:01):
What do you think is really the honest truth about Amy?
The Truth about Amy?

Speaker 7 (01:15):
Episode ten.

Speaker 1 (01:20):
I'm Liam Bartlett.

Speaker 7 (01:23):
And I'm Alison Sandy.

Speaker 1 (01:26):
I'm ready.

Speaker 5 (01:27):
You're really blush.

Speaker 8 (01:28):
Cameras said, excellent, everyone has eyes and ears. Safety's off, okay,
and test fire. I'm going to try and pull the
trigger with my finger.

Speaker 5 (01:39):
I think it's very interesting right there. That's very very interesting.

Speaker 4 (01:43):
Day.

Speaker 5 (01:44):
Look at the force he's trying to put into pulling
that trigger, and he hasn't been able to pull the trigger.

Speaker 1 (01:53):
Okay, let's do it again out of the shooting range.
At the Campbelltown, Liverpool District Pistol Club in Western Sydney.
International Crime Reconstruction scene expert Scott Rhoda is testing the
shotgun which was used to kill Amy, not the actual gun,
which was a four to ten boyto twelve gauge double

(02:15):
barrel shotgun owned by her partner David Simmons, but an
exact match to be used as part of the crime
scene reconstruction. He's joined by Daniel Martin of Arms and FX,
who specializes in firearms, theatrical armory, pyrotechnics and props for
film and TV.

Speaker 8 (02:38):
Twenty one round in the chamber is going to be clear,
and I'll confirm that weapons clear, weapons safe on this one.

Speaker 9 (02:50):
When you pull the trigger, maybe just try to support
the gun just a little bit so some of you
can see if there's any kick of the gun coming
up off of that front pad. So maybe just try
to stabilize it a little bit to see if it
comes up to end at all sail. Yeah, just stabilize
it a little bit so that we can really feel.

Speaker 5 (03:12):
How much pressure you're putting on that trigger to make
it pull.

Speaker 9 (03:17):
Obviously, we can do manufacture, you know, settings to see
what the whole trigger hounds are.

Speaker 5 (03:24):
You know, on it.

Speaker 9 (03:25):
But I think if you stabilize it just a little bit,
that might show us that the.

Speaker 8 (03:30):
Barrel oka reacting safety is off. Weapons loaded and testing.

Speaker 1 (03:41):
Hmm.

Speaker 9 (03:43):
Now that had a substantial recoil and you just stabilize
it just a little bit.

Speaker 1 (03:49):
That just a little bit. It's also important for ROTA
to gauge how powerful the weapon is, the impact it
has a close range, and of course the recoil, which
is the pushback of the gun when it's fine.

Speaker 5 (04:03):
Okay, So that.

Speaker 9 (04:04):
Actually surprises me a little bit that we had that
much recoil. Let's go ahead and clear it, load it
up again, maybe this time you know, obviously rings to
one by one, but I think it's worthwhile to do
that a couple more times, uh, to see how.

Speaker 5 (04:20):
We can help how that gun.

Speaker 9 (04:21):
If it's clear, that's a lot more powerful than I anticipated.

Speaker 4 (04:27):
It to be.

Speaker 1 (04:27):
Yeah, and much more concussive.

Speaker 9 (04:29):
Yeah, yeah, no, there's definitely definitely without ear protection and
with close proximity to that weapon being discharged in that
small space, would you concur that there would be some
concussive effects?

Speaker 1 (04:43):
Absolutely?

Speaker 8 (04:44):
Yeah, Yeah, you're gonna gonna have a concussive effects. That's
a pressure wave coming at the end of the barrel.

Speaker 9 (04:49):
Yeah, and in that confined space you saw this indoors, Yeah,
indoors in the studio, in the bedroom, and in that
little concave, you know, in that little doorway, especially with
three sides, but nowhere for that sound to go.

Speaker 5 (05:05):
I think anybody in that room would be affected.

Speaker 1 (05:07):
Substantially without hearing protection.

Speaker 2 (05:11):
Yeah.

Speaker 8 (05:11):
Yeah, depending on how far that barrel was pressed against
the skull, that might muffle the sound a little bit. Yeah,
some of the sound way went because some of the
gases might enter into the skull, and that's gonna cause
them that slight muffling effect.

Speaker 5 (05:25):
Yeah.

Speaker 8 (05:27):
But yeah, in a smaller room, it's gonna be it's
gonna be even louder than we was experiencing right here, right.

Speaker 5 (05:32):
Yeah, Yeah, that was very beneficial.

Speaker 9 (05:34):
I said, let's do that a couple more times and
then and then we'll go to the we've got the
audio now, and we've got a couple more kicks.

Speaker 5 (05:43):
We've got a five inch kick approximately. I'd say, let's
try to get it.

Speaker 9 (05:46):
But maybe through a variation of your trigger pull and
you know, see what other kind of effects you can
get on handling the gun.

Speaker 5 (05:52):
I think I'm learning a lot by just watching you
do this. I think this is really helpful.

Speaker 8 (05:56):
Okay, whippons loaded. Everyone ready, Ye, Pifey's off. Hey, testing,
So we look at the backside of the target. We
can see the projectile hole right there.

Speaker 9 (06:14):
We got the projectile hole right here about a centimeter
as you mentioned.

Speaker 5 (06:19):
And then and that's the backside of the target. And
on the front side of the.

Speaker 9 (06:23):
Target, we've got this blast radius from the gas coming
out of the gun and you can see the devastating
nature of that.

Speaker 5 (06:32):
In this demonstration here, So.

Speaker 9 (06:36):
Once again confirming immediate incapacitation upon the bullet entering the
head and devastating injuries, you know.

Speaker 5 (06:45):
So yeah, I think you know.

Speaker 9 (06:47):
The idea that this gun is a low caliber or
not a twelve gage shotgun, I don't think there's any
bearing on the devastation that this gun can do.

Speaker 5 (06:56):
Is a powerful shotgun.

Speaker 8 (06:59):
Yes, it's designed for killing small things, but on a
human body, it's still going to be fatal.

Speaker 5 (07:05):
Yeah, yeah, I think it's arranges. Yeah, there's powerful.

Speaker 1 (07:13):
We first made contact with Scott Rhoda about two years
ago now to see if this was a case that
he could lend his expertise. His resume is extensive, having
consulted in more than fifteen hundred cases since two thousand
and one. They include reconstructions of the manner of death

(07:36):
of George Floyd, Michael Biker, Sherlock, and most famously Rever Stemcamp,
whose boyfriend South African former Olympic sprinter Oscar Pistorius was
finally convicted of her murder in twenty sixteen.

Speaker 7 (07:53):
Guilty of murder, with the accused having had criminal intentions
for thurs.

Speaker 1 (08:02):
Here, Rooda is trying to determine where the gun should
have landed based on Amy's position as presented at the inquest.
Despite tests already having been undertaken by biomechanical experts, Roda
is doing an independent assessment, which means carrying out his
own testing and going through the various scenarios of what

(08:26):
was possible given the forensic evidence of the room and
the position of Amy's body when she was discovered.

Speaker 9 (08:33):
Well, let's say hypothetically we have a right hand pull
with a right hand hold and becoming immediately incapacitated. That
gun is going to fly in the right direction so
soon as the trigger's pulled that God's going to be
flying after the rate, substantially out of her hand.

Speaker 8 (08:49):
If you're holding onto that gun one hand with a
weak hold, just depressing the trigger, the gun's going to
fly out of your hand.

Speaker 5 (08:56):
Yeah, yeah, substantially.

Speaker 9 (08:58):
There's no scenario where that gun could defy the forces
of nature and go toward the body with the butt
being between the legs.

Speaker 5 (09:08):
Yeah. This is not a one hand pull gun. This
is guns designed for a two hand.

Speaker 8 (09:13):
Pull, steady halled, two handed and absorbing some of that
recoal in both your arms and against your shoulder.

Speaker 9 (09:23):
If Amy was to have pulled this trigger in some
kind of a scenario that it might fit the physical evidence,
clearly the gun would have.

Speaker 5 (09:32):
Flown out of her hand and off to the right
of her body.

Speaker 9 (09:37):
There's no way the gun would be in the documented
position that we had from the friend, or from the
father or from law enforcement. So I think this clearly
confirms for me this was not unassisted shot. This was
not unassisted. This was done by another individual.

Speaker 1 (09:55):
Scott Rhoda heads up the US based company Evidence Room,
comprising a team of forensic and computer animation experts who
provide insight based on the evidence presented at the crime scene, and.

Speaker 9 (10:09):
Then the butt of the gun would be pushed out
this way, opposite, in opposite.

