Hearing transcripts

18 March 2008 - Morning session

1 Tuesday, 18th March 2008
2 (9.30 am)
3 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Good morning, can you hear us in
4 Paris?
5 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Yes, sir, we can hear you.
6 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: It is just taking a moment or two
7 while the jury are coming in.
8 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Thank you.
9 MR MANSFIELD: Sir, so as not to waste time, may I indicate
10 that there is something to be said vis a vis last night,
11 but may I do it later?
12 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Of course.
13 (Jury present)
14 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes, I call Dr Dumestre Toulet.
15 MR KEEN: Sir, I wonder if I might make a preliminary point
16 before the doctor is called, it is to do with her
17 evidence?
18 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes.
19 MR KEEN: It is to do with this. Yesterday, your office
20 received a copy of a letter which appears to have been
21 sent by Dr Pepin dated 23rd May 2006 and it was
22 distributed to interested persons last night.
23 I understand from Mr MacLeod that the English
24 translation of this was prepared by
25 the Metropolitan Police, although they do not know by

1

1 whom. Apparently, the letter was produced by them. It
2 appears, I should say, to be addressed to
3 Professor Forrest, although he was not asked about this,
4 because obviously we as interested persons were not
5 given it until yesterday.
6 The point I raise is simply this: there has been
7 a tendency and an absolutely correct tendency, where we
8 have both a French and an English document to have
9 the French witness read the French document and to have
10 the English read to the jury.
11 That is entirely appropriate and saves a great deal
12 of time and effort. However, it has been drawn to my
13 attention that there may be an issue over the
14 translation of this particular document.
15 Can I therefore request that the French documents be
16 put to the witness in order that we can perhaps clarify
17 any issue that might arise with that.
18 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Certainly. It will be done.
19 MR HILLIARD: Could the witness please either take an oath
20 or affirmation.
21 DR DUMESTRE TOULET (affirmed)
22 (evidence via videolink, interpreted)
23 Questions from MR HILLIARD
24 MR HILLIARD: I am going to ask you some questions first of
25 all on behalf of the Coroner and then you will be asked

2


1 questions by others.
2 Could you give us your full name, please?
3 A. Veronique Dumestre Toulet.
4 Q. And your occupation, please?
5 A. I am a toxicological expert with the Court of Appeal of
6 Bordeaux.
7 MR HILLIARD: Sir, what I am going to ask that we have now
8 is the bundle of documents of toxicology reports and
9 tests.
10 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes, certainly.
11 MR HILLIARD: If we can all have that available. In
12 particular, if we can please turn to page 78.
13 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Did these go into the jury
14 bundle? They did, didn't they?
15 MR HILLIARD: Yes, there is a separate bundle of them.
16 Divider 22, I am told.
17 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Wait a moment. Is this not in
18 tab 22, the complete bundle? It should be in mine.
19 (Pause) what page are we looking at?
20 MR HILLIARD: Page 78.
21 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Unfortunately, I seem to have
22 been given a different bundle from the bundle I had
23 originally. I had a complete bundle that should have
24 gone into the jury bundle alike with the jury's at
25 tab 22, but what has happened to it? Do you know?

3


1 I thought we had a clip of these that was produced
2 at the time, which had a number of documents --
3 MR HILLIARD: Yes and a treasury tag for all of them.
4 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I do not know what has happened
5 to it. What I have now is a large lever-arch file of
6 a whole lot of stuff. It looks as if mine has been
7 taken out of the jury bundle and put somewhere else.
8 But I do not know what has happened to it. Do you have
9 another copy?
10 MR HILLIARD: I am afraid I do not.
11 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: We should press on, really. What
12 I want is to have the same thing as the jury have.
13 MR HILLIARD: Of course.
14 Doctor, while we are trying to find a document here,
15 so that you know what we are looking at, I think in
16 the documents that have been faxed out to you,
17 the report begins at page 8 of 18, if you look in
18 the top right-hand corner. It will have D1519 there,
19 but in the faxed bundle, it starts at page 8 of 18.
20 THE INTERPRETER: We have the document, but we only have
21 pages 1 to 7.
22 MR HILLIARD: Right. Is page 1 the first page of your
23 report, doctor?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Well, let's hope what we need is in the first seven

4


1 pages.
2 If we look at the front of it, if you have it there,
3 can you see that there is reference to the Paris court
4 and to an order -- I am looking at the top left for
5 us -- to instruct expert by a Mr Stephan, the examining
6 magistrate.
7 A. Yes, absolutely.
8 Q. And it says:
9 "Case: Paul, Henri", and then there is a number,
10 "971078".
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And then there is reference to an expert toxicological
13 report in the middle of the page. And then at the
14 bottom, your details appear and the details of Dr Pepin;
15 is that right?
16 A. Yes, that is right.
17 Q. And if you turn to the next page, for us it is page 79,
18 it says that you and Dr Pepin have received instructions
19 from the examining magistrate?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And if you turn on, please, to the next page for you --
22 it is page 80 for us -- can you see that at the bottom,
23 for us it is translated as assignment but for you,
24 the word "mission". Can you see that section at the
25 bottom of the page?

5


1 A. Yes.
2 Q. I am reading the English but what we have is this:
3 "To analyse the blood sample taken from the body of
4 Henri Paul in my presence on 4th September 1997 in order
5 to determine alcohol consumption habits by
6 measuring ..." something that is then set out at the end
7 of the sentence, which we have been calling CDT for
8 short.
9 All right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. It goes on to say:
12 "We have carried out our assignment conscientiously
13 and in good faith."
14 Correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And there is a date, "Paris, 17th September 1997" and
17 then at the bottom of the page, it says:
18 "G Pepin" and "V Dumestre Toulet" and those names
19 I think are typed, is that right; printed?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Do your signatures in fact appear under those typed
22 names, or not?
23 A. Yes, at the end of the report, after the conclusion.
24 Q. So not on that particular page?
25 A. No.

6


1 Q. Now, I am going to come on to your results later, but
2 here you are, is this right, certifying on
3 17th September of 1997 that the work has been done?
4 A. Absolutely.
5 Q. Can you just help us with when it was that you actually
6 did your work?
7 A. I received the samples sent on 15th September 1997 by
8 Mr Pepin by a special mail service, Chronopost, on 16th
9 at 10 o'clock in the morning and I made the analysis in
10 the afternoon of the same day.
11 Q. So that is on the 16th in the afternoon that you do
12 the analysis?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Can you just help with this: How is it that you are
15 able to say that the sample was sent on 15th by Dr Pepin
16 and received at 10 o'clock in the morning on the 16th;
17 do you have a note of that?
18 A. Well, we have an acknowledgment of receipt and this
19 information is written down on the request for an
20 analysis, the fact that it was received on the 16th at
21 10 o'clock.
22 Q. If you turn on, please, to the next page in the report,
23 it is page 81 for us. There is a heading which is
24 translated for us "Identification and Description of
25 Sealed Exhibit" and it says this:

7


1 "On receiving [if you look at the first paragraph]
2 the above assignment, Dr Pepin went to the IML [and
3 the address is given] on 4th September 1997 and was
4 present when Dr Campana took samples from Henri Paul's
5 body in the presence of the judicial police officer and
6 Mr Stephan, the examining magistrate."
7 It goes on:
8 "Sealed exhibit number 2: this was a brown envelope
9 containing a plastic bottle closed with wax seals.
10 The label being stuck to the envelope and containing
11 the following particulars: Police Headquarters, Judicial
12 Police Department, Criminal Investigation Department,
13 case of Martinez and others, charged with manslaughter,
14 nature of offence, victim, nature of object."
15 And then:
16 "Sealed exhibit number 2, blood sample left femoral,
17 judicial police officer's stamp and signature of
18 judicial police officer. The seal was intact.
19 The deglycosylate transferrin was measured."
20 That is your laboratory in Bordeaux, was it?
21 A. It was, 11 years ago.
22 Q. Right.
23 I am going to come back to the question of seals in
24 a moment, but the last sentence of this page explains
25 this the measurement was made at your laboratory,

8


1 doesn't it? And you have explained to us that the work
2 was done on 16th September.
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. I just want you, please, to look at one document to see
5 if you can help us with this. It is [INQ0020413].
6 Now, you should have a copy of this, doctor. It is
7 in the clip of documents that were faxed. It says in
8 the top right-hand corner "page 18 of 18".
9 A. But it is an acknowledgment of receipt that Mr Pepin got
10 when he sent back the report. It is not an
11 acknowledgment of receipt that relates to the sample
12 itself.
13 Q. Do you see that the date on it, if we start from
14 the left, 19th September 1997. Can you just help us,
15 where is this document filled in?
16 A. Well, it is a specificity of the French post. That is,
17 when you send something by registered mail, you get this
18 document when the person goes to get it at the Post
19 Office or signs the receipt, if the person is contacted
20 by the postman. That is the proof. It is my
21 handwriting that Mr Pepin received the report on
22 19th September 1997.
23 Q. This relates to you sending the report of the analysis
24 to Dr Pepin; is that right?
25 A. Yes, that is right.

