PDA

View Full Version : New evidence of cover up in Dr David Kelly's death. Doctors want inquest.



Magda Hassan
07-12-2009, 09:18 AM
13 doctors demand inquest into Dr David Kelly's death

By Glen Owen (http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authornamef=Glen+Owen) and Miles Goslett (http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authornamef=Miles+Goslett)
Last updated at 1:08 AM on 12th July 2009

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/07/12/article-1199109-0068D54C00000258-696_233x379.jpg No inquest: Dr David Kelly in the days before his death

The death of Government scientist David Kelly returned to haunt Labour today as a group of doctors announced that they were mounting a legal challenge to overturn the finding of suicide.
Dr Kelly's body was found six years ago this week in woods close to his Oxfordshire home, shortly after he was exposed as the source of a BBC news report questioning the grounds for war in Iraq.
Unusually, no coroner's inquest was held into his death.

The only official verdict has come from the Hutton Inquiry, commissioned by Tony Blair, which concluded that Dr Kelly, 59, died from loss of blood after cutting his wrist with a blunt gardening knife.
Critics regarded the report as a 'whitewash', and Mr Blair remains acutely sensitive to the accusation that he has 'blood on his hands' over the scientist's death.

But now a team of 13 specialist doctors has compiled a detailed medical dossier that rejects the Hutton conclusion on the grounds that a cut to the ulnar artery, which is small and difficult to access, could not have caused death.
It will be used by their lawyers to demand a formal inquest and the release of Dr Kelly's autopsy report, which has never been published. It will also be sent to Sir John Chilcot's forthcoming inquiry into the Iraq War.

The 12-page opinion, a copy of which has been seen by The Mail on Sunday, concludes: 'The bleeding from Dr Kelly's ulnar artery is highly unlikely to have been so voluminous and rapid that it was the cause of death.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/07/11/article-1199109-0093870B1000044C-509_468x286.jpg Speaking out: David Halpin, pictured with his wife Sue, is among the doctors behind the legal challenge

'We advise the instructing solicitors to obtain the autopsy reports so that the concerns of a group of properly interested medical specialists can be answered.'
The doctors do not say how, or why, they believe Dr Kelly did die but they have worked closely with campaigning Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker, who believes that the scientist was murdered by enemies he made in the course of his work as a weapons inspector.

And two of the doctors have added to the sense of persistent intrigue surrounding Dr Kelly by claiming that thousands of emails relating to the case had 'vanished' from their computers, in what one claimed was an act of 'state-sponsored sabotage'.

A coroner's inquest into Dr Kelly's death was suspended before it could begin by order of the then Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer. He used the Coroners Act to designate the Hutton Inquiry as 'fulfilling the function of an inquest', but as a judicial investigation it had no power to make witnesses give evidence under oath.
After taking evidence from - but not cross-examining - Dr Nicholas Hunt, the pathologist who carried out the post-mortem examination, Lord Hutton concluded that 'the principal cause of death was bleeding from incised wounds to the left wrist' combined with the consumption of painkillers and 'silent coronary artery disease'.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/07/11/article-1199109-008ED4811000044C-831_235x283.jpg Not forgotten: The sign marking Dr Kelly's grave in an Oxfordshire churchyward

The doctors also say that the level of the painkiller co-proxamol in Dr Kelly's blood was about one third of that required to produce death and point to Dr Hunt's comments at the end of giving evidence to Lord Hutton.
Asked if there was anything further he would like to say on the circumstances leading to Dr Kelly's death, he said: 'Nothing I could say as a pathologist, no.'
After the report was published, Dr Hunt added to the doctors' suspicions by telling Channel 4 that he thought a full coroner's inquest should be held.
The doctors have hired solicitor Martin Day, of Leigh Day and Co, and received advice from barrister Richard Hermer, QC, both of whom have a strong track record in civil liberties actions, including winning nearly 3million in compensation from the British Government for the family of Iraqi Baha Mousa, who died while being detained by UK troops.
They intend to use the Coroners Act to challenge Lord Falconer's suspension of the inquest.
One of the doctors, David Halpin, told The Mail on Sunday that they had argued their case in the legal document in 'microscopic' detail.
He said: 'We reject haemorrhage as the cause of death and see no contrary opinion which would stand its ground. I think it is highly likely he was assassinated.'
Mr Baker said: 'The fact that eminent medical experts feel so strongly that the official explanation for Dr Kelly's death cannot be sustained and are now taking legal action against the Government to secure a proper inquest demonstrates both how suspect Lord Hutton's conclusions were and how this dark chapter cannot be closed unless Sir John Chilcott's inquiry into the Iraq war addresses this issue.
'A proper inquest into Dr Kelly's death must take place.'
Among the doctors is Christopher Burns-Cox, 71, the former senior consultant physician for the Frenchay Healthcare Trust, Bristol, and current co-chairman of the NHS consultants' association.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/07/12/article-1199109-0659FEBA0000044D-362_468x286.jpg Campaign: Lib Dem MP Norman Baker at the place where Dr Kelly's body was found in 2003

Mr Halpin, 69, meanwhile, is a former lecturer in anatomy at King's College, London, and a former consultant in orthopaedic and trauma surgery at Torbay Hospital. He continued in general practice until 2005.
Mr Halpin said that he lost more than 6,000 pieces of correspondence - many relating to Dr Kelly - during his investigation, explaining that the mystery began when the 'firewall' on his computer, which all similar machines are fitted with as a security measure, became inactive without warning.
His emails started disappearing as though they were being sifted remotely. 'I believe this will have been done by a state-sponsored agency and not by an amateur acting singly,' he said.
A close associate of Mr Halpin's who has also taken an active interest in the case confirmed to The Mail on Sunday that at around the same time he, too, fell victim to what he believes was a rogue agent, losing 'somewhere in the region of 2,000 emails', many of which discussed Dr Kelly.
For professional reasons, the individual concerned, a civil servant, said that he could not be identified by name.
He said: 'I have no doubt that my computer was hacked into and I also have reason to believe that both my mobile telephone and my landline have been bugged until fairly recently. It echoes on the end of the line, things like that.
'But if I made an accusation like that in public without being able to prove it, it would compromise me and for the sake of my children I do not want to enter that territory. I cannot say any more about it at the moment.'
Mr Baker, who published a book about Dr Kelly's death in 2007, also believes that his computer was hacked into remotely, leading to the loss of sensitive files about David Kelly from his constituency office in Lewes, East Sussex.

'I think it is highly likely he was assassinated'


And Mr Halpin added that Rowena Thursby, who helped establish the Kelly Investigation Group which has campaigned for the inquest into Dr Kelly's death to be reopened on several occasions, has also lost scores of emails in a similar, suspicious manner.
The developments come as investigative journalist Bob Coen prepares to screen a 90-minute documentary, Anthrax War, in London on the sixth anniversary of Dr Kelly's death, this Friday.
The film claims that Dr Kelly's death may have been linked to the secret world of germ warfare research.
Until his death Dr Kelly was privy to some of the state's most sensitive information and worked closely with the intelligence services of all the major industrialised countries.
Among notable claims in the film, which was made over four years, is Dr Kelly's connection with Dr Walter Basson, whose work for the South African apartheid regime used chemical and biological weapons research destined for extrajudicial execution, and whose goals included ethnic cleansing.
The film also suggests that Dr Kelly was preparing to write a book that would have breached the Official Secrets Act.


He could not have died from loss of blood, say the experts

The draft version of the doctors dossier a final version, including diagrams and a copy of Dr Kellys death certificate, is being prepared for lawyers this week concentrates on the ulnar artery, a blood vessel in the forearm.
The Hutton Report quoted Dr Nicholas Hunt, the forensic pathologist who examined
Dr Kellys corpse, as seeing evidence of a significant incised wound to his left wrist, in the depths of which his left artery had been completely severed...

The arterial injury had resulted in the loss of a significant volume of blood, as noted at
the scene.

But the doctors draw on their specialist knowledge of human anatomy to argue in detail that a wound to this artery could not have resulted in enough blood loss to cause his death.

This artery has the width of a matchstick in its constricted state, they write.

It is not easily felt on the little finger side of the wrist... on the contrary, the radial artery
pulse is easily felt beneath the skin on the opposite side of the wrist. It is thus more
difficult to cut the ulnar artery.

They go on to argue that, according to the evidence given by Dr Hunt to Lord Huttons
inquiry, Dr Kellys blood would have quickly clotted, thus stemming the flow and preventing his death.

They write: Dr Hunt describes complete severance of this artery, ie transection. This
means the elasticity of the artery would have caused it to retract within its sheath.

Contraction of the circular smooth muscle within the arterial wall would have narrowed the artery, thus reducing or stopping blood flow.

Blood clots would have formed in the wound, but also within the narrowed artery.

That clotting within the artery would have happened more speedily because the cutting was done with considerable trauma, thus causing more damage to the lining membrane, the intima.

Damage to the cells of the intima causes aggregation of blood platelets, thus
hastening clotting within the vessel.

The doctors cite a number of studies which they say prove for all practical purposes that suicide using the means allegedly adopted by Dr Kelly does not exist in Britain.

Although the doctors do not believe the painkillers taken by Dr Kelly contributed to his
death in any way as argued by Lord Hutton they have restricted the scope of their dossier to refute the reasoning he used on the question of haemorrhage.
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-1199109/13-doctors-demand-inquest-Dr-David-Kellys-death.html

Peter Lemkin
07-12-2009, 09:37 AM
UK weapons inspector who was found dead was writing expose: paper

By John Byrne

Published: July 6, 2009
Updated 1 day ago


http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/07/06/uk-...or-dead-expose/

British weapons inspector Dr. David Kelly was writing an expose about his work with anthrax and his warnings that Iraq possessed no weapons of mass destruction at the time of his death in July 2003, according to a report published in a British newspaper.

Kellys death said to have been a suicide has stirred controversy, as it came on the heels of testimony to the House of Commons about a memo which purported that Britain had sexed up a dossier on Iraqs alleged weapons of mass destruction. A Parliamentary inquiry ruled that the death had been suicide, though it also included testimony from a former British ambassador who quotes Kelly as having said, I will probably be found dead in the woods if Iraq were invaded.

The new report says Kelly had spoken with an Oxford publisher several times about a book.

He had several discussions with a publisher in Oxford and was seeking advice on how far he could go without breaking the law on secrets, the UK Daily Express alleged.

Kellys computers were seized in the wake of his death. He was a signatory to Britains Official Secrets Act, which allows for the prosecution of those who talk to the press about state secrets and prescribes a more stringent framework for secrecy than in the United States.

According to the paper, he was intending to reveal that he warned Prime Minister Tony Blair there were no weapons of mass destruction anywhere in Iraq weeks before the British and American invasion and was also intending to lift the lid on a potentially bigger scandal, his own secret dealings in germ warfare with the apartheid regime in South Africa.

The allegations of a potential Kelly expose come from a new film about biological weapons being debuted in London on the sixth anniversary of Kellys death titled Anthrax War (the documentary aired earlier this year on Canadian public television). Kelly was an expert in biological warfare agents, as well as a former United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq.

Anthrax War

The deeper you look into the murky world of governments and germ warfare, the more worrying it becomes, the films director, Bob Coen, is quoted as saying. We have proved there is a black market in anthrax. David Kelly was of particular interest to us because he was a world expert on anthrax and he was involved in some degree with assisting the secret germ warfare program in apartheid South Africa.

According to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporations summary of the film, Coen was raised in Zimbabwe where the former white regime has been accused of unleashing anthrax against the black population [who] embarks on a journey that raises troubling questions about the FBIs investigation of the 21st centurys first act of biological terrorism.

Coens investigation takes him from the U.S. to the U.K. and from the edge of Siberia to the tip of Africa. In a rare interview, Coen confronts Doctor Death Wouter Basson, who headed Project Coast, the South African apartheid-era bio-warfare program, the networks website adds. Project Coast used germ warfare against select targets within the countrys black population.

Anthrax War also investigates the mysterious deaths of some of the worlds leading anthrax scientists, including Dr. David Kelly, the UKs top military microbiologist, the Soviet defector Dr. Vladimir Pasechnik, and Dr. Bruce Ivins, the CBC continues. The FBI claims - despite the doubts of highly ranked U.S. officials - that Ivins was the only person behind the U.S. anthrax murders.

A Torrent download of Anthrax War is available at this link. Several shorter clips are also available on YouTube.

This video is from CBCs Anthrax War.