Speaker 1 (10:13):
For this case, Rhoda brought with him Pat Mooney, who
specializes in the physical and virtual recreation of the crime
scene itself.

Speaker 10 (10:23):
With the butt by your feet, muzzle towards her head.

Speaker 1 (10:26):
We're at a warehouse in Merrickville where they've developed a
model to the exact scale of the bedroom Amy's body
was found.

Speaker 11 (10:34):
So let's assume this was self inflicted for a moment.

Speaker 1 (10:37):
Their first test aims to find out whether Amy could
have used her left hand to shoot herself, and.

Speaker 9 (10:44):
The gun was in this documented position with the butt
of the gun along the left ankle and the gun
chat wound out of the right the right hands under
the right bidock.

Speaker 11 (10:55):
One the blood would be an entirely.

Speaker 9 (10:57):
Different tape of a position. So I think we can
conclude say that the position the gun was documented to
be in between her legs more towards her left ankle,
is not at all consistent with any evidence we see here,
and I think we can rule that out completely completely

(11:17):
as being part of the scenario.

Speaker 11 (11:19):
So now I think we have to factor in.

Speaker 10 (11:22):
The evidence was.

Speaker 9 (11:24):
Polluted by a minimum of two people prior to officers
being able to document the condition. So the reliability of
this being an actual position related to some kind of
a self inflicted gunshot wound, I think doesn't pass any
test whatsoever. So the second scenario would be, would Amy,

(11:47):
without being able to use her right arm, be able
to stabilize the gun to create the wound from a
ninety degree right to left in the right temple and
produce blood on the opposite wall by either resting it
on the bed, which I think that's what you're showing

(12:08):
here now, right, to use the bed kind of as
a as a stabilizer, But you can't use that much
of the bed as a stabilizer because the angle it's
got to kind.

Speaker 10 (12:21):
Of rest on the edge, right, Yeah, it's such a
tight area.

Speaker 9 (12:25):
And say, for example, let's say she pulls the trigger there,
the gun's going to fall directly.

Speaker 11 (12:32):
Like horizontal with the body or parallel.

Speaker 12 (12:36):
Or almost in a similar position as as the other scenario, right,
which doesn't fit. Right, which doesn't fit at all. And
then the other scenario is having the gun on the floor,
using the floor as the.

Speaker 9 (12:51):
Stabilizer for the weapon, and then the head being the
other stabilizer with the left hand kind of holding it
into place here, but still you need to use the
right hand to pull the trigger.

Speaker 10 (13:05):
And that doesn't fit our trajectory angle well.

Speaker 9 (13:08):
And you can't get the right hand underneath the right
buttock or the right thigh. You can't get it underneath
the body. Because I think we've been clear and the
record is clear, and it's on the record that this
would be an immediately incapacitating shot with no purposeful movement

(13:28):
after the trigger is fired. So I think having the
gun being propped on the ground as a stabilizer is
also now ruled out because you cannot pull the trigger
and get the hand underneath the right buttock prior to.

Speaker 5 (13:49):
The shot.

Speaker 9 (13:50):
The shot, it's an ending shot, it's over, and once
the trigger is pulled, it's over. She's now immediately incapacitated,
and there's really not going to be any way to
get that right hand underneath or bomb.

Speaker 11 (14:04):
Post shot, not at all.

Speaker 10 (14:08):
And there's no way to do the angle does not match.

Speaker 1 (14:11):
Then there's the question of how drops of blood were
found inside the firearm, which they examine.

Speaker 11 (14:18):
But do you see blood seeping into the crack of
the gun.

Speaker 10 (14:24):
It looks like a pretty tight fit. It's almost seamless.

Speaker 5 (14:27):
Yeah.

Speaker 9 (14:28):
The only seam I see is on the side right
in here, tiny little corner there and little corner there,
But the seam right here is flawless. So the chances
of blood getting in here without.

Speaker 11 (14:43):
The gun being cracked, without the gun open, yeah, without the.

Speaker 9 (14:47):
Gun being open, there's really no way to get blood
into this area. The only way I think blood could
get into into this area here is if the gun
is already covered in blood and then a witness or
an accomplice or someone anyone doesn't matter who came in

(15:08):
unloaded the gun and then the blood from the execure
then seeped in that way.

Speaker 10 (15:14):
Yeah, that's a possibility. But for the blood to.

Speaker 9 (15:17):
Get in the gun without deliberately opening the without the
opening gun to take the ammunition out, I don't think
that's going to be possible.

Speaker 10 (15:26):
But we can do that test, right, Yeah.

Speaker 1 (15:29):
They also discuss the circumstances of Amy's death, such as
the language Simmons used in his phone call to triple zero.

Speaker 9 (15:38):
So we have a triple zero call by Simmons Ambulance.
What's the address of the emergency from the operator twenty
seven eighty three Southwestern Highway, Serpentine. Okay, tell me exactly
what happened. Somebody shot himself in the head. That's what

(16:01):
the first quote is, Okay, from the Triple zero call
by mister Simmons, who is the romantic partner of the deceased.
So right out of the gate, when the operator of
Triple zero, and this is important to nail this down.

Speaker 10 (16:20):
I think, is somebody shot himself in the head.

Speaker 11 (16:22):
Somebody shot himself in the head.

Speaker 9 (16:24):
I mean, it could be some local colloquialisms there himself
herself themself whatever.

Speaker 11 (16:29):
That doesn't bother me. But the fact that it says
somebody shot himself in.

Speaker 10 (16:34):
The head, yeah, I'm very vague.

Speaker 13 (16:36):
Right.

Speaker 9 (16:36):
If I walked into say my wife who has apparently
been shot, and I'm calling Triple zero, I'm not saying somebody, Yeah,
you would say my wife.

Speaker 11 (16:48):
Amy.

Speaker 9 (16:49):
So the fact that mister Simmons has somebody shot himself
in the head, Triple zero operator, okay, are you there
with the person at the moment.

Speaker 11 (16:58):
No, I'm not draw down service.

Speaker 9 (17:01):
I had to drive down to the service station because
my phone is broken. I have two kids, and my
wife has shot herself. There's a lot there no, I'm not.
I had to drive down to the service station because
my phone is broken. I have two kids, I'm assuming

(17:22):
meaning with me, and my wife has shot herself operator.

Speaker 11 (17:26):
Okay, how old is she? How old is she? Twenty three?
I just she's dead.

Speaker 9 (17:35):
The language being used to describe now, mind you, of
course you have to factor in I think post traumatic stress, right,
if you reaction to the situation, right, maybe some people
have a colder reaction or you know, so just so forth,
So I guess we can't go too off the deep
end with the analysis just yet.

Speaker 11 (17:52):
But there's more. How old is she? How old is she?
Twenty three?

Speaker 9 (17:55):
I just she's dead, right, Okay? All right, so she's
not conscious or breathing. Okay, but he's not there anymore.
He's already gone because I'm assuming to say that he
has a broken phone that he can so as important
to mister Simmons in this triple zero call as the

(18:18):
fact that Amy is possibly.

Speaker 11 (18:20):
Dead or is dead, is that also his phone is broken?

Speaker 9 (18:24):
I think the same level of detail has been given
about both subjects so far in this very critical triple
zero call. Okay, so all right, so she's not conscious
for breathing, yes, I've got kids in the car. I'm
going to have to take them to their alright, and
I have a mate standing on the highway. Okay, can

(18:48):
you just please come and take her or do something.

Speaker 13 (18:54):
Something.

Speaker 9 (18:55):
I'm kind of at a loss for words.

Speaker 11 (19:00):
Could just come take her and do something?

Speaker 10 (19:03):
Okay?

Speaker 11 (19:03):
So, yes, we're going to get that organized.

Speaker 10 (19:08):
So that was R.

Speaker 11 (19:10):
Jay Simmons, R and B. Simmons, R and B. Simmons.

Speaker 9 (19:14):
Okay, what is your name, sir, David Simmons. Why did
she fucking do that? That's what David Simmons says. Okay,
I'm going to get that organized for you straight away.
Mister Simmons says, all right, thank you very much. All right,
see you all all right by all right, end of

(19:35):
the Triple zero call.

Speaker 1 (19:43):
In her findings, the Kroner indicates she believed David simmons testimony.
But before we proceed with what she said, we just
want to apologize in advance for some of the wording
used here and elsewhere in this podcast. When discussing suicide.
We're aware that it should never be classified as committing suicide,

(20:07):
but taking one's own life or dying by suicide. However,
for accuracy we are quoting from transcripts provided to us.