9


1 Q. I said that I was going to come back to the question of
2 the sample and the sealing of it. It is our page 81.
3 Now, we have seen from that page that blood was
4 taken on 4th September of 1997.
5 Sir, I am just going to ask, I think at the front of
6 the clip of documents we have a summary of toxicological
7 results. It is the two-page document.
8 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes. Is this appendix J?
9 MR HILLIARD: That is right. And I repeat again the warning
10 that Mr Keen gave us a long time ago, that there is an
11 issue about much of this, but --
12 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes.
13 MR HILLIARD: -- it is certainly of some help.
14 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I have been given a copy of the
15 bundle that the jury has been given this morning and the
16 first page of appendix J is --
17 MR HILLIARD: Professor Lecomte's report --
18 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: -- attached to it. The second
19 page is not.
20 MR HILLIARD: Whilst we are seeing what we can do at this
21 end, doctor, for you in the clip of documents, it is
22 page 17 of 18.
23 MR MACLEOD: The second page of the appendix is
24 [INQ0001745], so that it can be put on the screen.
25 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: That is all very well, but what

10


1 do the jury have in their bundle? I have a copy of the
2 jury bundle. I have been given --
3 MR HILLIARD: Do you have this page of it? (indicating).
4 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I have been given a copy of the
5 bundle that has been put before the jury today and it
6 has pages 1 to 87 and it has attached to the front,
7 a document called "appendix J, 1 of 2", but the second
8 page is not there and cross-checking it, the page that
9 is missing is [ INQ0001745]. It is missing in my bundle
10 that I have been given.
11 MR HILLIARD: I think the jury all have it.
12 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Do they? I can get it elsewhere.
13 As long as the jury have it.
14 MR HILLIARD: And it is in France as well.
15 It is just to note this, doctor: in the middle of
16 that page, there is a section that says:
17 "Samples taken in the presence of the judge on
18 4th September 1997 by Dr Campana".
19 And it goes down, do you see, on the left:
20 "Sample, blood, left femoral."
21 A. We cannot see it.
22 Q. Does the top of the page say "appendix J"?
23 THE INTERPRETER: We have two similar, identical documents,
24 one says appendix A and the other says appendix J.
25 MR HILLIARD: Appendix J is the right one and it should say

11


1 at the bottom of the page I want you to look at, page 2
2 of 2.
3 THE INTERPRETER: Well, we have 2 of 2 actually.
4 MR HILLIARD: All right. So do you see in the middle then,
5 "Samples taken in the presence of the judge on
6 4th September 1997 by Dr Campana"?
7 THE INTERPRETER: Yes, we can.
8 MR HILLIARD: And then do you see "Sample, blood, left
9 femoral" and then do you see "tested by Dr Pepin" and
10 the dates you see are 5th September and 9th September?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And then can you see at the bottom of that same section,
13 there is your name and Dr Pepin's and the date,
14 16th September, that you have told us about.
15 A. Absolutely.
16 Q. And then do you see the result is summarised of the CDT
17 test?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Now, to state the obvious, if a sample of blood is taken
20 on the 4th, and it is sealed, and then some tests are
21 done on the 5th and the 9th, obviously the sample has to
22 have been opened for that to be done.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Now if you go back to the report, it is the fourth page
25 for you, it is page 81 for us, you can see on that page

12


1 before there is reference in the last lines about your
2 test, it says that the seal was intact.
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Now, what I want to know is this: when you received
5 the sample that you analysed, was there any indication
6 that the sample had been opened already after it had
7 been taken and before it got to you?
8 A. The sample had been opened by Dr Pepin, and its blood
9 sample that came from the second seal that he sent to me
10 on 15th September 1997 with a block of ice in a plastic
11 box.
12 Q. Was it clear to you when you got it that the sample had
13 already been opened since it had first been taken?
14 A. Absolutely.
15 Q. When there is reference in the report, do you see, to
16 the seal being intact, do you see that on the page, on
17 the fourth page?
18 A. Well, we were the two experts working on that case, so
19 it is something that was put down in that report by
20 Mr Pepin because he received it intact.
21 Q. Now, I am going to just come on to the results of your
22 tests in one moment, but I just want to ask you about
23 a passage in a letter that Dr Pepin sent to
24 Professor Forrest, a toxicologist in this country on
25 23rd May 2006.

13


1 A. Yes.
2 Q. I think this sir, is where the French ought to go up
3 because there is an issue about the translation. I am
4 not saying that it is right or wrong but --
5 MR HILLIARD: Quite. That is exactly what I had meant to
6 happen:
7 If we just go down, there is a section towards
8 the bottom of the page, that is the one. Can I ask that
9 the interpreter please -- and doctor, if you will read
10 this last section to yourself -- do you see that
11 begins --
12 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Mr Hilliard, we don't have
13 the letter here and nothing on screen. Ah, it is on
14 screen now.
15 MR HILLIARD: Good. So, if, doctor, you could read those
16 last two paragraphs to yourself and Mr Interpreter,
17 could you translate them for us, please? Do you want
18 a moment just to read it, Mr Interpreter first, so that
19 can you get your bearings with it.
20 THE INTERPRETER: And also, maybe I am going to have to
21 stand up and walk to the screen, because it is very
22 difficult to see from here.
23 MR HILLIARD: By all means, if that is easier. Obviously,
24 if the doctor would also like to get up so that she can
25 read it clearly then ...

14


1 (off-screen conversation in French)
2 THE INTERPRETER: It says that:
3 "I consult you that I dedicate to you and
4 (inaudible) publication concerning the analysis of CDT
5 in the blood and vitreous humour of [Paul]. The seal
6 number 2, used for this analysis, was opened by myself
7 and I took part of it in order to make my analyses,
8 including analysis of alcohol and carboxyhaemoglobin.
9 After having made my analysis, I sent to Dr Dumestre
10 Toulet a part that was left of seal number 2,
11 accompanied by the label of the seal put on it by an
12 officer of judicial police and she has been co-appointed
13 me as an expert."
14 MR HILLIARD: In case we had difficulty with that, I hope
15 I have it down, will you look carefully please,
16 Mr Interpreter, I think what you said was this:
17 "Sealed exhibit number 2 used for this analysis was
18 opened by myself and I took part of it in order to make
19 my analysis including analysis of alcohol and
20 carboxyhaemoglobin. After having made my analysis,
21 I sent to Dr Dumestre Toulet the part that was left of
22 seal number 2, accompanied by the label."
23 Then the next bit I just did not get, so
24 "accompanied by the label... "
25 THE INTERPRETER: It is "the seal established by an officer

15


1 of the judicial police."
2 MR HILLIARD: Did you say a seal established by an officer
3 of the judicial police?
4 THE INTERPRETER: Yes.
5 MR KEEN: Actually, what the interpreter said, sir, was "put
6 on it by an officer".
7 MR HILLIARD: I am very grateful. Thank you.
8 So, "The seal put on it by an officer of the
9 judicial police", and it goes on, "As she was
10 co-appointed with me as an expert". Do I have that
11 right?
12 THE INTERPRETER: Yes.
13 MR HILLIARD: Is there any comment you want to make about
14 that, doctor?
15 A. Well, it just confirms what is in the report and what
16 I just explained to you.
17 Q. Now, I am going to come now, doctor, to the result of
18 your analysis which is on the next page of your report.
19 For us, it is page 82 at the bottom.
20 Do you have that?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And the figure, if we just go straight to that at the
23 bottom of the page, is a figure of 32. Do you see that?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Now, we heard from Professor Forrest that if someone is

16


1 a heavy drinker -- I will do this slowly so that you can
2 translate it -- or has a rare genetic defect, something
3 called transferrin comes out of the liver and into
4 the blood stream deficient in carbohydrate.
5 A. Right.
6 Q. Hence the name of the test, carbohydrate deficient
7 transferrin.
8 Do you agree, first of all, with that very brief
9 explanation of it?
10 A. I do.
11 Q. If we can go, please, then on this page to section 2;
12 it is section 2 of our page 82. If you read it, please,
13 and check that I am translating correctly but you can
14 read it in the French, we have this:
15 "If daily consumption of alcohol is approximately 50
16 to 80 grams for at least one week, this is sufficient to
17 produce a higher result than normal. That quantity is
18 equivalent to between four and a half and six and a half
19 glasses of wine or whisky or any other alcoholic
20 beverage."
21 All right?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. If you turn over to the next page, for us it is page 83,
24 it says I think at the top of the page, that the level
25 in Henri Paul's blood was above the critical threshold

17


1 of 20. You measured it, is this right, at a level of
2 32?
3 A. That is right.
4 Q. The report goes on that the level is abnormal if it is
5 over 20 in men?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. That was obviously your view in 1997.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Is it still your view now?
10 A. I would say so, although I do not use the same technique
11 any more. I do not have the equipment that I had at the
12 time. But using this particular technique, I would say
13 yes, it is valid.
14 Q. The report goes on:
15 "It is indicative of either chronic alcoholic
16 intoxication or ..."
17 And then there is reference to the rare genetic
18 defect, which can put the level up without any alcohol
19 consumption at all.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And there is a frequency for the genetic defect of 1 in
22 500; is that right?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And it goes on to say this, looking at about the middle
25 of the next paragraph:

18


1 "... and indicates excessive alcohol consumption for
2 at least one week, 4.5 to 6.5 glasses per day."
3 And then, in the conclusion section, you repeat
4 the level that you found of 32, you say that it is
5 slightly higher than the critical threshold of 20 set
6 out in the literature, and you say that it is consistent
7 with moderate chronic alcoholism for at least a week.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. That was your view then. Is that your view now?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Now, Professor Forrest told us that there may be
12 a problem using this test on samples that have been
13 taken after death because, he said, processes that occur
14 in the body after death could cause the CDT level to
15 rise.
16 Do you want to make any comment about that?
17 A. Well, yes, that is that Professor Forrest also said that
18 CDT has some utility in the assessment of heavy drinking
19 in freshly collected post mortem blood samples and also
20 I have a list of publications from the time that
21 indicate that the CDT test is a very good marker of
22 chronic alcoholism.
23 Especially, there is the publication by a Mr Sadler
24 entitled "Post Mortem Markers of Chronic Alcoholism",
25 and also, I personally participated in works concerning

19


1 the CDT test. The title of the publication is: "Review
2 of factors susceptible of influencing post mortem
3 carbohydrate deficient transferrin" and this showed that
4 the blood sample, if it is kept at 4 degrees celsius, it
5 stays stable for 15 days, especially if it is a blood
6 sample taken from the heart femoral.
7 Q. You have mentioned there the question of the temperature
8 at which the sample was kept. Professor Forrest said
9 that in his view, it would be better if a sample of this
10 kind had been sent refrigerated. You mentioned I think
11 something about ice earlier. I may have misheard that.
12 A. Yes, actually said that CDT should be maintained at
13 4 degrees was posted.
14 Q. What I want to know is: when it had come through the
15 post, was this sample still refrigerated in some way?
16 A. Well, the sample that we received that was sent on
17 the 15th and that we received on the 16th was put in
18 a plastic box, polystyrene box with a block of ice. So,
19 refrigerating blocks of ice.
20 Q. And lastly, I just want to ask you this:
21 Professor Forrest's view was that the result of this
22 test should not be looked at in isolation, but should be
23 looked at as part of the whole picture, including
24 everything that was known about someone's drinking.
25 A. I totally agree with Mr Forrest.