Magda Hassan
07-12-2009, 12:01 PM
Click here for Part Two of Norman Baker's shocking investigation

Last updated at 00:09 20 October 2007


It was a normal day in Westminster. The House was sitting and Parliament was full of the usual collection of weary MPs like me traipsing from one meeting to the next, and primly dressed men in ceremonial tights harrumphing around the place.
I left my office and took the stairs down to the reception area where my next appointment was waiting for me.
I had never heard of him before and my mind was on the pile of unfinished work on my desk rather than the meeting about to take place.
I assumed it would be a short and uneventful one, but I couldn't have been more wrong.
Scroll down for more ...
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/10_03/kellywddgPA1910_468x834.jpg Happier times: Dr Kelly was known as a devoted husband and father

My visitor was nervous and distracted. I began to wonder if he was unwell. Then he suddenly decided to open up.
The ostensible reason given for the meeting was essentially a pretext. My visitor really wanted to talk about the death of David Kelly.
Let me say here that I subsequently checked out this person's bona fides and was able to confirm them. He was who he said he was, and worked where he said he worked.
I have to be very careful with what I say about him, as he clearly believes that he is at risk if he is identified as producing information. For this reason, I can also relate only a fraction of what he said to me, and what is recorded in my extensive contemporaneous notes.
He told me of a meeting where members of a UK-based Iraqi circle had named people who claimed involvement in Dr Kelly's death.
It seems the Iraqis felt Dr Kelly had besmirched them through his publicly reported actions in doubting the intelligence their organisation had provided to MI6, not least in respect to the now infamous September dossier.
There was also concern that, had he lived, Dr Kelly might have gone public with even more details.
I stayed in contact with my informant, by necessarily elaborate means, and one day he undertook to send me some specific material. It never arrived, and he went quiet.
Some weeks later, I discovered why. When we met again, he was even jumpier than at our first meeting and what he told me was chilling.
On the day after he had undertaken to post me the material we had discussed, he kept an appointment, made at short notice. He had been promised certain information, which was to be conveyed to him by a contact.
I learnt that at that impromptu meeting he was subjected to an horrific attack by an unknown assailant, the full details of which he has asked me not to reveal. Perhaps not surprisingly, he has been reluctant to get any further involved, though he remains well.
The information he had given me had pushed my investigation on immeasurably. It now seemed that I was closer than ever to understanding who had killed Dr Kelly but one thing remained unexplained. Why would his death have been made to look like suicide?
I realised that a clue to this might lie in another piece of information given to me by my visitor at Westminster before he decided, for his own safety, that he could help me no longer.
He told me that the police or the security services had got wind of a possible plan to assassinate Dr Kelly but were too late to prevent his murder taking place.
Suppose this were true - and suppose also that they were told that, in the interests of Queen and country, this information should not come out for fear of destabilising both Britain and Iraq.
Under those circumstances might it just be possible that they saw it as their patriotic duty to intervene - allowing the impression to be formed that Dr Kelly had killed himself?
It seemed incredible but the more I thought about it, the more I realised it might explain some strange anomalies in the police's handling of Dr Kelly's case.
The first relates to a secret file of evidence submitted to the Hutton inquiry by Thames Valley Police.
While the contents remain classified, the cover is publicly available and reveals that the codename for the investigation was Operation Mason.
This has given rise to wild rumours of a freemasonry angle to the case but, while these are almost certainly without foundation, what is more concerning is that the start time of Operation Mason is given as 2.30pm on Thursday July 17, which was half an hour before Dr Kelly set off from his home for a walk from which he would never return.
Scroll down for more ...
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/10_03/funeralPA1910_468x309.jpg Grief-stricken: Mourners at Dr Kelly's funeral

When I challenged this curious timing, I was told that the starttime of an operation is fixed not to relate to the moment that the police know of an incident but to reflect the period of interest to them. This sounds superficially plausible until one reflects that any police investigation worthy of the name would look back way before 2.30 on that Thursday afternoon.
Yet what is the explanation, if this is not the case? Premonition and occult powers can be safely discounted, which leaves us with the possibility that some element within Thames Valley Police had foreknowledge, to at least some degree, of that afternoon's tragic events.
This might help us understand other curiosities about the case - including two searches made of the Kelly home in the early hours of the morning after Dr Kelly vanished.
The first, conducted shortly after midnight when officers first arrived at the house, made some sense. Dr Kelly might, for example, have suffered a heart attack in a little-used part of the house - but a second more detailed search at around 5am is more difficult to understand.
Surely if Dr Kelly had been there, he would have been found the first time. More puzzling still, Mrs Kelly was asked to wait in the garden while a dog was put through the house.
A chief constable with whom I have discussed this matter was unable to explain why Mrs Kelly would have been asked to leave her home.
In his view, if the objective was to locate Dr Kelly, her knowledge of the house's layout would have been helpful in any search.
He described the police actions as "bizarre" but, as we shall see, they become entirely understandable if there was a hitherto undisclosed reason for this second search.
Could it be linked, for example, to a number of strange inconsistencies in the testimony of those who saw Dr Kelly's body on the morning it was discovered?
Two key pieces of evidence suggesting that Dr Kelly had taken his life were the presence at the scene of the blunt pruning knife with which he was supposed to have cut his wrist, and the halfdrunk bottle of water which, we are led to believe, he used to help him swallow his wife's painkillers.
Strangely, however, no mention was made of these items by Louise Holmes and Paul Chapman, two volunteers who had joined the search party that morning and came across Dr Kelly's body at about 8.30am.
They must have been truly unobservant to miss the bloodied knife and water bottle.
Yet this was not the only apparent difference between what they saw and the accounts given by others. For example, Paul Chapman told the Hutton inquiry that Dr Kelly's body was sitting on the ground and leaning up against a tree, a view with which Ms Holmes concurred.
But those who came later said that Dr Kelly was lying on his back with the knife and water bottle next to him.
The position of the water bottle was interesting: propped up, at a slight angle, to the left of Dr Kelly's head, with the cap by the side of it.
Given that Dr Kelly was righthanded, the police might have been expected to find it on that side of his body, but the configuration is just about possible if Dr Kelly were sitting up against the tree.
If, however, he was lying on his back, we are asked to believe that he placed the water bottle, presumably with his undamaged and natural right hand, by his head on the left and placed the cap neatly next to it.
Despite his serious injuries, he even managed, at this contortionist's angle, to ensure that the bottle was propped up.
It's also strange that no mention was made at the Hutton inquiry of whether there were any fingerprints on the knife. No- one volunteered any information on this and no one was asked.
After some delay, Thames Valley Police finally told me earlier this year that no fingerprints were recovered from the knife. And yet we know from the evidence of forensic biologist Roy Green that the knife was blood-marked.
Try holding a knife tightly, as if you were about to use it to make an incision. Is it not a natural action to use your fingers to apply pressure on the knife to hold it firm and in place?
Did Dr Kelly then have a most curious way of holding a knife? Or are we being asked to believe that he tidily wiped his prints off, just as he tidily put the bottle cap next to the water bottle by his left shoulder, and the empty coproxamol blister packs tidily back in his coat pocket?
Other confusion arose over what he was wearing when he left home. Many of the papers published in the weekend immediately following his death suggested that he had been jacketless - a view supported by Acting Superintendent David Parnell of Thames Valley Police, who was quoted as saying he was "dressed in jeans and a cotton shirt".
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2006/09/hutton150906_228x338.jpg Lord Hutton: His findings were controversial

By contrast, the Hutton inquiry was told that he was wearing a coat when he was found - variously described as a green or blue Barbour-type wax jacket.
Given that it was a warmish day in July, albeit somewhat cloudy, it's perhaps questionable whether he would have donned a wax Barbour, but, if the theory that he committed suicide is correct, it's conceivable that he would have needed the pockets to transport his knife, water bottle and tablets.
If, on the other hand, he was murdered, then perhaps not just the coat, but the knife, the pills and the water bottle were all taken from the Kelly home to Harrowdown Hill by someone other than Dr Kelly with the express purpose of creating a suicide scene.
Someone wanting to kill themselves might have been expected to use a sharp blade - a razor blade, for instance - rather than a blunt pruning knife.
But then, the knife was one that Dr Kelly had owned since boyhood, making it a very convenient clue to support a suicide verdict, just like the painkillers that could be traced back to others at his home.
It is all too easy to dismiss so-called "conspiracy theories". But history shows us that conspiracies do happen - and that suicides can be staged to cover murderers' tracks.
All the evidence leads me to believe that this is what happened in the case of Dr Kelly. In Monday's Mail, I'll describe how I believe his killing was carried out.
? EXTRACTED from The Strange Death Of David Kelly (http://explore.dailymail.co.uk/people/kelly_david) by Norman Baker, published by Methuen on November 12 at 9.99. Norman Baker 2007. To order a copy (p&p free), call 0845 606 4206.
NORMAN BAKER is the Lib-Dem spokesman for Cabinet Office Affairs who brought down Peter Mandelson over the Hinduja passport affair and blocked attempts to hush up MPs' expenses.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488670/Click-Part-Two-Norman-Bakers-shocking-investigation.html

Magda Hassan
07-12-2009, 12:07 PM
David Kelly: The belly-dancing spy whose secrets they just ignored

By NORMAN BAKER MP
Last updated at 00:59 23 October 2007
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/10_04/maipederson2210_228x381.jpg Bewitching: Mai Pederson

Uuncorrected to this day, the transcripts of the Hutton Inquiry still refer to a mysterious figure called Mike Peddison, mentioned in the testimony of David Kelly (http://explore.dailymail.co.uk/people/kelly_david)'s wife Janice as a family friend.
In fact, the transcribers misheard the name.
Mrs Kelly was talking about Mai Pederson ? a bellydancing US Army sergeant who, according to both her ex-husbands, is a spy with an astonishing ability to bewitch men.
Charismatic and exotic, Ms Pederson was an Arab-American linguist whom David Kelly met in Iraq in 1998.
Jim Pederson, her former husband, suggests getting to know Dr Kelly was part of an official assignment.
"She undoubtedly viewed him as an intelligence source," he said.
Whether or not this was her motive, the two became close.
She introduced Dr Kelly to the Baha'i faith, which teaches respect for life ? and expressly forbids suicide.
On his frequent trips to the U.S., Dr Kelly crossed from New York to California, where Ms Pederson was stationed, whenever he could. It was a long way to go just to say hello.

Postal records show that in the 16 months prior to Dr Kelly's death, Ms Pederson was registered at three different addresses in America where he was also registered as living.
As late as July 2003, the month Dr Kelly died, their names appear on the register for a house in Montgomery, Alabama.
They were an odd couple: he giving all the appearance of a boffin in his glasses, sports jacket and jeans; she fabulously attractive, seductively dressed and 16 years his junior.
After Dr Kelly's death, Ms Pederson was at pains, through her lawyer, to reject suggestions that their relationship was anything but platonic.
She claimed he simply used her address to secure loans ? which seems unlikely given that he could have used his existing British credit references.
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/10_03/dkellyDM2110_228x570.jpg Pederson told the Mail on Sunday that she did not believe that Kelly commited suicide

Lord Hutton told me that he had first learnt of Ms Pederson through press reports and asked the Thames Valley Police to interview her in the States. Two detectives flew out and spent two days questioning her.
Later, he was assured by the police that she had nothing to say about Dr Kelly that was not available from other sources.
This seems strange. After all, she appeared uniquely placed to offer insights into his personality and frame of mind.
Indeed, an interview she subsequently gave to the Mail on Sunday was electric in its content.
She bluntly said she did not believe Dr Kelly committed suicide and revealed that he hated all types of pills.
I have since learned that on one occasion she visited Dr Kelly's home in Oxfordshire, and when she said she was in pain for some reason, Janice Kelly (http://explore.dailymail.co.uk/people/kelly_janice) offered her some of the coproxamol pills she took for arthritis.
She accepted, but Dr Kelly criticised his wife for offering tablets prescribed for her alone.
This can only reinforce doubts that he chose to kill himself by ingesting 29 of these tablets.
Platonic friend or not, Ms Pederson was clearly a key figure in David Kelly's life.
It is difficult to see how Thames Valley Police concluded she had nothing of interest to say.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-489172/David-Kelly-The-belly-dancing-spy-secrets-just-ignored.html

Peter Presland
07-12-2009, 01:21 PM
One of the best hypotheses I have come across on the death of David Kelly, neatly summarised and posted in January 2004 - IOW well before the Hutton Inquiry had completed its whitewash - can be found here
(http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2004/01/david-kelly.html)
Bullet point summary:




Pederson wasn't CIA or working for the CIA, but for military intelligence (although I suppose she could have been cross-posted); there is no reason to believe Kelly was going to leave his wife;



the Iraq warmongering plans go back to the late 1990's, and part of Pederson's job was to 'process' faked Iraq documents to create the intelligence dossier used within the American government to press for war, a process that was so successful it is still influencing opinion in Washington (David Kay's recent comments prove that the whole thing was a lie);
Pederson met Kelly, saw a weakness in him, and exploited that weakness through converting him and turning him into a back channel by which the Pentagon could funnel some of this misleading data on Iraq to the British government;
Judith Miller may have been a witting or unwitting part of this, buttering Kelly up by praising (http://www.spiked-online.com/Printable/00000006DF05.htm) him in a book and being one of the last persons he e-mailed, perhaps indicating a constant line of communication (with more American intelligence lies on Iraq funneled to Kelly to influence the British government);
German Lieutenant-Colonel Gabriele Kraatz-Wadsack may also have played a role (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/kelly/story/0,13747,1041815,00.html) in miseducating Kelly by feeding him fake documents, but it is more likely that it was her 'concerns' that started to tip Kelly off to the fact that he had been had;
the fact that Gilligan had two sources for his story, one high up in the MoD or elsewhere in the British government, explains why Kelly was confused about the contents of Gilligan's reporting (he thought he was Gilligan's source but couldn't understand where Gilligan got information Kelly hadn't told him; this was so confusing Kelly had started to doubt his own memory), and why Kelly saw 'dark actors playing games', as he knew what he told Gilligan would not in itself be a breach of any confidentiality agreements (but what the secret source told Gilligan would have been, thus setting Kelly up for the treatment he received at the hands of the MoD and Blair's operators);
Kelly was being used as a back-door conduit of information from the Pentagon to the MoD, and simultaneously was used by his female contacts (Pederson and possibly Miller) to get inside information to the Pentagon on the status of thinking on Iraq in the MoD and the progress the MoD was having in motivating the Blair government (despite Hoon's lies about it, Kelly had had a lunch (http://media.guardian.co.uk/huttoninquiry/story/0,13812,1030145,00.html) with Hoon not long before all this mess started, showing how well connected he actually was, and how useful he would be as a two-way conduit of information);
Kelly honestly believed the lies he was being fed by Pederson until his suspicions were raised in the process of meeting to discuss Blair's dossier, when he began to realize that he was being used, and started the process of discovering what was really going on;
fundamentalists in the Bah' faith found out about Kelly's misgivings when he gave his presentation to a group of Bah' members in October, and manipulated Kelly to keep quiet about his misgivings until after the war so that the defeat of Saddam would open up the Bah' pilgrimage sites in Baghdad and revitalize a failing religion (Kelly probably justified this to himself on the basis that Saddam had to be taken out sometime anyway, even though he presented no imminent danger, and Kelly may have still been partly misled by Pederson's documents);
the peculiar nuances in Kelly's positions on the war are explained by the fact he was trying to balance his commitment to the truth, his anger at being lied to and manipulated in the creation of the dossier, his gradual realization that Pederson had been feeding him lies over the years, and his continuing loyalty to the Bah' faith, whose leaders saw a benefit in the attack on Iraq;
Kelly was murdered either because he was regarded as a traitor by someone in the MoD or British Intelligence, or because the Americans feared he would disclose the intelligence nature of the relationship with Pederson and that the information he was being given was Pentagon lies intended to influence British government opinion; and
the bottom line is that David Kelly is dead because he somehow fouled up or threatened to foul up the secret line of communications between American military intelligence to the British government whereby lies, not just those involving Iraq, are fed to the British government to influence British actions along lines favorable to the Pentagon.

