A top forensic pathologist has cast doubt over claims that Private Cheryl James killed herself at Deepcut Barracks.
The 18-year-old Army recruit was found with a fatal head wound on November 27 1995, making her one of four young soldiers to die at the barracks in Surrey over a seven-year period, between 1995 and 2002.
Ballistics experts have told her inquest that “soot deposits” could be seen on her face and thumb that are “indicative” of a close or hard contact gunshot wound.
But forensic pathologist Professor Derrick Pounder, brought in by Pte James’s family to provide an exhumation post-mortem examination on the soldier last year, said dark marks that had been taken for soot were actually either dirt or bruising.
And he said explanations given as to why no soot was found seared into Pte James’s head near the bullet wound were “not known to medical science”.
He told Woking Coroner’s Court that the issue of whether or not soot from the firing of the rifle could be found on Pte James’s body “is the determining fact, the critical fact to decide upon”.
But he has told the inquest he did not find any soot in his examinations.
Comparing photos of Pte James, from Llangollen, Wales, with that of an anonymous suicide victim, known only as Soldier A, he said the latter “clearly show the seared-in soot and propellant” and bits of soot next to the wound.
He added: “When we turn to the photos of Miss James what we see are lacerations, what we don’t see is any seared-in soot and propellant.
“It is my understanding that no-one who has looked at the photos of Miss James is suggesting that it is possible to see this five star seared-in soot propellant. That is a very substantial and significant difference.”
He said claims by some experts the wound could have opened and effectively swallowed up the seared-in soot, meaning it was no longer visible, were wrong.
He told the inquest: “I expressed the view that this was not known to medical science.
“The argument that was being advanced was that the top of the wound could open like a mouth and envelop the muzzle of the gun and thereby the soot and propellant would enter the wound and not appear on the surface of the skin around the wound.
“This is not how the skin behaves.”
He said a gun blast would cause the skin to “billow out” like a “balloon” and a large amount of gas would hit the skin’s surface and leave a mark.
He added: “As a theoretical concept it made no sense to me in terms of known science, it made no sense to me in terms of my experience, it made no sense to me in terms of the evidence.”
The inquest is expected to finish hearing from witnesses on Wednesday.
The coroner will deliver his conclusions on May 18.