20


1 MR HILLIARD: Thank you very much indeed.
2 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Mansfield?
3 MR MANSFIELD: No thank you.
4 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Keen?
5 MR KEEN: Thank you, sir.
6 Questions from MR KEEN
7 MR KEEN: Good morning, doctor. My name is Richard Keen and
8 I appear as counsel on behalf of the parents of the late
9 Henri Paul.
10 A. Good morning.
11 Q. I think you are aware that Professor Forrest and
12 a number of experts have already given evidence to this
13 inquest.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Have you had the opportunity of discussions with
16 Professor Forrest?
17 A. With my French colleagues, yes, but not with
18 Professor Forrest.
19 Q. Could we have up on the screen, please, [INQ0035092]?
20 If I explain what this is, doctor, it is a joint
21 statement of four experts: Professor Forrest,
22 Professor Johnston, Professor Oliver and
23 Professor Vanezis which they signed on 20th and
24 25th July 2007.
25 It is an expression of their joint opinion. I will

21


1 read it out, because it may be difficult to follow on
2 the screen, it can then be translated for you.
3 I am referring to what is headed up as items 30,
4 "Carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (CDT) analysis" and
5 what the four experts say is this:
6 "With respect to the assay of the blood attributed
7 to Henri Paul for carbohydrate-deficient transferrin
8 (CDT) we are agreed that false positive results can be
9 obtained in post mortem samples and, consequently, taken
10 in isolation, the CDT result in this case cannot be said
11 to be probative of recent heavy alcohol use by
12 Henri Paul."
13 Do you agree with that expression of expert opinion,
14 doctor?
15 A. Because if the sample is taken post mortem, it is not
16 valid but Forrest said the contrary, also.
17 Q. Well, he may have said the contrary but this, as
18 I understand it, is his most recent expression of expert
19 opinion together with that of the other experts and I do
20 not want to inquire into what he has or has not said.
21 I simply want to know doctor whether you agree or
22 disagree with the statement of expert opinion that
23 we have in this joint statement from the experts.
24 I should add that if you don't feel qualified to
25 answer, you should simply say so.

22


1 A. Well, I do not totally agree with the assertion in
2 the sense that it is still used today, this CDT
3 analysis, it is just that you should not consider it in
4 isolation. You should consider it jointly with other
5 sources of information and we quote a study that was
6 published recently by a different expert, including
7 Henrik Druid from the Stockholm University who is a very
8 well-known expert in the field internationally. That is
9 called "Post Mortem Stability and Redistribution of
10 Carbohydrate-Deficient transferrin" that was made
11 available on line on the internet on 1st May 2007.
12 Q. So, do I understand from your answer, doctor, that you
13 do not entirely agree with the joint statement of
14 Professor Forrest and the other experts that I have just
15 referred you to?
16 A. That is right. I maintain what I have just said.
17 Q. But you are aware that this joint statement was prepared
18 after the date of the expert paper that you have just
19 referred to?
20 A. Actually, it was published in the Forensic Science
21 International Magazine on January 30th 2008, the study
22 that I have just mentioned.
23 Q. Yes, as you said before, it was available on
24 the internet from May 2007, was it not?
25 A. Well, yes, again with dates here.

23


1 Q. Have you discussed this matter with Dr Gilbert Pepin,
2 doctor?
3 A. Yes, we discussed it several times.
4 Q. How recently did you discuss this matter with Dr Pepin?
5 A. Well, I cannot specify a date, but that was in
6 the course of the last month.
7 Q. Were you aware that Dr Pepin had contacted a member of
8 the Metropolitan Police to suggest that your evidence
9 might be delayed for a period?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And were you aware that that was in connection with
12 medical records from the Ritz Hotel pertaining to
13 the late Henri Paul?
14 A. Absolutely.
15 Q. And are you aware that Detective Sergeant Easton of
16 the Metropolitan Police, acting as one of the Coroner's
17 officers was told by Dr Dagneaux, the doctor in respect
18 of the Ritz Hotel responsible for Henri Paul's records
19 that there was nothing in them relating to alcohol?
20 A. No, I was not aware of that.
21 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Mr Keen, do we still need your
22 document on screen?
23 MR KEEN: It can now come off the screen, thank you.
24 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: Thank you.
25 MR KEEN: I would like to come back, if I may, to your own

24


1 report, doctor.
2 Just to take up one or two points, I think it is
3 page 85 of the jury bundle, sir, that I am going to
4 refer to.
5 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Thank you.
6 MR KEEN: I have the last page of your report and it is
7 a chart. The jury should have what looks like a graph
8 (indicating).
9 Now, I was a little concerned when you said that you
10 only had seven pages of your report. Do you have
11 the chart that was annexed to your report?
12 A. No.
13 Q. I see. You see, we have been provided with the chart
14 that was annexed to your report, and I wonder if a copy
15 of it should be put on the screen. It is extremely
16 indistinct I am afraid, sir.
17 We have it on the screen, this is about the best
18 we may be able to do. Do you have a copy of that,
19 doctor?
20 THE INTERPRETER: Actually we do, yes.
21 MR KEEN: Well, that is helpful.
22 THE INTERPRETER: It is not legible.
23 MR KEEN: What is legible is a date, 97-Sep-10. It is in
24 the bottom right-hand corner. I was wondering if you
25 could help me with that date?

25


1 A. Well, actually it is not 10, it is 16.
2 Q. Well, we actually have hard copy here and on the hard
3 copy, because this is a matter that has been the subject
4 of some examination, it does clearly appear to be a 10.
5 Do you have a document that appears to show it as a 6,
6 not a 0?
7 A. No. I cannot assert anything because it has been a long
8 time.
9 Q. So do I --
10 A. Sometimes fax machines are not up to date and the date
11 may be wrong, the one that is printed.
12 Q. But do I understand that you have what we can see on the
13 screen, rather than a 6?
14 A. That is right, but I could not tell you for sure whether
15 it is a 0 or 6, the last figure.
16 Q. All right. Now in your evidence, you told my learned
17 friend that what you had received from Dr Pepin on
18 16th September was a blood sample on which the seal was
19 broken?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And that was accompanied by the label of the seal put on
22 it by an officer of the judicial police.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. If we then look at your report, this is page 78, sir, of
25 the jury bundle, we see that it bears to be a toxicology

26


1 analysis report of both yourself and Dr Pepin and if
2 we turn to the third page of the report, this is page 80
3 of the jury bundle, we see it is titled "Paris,
4 17th September 1997".
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And if we go over the page to page 81, we see
7 a reference to the sealed exhibit number 2, blood
8 sample, left femoral.
9 And just above the last sentence it says
10 the deglycosylate transferrin was measured at
11 the Laboratory Ruffie in Bordeaux and we have the words
12 "the seal was intact", do you see that?
13 A. We have already answered this question.
14 Q. Well, I wonder if you could help me a little. Could
15 we have on the screen [INQ0007346].
16 Now, the interpreter will have to translate this
17 into English, doctor, so I will just read the first part
18 of paragraph 23, but before I do so, I should explain
19 that this is a statement that Dr Gilbert Pepin gave to
20 the Metropolitan Police and to Professor Forrest
21 concerning the matter of the CDT test. And what he told
22 the Metropolitan Police and Professor Forrest was this:
23 "The sample sent to Dr Dumestre Toulet was an
24 unused, unopened, sealed vial. Dr Pepin provided, for
25 ease of reference, a copy of an extract of Dr Dumestre

27


1 Toulet's report describing how the sample had been
2 received with an intact seal."
3 Now, doctor, why do you suppose Dr Pepin would have
4 told Professor Forrest and the Metropolitan Police that
5 if it was not true?
6 A. I cannot answer.
7 Q. Very well.
8 If we go on just a little further in this part of
9 his statement, he said this:
10 "The form which accompanied the sample to
11 Dr Dumestre Toulet's laboratory and the stamped and
12 signed receipt for the sample which had been posted on
13 19th September 1997 in Paris by Dr Pepin was signed as
14 being received by Dr Dumestre Toulet."
15 And he says:
16 "Mr Beer was given copies of these documents."
17 Now I have to tell you, doctor, that we have heard
18 that the receipt that Dr Pepin was handing over there to
19 the Metropolitan Police as the receipt for the blood
20 sample is the one you have already been shown this
21 morning.
22 A. Well, I do not think so because it is my handwriting on
23 this receipt.
24 Q. Well, why would Dr Pepin hand this receipt --
25 A. It is me who sent it.