Speaker 14 (20:19):
David Simmons denied having any involvement in Amy's death and
maintained his position that Amy committed suicide. In my view,
there were aspects of David's evidence that minimized the difficulties
of his relationship with Amy and his controlling and aggressive
behavior towards her, but there was nothing in his demeanor
to suggest he was lying about how Amy died. Further,

(20:40):
I give some weight to the limited opportunity the two
men had to concoct a story, given the short time
frame between when Amy spoke to Nancy and their arrival
at the Serpentine roadhouse. Weighing against the evidence of Amy's
family is the evidence that Amy had been diagnosed with
anxiety and depression, which has a known association the increased
risk of suicide, and was clearly in a tumultuous relationship

(21:04):
that had made her deeply unhappy at times. She was
separated from David a number of times, but they always
got back together, which may well have created some sense
of futility in her mind as to her prospects of
ever escaping the relationship. Some of her messages to friends
and even to David indicate that she felt caught in
a vicious cycle where she loved him and wanted to

(21:26):
keep her family unit together, but felt like David would
never change. I accept that Amy loved her daughters unconditionally,
but many people who love their family sadly do commit
suicide in moments of despair without thinking through the tragic consequences.

Speaker 1 (21:43):
So just noting here that contrary to the analysis of
evidence by experts, the coroner still considers suicide an option
in Amy's manner of death. I catch up with Skill
to discuss what the evidence tells him happened to Ami

(22:05):
and the why her caise has been handled todight.

Speaker 11 (22:08):
There's so many things that trouble me about this.

Speaker 9 (22:11):
The number one thing is the position in which she's
located is not in a position you would expect.

Speaker 11 (22:19):
Somebody who is taking their own life.

Speaker 5 (22:23):
Right.

Speaker 11 (22:24):
She's in a position that is not comfortable. It's not
a position that you would naturally be in.

Speaker 9 (22:32):
I would think that if there was a deliberate self
inflicted gunshot wound, maybe you'd be on the bed, you'd
be sitting in a place. Because, especially when it comes
to women and suicide, they tend statistically to not do
things that are messy or bloody, right because they know

(22:54):
they're going to be found by people that love them.

Speaker 11 (22:58):
And it's just to me, does not.

Speaker 9 (23:01):
Strike at all as a suicide scene when we look
at the corners details of the report, which demonstrates that
there's a pneumothorax on her left chest. So deep bruce, Yeah,
deep bruise on a left chest. And now we can't
time how soon before the shot that that bruce happened,

(23:26):
but that bruce is there, and it's incredibly suspicious and
to me indicates that there was violence. And even if
you look at the photograph, the selfie that Amy took
sitting on the bed right there into that mirror, to me,
that was a protest photograph like don't mess with me.

Speaker 1 (23:46):
I've got the gun, I'm in control, I'm.

Speaker 9 (23:48):
In control of my life, this is my life. That
was a protest picture. That was not a picture foreshadowing
a suicide. That was a picture of strength and self empowerment,
like I've got this, don't mess with me.

Speaker 11 (24:04):
That's what that picture says to me.

Speaker 1 (24:05):
And yet less than an hour lighter, that's where she is.

Speaker 9 (24:09):
She stayed, Yeah, crammed between a door, so that you
can barely open the door with blood on the left
side on this wall here at about chair level, with
bruising on her chest, bruising on her buttock, with her
right hand properly under her right buttock, so which means

(24:32):
that that takes her right hand out of play to
pull the trigger.

Speaker 1 (24:36):
Well, if she's pulled the trigger with her left hand,
as the police insisted, yeah, Hall the heck has she
done that?

Speaker 10 (24:44):
You cannot do it.

Speaker 9 (24:45):
You cannot have a shot to the right side of
the forehead right at the temple at ninety degrees, being
able to hold the gun out with your right hand
under your buttock and even reach the trigger with your
left hand. Now, mind you, the left hand cannot pull
the trigger because the left hand has gunshot residue on it,

(25:10):
meaning the left hand was wrapped around the barrel of
the gun, which is the positive of the gunshot residue
and burning on the interior of her left hand, and
that's a defensive wound.

Speaker 7 (25:22):
As you know. The same conclusions were made at the inquest,
except they've tried to reason that it was possible Amy
used her right hand. The currenter concluded in her findings.

Speaker 14 (25:32):
I have some reservations about how much weight I can
give to the biomechanical expert opinions given the limitations in
the testing. However, I have indicated that I am persuaded
by those opinions that the position of Amy's right hand
in the photographs taken by Senior Constable Reynolds raises doubt
as to whether Amy committed suicide, given the results of
the biomechanical testing and their general expert opinions as to

(25:55):
the positioning of her hand in that manner. Counsel for
the family also pointed to the absence of gunshot residue
on Amy's right hand, but I consider this evidence less
compelling given the limitations of this type of forensic evidence
and the qualifications of doctor Pitts. Doctor Pitts could not
exclude the possibility that Amy pulled the trigger of the
shotgun with her right hand and then fell underneath her

(26:18):
body before the gunshot residue settled. The absence of fingerprints
on the shotgun and her blood inside the breech face
and barrel chamber also did not advance the case given
the other explanations provided by expert witnesses.

Speaker 7 (26:40):
While not wishing to give weight to the biomechanical analysis
on the basis the testing had too many limitations. Her
honor surprisingly determines the selfie taken by Amy half an
hour before her death was objective evidence supporting suicide. Objective
is the word she uses in mind that the selfie

(27:01):
was taken after her confrontation with Simmons, but before Amy
spoke to her mum, Nancy, who she told she was
on her way.

Speaker 4 (27:10):
Oh I will I'll see you soon, I will come.

Speaker 14 (27:14):
In my view, the existence of the photograph adds weight
to the possibility that Amy committed suicide. Although it is
not conclusive, it shows she had access to the shotgun
when alone in the bedroom only minutes before she died.
As a result of discharging as a coroner, I have
seen many similar photographs in other cases where a person
has taken a photograph of themselves with an item that

(27:36):
they then subsequently use to take their own life. Often
they'll send the photograph to family or friends beforehand, but
not always. The photography is not by definition a suicide note,
but it is often a way of documenting their intention.
I accept that there might be other reasons Amy took
the photography, including perhaps with an intention to send a

(27:56):
warning to David that she had a firearm and might
be prepared to pecked herself with it. There's no evidence
she sent the photo to him, but there was evidence
that the mobile coverage in that area was often poor,
which could explain why she did not send it, either
as an indication of her intention to commit suicide or
a warning.

Speaker 7 (28:15):
What doesn't make sense here is how the coroner could
draw any conclusion on the photo when it's impossible to
know what Amy was thinking when she took it, especially
as she did not even know Amy, Whereas the actual
objective evidence of experts carrying out testing based on the
facts known in Amy's case is given significantly less weight.

Speaker 5 (28:37):
She could stabilize the gun and pull the trigger with
her right hand.

Speaker 7 (28:41):
It's possible back to Liam's interview with Scott where they
discussed the position of the gun in relation to Amy's body.
According to people who were there the night she died, this.

Speaker 1 (28:50):
Is how Amy was found. This is the exact position,
and this is the exact dimensions. How the heck did
the gun end up like that?

Speaker 11 (29:01):
Well, the answer is very simple. The gun did not
end up like that.

Speaker 9 (29:03):
Somebody just said the gun was like that, because we
have a polluted crime scene. Before the police officer comes
into the scene, we have a minimum of two people,
possibly three people other than Amy that have already interacted
with the gun and the scene. And those people I
don't believe were properly quarantined, questioned, examined, searched, and tested

(29:29):
to test the veracity of what they said they did,
which clearly they manipulated the crime scene.

Speaker 11 (29:39):
They polluted the crime scene.

Speaker 1 (29:41):
Well, you've seen a lot of these sort of scenes.

Speaker 11 (29:44):
Unfortunately, yes, over the years.

Speaker 1 (29:46):
So what do you think on first glance and looking
at all the forensic analysis, is this a murder saying?
Or is this a suicide saying?

Speaker 11 (29:54):
One hundred percent? This is a murder scene one hundred percent.

Speaker 9 (29:59):
This is a as a matter of fact, every police investigation,
when you have a suspicious death, you must start with murder.
You must assume that it's murder, and then work the
evidence to either confirm the murder or another hypothesis. But
if you don't start with murder, you're going to miss

(30:21):
critical evidence, and unfortunately happen to be in the situation
that we're in now where it's ten years later and
we're rehashing things that should have been done the day
of the death, and that's tragic.

Speaker 1 (30:37):
Scott. That is quite a big gun. I mean, I
know it's a small gun in a shotgun way, but
it's still quite a big gun. Especially you can see
the dimensions of the time of Amy's body. For a
slightly built lady that she was, that's quite a big gun.

