6. The human material residue left on the scene should be feasible given the injuries as seen on video and as reckoned by the coroner
As we saw at the end of the last chapter, any statement that assumes that the same evidence that can be gleaned from the video as can be gained by the evidence provided by the case coroner is flawed. The two are not compatible. In the relevant chapter above, it was concluded upon that the body as seen in the video didn’t indicate all the damage reckoned done to it by Simon Poole.
So the question here really should be, as it become in the last section of the previous chapter, does the residue left on the scene validate the coroner and the extensive blood loss suggested by the injuries he catalogued, or does it justify the supposition that there was very little blood loss because of how Rigby’s body appeared to be in fine fettle?
If we analyse the appearance of blood on the street scene, we can divide it into 4 distinct areas. The first is the big pool by the wall where Lee Rigby was supposedly attacked. There are drag marks coming off of this moving towards the kerb. Then there are two spatters of blood between this and the kerb. The first one is tiny, and again gives the impression of being deposited while the body was being moved. The second one is larger, and reminds one of that part of Greece at the top that dips into the Aegean: three strands of blood flow from it down the hill for about 3 feet, so we have to think of how an adequate amount of blood to feed these rivers must have been deposited, and balance that against the time Rigby was in transport as he was being unceremoniously dumped in Artillery Place. The third blood mark is on the kerb and then onto the red lines beside the kerb in the gutter area. The last blood is an emanation that seems to come from Rigby’s head after he had been dumped in the road.
Let’s examine these one at a time. The pool of blood (1) is quite impressive when it is seen from a BBC helicopter that captured images of the police forensics activity at some later point in the evening. By this time, a rivulet of blood had developed and ran at the blind side of the Tigra to extend down the hill for 7 flagstones. This dribble can be seen on the Bus Footage at the beginning of the Woolwich Angel or waiting period; at this stage it only extends for two flag stones. Before Adebolajo is about to run at the police, this rivulet is also visible and has trickled down to the 6th flagstone. According to the official narrative there are about 10 minutes between these two parameters, and so what the pictures tell us is that the pool cannot offer much of a reservoir of blood if it only pushes out a 9 feet long line of liquid over 1/6 of an hour.
Other footage actually presents evidence that casts doubt on the very existence of the pool. These are images of supposedly ignorant passers-by walking in the gap between the wall and the Tigra. There are two of these who are actually photographed walking through the area that is supposed to be covered in this pool.
One in particular, an older woman with what looks like a shopping bag, can be seen maintaining her regular stride; she doesn’t adjust to manoeuvre this obstruction, and she certainly doesn’t mind traipsing through it. Collectively in the footage, we know of two others who were approaching the area with purpose and aiming to walk through the gap before the footage cuts off (see Figs. 98 and 99).
The behaviour of these people suggests that a large pool of blood did not exist through the waiting period, and that in fact it only materialised before TV cameras had access to the scene from the air. There may have been a basic deposit of liquid that provided the rivulet at the start, but nothing that would have caused pedestrians to recognise what was on the pavement as blood and gore. Furthermore, in an image taken from the front seat of the top floor of the bus (see Fig. 26), the drag element of the pool is not visible. On the other hand, in another piece of footage – the Sun Angel Footage (see Fig. 101) – which is taken from the front of the bus this time on the ground level, the drag element is barely visible, and is so because it is reflecting light differently to the general pavement. There is no colour complexion by which one can recognise it as blood.
The same effect can be seen on the Bus Footage with regards the second grouping of blood – it appears as an expression of the reflection of light (see Fig. 100). The effect is very prominent mostly in this footage where it looks almost silver. In other footage, the pavement just looks dirty at that place, rather than bled upon. There is no obvious scarlet colouration.
The patch on the kerb (3) is the only blood staining that is clearly visible and clearly identifiable as blood in any footage that was shot while the incident was ongoing. Specifically, it is visible in the Mirror Footage and it is noticeably dark red in colour and it cannot be mistaken. Having said that, it is nowhere to be seen in the Bus Footage, and in other footage one can perhaps detect general scrofulous matter, but not anything so obviously blood.