28


1 Q. Why would Dr Pepin hand this receipt to the Metropolitan
2 Police as the receipt for the sending of the sealed
3 blood sample, he refers to, "the unused unopened sealed
4 vial" if that was not true; do you know?
5 A. Well, maybe he made a mistake. I cannot answer this
6 question.
7 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Keen, we are going to have to
8 break off for our adjournment now, or very, very
9 shortly.
10 I have been given a message that Mr Lucard is only
11 available until a quarter to 12, and we are getting
12 pressed for time.
13 MR KEEN: I appreciate that.
14 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: And a lot of these questions that
15 are being asked are really matters that this witness
16 says: well, I cannot answer for Dr Pepin.
17 MR KEEN: I am just coming to a point that she can answer
18 and that is why I was doing it in this way because one
19 has to explore to what extent she could give the
20 evidence she gave earlier today.
21 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: If you bear that in mind and
22 break off in the next couple of minutes.
23 MR KEEN: Of course, I certainly will not be terribly long
24 after the break, sir.
25 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I would prefer to break off now

29


1 and we will resume again at 11 o'clock and I hope that
2 arrangements can be made appropriately.
3 MR MACLEOD: On the matter of timing, in the light of what
4 was said about Mr Lucard, and in the light of
5 the questions being asked of this witness, I would
6 anticipate being 45 minutes or so with
7 Dr Dumestre Toulet.
8 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: We have heard that. I hope
9 arrangements can be made behind the scenes with Paris to
10 accommodate everybody to the least disadvantage to
11 everybody and the inquest.
12 Can we resume at 11 o'clock today, because it is
13 rather important.
14 (10.50 am)
15 (A short break)
16 (11.03 am)
17 (Jury present)
18 MR KEEN: Thank you, sir.
19 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I do not know if problem over
20 the witnesses has been resolved? I am told it has.
21 MR HILLIARD: Yes. Mr Keen will not be long with this
22 witness and then we will go to the questions of the next
23 one and then revert to her in a minute.
24 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Thank you.
25 MR KEEN: Dr Dumestre Toulet, if I could ask you a few more

30


1 questions?
2 We were looking at Dr Pepin's statement that he had
3 sent you an unused, unopened, sealed vial and that he
4 had used a stamped and signed receipt for that sample
5 posted on 19th September 1997.
6 Now, when you looked at this receipt earlier this
7 morning, you told us that in fact it related to you
8 sending a document to Dr Pepin.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And obviously, only Dr Pepin can explain why he told
11 the police what he did. But I wonder if we can look
12 again at the receipt which is [INQ0020413].
13 Now, can I raise two points with you, doctor? First
14 of all, if we look to the top right-hand corner, we can
15 see that this document is indeed postmarked Paris,
16 19th September 1997, can't we?
17 A. Yes, it was stamped when he received the report.
18 Q. If we then go to the left-hand side, doctor, we see your
19 signature, don't we?
20 A. Absolutely.
21 Q. Under the words "Signature du destinataire", which is
22 "signature of recipient"?
23 A. Oh, sorry, I did not look. It is not my signature.
24 Q. I thought you said earlier it was your signature.
25 A. No. It is not. I did not have my glasses on.

31


1 Q. Well, if it is not your signature, presumably you cannot
2 explain anything about this receipt that Dr Pepin handed
3 over to the Metropolitan Police, can you?
4 A. Yes, I can, because the address on the right-hand side
5 is the one I wrote down. And the date is also my
6 handwriting. And also, what is hardly legible, under
7 the address of Dr Pepin. I wrote that too.
8 Q. And does that contain your name, doctor?
9 A. Yes, it does, you can read "Dumestre Toulet", because
10 the receipt is sent back to me. It is returned to
11 "Mrs Dumestre Toulet".
12 Q. In that case, how would it come to be in Dr Pepin's
13 possession when he hands it over to
14 the Metropolitan Police?
15 A. Because he asked me a few years ago all of the documents
16 connected to our correspondence and I sent him Xerox
17 copies of everything I had.
18 Q. And why would he then describe this as the receipt for
19 him sending a blood sample to you?
20 A. I cannot answer this question.
21 Q. Very well.
22 Just one further matter about seals: we were looking
23 at the statement Dr Pepin gave to the Metropolitan
24 Police about sending you an unused, unopened, sealed
25 vial and I wonder if we can look at an earlier statement

32


1 he made in the interview.
2 Sir, it is [INQ0007345].
3 I am going to read out paragraph 17 and the first
4 paragraph of 18 and if I read it in English, perhaps
5 the interpreter could take Dr Dumestre Toulet through
6 it:
7 "We then discussed what happens when a court
8 requests two sets of analyses on one blood sample, for
9 example, Alcohol and Carbohydrate Deficient
10 transferrin."
11 THE INTERPRETER: Is it possible for us to walk up to
12 the screen?
13 MR KEEN: Of course, you do that.
14 "Dr Pepin explained that if a sample had been
15 opened, a police officer could, at the request of
16 a judge, if the laboratory asked, apply a judicial seal
17 after the analyses in the first laboratory had been
18 completed. An example of where this might be done would
19 be when dealing with a very large seizure of cocaine.
20 There is also something called an expert's seal, whereby
21 Dr Pepin himself could place the sample in a paper
22 envelope and apply a sealing wax seal. He provided
23 a sample of such a seal which Mr Beer took possession
24 of. This could be done if he resealed a sample before
25 submitting it to another laboratory on the order of

33


1 a judge.
2 "In this particular case, neither of these
3 procedures were necessary."
4 Now, doctor, you have seen the two procedures that
5 Dr Pepin describes in paragraph 17, haven't you?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And you have seen his statement in the next line, that
8 in this particular case, neither of these procedures
9 were necessary.
10 A. Absolutely.
11 Q. And it is true that neither of these procedures would
12 have been necessary if Dr Pepin had, as he claimed, sent
13 you an unused, unopened sealed vial.
14 A. Yes, but it was not the case.
15 Q. That was just my point. You say that is not what he
16 did. Are we clear about that, doctor?
17 A. Yes, we are clear.
18 MR KEEN: No further questions, sir.
19 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Thank you.
20 I think the arrangement is that we are going now to
21 ask Dr Dumestre Toulet to wait briefly while we deal
22 with the evidence of Mr Lucard because he has time
23 pressures.
24 We are very grateful to you, thank you very much.
25 I hope it will not be long.

34


1 Good morning, Mr Lucard, can you hear me?
2 A. Sure. Good morning, sir.
3 MR HILLIARD: I am going to ask you questions first of all
4 on behalf of the Coroner, then you will be asked
5 questions by others.
6 A. Sure.
7 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: It may be that we don't need
8 a translator?
9 MR HILLIARD: Are you happy if we do the questions and
10 answers in English?
11 A. I would rather have the advice of my neighbour
12 (indicating).
13 Q. Can you start by taking an oath or affirmation?
14 MR FREDERIC LUCARD (affirmed)
15 (evidence via videolink, interpreted)
16 Questions from MR HILLIARD
17 MR HILLIARD: Is your name Frederic Lucard?
18 A. Yes, it is.
19 Q. Mr Lucard, I think this is right, that in August of
20 1997, you were a student but --
21 A. I was, yes.
22 Q. But you were also working as an assistant doorman and
23 car parker at the Ritz Hotel in Paris?
24 A. Yes, I did, sir.
25 Q. And I think you made a statement about events on

35


1 the night of 30th August, 1997, to the police on
2 27th April 1998?
3 A. As a matter of fact, yes.
4 Q. Coming now straightaway to 30th August of 1997, I think
5 you started work at about 7 o'clock in the evening?
6 A. Exactly, yes.
7 Q. And your work I think consisted of taking charge of
8 clients' cars and putting them down in the hotel car
9 park; is that right?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. We know that the Mercedes that had the Princess of Wales
12 and Dodi Al Fayed in it came to the hotel at about 10 to
13 10 in the evening.
14 A. I do not remember the exact time, but it was not yet
15 totally dark. So it must have been around that time,
16 yes.
17 Q. And you saw the car arrive; is that right?
18 A. Yes, I did.
19 Q. I am going to give you another time, again which we can
20 take from CCTV film.
21 At about five past 10 in the evening, a Mini car
22 pulled up outside the front of the hotel.
23 A. Yes, that is right.
24 Q. I think you know now that the driver was Henri Paul, but
25 you did not know who he was then.

36


1 A. Well, I did not know when he got there, but I got to
2 know who he was a few minutes later, after he arrived,
3 because one of my colleagues told me who he was.
4 Q. By this time, 30th August 1997, how long had you been
5 working at the Ritz for?
6 A. About two years. It was not a regular job, so I worked
7 for the Ritz from time to time, occasionally.
8 Q. Now, although you did not know who he was at the time,
9 when Mr Paul arrived in his Mini, did you speak to him?
10 A. Well, as my job was one of assistant car driver for
11 the Ritz, then I must have spoken to him offering to
12 park his car.
13 Q. And what did he say in response?
14 A. He said that -- well, as far as I can remember -- that
15 it was not necessary, that he was used to parking his
16 car there and that other car drivers at the Ritz did not
17 mind.
18 Q. Is this right, I think you went to complain to one of
19 the doormen?
20 A. Well, I think that is what I stated to the French
21 police, but actually I did not complain, I just asked
22 the question about what was to be done with that car.
23 Q. And did the doorman tell you that it was Mr Paul's car
24 and that he worked there; it was all right?
25 A. Yes and it is in fact at that time that I got to know

37


1 who Mr Paul was.
2 Q. Later on in the evening, is this right, you saw
3 the Mercedes and a Range Rover drive round the square
4 and come back to the front of the hotel?
5 A. That is correct.
6 Q. And I think you were aware of a number of photographers
7 outside the hotel?
8 A. Yes, a good deal of them.
9 Q. Did you see Mr Paul have any contact with any of the
10 photographers at this time?
11 A. Well, I just remember, just like I did ten years ago,
12 that Mr Paul came out a couple of times briefly, just to
13 have a few exchanges with the photographers in
14 a friendly manner. He was smiling.
15 Q. And then Mr Lucard, did there come a time in the evening
16 when Mr Musa gave you a special job to do?
17 A. Yes, Mr Musa later in the evening asked me to go and get
18 the Mercedes, quite desperately and to drive it to
19 Rue Cambon in front of the service door of Ritz.
20 Q. What sort of time was it that he asked you to do that?
21 A. I think it was at about 11 o'clock in the evening.
22 Q. Did he tell you what the car was wanted for?
23 A. Yes, he told me that Princess Diana, Dodi Al Fayed and
24 their bodyguard would come out and that Mr Paul was to
25 drive.