In other words, it was neither suicide, nor Iraqi agents of Saddam Hussein as proposed by Norman Baker (in a flight of fancy that rather undermines his otherwise detailed investigation), but the SIS's of the US/UK. It seems that otherwise healthily sceptical politicians simply cannot bring themselves to countenance the bleedin' obvious where possible complicity by their own government is involved, even when it is staring them in the face. It is precisely that wilful blindness (just tooooo awful to contemplate....) that is relied upon and allows governments and their police, military and SIS enforcers to get away with murder, quite literally, time and time again.

Jan Klimkowski
07-12-2009, 10:36 PM
Peter - many thanks for posting that.

I've decided to add the entire piece to this thread, partly because it includes both the infamous "Mr Toad" alleged leak from his "friends on the riverbank" and an intelligent commentary on that alleged leak.

The role of American Military Intelligence agent Mai Pederson is crucial.

The entire piece is from before Hutton reported.

When David Guyatt reappears, I will be delighted to hear his own informed commentary....



Monday, January 26, 2004
David Kelly
Final (?) thoughts on the murder of David Kelly:


1. One of the mysteries of the case of David Kelly is how he thought he was going to get away with revealing the sordid things about the British Ministry of Defence (MoD) and Blair's government that he apparently told Andrew Gilligan. Another of the mysteries is why he waited until after the war was over to express his thoughts on the misleading nature of Blair's dossier, when he could have stopped or delayed the attack had he spoken out sooner. Maybe we can answer both questions.

2. Pilgrimage is important in Bah'. The main places of pilgrimage are the former residence of the Bb (1819-1850) in Shiraz, Iran (demolished during the Islamic Revolution and not yet rebuilt); the former residence of Bah'u'llh during his banishment and exile in Baghdad and the Garden of Ridvan on the banks of the Tigris in Baghdad (both inaccessible due to the political conditions in Iraq); and the Shrine of Bah'u'llh at Bahj. The Shrine, which is the holiest place, is located in Israel, and is thus completely accessible.

3. Bah' sounds like the kind of organized religion I might become interested in, were I suddenly to lose half my IQ and organized religion started to make sense to me (in my present state of IQ, organized religion strikes me as easily the single largest source of evil in the world today). It seems to be all sweetness and light, almost a religion of liberalism. But looks can be deceiving. Religion drives men mad, and it has driven some of the leaders of Bah' mad, leading to the creation of Bah' fundamentalism (see here; and here, which shows how Bah' exhibits the main characteristics of modern religious fundamentalism; and here). The strict tenets of the religion are enforced by shunning those who don't conform, who are known as 'covenant-breakers'. The fundamentalists control the supreme governing body of Bah', the Universal House of Justice (UHJ) in Haifa, Israel, and believe that decisions of the UHJ are infallible. The combination of shunning and infallibility creates total centralized control over the tenets of the religion. Despite what seem to be the tenets of the faith, the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bah's of the United Kingdom officially came out with a policy that members of the faith should take no position on the war on Iraq, i. e., they should not oppose it, even though Bah' officially advocates non-military resolution of conflicts and the supremacy of the United Nations. Fundamentalism seems to be slowly killing the religion, as people become disillusioned on finding that this nice liberal religion is led by the same type of crazies who lead all the other religions. It is possible that the opening up of Iraq would create new pilgrimage opportunities that would reinvigorate a religion that is rapidly becoming moribund due to the stultifying influence of the fundamentalists.

4. David Kelly gave his only known public speech on his work as a weapons inspector in Iraq and his misgivings on Blair's process of creating the dossier at a Bah' meeting at the home of Geeta and Roger Kingdon on October 5, 2002 in Abingdon, Oxfordshire. Roger Kingdon discusses Kelly's position:

"Roger Kingdon told The Observer last night that Kelly expressed his unhappiness with how the document was being interpreted, saying the intelligence information supplied was accurate, but indicating that he was uncomfortable about how it was being represented."
and:

"Critically, however, Kingdon said it was unclear whether Kelly was saying that he was unhappy at the way the document had been presented by the government, or at the way it had been interpreted by the media, or both.

'I asked him what he thought of [the dossier]. It was clear that he was happy with the factual content but less happy... and felt frustrated... by the way it had been interpreted... But he did not say who by.'

Kingdon said Kelly was 'ambiguous' about exactly who he blamed for the misrepresentation of the dossier. '[He] expressed frustration at how it was interpreted but did not say by whom,' he said."
It is interesting that there appears to be an attempt on behalf of Bah' to cover up the fact that this was a Bah' meeting (and generally, the Bah''s are looking for an innocent explanation of the Pederson-Kelly connection). When he gave his presentation, his identity and position in the process which lead to the creation of Blair's dossier became known to those in power in the Bah' faith. Professor Juan Cole and Frederick Glaysher have raised the issue whether there is a Bah' angle to Kelly's actions, particularly given the involvement of Mai Pederson.

5. Mai Pederson is a U.S. Army linguist and, despite what she might claim, an American spy. She has hired a lawyer, Mark Zaid, who specializes in intelligence matters. She has not allowed her unsworn statement to the Hutton inquiry to be released, and has, for all intents and purposes, gone into hiding. She and Kelly worked together in Iraq, at a time when the Americans weren't supposed to have spies in the UN team. She converted Kelly to Bah', and the conversion took place near the Defence Language Institute in Monterey, California, a Pentagon foreign language and espionage school. It was completely unnecessary for Kelly to go to California for the conversion. Pederson's husband describes her:

"Part of her military training was to cultivate anyone who might be able to help her in her intelligence work. It may well have been why she zeroed in on Dr Kelly. She undoubtedly viewed him as a potential intelligence source. The two things that obsessed her were the military and the Bahai faith."

It appears likely that she saw how she could use the religion to manipulate Kelly, and keep the lines of communication open which she could use for American military purposes. It would not surprise me if her avowal of the Bah' faith was part of her intelligence cover. It is also interesting that she is Kuwaiti.

6. Operation Rockingham was the British part of the disinformation campaign to feed misinformation concerning Iraq's weapons to the British press in order to start a war. Kelly, because he was used as a liaison to journalists, may have been part of this operation, but was possibly genuinely fooled by some of the misinformation. It is funny to see that the rats at various British intelligence agencies are already trying to avoid the blame for the lies told to the British people by Blair.

7. Kelly's thoughts on the real nature of Saddam's threat have been described in various ways. He started as a genuine warmonger who seemed to firmly believe in the threat of Saddam. The obviously corrupt process of creating Blair's dossier seemed to have awakened his misgivings. In an unbroadcast television program taped on October 29, Kelly expressed the view that Saddam could get his weapons filled in a matter of days or weeks, but would probably use them only in self-defense:

"I think some people would consider that when the chips are down, and he is fighting his last battle, that is when he may be prepared to use them. I think he would be reluctant to use them in the build-up to the war - in the transition to war - because he knows what the response would be. It would be utterly devastating for him."
Later, just before the war, Kelly wrote an article which expressed views quite different from the claims made in Blair's dossier. He wrote that "the current threat presented by Iraq militarily is modest, both in terms of conventional and unconventional weapons", but felt that the long-term threat, which could only be averted by regime change, was "Iraq's development to military maturity of weapons of mass destruction". It was hardly a ringing endorsement of the war, but was vague enough that it did nothing to dissuade from war.

8. I don't think it is 100% correct, but it is getting very close, so I reprint the whole of the posting of Mr. Toad from the Guardian talk forum of December 30, 2003:

"This from my friends on the river bank:



Hutton is a jigsaw puzzle. And like all the best puzzles there was a piece missing. Some people have found the missing piece, but they keep trying to put it in upside-down.



1998 - Mai Pederson attached to Kelly as UNSCOM translator.



1998 - UNSCOM out of Iraq



1998 - Tom Mangold presents Panorama documentary revealing extensive infiltration of UNSCOM by national security services.



1998+ Pederson / Kelly relationship remains close



2000-2003 MoD becomes suspicious of Kelly's relationship with Pederson. Begins moving Kelly towards the door marked 'exit', but does it quietly so as not to alarm Kelly or his friends overseas. No grading increase, retirement age reduced from 65 to 60, moved to PR role with no access to classified information.



May 2003 Gilligan interviews senior member of HMG, who makes the Campbell 45 minute claim 'off the record'. Gilligan cannot run the story without a creditable source, so is pointed to Kelly as 'unattributable' MoD source.



Gilligan goes to Kelly, tells him he knows the 45 minute claim is fictitious and plays the 'name game', then goes home and writes up his piece overnight using info from souce 1 effectively attributed to Kelly. Kelly is baffled by Gilligan's interview, but once Gilligan's piece goes out he realises he has been set up. He writes to MoD to admit the unauthorised interview but denies he is the original source of Gilligan's information.



Kelly is called to meeting with line managers and told that orders from on high dictate that he will be the 'fall guy' or will lose his pension and find his relationship with Pederson plastered across the front page of the Telegraph and tv news. What Kelly did not realise was that this was a bluff. MoD were well aware of Pederson's actual role and would never have allowed the name to come out in this way at the time.



Kelly does as he's told and goes before the parliamentary committee and ISC. This should be the end of it, except that Kelly broods on it and decides he will take steps to clear his name. Unfortunately, to do this he has to admit to the Pederson relationship. throughout the whole saga Kelly has been in close touch with Pederson, who has been reporting back to her masters. On July 17th Kelly tells Pederson he is going to leave his wife and going to the press to clear his name. Pederson reports immediately to her managers, the alarm bells go off in Washington as they believe she is about to be 'outed' and it's "goodnight Vienna".



Here's why:



The CIA did to Kelly what they did to everyone, lied to him about Iraq's WMD. The difference is that they thought Kelly's position as MoD bio-weapons expert would allow him to influence the policy of HMG.



Here's how it was done: Pederson was a US airforce translator working from Arabic to English. After the removal of UNSCOM from Iraq in 1998, evidence of WMD capability came from satellites and smuggled documents. These would land first on the desk of Ms Pederson and her colleagues for translation, before passing to the scientists for analysis, who then advised USG.



In the case of Pederson, however, the documents did not come from Iraq, but from the CIA. Pederson 'leaked' fake intelligence to Kelly over an extended period, which she claimed came from smuggled Iraqi documents indicating the existence of WMD. By 2003, Kelly was completely convinced not only of the existence of WMD in Iraq, but also believed he knew what they were and where they were.



However, when Kelly attempted to go to Iraq (post invasion) to locate them, he found his was mysteriously barred. On a first occasion his official visa proved worthless and he was turned back at Kuwait. On a second occasion he found himself confined to an airbase for the duration of his stay on security grounds.



There may be some evidence that shortly before his death, Kelly became aware of the nature of Pederson's information. In preparation for his next planned visit to Iraq Kelly appears to have shared informaton from Pederson with Gabriele Kraatz-Wadsack, a German army weapons inspector and biological weapons expert. It appears from her reply, however, that she was less than convinced as to the veracity of the information, as made clear by the 'concerns' she expressed.



In short, Kelly's death was the result of two conspiracies colliding. The first being the civil war within the cabinet of HMG, which nearly resulted in the exposure of the second, USG's plans to help HMG make up its mind with regard to Iraq's WMD.



Ultimately, it wasn't murder or suicide, but a series of unfortunate accidents.



Trouble with this jigsaw puzzle is, once you put it together, you realise it's just a part of a much bigger puzzle."



