As someone - one of the few - who attended the inquest into the death of Charlotte Coursier, I can tell you that the most accurate report of the evidence presented at the inquest is actually to be found in the Daily Mail.Dr. Mark Jago expressed concern on CDN's Twitter feed about the reporting. Dr. Boddington replied:
MJ: @paulaboddington On DM tone: I felt the 'he followed her to Oxford' bit in particular was far from neutral reporting.
PB: @Mark_Jago Yes but cld b read 2 ways: if you'd heard witness statement from which this was taken, it is understandable. You weren't there.Dr. Boddington might at some point like to clarify the source of this "witness statement".
UPDATE (10 July 2014): Dr. Boddington maintains her steady literary output defending The Daily Mail's bizarre fabrications about me, including certain time-travel allegations against me. Dr. Boddington refuses to clarify the question that I and CDN asked, namely, the identity of the person whose "witness statement” engendered the most deluded of The Daily Mail fabrications. Let me try and explain a very simple concept here, a concept not hard to fathom, whose use requires merely logic, evidence and rational thinking: the concept is the concept of FALSE ALLEGATIONS. Ok – is that crystal clear? I have long wished to protect the memory of a person who tragically took her own life, and keep the true nature of her behaviour away from public scrutiny. If you wish Charlotte Coursier’s background to be revealed, then shame on you. Do not play games with other peoples' lives. It is despicable.