38


1 Q. In your statement in 1998, you thought the conversation
2 was shortly before midnight. You have told us now about
3 11 o'clock?
4 A. Well, no. I am not saying 11 o'clock. What I can say
5 is that, you know, it has been ten years ago and many
6 things have happened in my life since then. All I can
7 say is that I testified in an honest manner and in good
8 faith ten years ago and so what is in my statement dated
9 1998 is correct.
10 Q. Right. Did you go and get this particular Mercedes?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Where did you go and get it from?
13 A. Well, I got it from the second basement under
14 the Vendome Square, where cars for the Ritz Hotel were
15 parked.
16 Q. And did you drive it to the service entrance at the back
17 of the Ritz in Rue Cambon?
18 A. Absolutely.
19 Q. Now, when you got to the back of the Ritz, was anybody
20 in the street near your vehicle?
21 A. Like I said ten years ago, there were three motorcycles
22 or scooters with their riders, waiting there.
23 Q. And I think subsequently you identified one of those
24 when you were shown an album, as being Mr Benhamou. Do
25 you remember that?

39


1 A. Yes, I remember that was the case. Yes.
2 Q. What did you do once you had pulled up in the car,
3 Mr Lucard?
4 A. Well, you know, just like I said ten years ago,
5 everything happened very quickly. When I stopped
6 the car in front of the service entrance in Rue Cambon,
7 I opened the door to the driver's seat and kept
8 the engine running.
9 The Princess, Dodi Al Fayed and their bodyguard got
10 out of the Ritz, I opened the door on the left-hand
11 side, that is the side of the Ritz Hotel, for
12 the Princess who got in the car.
13 Then, Dodi Al Fayed got in the car and the bodyguard
14 sat in the passenger's seat in the front of the car.
15 And the last one to come out of the hotel was Mr Paul
16 and he just said to me a few words. He just said, "I am
17 going to take the wheel".
18 Q. And did you say anything to him?
19 A. I just said, "Yes, I know".
20 Q. Did Mr Paul say anything to anybody else, that you
21 heard?
22 A. Yes, he said, smiling, to two or three photographers on
23 motorbikes or scooters, "Don't try to follow us, you
24 won't be able to catch up".
25 Q. Do you remember where he was when he said that?

40


1 A. Well, he was standing next to the car, and next to
2 the driver's door.
3 Q. Did he then get into the car?
4 A. Yes, he did.
5 Q. Did you see the car set off?
6 A. Yes, I did.
7 Q. At what sort of speed?
8 A. Very fast.
9 Q. And what about the bikes that you had seen; what did
10 they do?
11 A. Well, they left at once to follow the car.
12 Q. At the same sort of speed?
13 A. Yes, as far as I can remember.
14 Q. Did you then go back into the hotel?
15 A. Yes, immediately, to resume my work.
16 Q. Did there come a time, Mr Lucard, when you learned that
17 something had happened?
18 A. Yes, later, during the night I was made aware by
19 someone, I think it was a doorman, that an accident had
20 happened, most likely quite serious.
21 Q. Did you learn that it involved the car which had
22 Mr Dodi Al Fayed and the Princess of Wales in it?
23 A. Yes, that was the car that was implicated, involved in
24 the accident, unfortunately.
25 Q. A little later, did Mr Rocher speak to your brother who

41


1 also worked at the hotel, and yourself, asking one of
2 you to get a car to take Mr Roulet on a journey?
3 A. Yes, as a matter of fact, yes.
4 Q. Was it your brother who got a car and drove Mr Roulet?
5 A. Yes. It was him.
6 Q. Do you know where he took him?
7 A. Well, I think they went to the scene of the crash.
8 Q. Later, did you have any conversation with Mr Tendil?
9 A. Well, I do not remember who Mr Tendil was, but yes, as
10 a matter of fact, someone else came to tell us that
11 the crash was a serious one.
12 Q. Do you remember somebody saying something about
13 Mr Henri Paul to you later on?
14 A. Today, I cannot remember but once again, everything is
15 in my statement, the one I made ten years ago.
16 Q. Well, have a look please. Would you turn to the fifth
17 page, it is towards the top? Can you see this passage?
18 In the translation, it is the fourth line down which
19 says:
20 "Some time afterwards, Mr Tendil, one of the
21 security agents, met us (Sebastien and me)."
22 A. Yes, I can read it, sir.
23 Q. Sebastien was one of the doormen; is that right?
24 A. Yes, I as far as I can remember.
25 Q. The statement goes on:

42


1 "He then mentioned Mr Paul, saying that it was
2 terrible to drink."
3 A. It is what I can read also. Yes.
4 Q. You told us earlier that you had told the truth in this
5 statement you made in 1998?
6 A. Absolutely.
7 Q. And is this true? Was that said to you?
8 A. Well, if it is in my statement, it is true, because you
9 have to bear in mind that it was a criminal procedure,
10 so it was out of the question to say anything else but
11 the truth.
12 Q. Had you noticed anything about Henri Paul yourself to
13 suggest that he might have been drinking?
14 A. No. I never noticed anything in particular. And also,
15 I have to remind you that I only saw Mr Paul three
16 times. That is, when he got to the Ritz and parked his
17 car in front of the hotel, when he came out to speak to
18 the journalists and the third time was when I left him
19 the wheel of the Mercedes at the Rue Cambon. So, every
20 time it was very brief but anyway, I did not notice
21 anything.
22 Q. Did you carry on working at the Ritz for a time after
23 this?
24 A. Yes. I did.
25 Q. For how long?

43


1 A. Until late April, 1998.
2 MR HILLIARD: Thank you very much.
3 A. You are welcome.
4 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Mansfield?
5 Questions from MR MANSFIELD
6 MR MANSFIELD: Yes. Good morning, my name is
7 Michael Mansfield. I represent Mohamed Al Fayed.
8 A. Good morning, sir.
9 Q. I just have one issue or topic to ask you about, and
10 I apologise it is some time ago.
11 The topic is the question of motorcycles at the rear
12 of the Ritz when the Mercedes left.
13 A. Okay.
14 Q. It may be helpful at this end, for the sake of
15 reference, if the jury have their jury bundle and you
16 do, especially for the section which has just recently
17 been added.
18 I apologise, M Lucard, just for a moment.
19 A. Sure.
20 MR MANSFIELD: The tab which the jury should have at
21 the moment that has been added is tab 3, (viii):
22 the paparazzi summary table should be attached to
23 the paparazzi timeline. It is the summary table which
24 is the easiest way of dealing with this.
25 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: It should be tab 3?

44


1 MR MANSFIELD: Tab 3, (viii).
2 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I do not have any Roman numerals
3 on mine. I do not know if the jury do.
4 MR MANSFIELD: It may well be that the Roman numerals are
5 not on there. The other way of identifying it is that
6 it should be the last entry effectively under that tab
7 number 3.
8 It should be the last one that has been put in.
9 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: We are looking for the timeline
10 summary?
11 MR MANSFIELD: I see a juror seems to have it. I am most
12 obliged. It is a column and it is all in sections like
13 this (indicating). And the paparazzi are set out there.
14 It has the names on the left-hand side, vehicles --
15 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Just a moment, this isn't in my
16 bundle, I am told it is in tab 29? Members of the jury,
17 do you have it in tab 3, or where is it?
18 MR MANSFIELD: Perhaps it is just as well that this is
19 sorted out now.
20 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: I think something is going to
21 have to be done about this.
22 MR MANSFIELD: Mine is in tab 3. But if it has now been put
23 into tab 29, I see on the new index that you are quite
24 right. It has now been added at tab 29. So we will
25 sort that out later.

45


1 Mr Lucard, so you understand, it has been possible,
2 since these events, to draw up a list of all
3 the paparazzi that can be identified and we have been
4 able to identify all the vehicles being driven by
5 photographers. At the rear of the Ritz, there is only
6 one photographer on a motorcycle and his name is
7 "Benhamou", and he was driving a dark green Honda
8 scooter.
9 Sir, you will see that is the third one down on the
10 list.
11 Now, you may not remember now, Mr Lucard, but that
12 particular individual you were able to identify from
13 a photograph. Do you remember?
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 Q. So that it is clear, I do not know whether the jury need
16 a test of bundles yet again, it should be tab 6. Well
17 I have (ii), but perhaps others don't. Tab 6 should be
18 a photograph showing a line-up of five with Mr Benhamou
19 on the left-hand side. So it should look like that
20 (indicating). Yes, I think we are all together on this
21 one at the moment.
22 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes.
23 MR MANSFIELD: Right.
24 Mr Lucard, I now want to ask you about the other
25 two. You were not able to identify those at the time,

46


1 were you?
2 A. No. I could not identify them because I did not have an
3 accurate memory of them.
4 Q. And it may be that they were not photographers.
5 A. Maybe.
6 Q. Can I ask you about the motorcycles that you recalled
7 that the other two were driving and I am going to just
8 I am just going to remind you of your statement, because
9 it is so long ago. If you have the statement there, you
10 can follow it in French if you wish, it is the fourth
11 page and it is the third paragraph down. The sentence
12 in English reads:
13 "As regards the two other two-wheeled vehicles, my
14 impression is much less precise but there may have been
15 a high-powered motorcycle."
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And was that your recollection nearer the time, ten
18 years ago?
19 A. Absolutely.
20 Q. And in contrast to that, you were sure, positive, that
21 Mr Benhamou was in fact on a scooter.
22 A. Yes.
23 MR MANSFIELD: Thank you.
24 A. You are welcome.
25 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Keen?