Speaker 15 (30:55):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (30:57):
How the heck could she have with her left hand,
as the police say, raise that up this way, horizontal
to the floor and shoot it, because that's what they
maintained at the coronial inquest.

Speaker 9 (31:09):
Well, I would like to be at that Coronial in
Quest part two to put some questions to them, because
I don't think that they can answer the questions, and
we intend to prove, and I think that we have
proven so far based on the evidence, that that's just
just wrong.

Speaker 5 (31:25):
It's just wrong.

Speaker 11 (31:26):
However, we can.

Speaker 9 (31:27):
Put together an experiment to substantiate what we believe is
the most reasonable to a degree of scientific certainty, we
can do that they cannot.

Speaker 1 (31:37):
Well, given the position of the body, given the dimensions
of this room, the blood spatter where it was. What's
your biggest issue, what's your biggest single problem with finding
of suicide.

Speaker 9 (31:52):
I think the thing is it's the totality of the circumstances.
It always comes down to the interrelationship of the evidence
that SuDS everything of everything because I first, whenever we
do any kind of a homicide investigation, it's about the
contextual analysis.

Speaker 1 (32:05):
Right.

Speaker 9 (32:06):
So we've got two children, Amy's two children in the
car just however many yards out that way with the
car on the kids in the car, right, and she's
just popping back in the house for a second, right,
and she's going to commit suicide. That doesn't make any sense, right,
doesn't make any sense.

Speaker 7 (32:24):
Even if taking into consideration the body being moved. There's
no scenario with the available evidence that makes sense to
rote out.

Speaker 9 (32:32):
There's got a trigger pull, right, you take some power
to pull that away, right, because if the gun is
this way, she's got to pull the trigger that way,
and pull the trigger that way.

Speaker 6 (32:45):
She's got to push it out right and keeping.

Speaker 11 (32:48):
It in close contact. But then.

Speaker 9 (32:53):
Maybe she could have done it with the right hand,
but the right hand's properly under her buck, so that's
not possible. So there's another scenario that we could try
to work out for possibility is maybe the gun was
propped on the ground, using the ground as the as
the force. And then if you could just take your
left hand and put it around the barrel and put
it towards your temple like that, Okay, and then and

(33:15):
then but then, okay, it.

Speaker 11 (33:16):
Would still require her to pull the trigger.

Speaker 9 (33:18):
With her right hand, which cannot do because it's under
her right bum properly. And if she did it this way,
the spatter would be an upward trajectory and the shape
of the wound wouldn't be symmetrical, but it would be elliptical.

Speaker 6 (33:35):
It would be it would be an.

Speaker 11 (33:36):
Elliptical shape, and the wound would spray out this way.
But that's not what the corner says.

Speaker 9 (33:42):
The corner says it was ninety degrees straight, straight level plane.

Speaker 1 (33:46):
Yeah, horizontal to the ground.

Speaker 7 (33:48):
Right.

Speaker 9 (33:49):
So there's really no scenario left hand, right hand, because
you have to factor.

Speaker 11 (33:54):
In what we have known variables. Right we have known data.
The right hand is under the bum.

Speaker 9 (34:00):
Her left hand has got burn marks around it, which
means it was in contact with the barrel as the
barrel as the.

Speaker 11 (34:06):
Gun was fired.

Speaker 9 (34:07):
So the left hand can't pull the trigger, the right
can can't pull the trigger, and as an investigator, Liam
is becoming pretty obvious she didn't pull the trigger.

Speaker 1 (34:17):
There's no scenario that you can concoct here now with scale,
in any way, shape or form that gets you to
the point where she pulls the trigger.

Speaker 9 (34:28):
Now, there's no scenario based on the evidence that we have,
where she could do this by herself.

Speaker 11 (34:35):
Just nothing could happen that way, just can't happen.

Speaker 7 (34:37):
Scott Rohder and his team of forensic experts are convinced
Amy didn't take her own life.

Speaker 11 (34:43):
This is not a suicide. I'm telling you one hundred
percent not a suicide.

Speaker 7 (34:48):
And as you'll recall, there is now a one million
dollar reward for anyone with information that will lead to
a conviction. But because of the current's open finding, there
doesn't seem to be any urgent and the idea it
could have been suicide still casts a dark shadow over
the possibility of progress in the case.

Speaker 1 (35:11):
I mean, there are so many variables that have been
poured over. What sticks out for you?

Speaker 9 (35:18):
The first thing I think that sticks out for me
is that Amy was trapped. The position that she's found
in her final resting position, it looks like she was trapped.

Speaker 1 (35:30):
So that's a red flag to you straight up, as
it was for the uniformed officers who first turned up
and first viewed that scene. And yet when the detectives
turned up, none of those bells and whistles went off.
Are you surprised, knowing what you know now, are you
surprised the detectives so quickly put that into the suicide basket?

Speaker 6 (35:56):
Well, I'm shocked, frankly.

Speaker 9 (36:00):
Surprises, and I think strong enough, I'm shocked, and it's inexplicable.
It's unexplainable to look at a woman who has no
cause or history to commit suicide. She's in a trapped space, confined,
and to just put it in the basket of suicide

(36:23):
is frankly against all principles of forensic science and homicide investigation.

Speaker 14 (36:31):
It became clear by the end of the inquest that
very few of the witnesses were neutral in their position
as to how Amy died. While acknowledging the importance of
the evidence and opinion of all the witnesses, there are
several opinions that stand out to me as carrying particular weight.

Speaker 7 (36:47):
The Deputy State Coroner doesn't refer to any of the
forensic experts here, only police officers including those first unseen,
the officer responsible for undertaking the coronial investigation, the head
of the cold case homicide review team, and former homicide
detective Ron Eddels. You'll hear from mister Eddels shortly.

Speaker 14 (37:08):
What I take from these various opinions is that while
the available evidence points to Amy having made an impulsive
and tragic decision to take her life, a number of
experienced police investigators continue to have reservations about this case
and retain some doubt about the conclusion Amy committed suicide.
While none of them have been able to identify evidence

(37:28):
that would go anyway towards proving that another person was
involved in her death, they are also not satisfied that
it can be ruled out based on their training, experience
and gut instincts.

Speaker 7 (37:39):
Scott Rhoda would beg to differ.

Speaker 9 (37:41):
We've done dozens and dozens of investigations where it's been
ruled initially a suicide and then after some work, you know,
we've determined to a degree of scientific certainty that it
was a homicide.

Speaker 6 (37:56):
This case is one of those cases.

Speaker 1 (38:00):
What's the biggest roadblock for you in accepting the police
position that it was suicide?

Speaker 6 (38:05):
Well, I just can't accept their position.

Speaker 9 (38:07):
But the biggest roadblock is the physical and the forensic
evidence and the inter relationship of that evidence to the
factual scenario of how we even get to the triple
zero phone call. You know, it's not all about just
bullet trajectory, blood spatter, and body position. It's what that

(38:29):
tells you about what was happening prior to the shot
being fired. And we have all kinds of evidence in
this case that tell us she was trying to escape
that life, not end that life.

Speaker 1 (38:44):
Often in court these things come up in terms of probability.
Do you think there is any probability that Amy killed herself?

Speaker 6 (38:55):
No, No, one under.

Speaker 1 (38:58):
This is a homicide. You wouldn't even give it a chance.
No statistical attribution whatsoever to Amy killing herself.

Speaker 9 (39:10):
I'll explain it this way. There is a chance that
I'm a hologram sitting here talking to you. There's a chance.
It's not probable, though, Liam, I'm really here. But there's
a chance that I'm a hologram. Small chance.

Speaker 1 (39:28):
I put it on that level, so almost absurd.

Speaker 9 (39:30):
Yeah, it is absurd, honestly, when you look at the
totality of the evidence, when you look at her body position.
When you look at her wounds, you look at the
position of her hands. She could not physically do.

Speaker 6 (39:44):
This to herself.

Speaker 1 (39:46):
I take what you say about the totality of evidence,
and that's safer. But can we just talk about the gun, sure,
just the gun and the gun shot, the gun that
Amy used. Is there any way physically that you can
see that she could have used her own hand to
pull that trigger.

Speaker 9 (40:04):
Yes, but it's not possible for her to discharge it,
and it be consistent with the wound, the trajectory, the
blood spatter, and honestly.

Speaker 6 (40:19):
Her hand positions.