My comments:


* Pederson wasn't CIA or working for the CIA, but for military intelligence (although I suppose she could have been cross-posted); there is no reason to believe Kelly was going to leave his wife;

* the Iraq warmongering plans go back to the late 1990's, and part of Pederson's job was to 'process' faked Iraq documents to create the intelligence dossier used within the American government to press for war, a process that was so successful it is still influencing opinion in Washington (David Kay's recent comments prove that the whole thing was a lie);

* Pederson met Kelly, saw a weakness in him, and exploited that weakness through converting him and turning him into a back channel by which the Pentagon could funnel some of this misleading data on Iraq to the British government;

* Judith Miller may have been a witting or unwitting part of this, buttering Kelly up by praising him in a book and being one of the last persons he e-mailed, perhaps indicating a constant line of communication (with more American intelligence lies on Iraq funneled to Kelly to influence the British government);

* German Lieutenant-Colonel Gabriele Kraatz-Wadsack may also have played a role in miseducating Kelly by feeding him fake documents, but it is more likely that it was her 'concerns' that started to tip Kelly off to the fact that he had been had;

* the fact that Gilligan had two sources for his story, one high up in the MoD or elsewhere in the British government, explains why Kelly was confused about the contents of Gilligan's reporting (he thought he was Gilligan's source but couldn't understand where Gilligan got information Kelly hadn't told him; this was so confusing Kelly had started to doubt his own memory), and why Kelly saw 'dark actors playing games', as he knew what he told Gilligan would not in itself be a breach of any confidentiality agreements (but what the secret source told Gilligan would have been, thus setting Kelly up for the treatment he received at the hands of the MoD and Blair's operators);

* Kelly was being used as a backdoor conduit of information from the Pentagon to the MoD, and simultaneously was used by his female contacts (Pederson and possibly Miller) to get inside information to the Pentagon on the status of thinking on Iraq in the MoD and the progress the MoD was having in motivating the Blair government (despite Hoon's lies about it, Kelly had had a lunch with Hoon not long before all this mess started, showing how well connected he actually was, and how useful he would be as a two-way conduit of information);

* Kelly honestly believed the lies he was being fed by Pederson until his suspicions were raised in the process of meeting to discuss Blair's dossier, when he began to realize that he was being used, and started the process of discovering what was really going on;

* fundamentalists in the Bah' faith found out about Kelly's misgivings when he gave his presentation to a group of Bah' members in October, and manipulated Kelly to keep quiet about his misgivings until after the war so that the defeat of Saddam would open up the Bah' pilgrimage sites in Baghdad and revitalize a failing religion (Kelly probably justified this to himself on the basis that Saddam had to be taken out sometime anyway, even though he presented no imminent danger, and Kelly may have still been partly misled by Pederson's documents);

* the peculiar nuances in Kelly's positions on the war are explained by the fact he was trying to balance his commitment to the truth, his anger at being lied to and manipulated in the creation of the dossier, his gradual realization that Pederson had been feeding him lies over the years, and his continuing loyalty to the Bah' faith, whose leaders saw a benefit in the attack on Iraq;

* Kelly was murdered either because he was regarded as a traitor by someone in the MoD or British Intelligence, or because the Americans feared he would disclose the intelligence nature of the relationship with Pederson and that the information he was being given was Pentagon lies intended to influence British government opinion; and

* the bottom line is that David Kelly is dead because he somehow fouled up or threatened to foul up the secret line of communications between American military intelligence to the British government whereby lies, not just those involving Iraq, are fed to the British government to influence British actions along lines favorable to the Pentagon.


Do you think that Lord Hutton will have the courage to get close to the truth?



http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2004/01/david-kelly.html

Magda Hassan
07-12-2009, 11:10 PM
While I am sure that the Bah' faith is mostly comprised of genuine believers and many of its tenets are fine and moral it has also long been used as a vehicle by the US (and possibly other) alphabet agencies. I presume this is because of its historical connections in geographical areas which are of great interest to these agencies. It would be too good a cover not to exploit and manipulate for these groups.

Peter Presland
07-16-2009, 02:02 PM
It's strange the the Daily Mail got their teeth into this and don't appear to be letting go.

Here's their latest: (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1200004/Did-MI5-kill-Dr-David-Kelly-Another-crazy-conspiracy-theory-amid-claims-wrote-tell-book-vanished-death.html)

Did MI5 kill Dr David Kelly?

Just another crazy conspiracy theory? But, amid claims he wrote tell-all book that vanished after his death, it's one that refuses to go awayBy Sue Reid (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authornamef=Sue+Reid)

The day Dr David Kelly took a short walk to his death in the Oxfordshire countryside, an unopened letter lay on the desk of his book-lined study.

Sent from the heart of the British Government, the pages were marked 'personal' and threatened the world-renowned microbiologist with the sack if he ever publicly opened his mouth again.
The letter remained unopened for the seven days during the drama that would pitch Dr Kelly into the spotlight and end in his death at just 59.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/07/16/article-1200004-0069284B00000258-735_468x313.jpg Doubt: To this day there are many unanswered questions about how Dr Kelly died

No one has ever explained why the eminent scientist and UN weapons inspector did not open the letter, but everyone close to him is convinced he knew its contents.

It was designed to silence him because his Ministry of Defence bosses had discovered that not only was he secretly talking to journalists, but was also preparing to write an explosive book about his work.
It was six years ago tomorrow, on July 17, 2003, that Dr Kelly was found dead under a tree on Harrowdown Hill half a mile from his family home in Southmoor. His fate has become one of the most contentious issues of recent political history and has raised profound questions about the moral integrity of the New Labour government.

The former grammar school boy had celebrated his 36th wedding anniversary just a few days before.

The questions of why and how he died - and if he was murdered - have never gone away.
Dr Kelly had examined the Government's 'sexed up dossier' which declared that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction which could be activated in just 45 minutes. The claim was used by Tony Blair in 2002 as the central justification for the Iraq war.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/07/16/article-1200004-000EFFD41000044C-775_468x547.jpg Claim: Tony Blair used the 'sexed up dossier' to justify the Iraq war

When Dr Kelly secretly revealed his doubts about the dossier to BBC reporters, all hell broke loose.

After he was unmasked as the BBC mole, he was marched before the television cameras of a House of Commons committee and, later, taken away to a safe house to be interviewed by the British intelligence services.

In one final phone conversation he told a caller he wouldn't be surprised 'if my body was found in the woods'.
And so it was to be. The official inquiry into his death later decided that he committed suicide - by slashing his wrist and consuming a cocktail of painkillers.
But this week, 13 respected doctors declared that it was medically impossible for Dr Kelly to have died in this manner. They are mounting a legal battle to overturn the suicide verdict.
A new film, Anthrax War, to be released in London this weekend, also asserts that Dr Kelly had spent hours writing a tell-all book which would violate the Official Secrets Act by exposing Britain's dubious authority for toppling Saddam Hussein.
The film, directed by New York-based documentary maker Bob Coen, states that Dr Kelly, head of biological defence at the Government's secretive military research establishment of Porton Down, Wiltshire, was the brain behind much of the West's germ warfare programmes. Quite simply, the film says, Dr Kelly 'knew too much'.
In further unsubstantiated and hard-to-believe claims, the film alleges he may have been embroiled in apartheid South Africa's Project Coast programme to develop an ethnic germ weapon programme to target the black population.
Coen also says Dr Kelly had links to illegal human experiments on British servicemen at Porton Down, which sparked the largest ever investigation by Wiltshire Police.


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/07/16/article-1200004-02EBAB810000044D-786_468x361.jpg Saddam Hussein: It was claimed that the Iraqi dictator had weapons of mass destruction which could strike Britain in 45 minutes

Officers recommended charges against some scientists at the germ warfare establishment - but dropped the idea just days after Dr Kelly was found dead.
Whatever the veracity of all this, the film's central thrust - that he was writing a sensational book - has been confirmed by Gordon Thomas, a British intelligence expert, who had met Dr Kelly.
Thomas told me: 'I visited Dr Kelly as part of research into a book I was writing. But he told me that he was writing his own book, which intended to show that Tony Blair had lied about his reasons for going to war with Iraq.

He had told the Prime Minister categorically that there were no weapons of mass destruction.'
Thomas, in his own book, states: 'Dr Kelly was not a man given to exaggeration or showing off; he was the absolute expert in his field and if he said there no weapons of mass destruction, then there were none.
'I told Dr Kelly he would never be allowed to publish his book in Britain. I told him he would put himself into immense danger.

His plan was to resign from Porton Down and move with his wife to the United States where he could make more money from his revelations.'
Can this possibly be true? Certainly, Dr Kelly lived a double life. At home in Oxfordshire with wife Janice, he was the perfect husband.

The couple would have supper together in the garden after he had spent hours in what she called 'his secret world' - the book-lined study off the hallway.
Here, computers linked him to the Britain's intelligence services MI5 and MI6, GCHQ, the Ministry of Defence (MoD), the Foreign Office and foreign spy agencies - including Israel's notorious Mossad (for whom he had worked since 1995 as an advisor with the blessing of Whitehall).
Although he had an office in London - Room 2/35 in the MoD's Proliferation and Arms Control Secretariat - and another at Porton Down, Dr Kelly kept his secret data at home, including tens of thousands of documents and photographs; some show human victims of anthrax poisoning, as well as animal 'guinea pigs' poisoned with anthrax and other germs in labs across the world. For a man who was not a spy, it was an impressive collection.
From all round the globe he was consulted on biological weaponry, in particular the use of anthrax.

'You couldn't commit suicide like that'


Thomas takes up the story. 'Each intelligence organisation had installed its own computer for Dr Kelly to use on its behalf and to exchange encrypted messages. But Dr Kelly always said that most important information was filed in his head.'
However, perhaps fatally for Dr Kelly, his book was not only in his head. It was on hard-disk in one of his computers, which have all been seized by MI5 and are unlikely ever to see the light of day.
By any standards, the book would have been hugely contentious. In addition to Tony Blair and the British Government, there are any number of foreign intelligence agencies who would not want a public airing of the explosive information which they shared with Dr Kelly over the years.
His book was also expected to expose a black market trade in anthrax which was being exploited, and thus condoned, by many governments.
But it has now come to light that there may be another compelling reason why Dr Kelly might have been murdered.
Amazingly, 12 other well-known micro-biologists linked with germ warfare research have died in the past decade, five of them Russians investigating claims that the Israelis were working on viruses to target Arabs.

The Russian plane in which they were travelling from Tel Aviv to Siberia was shot down on October 2001 over the Black Sea by an 'off-course' Ukrainian surface-to-air missile.
Dr Kelly knew the victims and asked MI6 to find out more details. However, they drew a blank.
Five weeks later, Dr Benito Que, a cell biologist known to Dr Kelly, was found in a coma near his Miami laboratory.

The infectious diseases expert had been investigating how a virus like HIV could be genetically engineered into a biological weapon.
Dr Que, 52, was found unconscious outside in the car park of his lab and died in hospital. Officially, he suffered a heart attack - although his family say he was struck on the head. Police refused to re-open the case.
Ten days after Dr Que's death, another friend of Dr Kelly died. Dr Don Wiley, 57, one of America's foremost microbiologists, had a U.S. Government contract to create a vaccine against the killer Ebola fever and other so-called doomsday germs.
His rental car was found abandoned on a bridge across the Mississippi. The keys were in the ignition and the petrol tank full. There had been no crash, but Dr Wiley had disappeared.
The FBI visited Wiley's laboratory and removed most of his work. A month later his body was found 300 miles downstream, with evidence of severe head injuries. No forensic examination was performed and his death was ruled 'accidental'.
Little wonder, then, that Dr Kelly had begun talking about his body being 'found in the woods'.
And there is more. The most mysterious death of them all happened to Dr Vladimir Pasechnik - a Soviet defector Dr Kelly knew well.
The biochemist had left a drugs industry fair in Paris in 1989, just before the collapse of Communism, saying he wanted to buy souvenirs for family. Instead, he went to the British Embassy where he announced to a startled receptionist that he was a Russian scientist who wanted to defect.
Pasechnik was whisked secretly back to Britain, and Dr Kelly was brought in to verify his claims that the Soviets were adapting cruise missiles armed with germs to help spread killer diseases such as plague and smallpox.
As chief director of the Institute for Ultra-Pure Biological preparations in St Petersburg, Pasechnik had developed killer germs. 'I want the West to know of this. There must be a way to stop this madness,' he told Dr Kelly in a safe house.
Dr Kelly later told the author Gordon Thomas that he believed Pasechnik. 'I knew that he was telling the truth. There was no waffle. It was truly horrifying.'
The two scientists became friends. And soon Vladimir had set up the Regma Biotechnologies laboratory, near Porton Down. He seemed healthy when he left work on the night of November 21, 2001.

Returning home, the 64-year-old cooked supper and went to sleep. He was found dead in bed the next day.

Officially, the reason given was a stroke. However the Wiltshire police later said his demise was 'inexplicable'.
It is against this extraordinary background of highly suspicious deaths that Dr Kelly's own death occurred.
As we know, an inquest on his body was ruled out by Oxfordshire's coroner, a highly unusual move.


'Don't be surprised if my body is found.'


Instead, Tony Blair ordered an inquiry by Lord Hutton. It heard evidence from 74 witnesses and concluded that Dr Kelly killed himself by slashing the ulnar artery of his left wrist with a garden knife after swallowing painkillers - although none had been prescribed by his GP.
A detailed medical dossier by the 13 British doctors, however, rejects the Hutton conclusion on the grounds that a cut to the small ulnar artery is not deadly.
The dossier is being used by lawyers to demand a proper inquest and the release of Dr Kelly's autopsy report, which has never been made public. Their evidence will be sent to Sir John Chilcot's forthcoming Iraq War inquiry.
One of the doctors, David Halpin, former consultant in trauma at Torbay Hospital, Devon, told me: ' Arteries in the wrist are of matchstick thickness and severing them does not lead to life-threatening blood loss.'
He and the other doctors say: 'To die from haemorrhage, Dr Kelly would have had to lose about five pints of blood.

It is unlikely from his stated injury that he would have lost more than a pint.' A lack of blood at the death scene was also confirmed by the search team who found Dr Kelly and the paramedics who tried to treat him.
One of the country's most respected vascular surgeons, Martin Birnstingl, also says that it would be virtually impossible for Dr Kelly to have died by severing the ulnar artery on the little finger side of his inner wrist.
'I have never, in my experience, heard of a case where someone has died after cutting their ulnar artery.

The minute the blood pressure falls, after a few minutes, this artery would stop bleeding. It would spray blood about and make a mess but it would soon stop.'
He believes that if Dr Kelly was really intent on suicide he would have cut the artery in his groin.
Dr Kelly was also right-handed - which meant he would have to slash awkwardly from left to right on his opposite wrist to have cut into the ulnar artery to any depth.
And what of the tablets? The almost empty packet of Co-Proxamol found by the dead scientist's side suggested he had taken 29.