47


1 Questions from MR KEEN
2 MR KEEN: Just a few short points, sir.
3 Mr Lucard, my name is Richard Keen and I want to ask
4 you just a few questions.
5 In 2005, you appeared in a television documentary
6 with a person by the name of Martyn Gregory. Do you
7 recall that?
8 A. Sure.
9 Q. And that was a documentary in which Mr Gregory advanced
10 various claims about the circumstances of the death of
11 Dodi Al Fayed and Princess Diana.
12 A. Maybe, I have not seen this documentary.
13 Q. But you did participate in it being made?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And it also referred to claims by a Mr Willaumez
16 a barman at the Ritz?
17 A. Yes, someone I do not know and who I have never met.
18 Q. I see. Do you know how Martyn Gregory was able to
19 contact you for the purpose of making that documentary,
20 Mr Lucard?
21 A. No, I cannot remember.
22 MR KEEN: No further questions, sir.
23 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Croxford?
24 MR CROXFORD: No thank you, sir.
25 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr MacLeod?

48


1 Questions from MR MACLEOD
2 MR MACLEOD: Mr Lucard, my name is Duncan Macleod and I ask
3 questions on behalf of the Chief of London Police.
4 Just two matters: first of all, you have given
5 evidence about the manner that Henri Paul displayed when
6 he spoke to photographers outside the hotel, and I think
7 it is right that in the witness statement you made in
8 1998, you described his manner as jovial?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Secondly, you have been asked about the departure from
11 the rear of the hotel and the remark that was made to,
12 you felt, photographers but perhaps other persons.
13 Could I ask please that the jury bundle of paparazzi
14 photographs be turned up, please? And in particular,
15 could I ask that the photographs of Mr Benhamou, numbers
16 18 to 24, be put on screen?
17 Now, Mr Lucard, this is a photograph of
18 Mr Henri Paul and the Princess Diana leaving the back of
19 the hotel in the Rue Cambon.
20 If we can go, please, to photographs 19 and 20, and
21 then 21, and we can see in the left-hand side in a box
22 the photographer's car, Mr Odekerken, Pajero door open,
23 and then on photograph 22, in the centre of the page,
24 we can see a photographer, Mr Odekerken, next to his car
25 taking a photograph.

49


1 Then, page 23, we can see in the left-hand corner
2 a photographer, Mr Chassery, very close to the car. And
3 the same in photograph 24. Those were photographs taken
4 by Mr Benhamou, who had the scooter.
5 Could I ask please for photographs of Mr Chassery at
6 page 35 to be put up, please?
7 These are the photographs taken by the photographer
8 Mr Chassery and in photograph 36, we can see
9 the motorcycle or scooter of M Benhamou. And then
10 finally, if we look at the photographs of M Langevin
11 commencing at page 56, and then, turning through to
12 page 62 and 63, now, Mr Lucard, those are photographs
13 that we know were taken by paparazzi soon after
14 the emergence from the rear of the hotel by
15 Mr Henri Paul.
16 Having refreshed your memory from those photographs,
17 do you think it is likely that the remark that was made
18 about, "Don't try to follow us" was made to that group
19 of paparazzi?
20 A. Yes, this is what I think I can remember.
21 MR MACLEOD: Thank you very much.
22 MR HILLIARD: No questions, thank you.
23 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Thank you very much, Mr Lucard.
24 I hope you have not been too inconvenienced. We are
25 grateful to you for coming to give evidence. That will

50


1 be all and we can now continue with Dr Dumestre Toulet.
2 A. Thank you.
3 MR HILLIARD: I think you know that she also has time
4 constraints, if it were possible to go on beyond half
5 past 12, if we don't speak to quickly with
6 the interpreter, I suspect that might solve all
7 the problems.
8 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes. Good.
9 DR VERONIQUE DUMESTRE TOULET (continued)
10 Questions from MR MACLEOD
11 MR MACLEOD: Dr Dumestre Toulet, my name is Duncan Macleod
12 and I ask questions on behalf of the Commissioner of
13 London Police.
14 I want to ask you questions about the continuity of
15 the blood sample moving between yourself and Dr Pepin.
16 I also want to ask you about the document trail
17 evidencing the movement of the blood sample between
18 Dr Pepin and your laboratory in Bordeaux, and in
19 particular, I want to ask you whether the document trail
20 bears out what Dr Pepin said he did with the blood
21 sample.
22 Now, first of all, I want to ask you about
23 a document that was put to you by Mr Keen which was
24 the initial response by Dr Pepin to Professor Forrest on
25 18th May 2006.

51


1 Now, that was a meeting between Professor Forrest
2 and an interpreter of the Metropolitan Police and in it,
3 he indicated on 18th May that there was no division of
4 the blood sample he received, the left femoral gauche
5 blood sample, do you recall that? Do you recall that
6 document being put to you by Mr Keen?
7 A. A document according to which there was no blood sample
8 left from the left femoral?
9 Q. The document indicated that Dr Pepin said it was not
10 necessary to divide into two parts the original blood
11 sample of the left femoral gauche?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Can I ask please to be put under the scanner the letter
14 from Dr Pepin to Professor Forrest written five days
15 after he gave that response?
16 If you could follow it in French but starting with
17 the first paragraph:
18 "Monsieur le Professeur" and he addresses
19 Professor Forrest:
20 "I have taken the liberty of writing to you in
21 French because I know that you have an excellent
22 translator and this will therefore avoid any errors in
23 translation."
24 And then the passage at the bottom of the page,
25 under the heading "Joint Experts' Report with

52


1 Dr Dumestre Toulet", and there, Dr Pepin describes
2 correcting his initial answer of 18th May, what he did
3 with sealed exhibit number 2.
4 And it reads as follows:
5 "Sealed exhibit number 2 used for this analysis was
6 opened by me and I took part of it, in order to carry
7 out my tests, including alcohol and carboxyhaemoglobin.
8 Having made my analysis, I sent Dr Dumestre Toulet
9 the remaining part of sealed exhibit number 2, together
10 with its exhibit label put on it by an officer of the
11 judicial police as she was appointed as an expert with
12 me."
13 I want to see whether the documents that followed,
14 both in Dr Pepin's laboratory and at your laboratory
15 establish whether in fact that is what occurred. Do you
16 understand?
17 A. Okay, I understand.
18 Q. Can we first look at appendix J, page 2. In the centre
19 of the page, under the heading "Samples taken in
20 the presence of the judge on 4th September by
21 Dr Campana", and then on the left-hand side, "Blood,
22 left femoral", and we can see reported Dr Pepin's
23 analytical results showing alcohol 1.75, reported at
24 1.80. Fluoxetine, norfluoxetine, tiapride and
25 carboxyhaemoglobin.

53


1 And then, underneath that, the CDT test.
2 A. Absolutely.
3 Q. Now, first of all I want to look at the document trail
4 in Dr Pepin's laboratory for the tests he carried out on
5 5th September. Could I ask to be put up on the screen
6 [INQ0031819]. Now then, Dr Dumestre Toulet, if you
7 could please look in the top left-hand corner --
8 A. We cannot read anything.
9 Q. Can you see that now?
10 A. No. I cannot see anything.
11 Q. Would it be possible to go closer to the screen? Do
12 we see in the top left-hand corner "Current Case, Case
13 Code" and then the number under Paul, 19971042?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And then, moving to the right, "date of requisition,
16 4th September 1997" and I think that was the date -- you
17 can take it from me -- that M Pepin was assigned and
18 required to produce a report on the sample taken on that
19 date.
20 And then immediately underneath it, do you see "Date
21 of Arrival, 4th September 1997".
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. That, you can take it from me, is agreed evidence, was
24 the date it was received by Dr Pepin at Toxlab.
25 And then --

54


1 MR KEEN: I do not understand that to be agreed evidence,
2 sir. I don't want to make an issue over this but there
3 is a question mark over whether it is the 4th or
4 5th September. It may be a minor issue.
5 MR MACLEOD: Well, that is not pertinent to this line of
6 questioning. I am taking this, in fact, from Mr Keen's
7 cross-examination of Professor Vanezis.
8 Then we can see to the right "Forwarded 9th
9 September 1997" and you can take from me that that was
10 the date of Dr Pepin's report detailing the results of
11 his analysis of 5th September. And just above it, "for,
12 10th September 1997". That was the date that he was
13 required to provide that analysis to Judge Stephan. Do
14 you see that?
15 Then, at the bottom of the page, we can see
16 "Surname: Paul. Number 2147. Pathologist Campana.
17 Date of autopsy 4th September 1997" and then, beneath
18 that, "Blood (exhibit 2) arrived 4th September 1997."
19 Now, can I first of all ask you to bear in mind
20 the case number which we see on this document, 1997,
21 1042.
22 Then, could I ask for [INQ0004623] to be put up,
23 please. Now, Dr Dumestre Toulet, this is
24 the toxicological report prepared by Dr Pepin detailing
25 his toxicological analysis, which was carried out on

55


1 5th September.
2 Can we see in the top right-hand corner, "Case:
3 Henri Paul" and "Number: 971042" the same number that
4 we could see on the print-out?
5 And then, if we go to, please, [INQ0004626], we can
6 see the identification and description of the seal and
7 then underneath the date, "Seal number two" and then in
8 the centre of the page "Sample of left femoral blood"
9 and then, over the page, we can see a photograph of
10 the envelope and the container.
11 Then, at [INQ0004625], under "Mission":
12 "To analyse the samples of blood and tissues which
13 will be taken today [that is 4th September] ... in my
14 presence and yours from the body of Henri Paul ... for
15 the purpose of carrying out a full toxicological
16 analysis."
17 And just above it, we can see that he was required
18 to do that analysis by 10th September and at the foot of
19 the page, he had completed it on 9th September.
20 MR KEEN: Well, I would come in here, sir.
21 So far, Mr MacLeod has not obviously asked
22 a question for some pages. But if the intention is to
23 try to get Dr Dumestre Toulet to give evidence of what
24 Dr Pepin did, that is not appropriate and it is not
25 competent.