Speaker 9 (40:21):
Anybody can grab that gun and shoot it right, but
you cannot do it if you factor in what I
would call known values, and the known values in the
scientific aspect of the evaluation of this case are Her
right hand is out of play from pulling the trigger

(40:41):
or stabilizing the gun because of the position it's in,
which is under her right buttock. That's out of play.
Her left hand is out of play from pulling the
trigger because it's got burn marks and gunshot residue around
the palmer aspect of the webbing between her thumb and forefinger,

(41:03):
so that hand is out of play.

Speaker 6 (41:05):
Of pulling the trigger as well.

Speaker 9 (41:06):
Also, we had a wonderful model come in with same
height and weight to play Amy's character, and she couldn't
even get enough finger strength to pull the trigger in
the opposite direction with her left hand.

Speaker 7 (41:20):
There are three things that can happen from here. The
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions can build a
case to prosecute, a new inquest can be held to
determine if suicide can be ruled out, or they can
do nothing at all.

Speaker 1 (41:41):
Liam R.

Speaker 7 (41:42):
Scott Rhoda about some of the facts that Coron and
Sarah Linton used in twenty twenty one to justify not
ruling out suicide.

Speaker 1 (41:50):
Let me go to that selfie. You've seen it, haven't you. Yeah,
the selfie that Amy took less than thirty minutes before
she died, holding the gun in room. That's been painted
as very much an indicator that she was having suicidal thoughts.
Do you agree with that?

Speaker 6 (42:07):
Absolutely not.

Speaker 9 (42:08):
No. I think that selfie of her on the bed,
I think that's a statement of power, you know that
seeing don't mess with me.

Speaker 6 (42:18):
I'm armed.

Speaker 9 (42:19):
I'm going to protect myself. I believe that's what that
picture says me. Not some indication towards suicide Limb.

Speaker 1 (42:26):
So the total opposite.

Speaker 6 (42:27):
Yeah, absolutely, that's all opposite.

Speaker 1 (42:29):
Yeah, I'm trying to ask you questions without the benefit
of hindsight, which is difficult, but I think it's necessary
because there's no good either of us looking in the
rearview mirror and saying, aha, I know this now because
of dot dot dot. I'm trying to work out how

(42:50):
two detectives could view this scene even without the sort
of detailed analysis that you've already done, and so quickly
come to the conclude us that it was self harm.
I just I just can't. I'm not a police officer's scolpt,
but I can't wrap my hit around that.

Speaker 9 (43:06):
I can't rep mad around it either, lamb uh. And
for a trained investigator, for a trained detective, police officer,
constable first responder, this country, my country, any country, it's
just beyond the pale to just not do an investigation.

Speaker 1 (43:25):
Yes, that's right. The whole concept of amy suiciding was
actually suggested by one of the people who were there
on the scene before police even got there. Right.

Speaker 9 (43:36):
That triple zero phone call is an important piece of evidence.
There's there's things in that call that are such red flags.
Just get rid of her, get rid of the body,
do something. It's so flippant, it's so a lack of emotion,
lack of caring.

Speaker 1 (43:53):
Can you please just come and do something so away
from any forensic analysis, before you even get to the scene.
You think that that first phone call that David Simmons
made in itself gave police a story they should have
followed up.

Speaker 9 (44:06):
Absolutely, he put a story to the police on the
record right out of the box that one it was suicide. Two,
don't check my phone because it's broken, right, and get
rid of the body. I want to nail him down
in a chair for hours and hours and hours and

(44:27):
put those questions to him and see where we get
with it, because I'm not sure that was done properly in.

Speaker 1 (44:34):
Any cases that you've looked at around the world, Scott,
have you ever seen a story like this one where
a young mother has her two young kids in a
car only forty fifty meters away on the other side
of the wall, effectively and then does something like this.

Speaker 6 (44:51):
No, I really have not.

Speaker 9 (44:52):
I mean, we've had a lot of cases where it's
been put it's been put to us that there was
a murder or a suicide involving a young woman, hangings, medicines,
edged weapons, handguns, so.

Speaker 6 (45:06):
On and so forth.

Speaker 9 (45:07):
But not one of those scenarios, whether we found it
to be a suicide or a murderer, not one of
those scenarios. Did we have kids in a car waiting
for the mother at the time that happened. That's just
not any woman out there, any man out there.

Speaker 6 (45:21):
It doesn't matter. Think about that. The two most important
people in your life are in.

Speaker 9 (45:27):
A car with the engine on, waiting for you, with
birthday presents in the car for the child's birthday the
next day or the next two days. And you're gonna
just I'll be right back and then go shoot yourself
in the head and kill yourself like that. It's just
none of it makes sense, Leam.

Speaker 5 (45:46):
It just you know.

Speaker 9 (45:48):
And there's a reason why I got on a plane
from the United States and came to Australia for this
case and not any other case. It's because this case
is so inexplicably wrong. I wanted to be here personally
to tell.

Speaker 1 (46:02):
You that, Well, something needs to happen, doesn't it. Because
we've had a rash of domestic violence incidents in recent times,
and it's been trending. I mean, the build up has
just been why I and above anything that it should be.

Speaker 9 (46:18):
Yeah, listen, no woman should have to suffer from abuse
from their partner ever, ever, ever, and you should always
error on the side. I think of the woman in
a domestic violence situation because you know, whether people want
to argue about it or not, the male partner is

(46:41):
oftentimes stronger, has the ability to physically injure the person. Right,
There's never an excuse for it in any situation whatsoever.
I think this should be a call to action to
people to put pressure on law enforcement, on people in
their families to look out for domestic violence. There's never

(47:04):
a justification for it. I don't care your race, your age,
your color, your marital status, your gender, your sexuality, none
of it matters. What matters is the truth and holding
people accountable for violent crimes. And in this case, nobody's
been held accountable for this really violent crime and something

(47:25):
needs to be done about it.

Speaker 7 (47:27):
Or is it possible to just cut to the chase
and put Amy's case before a jury already.

Speaker 1 (47:32):
Even given that, notwithstanding that we've lost all that forensic gold,
if I can put it that way.

Speaker 9 (47:39):
Absolutely, because what we know is there's solid, verifiable data
that has been documented and although there's other evidence that's
been destroyed that would have made our job a lot easier,
but the basic tools to do our job are there, right,

(48:01):
And we were saying that our business people lie, witnesses lie,
but the evidence never lies, and the evidence in this
case is telling a very specific truth, and that truth
is that this is a homicide.

Speaker 6 (48:14):
And we can I think prove that.

Speaker 9 (48:16):
I think we have proven that based on the building
blocks that we have available to us already, so the
fact that evidence has been destroyed and yet we still
can come to this conclusion.

Speaker 6 (48:28):
Definitively. It does come down to the police commitment.

Speaker 1 (48:31):
So an Attorney General and a Director of Public Prosecutions
and a police commissioner wanted to do something, wanted to
do something positive for justice. It's possible, yes. Absolutely.

Speaker 7 (48:51):
On twenty sixth of November twenty twenty, on behalf of
Amy's family, Ashurst Lawyers, emailed former homicide detective ron Iddles
to provide he's expert opinion about the manner of which
Amy died and the way her case was handled by
wa police.

Speaker 16 (49:07):
My name is Ronald William iddles And I'm a retired
Victorian police officer. I've been provided with a copy of
the Code of Conduct for an expert witness in Western
Australia and my report complies with the Code of Conduct.
I was a police officer in Victoria for forty two
years and for thirty two years I investigated crime in Victoria.
During my career, twenty five years was spent at the

(49:29):
Homicide Squad Melbourne. In nineteen ninety nine I attended the
Homicide Investigator's Course in Albany, New York State. My investigations
from Victoria have taken me to every state in Australia
and overseas to France, Spain, New Zealand, New York and Norway.
I've given evidence on two hundred and thirty occasions in
criminal proceedings at the Melbourne Supreme Court and countless times

(49:52):
at the Melbourne Coroner's Office. The Homicide Squad in Victoria
is responsible for investigating all suspicious deaths in Victoria, and
my twenty five years attached to the squad I investigated
more than one thousand suspicious deaths. The outcome of a
suspicious death after investigation may be natural causes accident, misadventure,
suicide or homicide. With respect to homicide, it may be

(50:15):
murder or manslaughter, and other issues then may be whether
the act was done in self defense. For twenty years
of the twenty five years I was attached to the
homicide squad, I held the rank of detective senior sergeant.
During that time I was involved in three hundred and
twenty homicide investigations and at least two hundred and fifty
suicide cases. I am unable to give an exact figure

(50:36):
a firearm was used in cases I was involved in,
but would say as a minimum two hundred. Generally, when
attending a suspicious death involving the use of a firearm,
you work on the basis it is a homicide until
you prove different. This ensures no shortcuts are taken and
your conclusion is based on sound forensic evidence, witness accounts,
victimology and other intelligence. Theustralian Investigation Doctrine provides the standard

