Did any contractor ever come forward and admit to laying concrete?
As a qualified civil engineer with lots of experience in pouring concrete I can tell you now that the geologist was talking out of his backside. No expert can tell who laid concrete as like most things it can be faked in all sorts of ways. Had there been a contractor on site they would have been observed.
Here is Mark's response
The expert in question wasn’t claiming to identify who actually laid the mortar. He simply drew attention to stark differences in the methodology and workmanship of the mortar as compared to the concrete. We interpret this evidence to say that the same person couldn’t have been responsible for both. I imagine that someone with lots of experience in pouring concrete like yourself might be able to “fake it” as you say, but I think you have rather disproved your own argument here. In order to fake something, you need to know how to fake it in the first place. I am not an expert; I am not even a DIY enthusiast. The haulier knew I was out of my depth. “He looked as though he had never used a wheelbarrow before. He clearly didn’t have a clue what he was doing.” I am a pencil pusher, not a brickie.
As a qualified civil engineer, you might like to ask yourself this: could you mix, lay, compact, and shutter 3 distinct layers of mortar in just 3 hours? Ironically, no one thought to ask this simple question at my trial. Of course, as the expert explained, each layer along “would probably take 3 to 4 hours to dry and harden sufficiently for the next layer to be put on top”, forming distinct strata.
Let’s look at what we do know. The Forensic Archaeologist conducting the police excavation noted the following:
“No tool marks or prints were seen in the base of the grave, and there was no evidence of wash from the sides, or biological material such as leaves having been present prior to the pouring of the mortar. The grave was probably not open for a long time before the first layer of mortar was poured, as there was little evidence of weathering of the sides of the grave, or of any wind blown detritus such as leaves in its base.”
We can assume from this that the mortar was laid shortly before my return in mid November, and therefore during the month long period when it is accepted that I was away from the area.
Preparing the site would have involved excavating 2 metric tones of soil, while cutting away tree roots, and an eaves drip gully:
“A gully of loose bricks and rubbish could also be seen to have been cut through in order to dig the large hole. The root system of a tree had been cut down and cut away in order to excavate the hole. The site was apparently not designed as a grave. Not all the excavated length was utilized. It may be an indication that other means were first used to dispose of the body, but after the grave had been dug. The maximum depth was 1.2m. It was well constructed, by someone who appears to have known what they were doing.” SJP Forensic Archaeologist.
This perhaps points toward a disconnect between the excavation and the burial, as I discuss in a previous post. In any event, the excavation was followed by the mixing and laying of 1.09 cubic metres of mortar in 3 separate strata. The professionalism of the whole diabolical process would have required a high level of experience and expertise, far beyond my own understanding. And as we know, it was all done without being seen or heard. Not only does this contrast starkly to the very public arrival of a concrete truck heralding my return in November, but it would have required far more time to carry out than I was actually around for. Indeed of the 3 hours I spent at the house in November, half of it was taken up by the concrete delivery.
So, when am I supposed to have carried out this awful crime? The point is none of these timings add up. I simply wasn’t there long enough to have been responsible.