56


1 That appears to be what my learned friend is seeking
2 to do and I notice that Dr Dumestre-Toulet said when she
3 was first asked about these documents, she said in
4 French, although it was not translated, "This is not my
5 concern".
6 I did raise with your solicitor, as you know, the
7 extent to which the Metropolitan Police had been in
8 contact with Dr Pepin recently meant that there was
9 going to be some attempt to try and lead his evidence
10 without him giving evidence on oath and being subject to
11 examination, because there are a whole series of issues
12 to be raised with him. But I would object to
13 the fairness of the Metropolitan Police counsel
14 attempting to adduce the results of Dr Pepin's evidence
15 without it being tested in front of the jury.
16 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: What do you say, Mr MacLeod?
17 MR MACLEOD: These points were raised with Professor Vanezis
18 by Mr Keen himself which I am taking up to correct what
19 may be a misunderstanding on the document trail.
20 What I am seeking to do here is to lay the ground
21 with this witness as to what documents existed as
22 produced by Dr Pepin and then correlate those documents
23 with the receipt of the sample at her laboratory and tie
24 them up with, for example, her receipt, which I will
25 also go to. So that there is absolutely no mystery and

57


1 that the hares that were sent running by
2 Professor Vanezis can be tracked and slayed.
3 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: That does not seem to be an
4 unfair approach.
5 MR KEEN: I was not aware of there being any hares, nor was
6 I aware of the right to give speeches in front of the
7 jury. But there we are, sir.
8 MR MACLEOD: Could I please continue, Dr Dumestre Toulet.
9 I am laying the ground here with you so that we can see
10 the meaning of the document trail that does exist.
11 So, if please, we could put up next [INQ0004645],
12 and if we could highlight the top of the page, please,
13 this is the conclusion of the analysis taken by Dr Pepin
14 with the sample of the 4th September which he analysed
15 in his laboratory on 5th September. We can see looking
16 down the blood alcohol reading of 1.75, the finding of
17 the drugs and the presence of the carboxyhaemoglobin and
18 that accords with what is written on appendix J.
19 Can we now please look at [INQ0004646] and if
20 we could highlight the passage please:
21 "The blood not used for the analyses will be
22 preserved at Dr Pepin's analytical laboratory for one
23 year dating from the issue of this report."
24 Now, Dr Dumestre Toulet, is it clear to you, having
25 looked at those records from Dr Pepin's report and

58


1 laboratory, that first of all he used some of the blood
2 to carry out toxicological tests?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And secondly, that he retained in his laboratory after
5 5th September the remainder of that blood?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And can I then ask for the next document to be put up,
8 please, which is [INQ0043316]?
9 It is right, is it not, Dr Dumestre Toulet, that
10 this is the instruction of yourself and Dr Pepin to
11 carry out further tests on 11th September?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And if we turn please to [INQ0043318] we can see that
14 the assignment in the centre of the page was to carry
15 out further tests on the blood sample taken from
16 Henri Paul on 4th September by measuring the CDT; is
17 that right?
18 A. Yes, that is right.
19 Q. And then at the bottom of the page, because this will
20 become relevant later, can we see "I Laurence Maire,
21 clerk of the court", received the hard copy of the
22 report at the court on 23rd September 1997?
23 A. We can't read the date.
24 Q. Does that help you at the bottom, 23rd September?
25 A. Well, you know, I sent my report to Dr Pepin, then

59


1 we had some exchanges. We have a better copy now and
2 we can read the date.
3 Q. All may become clear in a moment when we look at
4 the remaining documents. But can I ask next please for
5 the CDT report to be put up, [INQ00043321].
6 We can see in the top left-hand corner, "Case:
7 Henri Paul. Number: 971078".
8 I ask you to pay attention to that number to see if
9 it correlates with the number on Dr Pepin's laboratory
10 print-out, dealing with the CDT analysis.
11 Now, turning please to [INQ0000023], there we have
12 your assignment to carry out the CDT test on
13 4th September 1997 and we can see that you and Dr Pepin
14 signed that you have carried out the assignment and that
15 is dated 17th September.
16 A. Yes, that is the date of the report. Everything was
17 completed by 17th September.
18 Q. Yes, and turning over the page, there is
19 the identification and description of the sealed
20 exhibit.
21 I want to ask you a question about the top passage,
22 headed, "Sealed Exhibit Number 2".
23 And it reads:
24 "Sealed Exhibit Number 2: this was a brown envelope
25 containing a plastic bottle closed with wax seals,

60


1 the label being stuck to the envelope ..."
2 Now, the first thing I want to ask you is this: was
3 sealed exhibit number 2 and the description of
4 the sealed exhibit referring to the envelope or
5 the bottle?
6 A. It refers to the envelope and what is under this
7 paragraph is what is written on the envelope.
8 Q. Yes. And what was sealed with wax seals? Was it
9 the envelope or the bottle?
10 A. I cannot answer this question because I did not receive
11 the bottle sealed. It is Dr Pepin who could answer.
12 Q. Very well. So, when there is reference at the foot of
13 the page to, "The seal was intact", are you able to say
14 whether that reference is to the seal on the bottle or
15 the wax seals on the envelope?
16 A. It refers to the seal like Dr Pepin saw it when he
17 received the sealed exhibit. Because it is a joint
18 report, we signed it both.
19 Q. Very well. Can I ask you next please to look at
20 the document [INQ0043328] which is the chart of your
21 tests.
22 Dr Dumestre Toulet, do you see in the bottom
23 left-hand corner the results of the CDT test recorded at
24 32.odd and 31.217?
25 A. Yes.

61


1 Q. And are those the results that were applicable to
2 Mr Henri Paul?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And can I ask you to look in the top right-hand corner,
5 if we could highlight the very top right-hand part of
6 corner, are you able there to decipher what is written?
7 Is it a date?
8 A. I am not able to.
9 Q. In that case, if that is indecipherable, can we please
10 look at the date 9th September and whether it is a 10 or
11 a 16, which is further down the bottom of page. So,
12 we see 97-Sep and then you thought that that might have
13 been meant to be a 16. Is it possible that the 6 has
14 been cut off at the top; in other words, that that line
15 has been cropped?
16 A. Well, it is possible, yes, absolutely.
17 Q. Because I want you now please --
18 A. Because it is a needle printer and lines were missing.
19 Q. I would like to ask you now please to look at a document
20 which you referred to earlier in your evidence, which
21 will have to go under the scanner. It is the request
22 for toxicological examination, dated 16th December 1997.
23 Now, first of all, do you see in the top right-hand
24 corner, Veronique Dumestre Toulet?
25 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: There is not a document on

62


1 screen, Mr MacLeod.
2 MR MACLEOD: We are just waiting for the document to appear.
3 SECRETARY TO THE INQUEST: It has appeared.
4 MR MACLEOD: Can we see "Request for Toxicological
5 examination", "Date: 16th September 1997", "Case:
6 Henri Paul", requested by Judge Stephan and then in
7 the centre of the page, "Purpose of question:
8 measurement of CDT in femoral blood."
9 And then, towards the bottom of the page, dispatch
10 method, "Chronopost -- Toxlab, Dr Pepin" and receipt,
11 (date and person receiving): VDT [Veronique Dumestre
12 Toulet, 16th Sep 1997, 10 am".
13 What is that document, Dr Dumestre Toulet?
14 A. Well, it is an administrative document. An internal
15 document in my lab.
16 Q. And is that the document that you referred to earlier,
17 proving the date of the receipt of the sample from
18 Dr Pepin?
19 A. Yes, it is.
20 Q. And could I now ask please for the document [INQ0031823]
21 to be put up please?
22 Now, this is a similar document from Dr Pepin's
23 laboratory. Very similar to the one that we have looked
24 at previously. You may need to go to the screen to see
25 the details.

63


1 If we can highlight the top left-hand corner:
2 "Current case, case code" and we can see the number
3 19971078.
4 Is that the same case code as appears on the front
5 of the CDT report that you prepared?
6 A. Yes, it is.
7 Q. And then, "Date of requisition", does it show the date
8 that you and Dr Pepin, 11th September 1997, were
9 required to test the sample for CDT?
10 A. Absolutely.
11 Q. And does the next line, "For 20th September 1997", refer
12 to the date that Judge Stephan required the test to be
13 carried out by?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And then, dropping down a line, we see "date of arrival,
16 15th September 1997". Given the document which I have
17 just shown you, which is the receipt of the sample on
18 16th September, do you think it is likely that that is
19 the date that the remainder of the sample was withdrawn
20 from Dr Pepin's control and sent to you?
21 A. Yes, it is the date the sample was sent to me.
22 Q. And then, the next line, "Forwarded 17th
23 September 1997", is that the date that the report was
24 completed as an assignment?
25 A. Yes, it is the date we signed the report.

64


1 Q. And then, dropping down to the centre of the document,
2 is your name appearing in the centre of the document,
3 "Other expert: Dumestre Toulet", and does the remainder
4 of the document carry Henri Paul's blood sample details
5 taken by Dr Campana on 4th September?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Now, the final document I would like to look at please
8 is [INQ0020413]. I am grateful.
9 Now first of all, can I ask you what this document
10 is? Is it a receipt note for registered mail?
11 A. Yes, it is.
12 Q. Who is the addressee? To whom was it sent?
13 A. It is Gilbert Pepin at the Toxlab Laboratory.
14 Q. And is the address to which the contents of this receipt
15 or envelope were sent that in the square box in your
16 handwriting; Dr Gilbert Pepin?
17 A. Absolutely. It is my handwriting.
18 Q. Is this a receipt recording any document that was sent
19 to you?
20 A. It relates to something that I sent to Dr Pepin, but
21 because I sent it by registered mail, I received this
22 note and you can read that note is returned to me,
23 "Dumestre Toulet".
24 Q. So the return address underneath the addressee's address
25 is yours?