(51:02):
for investigation of incidents by police officers in Western Australia.
It revolves around the crime model, contact, respond, investigate, manage
and evaluation. The five key strategies are physical evidence, witnesses, intelligence,
public awareness and suspect or person of interest. The initial
call to police emergency was made at five eighteen pm

(51:24):
and as a result, local police from Mundajong Police attended,
being officers Blanford, Dixon and Roberts. The response to the
incident by local police officers was in accordance with the
Western Australian Police Investigation Doctrine crime model. In responding, they
preserved the crime scene, located and isolated potential witnesses or

(51:44):
persons of interest, and in determining if an offense had
been committed, photographed the crime scene and requested detectives to attend.
The taking of statements from Simmons and Price at the
gate of the property was not ideal, at least it
committed them to a basic account. Detectives from Row Kingham
arrived around seven pm and after a short time all
drove to the house where they were briefed by police

(52:05):
officer Dixon. Kirkman and Weederman then entered the crime scene.
After examination, they both formed the view the deceased Wensley
had taken her own life. Concerns were raised by the
uniform police and attendance, which appear to have been ignored.
Dixon received a phone call at eight pm and was
informed that after reading the statements of David Simmons and

(52:25):
Gareth Price, the death was deemed non suspicious. Kirkman makes
the assessment based on speaking with the first responders, examination
of the crime scene, and reading the statements of Simmons
and Price. Of interest, it is deemed a non suspicious
death at eight pm and statements from Price and Simmons
are not completed at that time. Kirkman sets out his

(52:46):
observations and conclusions in his statement made some four years
after the incident. Paragraph thirty two describes the entry wound.
Paragraph forty notes no defensive wounds. In my opinion, the
issue of no defensive wounds does not not established suicide.
In my opinion what should have happened on the night
was the crime scene should have remained a protected forensic sight.

(53:08):
Specialists should have been called for so a proper examination
was undertaken, which should have included pathologist, photographer, crime scene examiner,
ballistics expert, chemist in relation to blood spatter and gunshot
residue consideration to consult with and request the attendance of
the major crime squad in accordance with the determination it
was a specialist investigation. Further basic steps should have been

(53:32):
to convey both Simmons and Price to the local police
station so a more detailed account could be obtained by
means of a formal interview. Both Simmons and Price should
have been interviewed by detectives that night. Josh Brydon should
have been located and interviewed on the night prior to
any decision being made around.

Speaker 3 (53:49):
The cause of the deceased's death.

Speaker 16 (53:51):
Robert Simmons should have been interviewed on the night as
at five twenty eight pm when he spoke with Sin
John's ambulance, he was of the view his son had
shot his partner and made a mistake. What is his
belief for making such a statement. Nancy Kirk should have
been interviewed. When she arrived at the property, she tells
David Simmons you killed her, you bastard. You would want

(54:11):
to know the basis of that statement and the history
between Amy and David. Explore avenues in relation to domestic violence.
The fact police have no record does not mean it
was not occurring. Ascertain movements and contact with Amy Wensley
during the day. Rachel Price should have been interviewed as
she had been with the deceased prior to death, make

(54:32):
a request for call charge records to ascertain who the
deceased had been speaking to or texting. I would expect
these steps to have been taken as a minimum at
the commencement of this type of investigation. The detectives from Rockingham,
and in particular Detective Sergeant Kirkman, as the most senior investigator,
failed to follow the crime model and completely missed the

(54:53):
most important phase investigation. From information contained in the inquest brief,
it is evident detective arrive around seven pm. They are
then given a verbal briefing, and at seven eighteen pm,
Kirkman and Weederman enter the actual crime scene. Photographs are
taken and a mud map is drawn by Kirkman. They
then leave by eight pm, having deemed the death a suicide.

(55:16):
That means an assessment has been made within forty two
minutes of viewing the scene. The report written by Detective
Weederman twenty seventh of June twenty fourteen states Detective Sergeant
Kirkman read the statements out to us. The statements from
Simmons and Price were consistent and corroborated the scene. We
assessed these comments contrast with the statement made by Kirkman

(55:37):
eighth of November twenty eighteen, where he states there were inconsistencies.
Once a crime scene is dismantled and cleaned, you can
never recreate it. To be exact, the determination by Rockingham
detectives to deem the case non suspicious and to remove
the protected crime scene without calling experts conducting some basic
investigation was a major mistake and drastically undermined the further investigation.

(56:01):
On twenty seventh of June twenty fourteen, the Major Crime
Squad assumed responsibility to determine the circumstances of the death
of Amy Wensley. There were obvious limitations forensically, as the
crime seene had been cleaned and future interpretations were based
on some assumptions. Simmons and Price were formally interviewed, children
interviewed and statements obtained from relevant witnesses. In total, sixty

(56:23):
six exhibits were lodged for holding or further examination. Detective
Sergeant Evans provided his final report on the fourth of
November twenty fourteen. His conclusion was no criminality has been
identified in this matter. No evidence indicates third party involvement
in the death of Amy and as such the matter
to be treated as a suicide with compilation of a

(56:44):
coronial file. The facts in the report of Evans are wrong,
one being police were called at five fifty pm when
in fact it was five twenty pm. Secondly, Amy spoke
to her mother at four forty five pm, but it
was confirmed to be five pm. The comment in the report,
Forensic analysis was conducted on the shotgun and cartridges and

(57:05):
nothing was identified that would indicate criminality in the death
of Wenesley. In my opinion, this shows a closed mind
to other possibilities. The absence of fingerprints or DNA does
not equate to no criminality, It just means it did
not assist the investigation. The final comments in Evans report
are premature. They may be based on verbal reports, but

(57:26):
the final written forensic reports were not completed to twenty
fifteen and further testing was requested early twenty fifteen.

Speaker 3 (57:34):
The crime model sets out five key investigative.

Speaker 16 (57:36):
Strategies, one being to minimize tunnel vision and or premature closure.
In my opinion, there was a failing of the Major
Crime Squad and the report of Detective Sergeant Evans, fourth
of November twenty fourteen supports my view of premature closure.
The major crime squad investigation was impacted by decisions of
Rockingham detectives because of the dismantling of the crime scene

(57:58):
and the fact they were not formally interviewed on the night.

Speaker 7 (58:01):
Ron Dalls acknowledges domestic violence was looked into.

Speaker 16 (58:05):
But very limited was done on the initial night, other
than to check on the police database.

Speaker 7 (58:10):
He refers to the statement by Amy's friend Shelley Stanley,
who called crime Stoppers only days after Amy died, saying,
you know, I thought that it.

Speaker 15 (58:19):
Was important that police knew that she was in an
abusive relationship and that David had an explosive temper.

Speaker 4 (58:30):
The person said, I'll pass.

Speaker 15 (58:32):
It on to the detective and if they think that
it warrants investigation, someone will contact you back. The next
time I was actually contacted by police was for the
cold case review, many many years later.

Speaker 16 (58:50):
She reported to police her concerns it was not followed up.
All detectives can investigate domestic violence matters and pursue issues
which may arise. Firstly, you need information of evidence to
follow and it appears they have done that, but somehow
the information by Shelley Stanley was not properly recorded or documented.
Domestic violence can be an attributing factor to homicide or

(59:12):
a suicide, and as a rule, the investigator presents that
evidence in determining an outcome. To establish if someone took
their own life or not, there are limited avenues to explore.
Health records provide some level of detail. Friends and associates
can provide evidence of research. Amy Wensley's medical records were
obtained from Pinjarramedical Center and some witnesses gave their own opinion.

(59:36):
All examinations have been conducted for this type of incident
or offense. The non preservation of the original crime scene
was an error. It's not unusual to conduct tests on
a crime scene post the offense, as often by the
time a crime is reported, the scene has been cleaned.
Over All, the forensic investigation has been thorough. The review
conducted by the Cold Case Unit of the Homicide Squad

(59:58):
by Detective Sergeant Jo is of a high standard. During
the review, they undertook strategies around Simmons and price to
maximize evidence gathering. In my view, details of the strategies
would involve public interest immunity. The outcome is not detailed
in the report. Ron eddallsm APM, retired Detective Senior Sergeant,

(01:00:19):
Victoria Police.

Speaker 3 (01:00:20):
Eighth of January twenty twenty.

Speaker 7 (01:00:22):
One, I reached out to Shelley, who told me that
despite being a fair bit older than Amy, they became
friends because her ex partner used to catch up with
Simmons a fair bit due to their mutual love for hunting.
She still remembers when she first learned of Amy's death.