But he had vomited and only a fragment of one remained in his stomach. The level of painkillers in his blood was a third of what is required to cause death.
As David Halpin says: 'The idea that a man like Dr Kelly would choose to end his life like that is preposterous. This was a scientist, an expert on drugs.'
So what really happened to Dr Kelly? The gardening knife that Lord Hutton said killed him was blunt and - although the scientist was not wearing gloves - had no fingerprints on it.
Which brings us back to that unopened letter found on Dr Kelly's desk, which had been sent to him at his home by MoD bosses and signed by Richard Hatfield, the ministry's personnel chief.


A whole series of experts died in strange ways


It emerged at the Hutton inquiry into Dr Kelly's death that it contained threats demanding his future silence.
At the time, Dr Kelly had received a number of warning phone calls at his home from the MoD about his indiscreet behaviour - and he will have been in no doubt that the official letter was written confirmation of these admonishments.
But he would not be put off. He saw his book as a guarantee of his financial future, which he often worried about.
On what he felt was a lowly 58,000 a year, the scientist fretted that his Government pension (based on his final salary) would not finance a decent retirement for him and his wife.
On the day he died, Janice has confirmed her husband was a distressed man. Dr Kelly lunched with her, before going out for a walk on Harrowdown Hill at 3.30pm.
It was a walk he made regularly at the same time of day - something anyone watching his movements would have been well aware of.
That day, events were already in motion elsewhere. An hour before, at 2.30pm, a senior policeman sat down at his computer at Thames Valley Police headquarters in Oxfordshire.

He began to create a restricted file on his secure computer. Across the top he typed a code name: Operation Mason. Although its contents have never been made public, it would detail the overnight search for Dr Kelly.
Incredibly, he created this file an hour before the scientist even left home.
After Dr Kelly's corpse was found at 8.30am by the volunteer searchers, the senior policeman made his last Operation Mason entry. It simply states: '9.00am. 18.07.03. Body recovered'.
Most intriguingly, at 8am, half an hour before Dr Kelly's body was discovered under the tree, three officers in dark suits from MI5's Technical Assessment Unit were at his house.
The computers and the hard-disk containing the 40,000 words of the explosive book were carried away. They have never been seen since.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1200004/Did-MI5-kill-Dr-David-Kelly-Another-crazy-conspiracy-theory-amid-claims-wrote-tell-book-vanished-death.html#ixzz0LQjy16Lu

Peter Lemkin
07-16-2009, 02:35 PM
It's strange the the Daily Mail got their teeth into this and don't appear to be letting go.

Here's their latest: (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1200004/Did-MI5-kill-Dr-David-Kelly-Another-crazy-conspiracy-theory-amid-claims-wrote-tell-book-vanished-death.html)

Did MI5 kill Dr David Kelly?

Just another crazy conspiracy theory? But, amid claims he wrote tell-all book that vanished after his death, it's one that refuses to go awayBy Sue Reid (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authornamef=Sue+Reid)

The day Dr David Kelly took a short walk to his death in the Oxfordshire countryside, an unopened letter lay on the desk of his book-lined study.

Sent from the heart of the British Government, the pages were marked 'personal' and threatened the world-renowned microbiologist with the sack if he ever publicly opened his mouth again.
The letter remained unopened for the seven days during the drama that would pitch Dr Kelly into the spotlight and end in his death at just 59.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/07/16/article-1200004-0069284B00000258-735_468x313.jpg Doubt: To this day there are many unanswered questions about how Dr Kelly died

No one has ever explained why the eminent scientist and UN weapons inspector did not open the letter, but everyone close to him is convinced he knew its contents.

It was designed to silence him because his Ministry of Defence bosses had discovered that not only was he secretly talking to journalists, but was also preparing to write an explosive book about his work.
It was six years ago tomorrow, on July 17, 2003, that Dr Kelly was found dead under a tree on Harrowdown Hill half a mile from his family home in Southmoor. His fate has become one of the most contentious issues of recent political history and has raised profound questions about the moral integrity of the New Labour government.

The former grammar school boy had celebrated his 36th wedding anniversary just a few days before.

The questions of why and how he died - and if he was murdered - have never gone away.
Dr Kelly had examined the Government's 'sexed up dossier' which declared that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction which could be activated in just 45 minutes. The claim was used by Tony Blair in 2002 as the central justification for the Iraq war.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/07/16/article-1200004-000EFFD41000044C-775_468x547.jpg Claim: Tony Blair used the 'sexed up dossier' to justify the Iraq war

When Dr Kelly secretly revealed his doubts about the dossier to BBC reporters, all hell broke loose.

After he was unmasked as the BBC mole, he was marched before the television cameras of a House of Commons committee and, later, taken away to a safe house to be interviewed by the British intelligence services.

In one final phone conversation he told a caller he wouldn't be surprised 'if my body was found in the woods'.
And so it was to be. The official inquiry into his death later decided that he committed suicide - by slashing his wrist and consuming a cocktail of painkillers.
But this week, 13 respected doctors declared that it was medically impossible for Dr Kelly to have died in this manner. They are mounting a legal battle to overturn the suicide verdict.
A new film, Anthrax War, to be released in London this weekend, also asserts that Dr Kelly had spent hours writing a tell-all book which would violate the Official Secrets Act by exposing Britain's dubious authority for toppling Saddam Hussein.
The film, directed by New York-based documentary maker Bob Coen, states that Dr Kelly, head of biological defence at the Government's secretive military research establishment of Porton Down, Wiltshire, was the brain behind much of the West's germ warfare programmes. Quite simply, the film says, Dr Kelly 'knew too much'.
In further unsubstantiated and hard-to-believe claims, the film alleges he may have been embroiled in apartheid South Africa's Project Coast programme to develop an ethnic germ weapon programme to target the black population.
Coen also says Dr Kelly had links to illegal human experiments on British servicemen at Porton Down, which sparked the largest ever investigation by Wiltshire Police.


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/07/16/article-1200004-02EBAB810000044D-786_468x361.jpg Saddam Hussein: It was claimed that the Iraqi dictator had weapons of mass destruction which could strike Britain in 45 minutes

Officers recommended charges against some scientists at the germ warfare establishment - but dropped the idea just days after Dr Kelly was found dead.
Whatever the veracity of all this, the film's central thrust - that he was writing a sensational book - has been confirmed by Gordon Thomas, a British intelligence expert, who had met Dr Kelly.
Thomas told me: 'I visited Dr Kelly as part of research into a book I was writing. But he told me that he was writing his own book, which intended to show that Tony Blair had lied about his reasons for going to war with Iraq.

He had told the Prime Minister categorically that there were no weapons of mass destruction.'
Thomas, in his own book, states: 'Dr Kelly was not a man given to exaggeration or showing off; he was the absolute expert in his field and if he said there no weapons of mass destruction, then there were none.
'I told Dr Kelly he would never be allowed to publish his book in Britain. I told him he would put himself into immense danger.

His plan was to resign from Porton Down and move with his wife to the United States where he could make more money from his revelations.'
Can this possibly be true? Certainly, Dr Kelly lived a double life. At home in Oxfordshire with wife Janice, he was the perfect husband.

The couple would have supper together in the garden after he had spent hours in what she called 'his secret world' - the book-lined study off the hallway.
Here, computers linked him to the Britain's intelligence services MI5 and MI6, GCHQ, the Ministry of Defence (MoD), the Foreign Office and foreign spy agencies - including Israel's notorious Mossad (for whom he had worked since 1995 as an advisor with the blessing of Whitehall).
Although he had an office in London - Room 2/35 in the MoD's Proliferation and Arms Control Secretariat - and another at Porton Down, Dr Kelly kept his secret data at home, including tens of thousands of documents and photographs; some show human victims of anthrax poisoning, as well as animal 'guinea pigs' poisoned with anthrax and other germs in labs across the world. For a man who was not a spy, it was an impressive collection.
From all round the globe he was consulted on biological weaponry, in particular the use of anthrax.

'You couldn't commit suicide like that'


Thomas takes up the story. 'Each intelligence organisation had installed its own computer for Dr Kelly to use on its behalf and to exchange encrypted messages. But Dr Kelly always said that most important information was filed in his head.'
However, perhaps fatally for Dr Kelly, his book was not only in his head. It was on hard-disk in one of his computers, which have all been seized by MI5 and are unlikely ever to see the light of day.
By any standards, the book would have been hugely contentious. In addition to Tony Blair and the British Government, there are any number of foreign intelligence agencies who would not want a public airing of the explosive information which they shared with Dr Kelly over the years.
His book was also expected to expose a black market trade in anthrax which was being exploited, and thus condoned, by many governments.
But it has now come to light that there may be another compelling reason why Dr Kelly might have been murdered.
Amazingly, 12 other well-known micro-biologists linked with germ warfare research have died in the past decade, five of them Russians investigating claims that the Israelis were working on viruses to target Arabs.

The Russian plane in which they were travelling from Tel Aviv to Siberia was shot down on October 2001 over the Black Sea by an 'off-course' Ukrainian surface-to-air missile.
Dr Kelly knew the victims and asked MI6 to find out more details. However, they drew a blank.
Five weeks later, Dr Benito Que, a cell biologist known to Dr Kelly, was found in a coma near his Miami laboratory.

The infectious diseases expert had been investigating how a virus like HIV could be genetically engineered into a biological weapon.
Dr Que, 52, was found unconscious outside in the car park of his lab and died in hospital. Officially, he suffered a heart attack - although his family say he was struck on the head. Police refused to re-open the case.
Ten days after Dr Que's death, another friend of Dr Kelly died. Dr Don Wiley, 57, one of America's foremost microbiologists, had a U.S. Government contract to create a vaccine against the killer Ebola fever and other so-called doomsday germs.
His rental car was found abandoned on a bridge across the Mississippi. The keys were in the ignition and the petrol tank full. There had been no crash, but Dr Wiley had disappeared.
The FBI visited Wiley's laboratory and removed most of his work. A month later his body was found 300 miles downstream, with evidence of severe head injuries. No forensic examination was performed and his death was ruled 'accidental'.
Little wonder, then, that Dr Kelly had begun talking about his body being 'found in the woods'.
And there is more. The most mysterious death of them all happened to Dr Vladimir Pasechnik - a Soviet defector Dr Kelly knew well.
The biochemist had left a drugs industry fair in Paris in 1989, just before the collapse of Communism, saying he wanted to buy souvenirs for family. Instead, he went to the British Embassy where he announced to a startled receptionist that he was a Russian scientist who wanted to defect.
Pasechnik was whisked secretly back to Britain, and Dr Kelly was brought in to verify his claims that the Soviets were adapting cruise missiles armed with germs to help spread killer diseases such as plague and smallpox.
As chief director of the Institute for Ultra-Pure Biological preparations in St Petersburg, Pasechnik had developed killer germs. 'I want the West to know of this. There must be a way to stop this madness,' he told Dr Kelly in a safe house.
Dr Kelly later told the author Gordon Thomas that he believed Pasechnik. 'I knew that he was telling the truth. There was no waffle. It was truly horrifying.'
The two scientists became friends. And soon Vladimir had set up the Regma Biotechnologies laboratory, near Porton Down. He seemed healthy when he left work on the night of November 21, 2001.

Returning home, the 64-year-old cooked supper and went to sleep. He was found dead in bed the next day.

Officially, the reason given was a stroke. However the Wiltshire police later said his demise was 'inexplicable'.
It is against this extraordinary background of highly suspicious deaths that Dr Kelly's own death occurred.
As we know, an inquest on his body was ruled out by Oxfordshire's coroner, a highly unusual move.


'Don't be surprised if my body is found.'


Instead, Tony Blair ordered an inquiry by Lord Hutton. It heard evidence from 74 witnesses and concluded that Dr Kelly killed himself by slashing the ulnar artery of his left wrist with a garden knife after swallowing painkillers - although none had been prescribed by his GP.
A detailed medical dossier by the 13 British doctors, however, rejects the Hutton conclusion on the grounds that a cut to the small ulnar artery is not deadly.
The dossier is being used by lawyers to demand a proper inquest and the release of Dr Kelly's autopsy report, which has never been made public. Their evidence will be sent to Sir John Chilcot's forthcoming Iraq War inquiry.
One of the doctors, David Halpin, former consultant in trauma at Torbay Hospital, Devon, told me: ' Arteries in the wrist are of matchstick thickness and severing them does not lead to life-threatening blood loss.'
He and the other doctors say: 'To die from haemorrhage, Dr Kelly would have had to lose about five pints of blood.

It is unlikely from his stated injury that he would have lost more than a pint.' A lack of blood at the death scene was also confirmed by the search team who found Dr Kelly and the paramedics who tried to treat him.
One of the country's most respected vascular surgeons, Martin Birnstingl, also says that it would be virtually impossible for Dr Kelly to have died by severing the ulnar artery on the little finger side of his inner wrist.
'I have never, in my experience, heard of a case where someone has died after cutting their ulnar artery.

The minute the blood pressure falls, after a few minutes, this artery would stop bleeding. It would spray blood about and make a mess but it would soon stop.'
He believes that if Dr Kelly was really intent on suicide he would have cut the artery in his groin.
Dr Kelly was also right-handed - which meant he would have to slash awkwardly from left to right on his opposite wrist to have cut into the ulnar artery to any depth.
And what of the tablets? The almost empty packet of Co-Proxamol found by the dead scientist's side suggested he had taken 29.

But he had vomited and only a fragment of one remained in his stomach. The level of painkillers in his blood was a third of what is required to cause death.
As David Halpin says: 'The idea that a man like Dr Kelly would choose to end his life like that is preposterous. This was a scientist, an expert on drugs.'
So what really happened to Dr Kelly? The gardening knife that Lord Hutton said killed him was blunt and - although the scientist was not wearing gloves - had no fingerprints on it.
Which brings us back to that unopened letter found on Dr Kelly's desk, which had been sent to him at his home by MoD bosses and signed by Richard Hatfield, the ministry's personnel chief.


