No this is not me interviewing the two ambulance crew that went to Harrowdown Hill on the morning of 18th July 2003. Instead I want to point to the interview by Antony Barnett, one of the better people from the MSM. You can read it here. They were so concerned about what they considered to be the lack of blood for an arterial bleed that they wanted to put on record their worries; I believe it was Rowena Thursby who was able to get them to see Mr Barnett. They don't appear to be people looking for the limelight, in fact they had already voiced their thoughts at the Hutton Inquiry. In reply to Mr Dingemans Ms Hunt had said "no obvious arterial bleeding. There was no spraying of blood or huge blood loss or any obvious loss on the clothing." At the end of Mr Knox's examination we have Mr Bartlett saying "we was surprised there was not more blood on the body if it was an arterial bleed." The ambulance crew can also be seen talking about the lack of blood on this video.
From Mr Barnett's report we learn that the medics had been to dozens of incidents of attempted suicide by wrist slashing and they were very familiar with the amount of blood resulting from these actions. Now it's very easy to be seduced by all the medical terminology in Dr Hunt's report into thinking "As forensic pathologist he is the expert, look at his qualifications, look at all the tests he did on Dr Kelly, surely we must believe him rather than anyone else regarding medical matters". My response would be "As a pathologist and then a forensic pathologist has he even once seen a death from an arterial bleed. After all we know that almost all attempts at wrist cutting are unsuccessful so such instances would be seen by paramedics rather than pathologists."
Being as even handed as possible it has to be stated in Dr Hunt's defence that (obviously) he spent time looking at blood stains on Dr Kelly's clothes and on the body itself and so would see evidence of blood in areas that the medics might failed to have noticed. Dr Hunt talks about heavy bloodstaining over the left arm and "a heavier patch of bloodstaining over the right knee area". As to the other areas where blood was seen one gets the impression it was more a case of blood just getting smeared around.
There are those that are keen on the suicide explanation who say that Dr Kelly lost more blood but that it soaked into the ground or into leaf litter at the scene. Regarding leaf litter let's remember that this was July, I've also read very erudite comments on the internet by somebody who has visited the site and stated there was no leaf litter at the location and also that Harrowdown Hill itself is composed of hard Oxford clay and is virtually impermeable to liquids that might otherwise soak into the ground. No attempt at all had been made to analyse soil samples, to estimate the quantity of blood loss or to estimate the quantity of blood still in the body after arrival at the mortuary.
In the real world it might not be easy to get these figures with much accuracy. But on the basis of seeing a lot of blood smeared around it would appear that Dr Hunt made the judgement that Dr Kelly had lost sufficient blood from cutting the ulnar artery to cause death. This is not good enough. Not nearly good enough. One has always to bear in mind for a valid verdict of suicide it has to be shown beyond all reasonable doubt that it was suicide. So far as the blood loss resulting from Dr Kelly's cut ulnar artery is concerned there is insufficient evidence to prove that Dr Kelly died from that cause. Dr Hunt might paint a scenario that leads him to believe that Dr Kelly died that way. The rock solid evidence needed is just not there.