The blood staining at the scene VS claims (*Warning - contains injury detail. Discretion advised*)

Claims are often made that Jodi Jones did not die at the locus where she was found. This has been conveyed by campaign leaders, online and in books and videos, and the same claims and theories have been carried through by campaigners and even moderators of support groups for Luke Mitchell. The assertion is usually related to the alleged lack of blood at the scene in the area where Jodi's body was found and has resulted in various conspiracy theories.

Blood spray was found low down on the wall, meters from the disposition site where Jodi's body was discovered on the evening of June 30th 2003, by Luke Mitchell and members of her family.

It has been claimed that this blood spray on the wall was NOT arterial spray and that the evidence points to Jodi being killed elsewhere and then her body being left behind the wall at Roan's Dyke path. 

However, this does not correlate whatsoever, with the professional opinions of either the pathologist, Anthony Busuttil, or forensics officer, Derek Scrimger, both who provided expert witness testimony at the trial

Pathologist Anthony Busuttil - the arterial spray on the wall

Some quotes from professor Busuttil's testimony 

Page 1856: AT (Advocate depute): We've heard that the pattern of blood staining there (on the wall), at least in parts, is consistent with what you might find by way of a large severed blood vessel? - I totally agree with that, yes

Alright. Does that tend to tell you anything, as to where the young girl was when the cutting fatal injuries to the throat were inflicted? - It suggests very strongly that the final cut, which killed her on the neck, happened very close to home. 

And of course if she was at or against the wall when the throat injuries were inflicted, that's where she would have died? - indeed 

Page 1883 - Because the spray on the wall also suggests that that was, I suppose it would probably be the carotid artery? - It looks like an arterial spurt, yes

If that is an arterial spurt, at that point in time she is so low down that it spurts on to the wall? - Yes

1885 - So asphyxia, then cut throat. At some point in time during the cut throat injuries being inflicted, she must have been down towards the ground near the wall? - yes

And once that exercise has been completed by the attacker, she is not going to survive any length of time? She (incomprehensible) could be dead in seconds.

1873 "The likeliest site where the cut throat fateful injury happened was by the wall"

On page 1871, the professor explains that a cursory examination of the scene was carried out before the body was taken to mortuary.

Busuttil agrees that there is evidence of movement in the locus, the killing was not static 

Jodi's body was moved from where she was killed at the wall, to beneath a tree?

1872 - The body was lying beneath a fallen branch or tree to where it appears to have been dragged or pushed? - Yes 

Can I just pause there and ask you about that? What did you see at the scene that led you to that consideration? - I think the cut throat injuries were obvious at the scene 

The lack of blood - why wasn't the blood staining obvious at the scene?

Was there really a lack of blood at the scene?

According to Forensic officer Derek Scrimger, there was blood staining, but it had been 'significantly' affected by rainwater.

A statement from Scrimger is read out during the testimony SIO Craig Dobbie transcript page 79:

 "A few areas of blood staining were visible but had been significantly affected by rainwater"

SIO stated that it had rained heavily, on the evening of June 30th, before Police arrived at the locus.

From press reports:

Mr Scrimger said the pattern of bloodstains was consistent with an artery being severed. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4096295.stm)

"Possibly the assailant would have been behind, standing for example."

"What many people fail to realise is that at the time of the assault there may not have been much blood there. There wouldn't necessarily be any blood on the assailant."

"bloodstain patterns on a wall suggested the 14-year-old would have been low down when the fatal wounds were inflicted" -

A press report (Free library) article states:

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/JODI%27S+WRISTS+TIED+UP+WITH+TROUSERS%3B+Expert+tells+of+body+found+at...-a0126143100

"Forensic scientist Derek Scrimger, 40,said he was called at home and arrived at the path at 8am the following day.

He said a colleague had been there earlier but because she had a bad back, she couldn't climb over the wall to the spot where Jodi lay.

When he got there, her body had been moved from the original position and her clothing gathered together.

Mr Scrimger said there were two areas of bloodstaining on the wall near where her body was found.

One could have been caused by Jodi or her bloodstained attacker falling or brushing against the wall.

The second area was lower and was consistent with blood spraying from a severed artery.

Advocate depute Alan Turnbull, QC, said: 'Does that suggest that if the young girl's throat was cut in the area near to the wall, she must have been near to the ground when that happened?'

Mr Scrimger: 'Given the angles the way the blood hit the wall, either kneeling or sitting.' Mr Turnbull: 'If the assailant was behind her when the young girl was low down at the wall and her throat was cut several times, is it conceivable she has collapsed on to the wall and down to the ground as the artery has been severed?'

Mr Scrimger: 'It is one possibility.'

The jury have already seen a video showing that Jodi also suffered massive injuries to her face, stomach and left breast.

Mr Scrimger said if her throat had been cut from behind, the blood would have travelled forward and there wouldn't necessarily have been any on the attacker.

But he agreed that if Jodi's clothing had been removed after death, it was likely the attacker would be bloodstained."