Speaker 15 (01:00:38):
My partner at the time knocked on my door and
there must have been the next day and said.

Speaker 4 (01:00:44):
Amy's dead.

Speaker 16 (01:00:46):
And I was like, what.

Speaker 15 (01:00:50):
What are you talking about, and couldn't really comprehend what
he was saying to me.

Speaker 4 (01:00:55):
I was like, how do you know?

Speaker 15 (01:00:57):
And he said he was at work, he saw it
on the shorts for the news or something, and he
recognized the driveway up to the house, so he apparently
drove down there.

Speaker 4 (01:01:10):
He got stopped on the driveway by police.

Speaker 15 (01:01:13):
Once I'd heard that supposedly it was suicide, I just
couldn't believe that.

Speaker 4 (01:01:17):
That was possible.

Speaker 15 (01:01:19):
I knew that Amy was in the process of getting
organized to leave Dave, and I warned her to be
careful and that it was a dangerous time and to
be safe.

Speaker 4 (01:01:32):
I didn't think that that would happen, but.

Speaker 15 (01:01:36):
I was worried because I had seen Dave's explosive temper.

Speaker 7 (01:01:40):
Despite initially believing Amy had met with thou Play, Shelley's
ex partner changed his mind when he eventually caught up
with Simmons.

Speaker 13 (01:01:48):
Dave told him.

Speaker 15 (01:01:49):
Things like, they tested my hands for gunshot residue and
there was none, so that proves I didn't kill her.
And from my understanding over everything that's come since then
is I don't think the police did do any residue
tests on the boys, and as.

Speaker 7 (01:02:07):
We know, if they had, gune residue would have been
found on their clothes anyway, because they had been shooting
guns all afternoon. I asked Shelley what her ex partner
thought about her reaching up to the police.

Speaker 4 (01:02:18):
I didn't say first up because I knew that he would.

Speaker 9 (01:02:24):
Not be happy that I called.

Speaker 15 (01:02:26):
Police, So I actually said that the police had called me,
and yeah, he went right off.

Speaker 4 (01:02:35):
He was not happy.

Speaker 7 (01:02:37):
Shelley recalls the incident when she saw Simmons lose his temper.

Speaker 15 (01:02:41):
One of the days that we visited their house in Serpentine,
David had invited us over there for a barbecue, so
he went over during the day, but we ended up
in the dam.

Speaker 4 (01:02:56):
We had some drinks of fair few drinks, or many
of us did. Amy didn't. She barely drank.

Speaker 15 (01:03:05):
The only time she usually drank alcohol was if Dave
pushed her into it, and then she would maybe have
one drink.

Speaker 4 (01:03:12):
Eventually, Nancy and Rick came and the kids were playing
on the kayak and that.

Speaker 15 (01:03:18):
But at some stage the kids the girls were saying
they were hungry, and Nancy was like, you know, we
should go back and cook the barbecue, but Dave was
pretty hell bent on keeping on drinking.

Speaker 13 (01:03:35):
We did end up down at the house and.

Speaker 15 (01:03:39):
Nancy was going to go inside and make the girls
sandwiches or something, because it was pretty obvious by that
stage that David wasn't going to do barbecue. And David
straightway flared up at Nancy's and he was really rude
to her.

Speaker 4 (01:03:55):
I mean, he was quite drunk as well, and then Rick.

Speaker 15 (01:04:01):
Stepped in and said, don't you talk to my wife
like that, and it just got Dave went from zero
to one hundred straight away, started pushing and shoving and
trying to have a fight with Nancy's husbands, and Amy
and Nancy both intervened. Amy was the one that sort

(01:04:25):
of peeled them apart in the end and calmed Dave
down and stuff. But yeah, he was ready to go
full throttle and fight Rick. And it was really it
was based on him being rude to Nancy, who was
just trying to look out for the girls who were hungry.

Speaker 7 (01:04:44):
And what about any sort of violence towards Amy.

Speaker 15 (01:04:49):
I didn't see like specific physical violence towards her, but
it's really hard to explain, but the way he spoke
to her and was quite demeaning at times.

Speaker 13 (01:05:06):
And one time we were camping out at the farm
and I can't remember what.

Speaker 4 (01:05:14):
It was about.

Speaker 15 (01:05:14):
He basically I think he was trying to pressure Amy
into drinking, and she was like, no, no, I think
one of us should be sober.

Speaker 13 (01:05:23):
You know, we're here with the girls.

Speaker 15 (01:05:26):
It's important somebody sober. I don't want to drink. And
he was like, go on, you know, pressuring it, go on,
you know, don't be.

Speaker 4 (01:05:35):
Don't be boring. You're always said boring, you know.

Speaker 15 (01:05:41):
He just carried on on on, pressuring her, and in
the end she relented and she's like, oh fine, so
she had one drink, but he just kept on sort
of at her, and to the point where I felt
the need to.

Speaker 4 (01:05:56):
Sort of say, you know, you really should appreciate.

Speaker 15 (01:06:02):
Amy issues looking out for you girls and doing the
right thing, and you know, she's an amazing person. Don't
you think you should sort of speak to her more nicely?
And then he said, oh, so you won't return.

Speaker 13 (01:06:18):
Out, do you?

Speaker 4 (01:06:20):
Is that what you like? You know, straight away because
I spoke.

Speaker 15 (01:06:27):
Highly of Aiming, Yeah, he's straightway started insinuating that there
was something more to that, which was just ridiculous seeing
footage of Dave and Gareth and Rachel sort of.

Speaker 4 (01:06:44):
This far down the track.

Speaker 13 (01:06:45):
Even back then, I felt like Aiming never.

Speaker 4 (01:06:53):
Really fitted in with that group.

Speaker 15 (01:06:56):
She was very education orientated for her girls, like she
was very Yeah, she was very determined that her girls
were going to get the best of her. She's spent
a lot of time and effort educating them, trying to
teach them to read, to tie shoelaces, to.

Speaker 13 (01:07:18):
You know, you name it.

Speaker 15 (01:07:20):
She just didn't fit in with that redneck, hill billy
peak shooting, drunken drug taking.

Speaker 1 (01:07:29):
Sort of world, a world she was hoping to escape
a year after his first statement, mister Riddles submits an addendum.

Speaker 3 (01:07:43):
Today, thirteenth of January twenty twenty one.

Speaker 16 (01:07:46):
I was provided with an unredacted copy of the internal
review conducted by Detective Senior Sergeant Bryan Hunter, dated fourteenth
of May twenty twenty. I've been asked by counsel assisting
the family to make comment on the investigator analysis, in
particular points one to fifteen. I have read the documents
and agree with all points one to fifteen. They are

(01:08:07):
all very sound and valid points. The most significant two
points at the bottom of page thirty four of the
document are the death occurred following a violent domestic altercation
between Simmons and the deceased. The deceased died as a
result of a gunshot to the head in her and Simmons' bedroom.
The two circumstances overwhelmingly demanded the investigation bethorough and to

(01:08:29):
the highest standard. Detective Senior Sergeant Hunter's report is a
very candid assessment.

Speaker 1 (01:08:34):
He's referring to the WA Police Internal Affairs Unit report,
of which we also have a copy. Despite what uniformed
officers advised him when he arrived on scene, it was
noted that Kirkman stated in his interview that he was
treating the matter as a sudden death under the Coroner's Act,

(01:08:56):
not a criminal investigation.

Speaker 16 (01:09:00):
Treat these matters as sudden death until such time as
it looked suspicious.

Speaker 3 (01:09:04):
When I turned up, I didn't know either way.

Speaker 1 (01:09:07):
Here is an excerpt of its findings in relation to
the conduct of detectives Kirkman and Wiederman on the knight
Amy died.

