St Leonards murder accused 'shot wife at close range'

Heather Whitbread (left) and Michelle Savage were shot several times, jurors heard

A woman was shot at such close range she had gunpowder tattooed on her skin, a court has heard.

Craig Savage, 35, of no fixed address, denies murdering his estranged wife Michelle Savage and her mother Heather Whitbread.

Consultant forensic pathologist Dr Ashley Fegan-Earl said Ms Savage was shot with seven bullets in St Leonards.

Dr Fegan-Earl, who carried out post-mortem examinations, told Lewes Crown Court she had sustained 13 wounds.

Jurors heard Ms Savage was shot in the buttock, shoulder, forearm, upper arm, stomach, hip and the sole of her foot.

An entrance wound on Ms Savage's hip showed a "muzzle imprint", which is where "the muzzle of the weapon is in close proximity to the skin", the doctor told the court.

He added: "If the weapon is in very close proximity or near-contact, a flake of gunpowder will tattoo itself on the skin."

Dr Fegan-Earl said: "When I looked under the microscope I saw a black flake in the skin consistent with the transfer of burning gunpowder from the end of the gun into the wound."

Craig Savage denies two counts of murder

Prosecutor Benjamin Aina QC said two bullets were shot vertically downwards and asked what this, with the foot injury, might mean.

Dr Fegan-Earl said: "It raises the possibility that she was in a kneeling position."

Mr Aina asked: "With whoever was holding the weapon standing above?"

The pathologist replied: "That would have had to be the case."

On Ms Whitbread's injuries, jurors heard she was shot six times, while a bullet that passed through her arm, ribs and lungs "would have proved fatal".

Mr Aina asked: "Your examination demonstrated the gunshot wounds were principally to the back of the body, with exits towards the front?"

The pathologist replied: "Yes."

Defending, Alan Kent QC said jurors had heard Ms Savage had been learning kung fu and asked if it was possible her foot injury had occurred when her foot was in the air or when she was on the ground.

Dr Fegan-Earl said it was not possible pathologically to differentiate this.

Mr Kent asked if she was "potentially kicking out". The pathologist replied: "Yes, if the foot presents itself in the same way."

The trial continues.