A whole series of experts died in strange ways


It emerged at the Hutton inquiry into Dr Kelly's death that it contained threats demanding his future silence.
At the time, Dr Kelly had received a number of warning phone calls at his home from the MoD about his indiscreet behaviour - and he will have been in no doubt that the official letter was written confirmation of these admonishments.
But he would not be put off. He saw his book as a guarantee of his financial future, which he often worried about.
On what he felt was a lowly 58,000 a year, the scientist fretted that his Government pension (based on his final salary) would not finance a decent retirement for him and his wife.
On the day he died, Janice has confirmed her husband was a distressed man. Dr Kelly lunched with her, before going out for a walk on Harrowdown Hill at 3.30pm.
It was a walk he made regularly at the same time of day - something anyone watching his movements would have been well aware of.
That day, events were already in motion elsewhere. An hour before, at 2.30pm, a senior policeman sat down at his computer at Thames Valley Police headquarters in Oxfordshire.

He began to create a restricted file on his secure computer. Across the top he typed a code name: Operation Mason. Although its contents have never been made public, it would detail the overnight search for Dr Kelly.
Incredibly, he created this file an hour before the scientist even left home.
After Dr Kelly's corpse was found at 8.30am by the volunteer searchers, the senior policeman made his last Operation Mason entry. It simply states: '9.00am. 18.07.03. Body recovered'.
Most intriguingly, at 8am, half an hour before Dr Kelly's body was discovered under the tree, three officers in dark suits from MI5's Technical Assessment Unit were at his house.
The computers and the hard-disk containing the 40,000 words of the explosive book were carried away. They have never been seen since.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1200004/Did-MI5-kill-Dr-David-Kelly-Another-crazy-conspiracy-theory-amid-claims-wrote-tell-book-vanished-death.html#ixzz0LQjy16Lu



As I understand UK State Secrecy Act, we will NEVER EVER get to see what was on that computer....if it hasn't already been destroyed...likely.

Well, good for the paper....but I somehow sense this will increase in import and public anger and then die away...as did Kelly...maybe I'm getting cynical in my old age....but we can hope and we can fight.

Peter Presland
07-16-2009, 04:07 PM
As I understand UK State Secrecy Act, we will NEVER EVER get to see what was on that computer....if it hasn't already been destroyed...likely.

Well, good for the paper....but I somehow sense this will increase in import and public anger and then die away...as did Kelly...maybe I'm getting cynical in my old age....but we can hope and we can fight.

It would take nothing short of a revolution for the unvarnished truth of what happened to David Kelly to be officially made public. Same goes for 7/7 and a host of other matters - and as with the US, we simply don't do revolution - PERIOD. In fact that is the primary focus of our establishment power structure - maintenance of the status-quo and the prevention of revolution - if necessary by co-opting it. So, whatever happens, it will be steered and stage managed by our Deep State apparatus. Such steering generally takes the form of setting the agenda but can also be turned to damage limitation where needs must.

That's my take on the UK anyway and my problem right now is that I can't quite see which is involved here. The Daily Mail is very much an establishment - as distinct from a revolutionary - organ and yet it gives every appearance of rocking the establishment boat with all this David Kelly and 7/7 stuff that it is suddenly taking an interest in.

Jan Klimkowski
07-16-2009, 07:04 PM
It's strange the the Daily Mail got their teeth into this and don't appear to be letting go.



Peter - this is to do with the nuances of individual British newspapers.

For our international members, the Daily Mail (commonly known as the Daily Hatemail) is a right-of-centre, Little Englander, rag which has almost always been uncritically Tory-supporting. Thatcher is a Goddess in their pantheon.

My own sense is that this is part of the Mail's anti-Blair agenda.

However, they do have good contacts with the security services, and it may be that spooky elements have told them, deniably of course, that Kelly was murdered and Blair knew.

In other words, I refuse to believe the Mail is acting in the interests of Truth and Honour.

The motives of the Daily Mail are probably banal. The consequences of their actions may be far from banal.

Well, we can but hope...

Jan Klimkowski
12-05-2009, 11:16 AM
Doctors demand inquest to 'prove Dr David Kelly was murdered'

Six eminent doctors have launched a legal action to reopen the inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly in an attempt to prove he was murdered.

Published: 8:00AM GMT 05 Dec 2009

Doctors have demanded an inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly

They plan to publish a report which they claim proves the weapons expert did not commit suicide, as the Hutton Report decided, and have hired lawyers to call on Baroness Scotland, the Attorney General, and the coroner Nicholas Gardiner to re-examine the circumstances of his death.

The doctors are asking for permission to go to the High Court to reopen the inquest on the grounds that it was improperly suspended.

In a phone conversation after he was outed as the source Dr Kelly said he wouldn't be surprised "if my body was found in the woods".

The inquest into Dr Kelly's death was suspended before it could begin by order of the then Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer, a former flatmate of Mr Blair.

He used the Coroners Act to designate the Hutton Inquiry as "fulfilling the function of an inquest".

The six doctors claim that the original inquest was never formally closed, and a proper inquiry should now be held.

They are Michael Powers, a QC and former coroner; trauma surgeon David Halpin; Andrew Rouse, an epidemiologist who established that deaths from cutting the ulnar artery as claimed in Dr Kelly's case are extremely rare; Martin Birnstingl, another surgeon; plus Stephen Frost and Chris Burns-Cox.

Lord Hutton concluded that Dr Kelly killed himself by severing an ulnar artery in his left wrist after taking an overdose of prescription painkillers.

However, he was criticised for glossing over controversies about the causes of death and instead concentrating on the political row between Downing Street and the BBC, which broke the story.

Dr Kelly's death certificate states that he died of a haemorrhage, but the results of a post mortem examination have never been made public.

The doctors tried to persuade the coroner to reopen his inquest in 2004 but were rejected because they were not judged to be "properly interested persons". However, now they have hired human rights lawyers Leigh Day & Co to challenge the use of the Coroners Act to close the inquest.

A source close to the doctors told The Daily Mail: "Lord Falconer is on record saying this is a "useful little law" but it was set up to avoid multiple inquests in cases where there were multiple deaths.

"It has been used for victims of train crashes and the Harold Shipman case but Dr Kelly's was not a multiple death.

"We argue that that's an abuse of due process. The lawyers have sent the letters this week.

"We have concentrated on the finding on the death certificate that the primary cause of death was a haemorrhage. We are spelling out why he could not have died from a cut to the small ulnar artery."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/6732234/Doctors-demand-inquest-to-prove-Dr-David-Kelly-was-murdered.html

David Guyatt
12-05-2009, 11:29 AM
Hat's off to the Kelly team for not giving up and keeping this going. Let's hope they have success.

Peter Presland
01-24-2010, 02:14 PM
I wonder if there is any precedent for the post mortem (autopsy) of an officially 'confirmed' suicide being embargoed for 70 years under 'The Official Secrets Act'?

Says it all really. David Kelly clearly did NOT commit suicide and the precise circumstances of his death must be hidden because they are vastly damaging to The Establishment. What other conclusion can their possibly be?

As for the Oxfordshire Coroner speculating that the motive for the secrecy is 'to protect David Kelly's Children' - It would be hilariously funny if the whole thing were not so serious. Is that really the best they can do?

From the Mail on Sunday: (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245599/David-Kelly-post-mortem-kept-secret-70-years-doctors-accuse-Lord-Hutton-concealing-vital-information.html#)


Vital evidence which could solve the mystery of the death of Government weapons inspector Dr David Kelly will be kept under wraps for up to 70 years.
In a draconian and highly unusual order, Lord Hutton, the peer who chaired the controversial inquiry into the Dr Kelly scandal, has secretly barred the release of all medical records, including the results of the post mortem, and unpublished evidence.
The move, which will stoke fresh speculation about the true circumstances of Dr Kellys death, comes just days before Tony Blair appears before the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War.

It is also bound to revive claims of an establishment cover-up and fresh questions about the verdict that Dr Kelly killed himself.


Tonight, Dr Michael Powers QC, a doctor campaigning to overturn the Hutton findings, said: What is it about David Kellys death which is so secret as to justify these reports being kept out of the public domain for 70 years?
Campaigning Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker, who has also questioned the verdict that Dr Kelly committed suicide, said: It is astonishing this is the first weve known about this decision by Lord Hutton and even more astonishing he should have seen fit to hide this material away.
The body of former United Nations weapons inspector Dr Kelly was found in July 2003 in woods close to his Oxfordshire home, shortly after he was exposed as the source of a BBC news report questioning the Governments claims that
Saddam Hussein had an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, which could be deployed within 45 minutes.
Lord Huttons 2004 report, commissioned by Mr Blair, concluded that Dr Kelly killed himself by cutting his wrist with a blunt gardening knife.

It was dismissed by many experts as a whitewash for clearing the Government of any culpability, despite evidence that it had leaked Dr Kellys name in an attempt to smear him.
Only now has it emerged that a year after his inquiry was completed, Lord Hutton took unprecedented action to ensure that the vital evidence remains a state secret for so long.
A letter, leaked to The Mail on Sunday, revealed that a 30-year ban was placed on records provided [which were] not produced in evidence. This is thought to refer to witness statements given to the inquiry which were not disclosed at the time.
In addition, it has now been established that Lord Hutton ordered all medical reports including the post-mortem findings by pathologist Dr Nicholas Hunt and photographs of Dr Kellys body to remain classified information for 70 years.

The normal rules on post-mortems allow close relatives and properly interested persons to apply to see a copy of the report and to inspect other documents.

Lord Huttons measure has overridden these rules, so the files will not be opened until all such people are likely to be dead.
Last night, the Ministry of Justice was unable to explain the legal basis for Lord Huttons order.
The restrictions came to light in a letter from the legal team of Oxfordshire County Council to a group of doctors who are challenging the Hutton verdict.
Last year, a group of doctors, including Dr Powers, compiled a medical dossier as part of their legal challenge to the Hutton verdict.

They argue that Huttons conclusion that Dr Kelly killed himself by severing the ulnar artery in his left wrist after taking an overdose of prescription painkillers is untenable because the artery is small and difficult to access, and severing it could not have caused death.
In their 12-page opinion, they concluded: The bleeding from Dr Kellys ulnar artery is highly unlikely to have been so voluminous and rapid that it was the cause of death. We advise the instructing solicitors to obtain the autopsy reports so that the concerns of a group of properly interested medical specialists can be answered.
Tonight, Dr Powers, a former assistant coroner, added: Supposedly all evidence relevant to the cause of death has been heard in public at the time of Lord Huttons inquiry. If these secret reports support the suicide finding, what could they contain that could be so sensitive?
The letter disclosing the 70-year restriction was written by Nick Graham, assistant head of legal and democratic services at Oxfordshire Council.

It states: Lord Hutton made a request for the records provided to the inquiry, not produced in evidence, to be closed for 30 years, and that medical (including post-mortem) reports and photographs be closed for 70 years.
Nicholas Gardiner, the Chief Coroner for Oxfordshire, confirmed that he had seen the letter.

Speaking to The Mail on Sunday today, he said: I know that Lord Hutton made that recommendation. Someone told me at the time. Anybody concerned will be dead by then, and that is quite clearly Lord Huttons intention.

Asked what was in the records that made it necessary for them to be embargoed, Mr Gardiner said: Theyre Lord Huttons records not mine. Youd have to ask him.
He added that in his opinion Lord Hutton had embargoed the records to protect Dr Kellys children.
The inquest into Dr Kellys death was suspended before it could begin by the then Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer. He used the Coroners Act to designate the Hutton Inquiry as fulfilling the function of an inquest.
News that the records will be kept secret comes just days before Mr Blair gives evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry on Friday.

To date, Dr Kellys name has scarcely been mentioned at the inquiry. One source who held a private meeting with Sir John Chilcot before the proceedings began said that Sir John had admitted he did not want to touch the Kelly issue .
A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said: Any decision made by Lord Hutton at the time of his inquiry was entirely a matter for him.
A spokesman for Thames Valley Police said yesterday that it would not be possible to search their records during the weekend.
The Mail on Sunday was unable to contact Lord Hutton.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245599/David-Kelly-post-mortem-kept-secret-70-years-doctors-accuse-Lord-Hutton-concealing-vital-information.html##ixzz0dXSu3RVX

Charles Drago
01-24-2010, 05:20 PM
David Kelly clearly did NOT commit suicide and the precise circumstances of his death must be hidden because they are vastly damaging to The Establishment. What other conclusion can their possibly be?

Peter,

I too am firmly of the informed opinion that Dr. Kelly was murdered.

That being noted for the record, I feel obliged to anwer your question thusly:

When authorities encourage what they know to be unfounded conspiracy allegations -- theories that can be blown out of the water whenever suppressed, convincing evidence of non-conspiracy is permitted to surface -- they are acting to diminish legitimate claims of conspiracy elsewhere.

Additionally, the superficially counter-intuitive official suppression of evidence in what is claimed to be a cut-and-dried case raises conspiracy rhetoric to an annoying pitch even as it serves to maintain the endless false doubt upon which contol of the many by the few is largely predicated.

Peter Presland
01-24-2010, 07:17 PM
Thanks Charles.

Both points well made and taken.

