This is another lodged piece of evidence from Thames Valley Police (Annex TVP3): http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.uk/Publications/Documents/Annex%20TVP%203.pdf
In it TVP try to discredit those who consider that the body was moved at some point.
We now know that searcher Paul Chapman says that the body was 'flat on the ground' in his written statement but at the Inquiry states that he was 'sitting up against a tree'. So why the difference? It has to be remembered that he sees the body twice - once when Brock has found the body and then about 25 minutes later when he takes DC Coe into the wood. It is not impossible that he did actually see the body in a new position. So at the Inquiry he describes the position (twice) as he first saw it but in his statement it is as he sees it with DC Coe.
In Chapter 5 of his report Lord Hutton states 'Mr Chapman showed Detective Constable Coe the body lying on its back'
The extract of Paul Chapman's evidence in TVP1 says that he saw the body 'from about 15 metres'. At the Inquiry it's 15 to 20 metres as his description of the nearest point he reached from the body. What isn't explained is whether he got closer when with DC Coe.
Louise Holmes is the first person known to have seen Dr Kelly's body so her evidence is of crucial importance. In her statement she makes clear that she gets to within 4 feet of the body. My logic tells me that at that distance she can distinguish between a body with its head and shoulders slumped against the tree and a body flat on the ground particularly as ambulance technician Dave Bartlett later said that he stood in the space between the head and the tree.
TVP in Annex TVP 3 appear to give no weight to the evidence from Louise even though the clear detail in her statement fits well with what she later gave in testimony at the inquiry. I am quite angry with the way they dismiss her evidence as apparently worthless.
In the submission TVP3 we have useful side by side comparisons of part witness statements and what was said at the Inquiry. Where there is a statement indicating the body being seen on its back then this highlighted. Having just read this section again I received quite a shock! The extracts of the police statements from PCs Franklin and Sawyer make no mention of the body position although they both tell the Inquiry that the body is on its back. It's inconceivable that the two PCs wouldn't have described the body position in their statements and as the whole thrust of TVP3 is supposedly to tell us that everyone (except Louise) is seeing the body on its back why don't we see the relevant part of the statements.
Is it possible that there is some key parts of the statements of Franklin and Sawyer that the police are desperate for us not to see?