65


1 A. Yes, it is.
2 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr MacLeod, what page is this in
3 the jury bundle?
4 MR MACLEOD: In the jury bundle --
5 MR HILLIARD: I do not think it is. It is certainly not in
6 the original bundle.
7 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: That is what I was looking for.
8 MR HILLIARD: We will add it.
9 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: It had better go in as page 88.
10 MR HILLIARD: Yes, sir. Right at the end.
11 MR MACLEOD: The final question I want to ask you is: you
12 will recall that your CDT report which you say -- would
13 you have sent the supporting data with the report?
14 THE INTERPRETER: Excuse me?
15 MR MACLEOD: Would Dr Dumestre Toulet have sent the
16 supporting data with the CDT report?
17 A. Which data?
18 Q. On 19th September, we see that someone has signed for
19 the contents of the envelope, which you say was your CDT
20 report.
21 A. Well, the signature that is on the note must be the one
22 of someone who works for Mr Pepin at the Toxlab.
23 Q. Yes. Did you know that a Mr Beot(?) and
24 a Mr Gaillard(?) worked at the Toxlab?
25 A. That might be him. Gaillard maybe, I cannot be sure.

66


1 Q. My question is: would you have sent your CDT report to
2 Dr Pepin on its own, or with supporting data?
3 A. Well, maybe I also sent a copy of the graph that we have
4 looked at earlier.
5 Q. Now, what I would like to ask you is this: having looked
6 at that document and identified it as the receipt of the
7 report that was collected on Dr Pepin's behalf on
8 19th September, do you think it is likely that the date
9 recorded on your CDT report recording the court clerk
10 receiving it on 23rd September is correct? So in other
11 words, you sent your report to Dr Pepin on
12 19th September, he picked it up and delivered it to
13 the court by 23rd September?
14 A. Yes, this page is very likely to be the right one.
15 MR MACLEOD: Thank you very much.
16 Further questions from MR KEEN
17 MR KEEN: I wonder if I could ask one short supplementary
18 question by reference to a document that my learned
19 friend Mr MacLeod went to, it is a question by reference
20 to a passage that he did not go to.
21 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: You can, but he will have a right
22 of reply.
23 MR KEEN: Dr Dumestre Toulet, it is Mr Keen again. I wonder
24 if I could ask you a very short point.
25 You will recall Dr Pepin talked about sending a

67


1 sealed vial or bottle and you explained your own view
2 that it was not.
3 Could we just have up again your own document
4 translated which is [INQ0020405].
5 If we go to the second part of this document, which
6 is to do with a CDT test, in the case of Henri Paul
7 allegedly, and if we go down just a little, do we see
8 that under reference to "Samples" what we are told is
9 "sealed", "seal opened". Number 2, can I ask you to
10 think back, Dr Dumestre Toulet, why would you record
11 a sample as "sealed" and "seal opened", if according to
12 you if it was not sealed?
13 A. Because what is actually surrounded is "free". There
14 are several possibilities and in that case it was
15 "free".
16 Q. I apologise. There are three references, "sealed",
17 "seal opened" and "free" and are you saying that
18 according to you, the sample was free when you received
19 it?
20 A. That is right.
21 Q. So it could not be, as Dr Pepin said, a sealed vial that
22 he sent to you according to your contemporaneous record?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Very well. And just one last point: it refers to
25 "Number: 2", why would that be number 2?

68


1 A. I cannot answer. I do not remember. Maybe it was
2 because it was sealed exhibit number 2 or there were two
3 samples, I do not know.
4 MR KEEN: Very well. Thank you, sir.
5 MR MACLEOD: Sir, just a brief supplementary.
6 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes.
7 Further questions by MR MACLEOD
8 MR MACLEOD: Dr Dumestre Toulet, of the samples that Mr Keen
9 asked you about, "sealed", "seal opened" and "free",
10 we can see on the English translation that the word
11 "free" is underlined, which accords with your
12 recollection?
13 A. If you say so.
14 Q. Could I ask you please to look at the document which is
15 the French version, which I am just going to put on the
16 screen so that there is no doubt about it.
17 THE INTERPRETER: We have it in front of us.
18 MR MACLEOD: And we can see in the French document, free,
19 "libres", is circled. Does that accord with your
20 recollection that the bottle sent to you containing
21 the blood had been opened by Dr Pepin at your
22 laboratory?
23 A. Absolutely.
24 MR MACLEOD: Sir, that is all I would ask.
25 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Mr Hilliard?

69


1 MR HILLIARD: Just two topics and I think only a question on
2 each, doctor.
3 Further questions from MR HILLIARD
4 MR HILLIARD: First of all, the receipt for the last time,
5 [INQ0020413].
6 I just want you to look as closely as you need to
7 with your glasses if you need to and go up to the screen
8 but as I understand it, you are saying that that is not
9 your signature over on the left below the date.
10 A. No, it is not.
11 Q. And that what we see there does not say in any way
12 Dumestre Toulet?
13 A. Well, my name is spelled with only one L.
14 Q. And then, lastly, thank you, the graph showing the test
15 results. It is our page 85 in our bundle. Do you have
16 that in front of you? Well, there it is [INQ0043328].
17 What I want to know is this: about a quarter of the way
18 up from the bottom, do you see where the 97-Sep date is,
19 that line, what I want to know is this: what is that on
20 the left, it could be a number but it could be something
21 "TECT". Can you tell us, do you know what that is?
22 A. "CDTECT" you mean? It is the name of the test.
23 Q. And if we go over, further to the right, where the date
24 is, and back a little bit, it looks like maybe two
25 letters, I do not know. Can you help us with what those

70


1 are, first of all?
2 A. No. Sorry.
3 Q. And then the date, we have gone over what the number is
4 or might be, but what I want to know is this: whatever
5 the number is, is that the date according to the machine
6 that the analysis is carried out, or is it a different
7 date, a date of a calibration check or anything like
8 that? Or is it the date that the analysis is carried
9 out? Do you know?
10 A. Well, it is the date at which the analysis was
11 completed.
12 MR HILLIARD: All right. Thank you very much.
13 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Thank you very much,
14 Dr Dumestre Toulet. That is all we require. We are
15 extremely grateful to you for making yourself available
16 to assist the English court. Thank you.
17 I think we can now close down the videolink for
18 today.
19 MR HILLIARD: Yes, we can.
20 Sir, could I mention three matters?
21 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Yes.
22 MR HILLIARD: The first is for very good reason, I have been
23 deserted and I just want to make sure between now and
24 when we start again that I cover everything that is
25 necessary this afternoon. I wonder whether we might say

71


1 2 o'clock?
2 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: Certainly.
3 MR HILLIARD: The second thing is that I know there is
4 a matter that Mr Tam wanted to raise and because of
5 other commitments, he was hoping that he might do that
6 at 2 o'clock. It will take five minutes, I do not think
7 it will involve the jury. Certainly not initially.
8 So it might be five past two for them and 2 o'clock
9 for him.
10 Finally I think there are two statements from
11 Mr Martin Smith. One which the proposal is that it is
12 dealt with under Rule 37 as being uncontroversial.
13 It is communications received from certain witnesses
14 since they gave evidence. I hope that identifies that
15 one.
16 And a second statement from him, and it is proposed
17 to call him to deal with the contents of that statement
18 as hearsay. It relates to communications between him
19 and a Mr Chapman at the Treasury Solicitors Department.
20 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: If there are any objections to
21 the Rule 37 statement, they had better be made between
22 now and 2 o'clock and Mr Smith can deal with it that
23 way.
24 MR HILLIARD: Thank you.
25 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: There is something I want to

72


1 raise, I do not think I need trouble the jury to remain
2 for the moment. But if I say we will see you at five
3 past two, members of the jury, for a slightly longer
4 lunch than usual.
5 MR MANSFIELD: May I intervene? I am sorry to delay
6 the jury. I do not know, because Mr Tam has not told me
7 but I suspect that what he has to say does bear upon
8 something that I wanted to raise first thing this
9 morning. It was a matter that was raised originally
10 yesterday in the presence of the jury. So I am very
11 concerned that the matter is rectified in the presence
12 of the jury.
13 I do not know what Mr Tam wants to raise at 2 in
14 the absence of the jury, but I would ask you to bear
15 that in mind.
16 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: We will still say five past two,
17 members of the jury, but I do not think there will be
18 a problem.
19 (Jury out)
20 LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER: The first matter is the reasons
21 for the decision not to call the Duke of Edinburgh and
22 ask questions of the Queen.
23 Bearing in mind that there is now, I understand, an
24 application for leave to apply for judicial review, and
25 that that is being heard this afternoon, it would seem

73

1 that there is no reason at all why those reasons should
2 not now enter the public domain, not of course for
3 the jury, but onto the website.
4 No doubt there will be argument in
5 the Administrative Court relating to them and there is
6 no reason it seems to me why the public should not have
7 the full picture. Does anybody want to say anything
8 about that?
9 MR MANSFIELD: Yes, sir. I spoke to Mr Burnett earlier
10 about this very matter. In my submission, the reasons,
11 if I may put it that way, the basis anyway, for not
12 putting the reasons on the website last week apply
13 equally to the question of what will be happening this
14 afternoon. In other words, the fact that you made
15 a decision, obviously has been made public, not to call
16 the Duke of Edinburgh or ask any questions of the Queen.
17 That has been made public in very short form.
18 Similarly, subject of course to what the court says
19 this afternoon, the fact of