Here's what Craig Murray (http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/options_for_ton.html) (that man again) has to say on the matter:

The Iraq Inquiry has taken us back again to that period where the government had engaged in a massive military build up ready to invade Iraq, and was desperately looking for evidence on WMD to trigger the invasion - an invasion on which the Washington neo-cons had pinned their entire hopes for the future of the Bush presidency.
Just at that crucial time, one of the UK's foremost experts on Iraqi WMD had let slip to the BBC that the government's claims did not stand up. As a result, he was found dead in a wood, while the BBC journalist, Andrew Gilligan, who correctly reported that there were no WMD, was fired for telling the truth.
The punishment of the BBC for failing to unquestioningly echo Blair lies went much further. The Chairman and Director General were forced out. All because the BBC said there may have been no WMD, when there were not.
It is almost incredible even now to state what New Labour have done. God know what future historians will make of it.
The BBC was traumatised, and went through an acceleration of cultural change that prized "managers" over journalists, and stopped criticising government. A foundation stone of democracy had been blasted away by Tony Blair.
Kelly's death was extremely convenient for Blair, Cheney and a myriad of other ultra ruthless people. It paved the way for war. We should not forget how very crucial the WMD issue was in convincing enough reluctant New Labour MPs to go along. Without the UK there would have been no coalition - most of the other Europeans would have quickly dropped out too. It is by no means clear that, despite Cheney's bluster, the Americans would have invaded Iraq alone.
So Kelly was the first man killed in the Iraq war. Hundreds of thousands of people died in Iraq after Kelly. Arms manufacturers, mercenary companies and the security industry made tens of billions in profit. That's a powerful motive to remove an obstacle. The Western oil companies are getting back into Iraq.
We will never know if Kelly would have gone on to repeat his - perfectly correct - doubts about Iraqi WMD, or if he would have shut up, as ordered by Tony Blair through the MOD. I do know, as many doctors have attested, it is extremely unlikely to bleed to death by cutting a wrist. I do know that the paramedics who attended said there was very little blood at the scene. I do know that the painkillers he took were a tiny proportion of a fatal dose and were not an anticoagulant. I do know that a chemical weapons expert like Dr Kelly would know better ways to kill himself.
And I do know that the government is keeping the evidence hidden for seventy years.
My own gut feeling about Kelly's murder is that the US SIS's were the instigators - probably without MI5/6 knowledge to make their message doubly clear. It's a vastly complex area but, having read Norman Baker's book (he blames the Iraqi's BTW) and most of the other public domain stuff, my best shot is that the wavering Limeys were 'made an offer they couldn't refuse' with David Kelly's silencing the opportunistic clincher.

Pure speculation I know - but it does have a certain ring to it in keeping with what we know of their modus operandi

Magda Hassan
01-25-2010, 06:43 AM
To protect David Kelley's (grown up adult) children? :sheep: That makes no sense. If his children want to see the report/documents it can then be made public? Almost as bogus as Jack Ruby's excuse for shooting Oswald. Interesting timing with the coming appearance of war criminal Blair in front of the inquiry.

Peter Presland
01-26-2010, 08:06 PM
Looks like we were a bit hasty over the 70 year gag.

This from the BBC: (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8481791.stm)

Details of the post-mortem examination of government weapons inspector David Kelly should be seen by doctors seeking an inquest, Lord Hutton has said.

The peer confirmed he had requested a 70-year gagging order on the material at the conclusion of his inquiry into Dr Kelly's 2003 death.

But he said on Tuesday the purpose of the secrecy order had been to avoid causing distress to Dr Kelly's family.

He has written to ministers saying the report may be seen by the doctors.

Dr Kelly's body was found in woods close to his Oxfordshire home in 2003, shortly after it was revealed that he was the source of a BBC report casting doubt on the government's claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction capable of being fired within 45 minutes.

Challenge

An inquest was suspended by then Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer, who ruled that Lord Hutton's inquiry could take its place.

Lord Hutton's report in 2004 concluded that Dr Kelly had killed himself by cutting an artery in his wrist.

But the finding has been challenged by doctors who claim that the weapons inspector's stated injuries were not serious enough.

One of them, former assistant coroner Michael Powers, raised concerns over the secrecy order after seeing a letter from the legal team of Oxfordshire County Council explaining the unusual restrictions placed by Lord Hutton on material relating to his inquiry.

The letter stated: "Lord Hutton made a request for the records provided to the inquiry, not produced in evidence, to be closed for 30 years, and that medical (including post-mortem) reports and photographs be closed for 70 years."

On Tuesday, Lord Hutton released a statement explaining his decision and revealing that he had written to the Ministry of Justice.

In it, he said: "At the conclusion of my inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly, I requested that the post-mortem report relating to his death should not be disclosed for 70 years as I was concerned that the publication of that report in newspapers, books and magazines would cause his daughters and his wife further and unnecessary distress.

"Much of the material in the post-mortem report had been given in oral evidence in public at the inquiry and substantial parts of that evidence had been set out in my report.

"However, I consider that the disclosure of the report to doctors and their legal advisers for the purposes of legal proceedings would not undermine the protection which I wished to give to Dr Kelly's family, provided that conditions were imposed restricting the use and publication of the report to such proceedings, and I have written to the Ministry of Justice to this effect."

Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker, who has conducted his own inquiries into Dr Kelly's death, said: "It's astonishing and unheard-of for material of this nature to be hidden away for any length of time, let alone 70 years.

"Coroners' inquests are held in public. Lord Hutton's inquiry was unique in its format and unique in requesting restrictions of this nature.

"His statement today undermines the validity of his own inquiry and gives further justification to the case being made by many for a proper inquest to be held into this most public of deaths." It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

Peter Lemkin
01-27-2010, 07:18 AM
That the old fallback...the family's sensitivities....They tried that with the autopsy photos of JFK - and Jack Ruby even killed 'Oswald' to protect Jackie's sensitivities and a protracted trial.....ha, ha, HA! :evil:

David Guyatt
01-28-2010, 11:14 AM
My increasing sense is that the US were driving this assassination. Did Bliar, the secret Opus Dei convert, know about it? Probably.

Magda Hassan
06-28-2010, 03:10 AM
Dr David Kelly: The damning new evidence that points to a cover-up by Tony Blair's government



By Miles Goslett (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authornamef=Miles+Goslett) and Stephen Frost (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authornamef=Stephen+Frost)
Last updated at 9:24 AM on 26th June 2010


Comments (141) (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1289692/Dr-David-Kelly-The-damning-new-evidence-points-cover-Tony-Blairs-government.html#comments)
Add to My Stories (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1289692/Dr-David-Kelly-The-damning-new-evidence-points-cover-Tony-Blairs-government.html)


The official story of Dr David Kelly is that he took his own life in an Oxfordshire wood by overdosing on painkillers and cutting his left wrist with a pruning knife.

He was said to be devastated after being unmasked as the source of the BBCs claim that the Government had sexed up the case for war in Iraq.

A subsequent official inquiry led by Lord Hutton into the circumstances leading to the death came to the unequivocal conclusion that Kelly committed suicide.

Yet suspicions of foul play still hang heavy over the death of the weapons expert whose body was found seven years ago next month in one of the most notorious episodes of Tony Blairs premiership.


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/25/article-1289692-0069284B00000258-564_468x323.jpg Mystery: A new investigation into the death of weapons expert Dr David Kelly has revealed shocking new claims of a government cover-up

Many believe the truth about the manner of Dr Kellys death has never been established properly. Some even fear that the 59-year-old, the worlds leading expert in biological and chemical weapons, was murdered.

Of course, it would be easy to dismiss these sceptics as wild conspiracy theorists but for the fact they include eminent doctors and MPs.

The blanket of secrecy thrown over the case by the last Labour Government has only fuelled the sense of mystery.

In January this year, it emerged that unpublished medical and scientific records relating to Dr Kellys death - including the post-mortem report and photographs of his body - had been secretly classified so as not to be made public for 70 years.

Lord Hutton, who had been appointed by Blair, was responsible for this extraordinary gagging order, yet its legal basis has baffled experts accustomed to such matters.

Against this shadowy background, we have conducted a rigorous and thorough investigation into the mystery that surrounds the death of David Kelly. And our investigation has turned up evidence which raises still more disturbing questions.

Our new revelations include the ambiguous nature of the wording on Dr Kellys death certificate; the existence of an anonymous letter which says his colleagues were warned to stay away from his funeral; and an extraordinary claim that the wallpaper at Dr Kellys home was stripped by police in the hours after he was reported missing - but before his body was found.


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/25/article-1289692-0069B56C00000258-742_468x286.jpg Suicide? An aerial view of Harrowdown Hill, Oxfordshire, where Dr David Kelly's body was discovered in July 2003

Until now, details of Dr Kellys death certificate have never been made public.

But the certificate was obtained by a group of leading doctors who have spent almost seven years investigating the case; doctors who believe it is medically implausible that he died in the manner Hutton concluded and are alarmed at the unorthodox way the death certificate was completed.

Near the top of all British death certificates is a box headed Date and place of death, in which a doctor or coroner should declare the exact location of a death, if it has been established.

Dr Kellys certificate gives his date of death as July 18, 2003. It then states in reference to place of death: Found dead at Harrowdown Hill, Longworth, Oxon.

Why was the word found used? Why was the crucial question of place of death not answered? The death certificate should be precise about the time, cause and location of death.

The doctors who have investigated the case believe the failure to answer this question leaves open the possibility that Dr Kelly died somewhere other than Harrowdown Hill, the wood where his body was discovered. If this was the case, they are concerned the law may have been subverted over Dr Kellys death.


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/26/article-1289692-0068D66000000258-89_468x315.jpg Dr David Kelly leaving The House of Commons, Tuesday July 15, 2003 after giving evidence to the Commons select committee

Any such irregularity would inevitably add to the pressure to reopen the case. Indeed, earlier this month it was revealed that Justice Secretary Ken Clarke and Attorney General Dominic Grieve, who have the power to undo Huttons 70-year gagging order and demand a coroners inquest into Dr Kellys death, are poised to re-open the case.

To this day, the location where Dr Kelly died remains a mystery yet it is surely the most basic requirement of an investigation into any violent or unexpected death.

Nor was the question of the location of death raised at the Hutton Inquiry.

Amazingly, Chief Inspector (now Superintendent) Alan Young of Thames Valley Police, who headed the investigation into Dr Kellys death, did not even give evidence to the Hutton Inquiry.

Significantly, it emerged via a Freedom of Information request in 2008 that a police helicopter with heat-seeking equipment which searched for Dr Kelly on the night he disappeared did not detect his body.


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/25/article-1289692-0068E63E00000258-109_468x286.jpg Search: It is claimed that on the night Dr David Kelly went missing, officers from Thames Valley Police removed wallpaper from his house

At 2.50am on July 18, 2003, the helicopter flew over the exact spot where Dr Kellys body was found by a search party less than six hours later, at 8.30am.

Yet the pathologist who took Dr Kellys body temperature at 7pm on the day his body was found determined that Dr Kelly could still have been alive at 1.15am on July 18 just 95 minutes before the helicopter flew over the patch of woodland.

If that was the case, the body would have been warm enough to be picked up by the helicopters heat sensors. Why didnt the helicopter pick it up? Was it because Dr Kelly did not die where his body was found?

A full coroners inquest, which, by law, must be held following any sudden, unexpected or violent death, would have addressed these discrepancies.

But no full inquest was ever held.

Oxfordshire Coroner Nicholas Gardiner opened an inquest on July 21. But on August 13 the then Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer, Tony Blairs former flatmate, ordered it to be adjourned indefinitely.

Falconer used an obscure law to suspend proceedings, and for the first time in English legal history he replaced an inquest with a non-statutory public inquiry to examine a single death, seemingly without any public explanation.

When we tracked Mr Gardiner down, he refused to say whether he was either happy or unhappy about this decision, but he did admit: Public inquiries of this sort are very rare creatures. I think this was only about the third there had ever been.

In fact, it was the fourth. Using a public inquiry to replace a coroners inquest - under Section 17a of the Coroners Act - in order to examine a death has only ever happened in three other cases. And in each case, it was where multiple deaths have occurred.

These were the incidents in which 31 people were killed in the Ladbroke Grove rail crash in 2000; the 311 deaths connected with Dr Harold Shipman; and the 36 deaths associated with the Hull trawler Gaul which sank in the Barents Sea in 1974 and whose case was re-opened in 2004.

The public was led to believe that the death of Dr Kelly would be investigated more rigorously by the Hutton Inquiry than by a coroner.


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/25/article-1289692-00949EA91000044C-363_224x423.jpg
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/25/article-1289692-0172D6F40000044D-522_224x423.jpg


Conclusion: Lord Hutton's inquiry ended while the judge was still taking evidence from witnesses. Coroner Nicholas Gardiner, right, refused to say whether he was either happy or unhappy that an inquest he opened was indefinitely adjourned


But it is now clear that the opposite was in fact true - for Hutton lacked the powers of a coroner. He could not hear evidence under oath; he could not subpoena witnesses; he could not call a jury; and he could not aggressively cross-examine witnesses.

Astonishingly, on August 18, less than three weeks into the Hutton Inquiry, which opened on August 1, Dr Kellys death certificate was mysteriously completed and the cause of his death officially registered as haemorrhage.

Put another way, five weeks before the Hutton Inquiry ended on September 24, 2003, and while the judge was still taking evidence about Dr Kellys death from witnesses, the official record of the cause of death was written and the case effectively closed.

Misleadingly, the death certificate states an inquest did take place on August 14 - even though we now know no inquest actually happened. And extraordinarily, though it bears the signature of the registrar, it is not signed by either a doctor or a coroner as every death certificate should be.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/26/article-1289692-0068D33C00000258-525_233x423.jpg Dr Kelly was discovered on Harrowdown Hill, next to woodland at the top centre left of the picture

Dr Michael Powers QC, a former coroner and an expert in coroners law who is working to secure a full and proper inquest, said: This death certificate is evidence of a failure properly to examine the cause of Dr Kellys death. It is evidence of a pre-judgment of the issue. In a coroners inquest the cause of death would not be registered until the whole inquiry had been completed. As we see here, the cause of death was registered before the Hutton Inquiry had finished.