Speaker 2 (01:09:17):
Apart from their observations at the scene, they failed to
seek any other independent corroboration of Simmons and Price's statements.
They classified Simmons and Price as witnesses and requested statements
be obtained from them by junior inexperienced staff. This was
prior to making any assessment of criminality. They failed to

(01:09:38):
speak to Simmons or Price to clarify inconsistencies or obtain
further details from them. They failed to attempt to establish
a timeline of events to confirm or rebut the account
of Simmons or Price, i e. What time the deceased
had arrived home, who she was with that day, time
of death, etc. They failed to speak or cause any

(01:10:01):
inquiries with Joshua Brydon, who was apparently also present during
the physical altercation with the deceased. They failed to speak
to the deceased mother, who Kirkman knew had received a
phone call from the deceased shortly prior to her death.
They failed to seek further information from family or friends
of suicidal ideation or previous domestic violence incidents. Apart from

(01:10:25):
checking the deceased hands and maybe arms, did not know
of any other injuries to her, failed to make any
inquiries concerning the missing door handle inside the bedroom or
even recognized it may have been evidence of a struggle.
Failed to make inquiries of the service station as to
Simmons and Price's actions there. Kirkman incorrectly determined the trajectory

(01:10:50):
of the projectiles was low to high, and theorized in
his interview the deceased had rested the butt of the
firearm on the ground before pulling the trigger. BPA expert
analysis states the firearm was likely perpendicular when fired. Failure
to interview Robert Simmons about him entering the scene and

(01:11:10):
handling the firearms prior to police attendants, failure to make
detailed notes of their actions and decisions. They failed to
consider the following forensic procedures were necessary, Seizure of Simmons
and Price's clothing, view and photograph Simmons as a result
of a violent altercation, Seizure of the deceased vehicle for

(01:11:32):
evidentary material blood patterns, damage, glass fragments, fingernail scrapings of
Simmons and Price, fingernail scrapings of the deceased. Wiederman and
ultimately Kirkman based their assessment of this incident on the
assumption Simmons and Price were telling the truth. However, in
these circumstances, that assumption is an unsafe approach and they

(01:11:55):
should have not made the decision based on their limited
level of investigation. Further investigation was necessary and Major Crime
Squad should have been informed of the matter to make
their determination. It has been found that Kirkman and Wiederman
neglected their duty by not adequately investigating this matter. In

(01:12:15):
the first instance, they failed to identify or attend to
matters of inquiry against the WA Police Force Investigation doctrine.
No criminal element to this matter was identified. The recommendation
was to refer the matters to the Integrity Review Panel
for consideration of issuance of an assistant Commissioner's warning notice.

(01:12:38):
The subject officers were notified of the IAU investigation outcomes
through an early assessment notice on fifteen April twenty twenty.
Both Wiederman and Kirkman were issued with an ACWN Brian
Hunter Detective Senior Sergeant, Internal Affairs Unit.

Speaker 1 (01:12:57):
This was dated fourteen May twenty twenty, So despite this
complete dereliction of duty, Weederman and Kirkman were both let
off with warnings. Now it's worth noting that only Weederman
remains on the WA Police Force payroll. Kirkman left some

(01:13:17):
time after the inquest findings came out. Meanwhile, the coroner
had an entire section in her findings about mister Iddle's
report and cross examination, which included the following observations of note.

Speaker 14 (01:13:32):
In the context of the thousand or so suspicious deaths,
mister Iddles has investigated only a small number involved women
and firearms, and of those only a couple involved a
female committing suicide. In those cases, the firearm used was
a handgun, and he had never been involved in a
case where a female person committed suicide with a shotgun.

(01:13:52):
In terms of firearm deaths generally, mister Iddle's commented that
the position in which Amy was found is not the
position you would normally find someone who used a firearm
to harm themselves. In his experience, most of these cases
either have the person seated in a chair or lying
on a bed. Therefore, in mister Eddele's opinion, Amy's case
is very unusual and warranted close investigation. Mister Eddles considered

(01:14:16):
the Major Crime Division investigation, which commenced the day after
Amy's death, Operation JUNDI, was investigated to a reasonable standard,
but was concluded prematurely, given the final comments of the
investigating officer were made before final written forensic reports were
available in relation to such items as Gareth and David's clothing.
Mister Eddles described the investigators as appearing to have tunnel vision,

(01:14:39):
in the sense that they appeared willing to come to
a conclusion before they had all the available evidence. He
also noted the investigation was impacted by the decisions of
the Rockingham detective's premature closure of the case on the
night Amy died. Although mister Idels did not have full
access to the investigative materials, he based his opinion upon
the information he did have an opportunity to review. He

(01:15:01):
noted the cold case review left three options open, namely suicide,
accident or homicide. Mister iddles expressed the opinion that he
did not think the evidence suggested the death occurred by accident,
but considered the other two options were open on the evidence.
In particular, mister Iddle's indicated his opinion that you still

(01:15:21):
can't rule out homicide on the evidence that has been identified.
Mister Iddle's agreed one evidence that could point to homicide
was the biomechanical evidence in relation to the position of
her hand, but he also pointed to the position of
where it happened, noting that women do not normally use
a shotgun to commit suicide, and if it did happen
as a suicide, based on his own experience, he would

(01:15:43):
have expected it to have occurred on the bed. If
the death occurred by suicide in the location where Amy
was found, and the evidence of Gareth was accepted that
the shotgun was first found on the legs, the scenario
does not account for the recoil of the shotgun. Therefore,
if it is the case that the bar of the
gun was found between Amy's legs, mister Iddle's commented, then
we've got an issue there that no one can explain,

(01:16:06):
and the lack of blood spatter and gunshot residue on
Amy's right hand on the balance of probabilities, suggested the
hand was more likely to have been underneath Amy's thigh
at the time of the shooting.

Speaker 1 (01:16:17):
Now, bearing in mind mister Iddle's is not privy to
all available evidence, the coroner still chose to seize on
his comment that you need more than suspicion, and rather
than recommend any action to build on this, she concludes
there's nothing more to be done due to the failure
by detectives to investigate thoroughly at the start.

Speaker 14 (01:16:41):
I note the history of this matter, including a previous
referral by a coroner to the Director of Public Prosecutions
under Section twenty seven, Part five of the Coroner's Act,
which included the first report of Professor Ackland. Under that section,
I may also make a referral to the Director of
Public Prosecutions if I believe in diet of offense has
been committed in connection with Amy's death. Although the required

(01:17:04):
standard of proof in an inquest is lower than the
criminal standard of proof, in making my findings, I have
applied the Briginshaw principle, which requires a consideration of the
nature of the allegations when considering what standard of proof
is necessary to support a judicial finding. In this case,
the allegations of involvement in concealment of a homicide are

(01:17:25):
patently very serious and could have grave consequences for individuals,
so I consider I require particularly strong or cogent evidence
to prove the allegations to my satisfaction. Given I have
made an open finding in relation to the manner of death,
in my view, there is insufficient evidence for me to
be satisfied that an indubtable offense has been committed in

(01:17:47):
connection with Amy's death. Therefore, I do not propose to
refer this case to the Director of Public Prosecutions for
further consideration.

Speaker 1 (01:18:00):
But it's not over yet, not by a long way.
WA Police has now announced it's dedicating a new team
to investigate Amy's case. It's been four years since the
cold case investigation ended, but they've acknowledged a number of
people have contacted them with new information as a result

(01:18:21):
of our podcast.

Speaker 17 (01:18:23):
The increased media attention has led to numerous calls to
crime stoppers. Part of the Special Crime Squad's role is
to follow up and determine if any new information has
been received that might open avenues for further investigation. To
achieve this objective, a team has been formulated to assess
new information received and investigate any new leads that may
be present. We don't want to give loved ones any

(01:18:45):
false hope. That we can reassure them that the WA
Police will follow up thoroughly and never stop looking. We
are always grateful to our media partners for highlighting unsolved
cases and to the friends and family who worked with
us to seek justice.

Speaker 7 (01:19:04):
Next episode, discrimination, victim blaming, and trying to move the
dial on a case where it's easier for the people
in power to just do nothing.

Speaker 2 (01:19:14):
There's plenty of loose hands, there's plenty of emerging possible
lines of inquiry, there's plenty of strategies that they can employ.

Speaker 15 (01:19:23):
The question is why not?

Speaker 1 (01:19:25):
And the startling new claims sent to WA Police to
follow up and yeah, she was dead.

Speaker 13 (01:19:32):
We've been pigging and we'd like founder And then.

Speaker 15 (01:19:36):
We had to burn the clothes because the costs were
chasing us and we didn't want them to think that
we had anything to do with it.

Speaker 13 (01:20:03):
We both know the now.

Speaker 4 (01:20:08):
You me.

Speaker 1 (01:20:20):
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

(01:20:46):
our website sevenews 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.
If you're on Facebook or Instagram, you can follow us
to see photos and updates relevant to the case, but

(01:21:09):
for legal reasons, unfortunately, you won't be able to make
any comments. And remember, if you like what you're hearing,
don't forget to subscribe. Please rate and review our series
because it really helps new listeners to find us. Presenter

(01:21:32):
and executive producer Alison Sandy, Presenter and investigative journalist Liam Bartlett,
Sound design Mark Wright, Assistant producer Cassie Woodward, Graphics Jason Blanford,
and special thanks to Tim Clark and Brian Seymour. This

(01:22:05):
is a seven News production.