The last patch of blood is very hard to detect on most images because it usually falls within the range of the blurring that is applied to hide Rigby – according to the Mirror Footage, that is. However, there are occasions when this area is not obliterated in an image. In one particular still taken from the Mirror footage, the bleeding can be determined clearly (see Fig. 91). There is a halo of red on the face side of Rigby’s head between his hands, which are also obviously dirty from blood. There is also a squirt of blood that extends from the head in a curve toward the kerb. This squirt must be representative of a spurt of blood escaping the body, because it doesn’t look like a rivulet that has formed by flowing. Ironically, we should expect to see this characteristic more often on the scene, but this appears to be the only example. Instead we see pools, dabs, drags and dribbles.
Unfortunately, more so than any other supposed blood mark, this one is just not visible on other footage – when there is not such extensive blurring, that is, as in the image in Fig. 101.
It would be worthwhile to examine pertinent information offered by Ingrid Loyau-Kennet and Amanda Donnelly at this juncture. They were not at trial to give witness testimony, which surprised a lot of people given that they were catapulted to near-celebrity status at the time of the incident by the corporate-media because of their close proximity to the goings-on. Nevertheless, the interviews they gave to newspapers and television allowed their account to go on the record. Ingrid had this to say:
There was blood on the pavement by the car where the man on the ground had been hit by it. At first there was no blood by the body but as I talked to the man it began to flow which worried me because blood needs a beating heart to flow.
London attack: interview with Ingrid Loyau-Kennett; Conal Urqhart; 23 May 2013.
What Ingrid seems to be saying is that she saw blood on the pavement that she linked with the car – i.e. that the impact with the car caused that specific loss of blood. There is no mention of the blood pool. The mention of the blood flowing from what was supposed to be a dead body is most interesting. Even when Adebowale is filmed in the ITN-Kipre Footage walking back across the road from the bus – so nearing the end of the waiting period, and the incident itself – there is no blood, or so it seems, around the head of Lee Rigby.
The following is what Amanda Donnelley said:
It was strange, because as he was lying there the hood from his hoodie was up so I couldn’t see any serious wounds.
He maybe had a bit of blood on his hands but that was it. My mind was not on what had happened to Lee, it was more ‘What can I do?’
Woolwich attack: Angels who helped murdered soldier Lee Rigby relive horror for first time; Ben Griffiths; 06 June 2013
Amanda Donnelly also testifies in a very significant if silent way by how she sat next to the body. She sat between the legs and the outstretched arms – next to the area of Lee Rigby’s body where previously Adebowale had been pounding with a knife as if trying to extract organs.
Verdict: The least we can say is that the picture of the blood is very confused. First of all we might have imagined blood to have escaped in such jets to a greater range than the pattern of spillage we have examined. Secondly, it makes no sense why blood can be seen in some images, and not at all in others, and this mystery invokes an all time general rule that should be applied now: if something is visible at only some times, but not all, then the thing we think we are seeing is not really there. To qualify that statement with relation to this blood on the scene, the thing we think we are seeing is not really there all the time. The fact that a number people walked through the big pool of blood indicates that it wasn’t there at first – so it should be said that it appears as if this blood was added to the scene. This means that Rigby did not bleed into it. If Rigby did not bleed into the main reservoir, then why should any of the other supposed blood on the scene be his?
What to make of the blood around Rigby’s head – which is possibly the same that Kennet sees flowing? The trouble is, although she corroborates what the Mirror Footage shows, this blood is not visible on any other image. On one hand, then, if there is not blood, we could say that the Mirror Footage has been enhanced to suggest the presence of blood when in fact it is not really there, and Kennett, by deciding that she could see blood, was unconsciously trying to rationalise why she decided to look for a pulse. On the other hand, if there was blood, we could say that Rigby really did bleed a little – and other photography somehow failed to pick it up. Ultimately, even if Rigby did bleed in places, it doesn’t discount the idea that because he didn’t bleed enough, the scene had to be enhanced to create the impression of a very bloody murder.
To come to a conclusion, then, even if we believe that the blood on the scene is organic, there is a case to make that it doesn’t reflect the consequences of an attack suggested by the findings of the coroner. If we think that the blood is artificial, at least most of it, that is, then that idea would be more faithful to the images in the video footage – which of course contradict the coroner who implied a lot of blood spilt.