RIDDLE OF RACHEL

Mum Prays For End To Four-Year Mystery

THE BLOATED, blackened corpse of a girl lies on a bedsit floor. A syringe
is clutched in her hand, and the dingy room is littered with the tools of a
heroin addict. This is Britain's image of Rachel Whitear, a bright, loving
21-year-old changed by death into a symbol of the evil of drugs.

But symbols are not always what they seem. After nearly four years, mystery
still surrounds how Rachel really died.

In a week, police will dig up her body for new forensic tests. They want to
find out if an overdose really killed her, or if forces even more sinister
than heroin were at work.

Rachel's jilted boyfriend has already been arrested over her death, only to
be freed.

He first denied being the last man to see Rachel alive, then admitted it.
He accepts no blame for what happened to her.

Millions of people have seen Rachel dead. Her mum Pauline and stepdad Mick
made police photos of the scene public, hoping to shock kids into saying no
to drugs.

A video, called Rachel's story, was even shown in schools.

There is no doubt Rachel was a heroin addict. But the police and coroner in
her case were so sure she died of an overdose that they did not even order
a post-mortem.

Blood tests were taken, however. They seemed to show that Rachel did NOT
have enough heroin in her system to kill.

SO did the drug really kill Rachel, or had someone made it look that way?
Police were faced with some baffling questions.

Tests on the syringe found in Rachel's hand apparently showed no sign of
heroin.

Police yesterday said new tests had revealed traces of the drug. But doubts
remain to this day over whether Rachel had enough heroin in her body to
kill her.

Detectives have also asked: lWHY was the syringe in Rachel's hand found
with a safety cap on its needle? Did she really replace the cap as she
died, or did someone put the syringe in her hand after death?

lWHY were traces of DNA from two people discovered on the syringe? Does it
suggest that more than one person was in the room when Rachel died?

lWHY, if Rachel was taking heroin, was no tourniquet found in her room?
Injecting addicts nearly always tie a tourniquet around their arm or leg to
bring up a vein.

lWHY was she taking heroin at all? She had not used the drug in several
days, her family said she was getting herself together,and a drug
counsellor who saw on the day of her death said she was feeling happy and
positive.

Police have studied Rachel's relationship with Luke Fitzgerald, the
ex-boyfriend who denies any responsibility for her death.

Rachel dumped Fitzgerald the day before she died. He denied seeing her the
following day then changed his story and admitted he had.

Fitzgerald wasa heroin addict whenhe met Rachel. Hewas 24, she was only 18.
Rachel was a happy girl from a stable and loving home her biggest worry was
deciding which university to go to that year.

Five universities had offered her places on the strength of her excellent
A-level results.

But Rachel's life was about to change. She left the family home in Hereford
and moved in with Fitzgerald, and was soon a heroin addict like her boyfriend.

Fitzgerald claims he did not introduce his girlfriend to drugs.

Rachel dropped out of university. She took a string of menial jobs, and
sold her possessions to buy heroin. But after three years with Fitzgerald,
she decided her life had to change.

Secretly, she rented a room where she could live on her own.

And on May 9, 2000, after Fitzgerald went into town to score some heroin,
she slipped out of the flat they shared in Exmouth, Devon.

Rachel left a note, saying: 'I need my own space, uninfluenced by anyone,to
develop a new life.'

Pauline was thrilled at the news.But within 24 hours, Rachel was dead.

Her new landlord did not find her until Friday May12,but the state of her
body told police she died on the 10th. Police found a scorched spoon, used
to 'cook' heroin, and several empty syringes in the room.

As a matter of routine, Fitzgerald was interviewed. He said he returned
home on May 9, read Rachel's note, then injected himself with all the
heroin hehad bought.

At 9 o'clock that night, he went to see Rachel at the shop where she
worked.They went to a nearby beach. He admitted they argued.

Fitzgerald told police he walked away and never saw Rachel again.

But Rachel's mother had a very different story. Her daughter had told her
she had agreed to meet Fitzgerald again next day the day she died.

Convinced something was wrong, Pauline asked police to speak to Fitzgerald
again.This time,he admitted seeing Rachel on the Wednesday.

It was a major change in Fitzgerald's story. It made him the last person to
have seen Rachel alive.

So was there more to her death than met the eye? A post-mortem would have
answered many questions.

But no such examination was carried out.The local coroner,Richard van
Oppen, was very busy at the time, and the police did not insist. Rachel's
body was released, and her family buried her.

Then the blood test results came back. They showed that Rachel had just
0.05 micrograms of heroin in her system per millilitre of blood.

Some experts claimed at least three times that amount would have been
needed to kill her.

Then there was all the evidence of the syringe cap, the DNA on the syringe,
the lack of the tourniquet, and Rachel's unexplained return to using heroin.

An inquest seven months later only deepened the mystery. Having failed to
order a post-mortem, the coroner was unable to give a definite cause of death.

He recorded anopen verdict, but added: 'There is only one thing of which I
am certain Rachel did not die from heroin.'

Mr van Oppen,now retired, also failed to call Fitzgerald to give evidence.
He decided the young addict was too unreliable.

Rachel's parents were bitterly unhappy. Pauline said the failure to call
Fitzgerald, and the lack of a post-mortem, made the inquest 'deeply
unsatisfactory'.

The family were also increasingly angry with Devon and Cornwall Police.
Pauline said recently: 'If the police had done their job properly and done
a post-mortem, we would know what Rachel died of. 'I suspect they saw a
heroin user with a syringe in her hand and decided it was an open and shut
case.

'The sudden death of a 21-year-old who had given up heroin and was looking
forward to a fresh start should have sounded warning bells.

'Instead, they chose to ignore them.' Pauline and Mick decided to lodge an
official complaint about the police. And an outside force was brought in a
year ago to reopen the investigation.

Detective Chief Superintendent Paul Howlett, of Wiltshire police, led a
team of six officers. They set about looking again at every detail of the
case. All the key players were re-interviewed. As a result, Fitzgerald was
arrested with a second manon suspicion of manslaughter and conspiring to
pervert justice.

Later,Crown lawyers decided there was not enough evidence to charge the men.

But Mr Howlett's work went on. Much of his time was spent talking to
experts about Rachel's blood test results.

Few shared the coroner's view that Rachel could not have died from heroin.
They explained that blood samples taken after death do not always reflect
drug levels in a living person's body.

Also, because Rachel had been off heroin, her tolerance to the drug would
have decreased. It was possible that a smaller dose could have killed her.

Mr Howlett was faced with an obvious, but harrowing decision. To find the
truth, Rachel would have to be exhumed.

A week from today, Rachel's family will gather at St Peter's churchyard
near Hereford for a memorial service before her body is removed.

The coffin will be taken under police escort to a hospital four miles away.
There, at last, a post-mortem will be carried out.

Doctors will check Rachel's body for broken bones and other signs of
violence. And they will test her hair and samples of her tissue for traces
of heroin.

Mr Howlett said: 'We will be considering everything and discounting nothing.'

Rachel is expected to be reburied within hours of the post mortem being
completed. AT A news conference yesterday,Pauline and Mick said they were
preparing for the toughest 10 days of their lives. Pauline, 53, said: 'It
is very upsetting. But we believe as a family that Rachel's spirit left her
body a long time ago, and that helps us.

'The decision to exhume Rachel's body gives us hope, but we are realistic
enough to know it may not bring us any closer to how she died.

'Time is a healer to many grieving people. 'For us, however, time has
brought nothing but agonising questions and a desire to know the truth,
something we regret we may never know.'

Whatever the outcome of the case, Pauline and Mick have no regrets about
agreeing to release the pictures of Rachel's body. Mick said: 'The film was
valid and important. It tackled the nightmare of drug abuse.'

Fitzgerald, now off heroin and living in Birmingham, sticks to his story
that Rachel simply died of an overdose.

He said after her death: 'I was horrified by the death of Rachel, whom I
loved very much. I did not introduce her to drugs, nor did I give her the
drugs which proved fatal.'

More recently, Fitzgerald's brother Simon insisted: 'If Luke had been there
when Rachel died, he would have done all he could to save her. He was in
bits about what happened.

'It's sad about the exhumation. But if that's what they've got to do, I
hope they find what they need and the whole thing ends soon.'