This is remarkable. To my mind it is evidence that the inquiry into Dr Kellys death was window-dressing because the conclusion had already been determined.

Since January 2004 a group of doctors has worked unstintingly for a fresh inquest to be held into David Kellys death because of the blatant shortcomings of the Hutton Inquiry.

They are radiologist Stephen Frost, trauma surgeon David Halpin, vascular surgeon Martin Birnstingl, epidemiologist Andrew Rouse and internal medicine specialist
Christopher Burns-Cox. Their investigations have raised many doubts about the widespread assumption that Dr Kelly killed himself.

A letter they wrote to the Press in January 2004 marked the first time anyone had raised the possibility in the mainstream media of Dr Kellys death not being a suicide.

In 2009 they spent almost a year researching and writing a medical report which disputes Huttons assertion that Dr Kelly died from haemorrhage after severing the ulnar artery in his left wrist. The doctors argued that the wounds to Dr Kellys left wrist would not have caused him to bleed to death.

In January this year they discovered that Lord Hutton made the extraordinary 70-year gagging order.

Since then they have asked via their lawyers Leigh Day & Co to see the classified records, but under the last Labour Government, the Ministry of Justice - the department which holds them - repeatedly denied them access in the run-up to the last General Election. No reason was given.

Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker, who in 2007 wrote a book suggesting that Dr Kelly was murdered, used the Freedom of Information Act in January to apply to the Ministry of Justice to see the records.


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/26/article-1289692-0068D32400000258-77_468x314.jpg British police officers guard a road leading to Harrowdown Hill near the home of Dr Kelly in Oxfordshire

His request was also denied. Using section 41 of the Act - known as an absolute exemption - the ministry said it was not obliged to reveal the information.

Mr Baker, now a transport minister in the coalition government, has appealed against this decision. But he and the group of doctors are not the only ones who harbour suspicions about a cover-up of Dr Kellys death.

Only last month one of the doctors, David Halpin, received an anonymous and carefully worded letter from someone claiming to be a relative of a former colleague of David Kellys at the Ministry of Defence.

The correspondent said Kellys colleagues were warned off attending his funeral - presumably by MoD officials, although this is not made explicit.

Similarly, in his recently published book The End Of The Party, the political commentator Andrew Rawnsley (who has close links with the Labour high command) claims that Geoff Hoon, Defence Secretary at the time of Kellys death, was so furious about being removed by Tony Blair as Leader of the House of Commons in May 2006 that he wrote out a resignation statement.

According to Rawnsley, he planned to make a speech about the [David] Kelly affair that he told friends could trigger the instant downfall of the Prime Minister.

Frustratingly, there are no more details in Rawnsleys book about what Hoon was referring to - but Hoon visited Dr Kellys widow shortly after his death and has never publicly denied this explosive charge.

Equally inexplicable is the attitude of Dr Nicholas Hunt, the forensic pathologist who attended the scene when Dr Kellys body was found on Harrowdown Hill.

Dr Hunts duty as forensic pathologist is to help uphold the rule of law. In March 2004, after the Hutton Report was published, Dr Hunt contacted Channel 4 News and said he thought a full coroners inquest should be held.

Yet mysteriously, he says now that - despite contacting the TV station - he has maintained a silence on this [matter] on behalf of the [Kelly] family for a very long time.


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/25/article-1289692-0074F6A600000258-487_468x309.jpg Tragic: Dr David Kelly's grave at St Mary's church in Longworth, Oxfordshire. Several doctors argued that the wounds to his left wrist would not have caused him to bleed to death

Adding further to the case for a proper inquest is a new fascinating claim by a woman who has also worked closely with the doctors and helped Norman Baker with his book.

Rowena Thursby, a former publishing executive who became fascinated with the case and started looking into it, told us that Dr Kellys widow, Janice, admitted to her that on the night Dr Kelly was reported missing in July 2003 - but hours before his body was found -Thames Valley Police asked her and her daughters to leave their house and wait in the garden.

It later emerged that while the Kellys were outside, officers stripped wallpaper from their sitting room. Why would they have done that? Could they have been sweeping his property for listening devices?

It is certainly a possibility. Despite the fact that the Labour government patronisingly dismissed him as a Walter Mitty character and nothing more than a middle ranking
official in the Ministry of Defence, Dr Kelly was arguably the worlds pre-eminent expert on biological and chemical weapons of mass destruction.

We have established that he had access to the highest levels of the security services and was cleared to see the most highly classified intelligence.

The claim that police removed wallpaper from his house has never been confirmed or denied by Thames Valley Police they refuse to make any comments about the Kelly case.

All these new revelations add weight to the list of unanswered questions surrounding Dr Kellys death, such as why were no fingerprints found on the knife with which he allegedly killed himself even though he wore no gloves.

As with the extraordinary details of the helicopter search, this vital information was only obtained using the Freedom of Information Act almost five years after the Hutton
Inquiry ended. It was not heard at the inquiry.

The doctors insist that concern about Dr Kellys death will continue to deepen until a full coroners inquest is heard. If one is finally granted, many will expect Tony Blair and Lord Falconer to be called to explain under oath why they went to such lengths to avoid the normal, rigorous and respected course of this countrys law.

Until this happens their reputations will continue to suffer, as will the reputation of the British legal system. The unavoidable conclusion must be that a full coroners inquest is the only way the whole truth about the Kelly affair, however uncomfortable, will emerge.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1289692/Dr-David-Kelly-The-damning-new-evidence-points-cover-Tony-Blairs-government.html

Jan Klimkowski
06-28-2010, 05:20 PM
See also here:

http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1802&highlight=%22david+kelly%22

http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1763&highlight=%22david+kelly%22

http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3075&highlight=%22david+kelly%22

Myra Bronstein
06-29-2010, 06:03 AM
A lot of new information in the Daily Mail article. Like the helicopter. I wasn't aware of that before. Very persuasive. Not that I need further persuasion of the blatantly obvious.

It mentions a group of doctors who are involved in the case. Any idea how they got involved?

Peter Presland
06-29-2010, 06:52 AM
A lot of new information in the Daily Mail article. Like the helicopter. I wasn't aware of that before. Very persuasive. Not that I need further persuasion of the blatantly obvious.

It mentions a group of doctors who are involved in the case. Any idea how they got involved?
Actually there was little new in the article other than its focus on the alleged wallpaper stripping. Norman Baker's book details the helicopter search, the death certificate and the timing anomalies together with the police asking (ordering?) the family to stay in the back garden whilst the house was searched. I considered that bizarre. I mean who would trust anybody - let alone the police - to root around one's house, not only without a warrant, but without witnessing it either? I guess there are simply some very trusting souls around still.

What I find most interesting is the tenacity with which a Spook dominated right wing newspaper is pursuing an issue of such apparent potential embarrassment to Deep State interests. For me, it's less a question of what they report; more one of who is drip-feeding the information and controlling the timing.

The other thing that intrigues me is reports of 'Justice' Secretary Ken Clarke considering re-opening the inquest and 'considering' the doctors request to have the 70 year embargo on the post-mortem report lifted. You will see from the other thread that the reaction to news that Hutton had embargoed it for 70 years was such as to get him reported as relenting and agreeing that these docs should be allowed to see it. Turns out that, once acceded to by government, the decision on any embargo-lifting remains with the government and it has NOT yet been lifted. There's a lot of perception management going on here - very much British Permanent Government par for the course in fact.

David Halpin is one of the doctors. He's a long-time campaigner on Palestine and other issues. He was on the first abortive flotilla. His web site is here (http://dhalpin.infoaction.org.uk/)

Jan Klimkowski
06-29-2010, 06:10 PM
What I find most interesting is the tenacity with which a Spook dominated right wing newspaper is pursuing an issue of such apparent potential embarrassment to Deep State interests. For me, it's less a question of what they report; more one of who is drip-feeding the information and controlling the timing.

The other thing that intrigues me is reports of 'Justice' Secretary Ken Clarke considering re-opening the inquest and 'considering' the doctors request to have the 70 year embargo on the post-mortem report lifted. You will see from the other thread that the reaction to news that Hutton had embargoed it for 70 years was such as to get him reported as relenting and agreeing that these docs should be allowed to see it.

It may be very simple. Certain interests may feel it is possible to lay the blame on Tony Blair, because the spooks know there is some incriminating paper/phone record which could be selectively leaked to establish foreknowledge of, or assent to, the assassination from Blair.

The cover-up would then be: this kind of unacceptable aberration occurs when politicians have too much control over the security services, and the operational independence of MI5 and MI6 must be re-established immediately.

This would achieve two deep political aims:

i) control the damage caused by the fraudulent war on Iraq by blaming an extant hate figure (Blair) and his acolyte (spinmeister Campbell);

ii) create a (bogus) rationale for the security services to operate outside governmental control.

Anyone who's examined the evidence around the death of David Kelly (see eg the other threads linked to in my post above), knows that the official version is complete and utter rubbish. From the security service perspective, there is a reasonable chance that the reality of Dr David Kelly's assassination will become established at some time in the future, and there is therefore a case (from their perspective) to control the damage and use the incident to their advantage.

In short, blaming it on Blair (and governmental interference) in a narrow and controlled fashion to enable MI5 and MI6 to achieve objectives i) and ii) above would be an acceptable result for the spooks.

Speculatively, of course.

Paul Rigby
07-04-2010, 08:45 AM
Anyone who's examined the evidence around the death of David Kelly (see eg the other threads linked to in my post above), knows that the official version is complete and utter rubbish.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-kelly-murdered-yes-and-i-bet-you-believe-in-the-tooth-fairy-too-2017805.html


David Kelly murdered? Yes, and I bet you believe in the tooth fairy too

Investigative journalist Tom Mangold, a friend of the government scientist, takes aim at theories rejecting the verdict that the arms inspector committed suicide

For the past 10 days, a new campaign suggesting that Dr David Kelly, the government scientist and weapons inspector who died nearly seven years ago this month, was murdered has been reaching fever pitch in one popular daily newspaper.

Officially, it was established that Kelly died by his own hand in an Oxfordshire wood: having first taken a large dose of the painkiller co-proxamol, he then slit his wrist with his garden pruning knife.

The Daily Mail and its Sunday companion, The Mail on Sunday, have produced "damning new evidence" of an alleged cover-up to hide a murder plot by persons unknown, for reasons unknown.

The "new evidence" now includes a statement last week from Mai Pedersen, Kelly's former US Air Force interpreter in Iraq, who was a close friend. After seven years, she has suddenly recalled that Kelly could not have cut his wrist because an elbow injury had left his arm too weak. She has also said that he could not have swallowed 29 tablets because he "had difficulty swallowing pills".

Further allegations include a claim that "a blanket of secrecy" was thrown over the case by the Labour government and that reports and medical records about the case have been classified for the next 70 years, bolstered by some apparently ambiguous wording on Kelly's death certificate.

I knew David rather well and I am firmly convinced not only that he committed suicide, but that those who believe in a cover-up have simply failed to produce a shred of primary-source evidence to support their claims.

I believe that David killed himself because he learned, a few hours before he took this fatal step, that lies he had told to investigating MPs on the Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on 15 July would be exposed. He had, foolishly, denied having contact with the BBC Newsnight journalist Susan Watts. She had taped the interview (for record purposes only) and the BBC was about to reveal this.

I believe David learned of this impending disaster late in the morning of his death through a benign telephone call from a colleague at the Ministry of Defence. With that knowledge came an instant awareness that his honour and integrity would be besmirched and that he would not be allowed to return the following week to his beloved Baghdad.

To add to his nightmare, he had received a stiff warning from his personnel boss at the Ministry of Defence, Sir Richard Hatfield. Kelly had reassured his Whitehall bosses that he had not spoken widely to journalists. After this assurance, Sir Richard gave Kelly a direct warning, twice, that disciplinary action would be taken if facts came to light that "appeared to call into question the account and assurances you gave me". In other words, he was shown the yellow card.

The moment, I believe, that David learned of the existence of the Newsnight tape, his world collapsed. At the Hutton inquiry, Janice, his widow, recalled: "I just thought he had a broken heart; he had shrunk into himself." She has also privately subscribed to the notion that her husband had learned something dreadful late in the morning of his death.

I know, from several interviews conducted with close friends in the US, that David was in very good spirits early on the morning of his suicide. He was convinced he'd passed through the worst and would be returning to Baghdad within a week.

Those who have set their hearts on the "Kelly was murdered" theory have yet to identify: 1. Motive. 2 Perpetrators. 3.Opportunity. If these people are right, the following events must have happened on that fateful morning in 2003:

At least two people entered his house, unseen, in the small village where he lived and where every stranger is "clocked" as a stranger. The intruders then stole his garden pruning knife and his wife's co-proxamol tablets from the upstairs bathroom, still unseen. (If they came to kill him, how extraordinary that they didn't bother to bring their own instruments for the purpose.)

They then kidnapped Kelly and forced him out of the house while his wife was present. (As she was there all the time, how could she not have seen the intruders? And why would David not have shouted for help?)

While frog-marching him to the death site in the woods, the killers must have had to release him for a while, because he was seen alone by a friend on his way to the woods where he died. Indeed, both men exchanged brief pleasantries.

The killers then would have had to re-kidnap him and march him to the woods still unseen, where they forced tablets down his throat and made him cut his own wrist. All this done without leaving a trace of forensic evidence on Kelly. (How does one force 29 tablets down a man's throat without leaving a mark of violence?)

The plot to cover up this murder (motive unknown) had to involve the local police, the local Special Branch, MI5 and MI6 (which were involved in the inquiries after his death: David was, after all, an intelligence officer) and a small cohort of government employees. Not only did these men and women willingly conspire to cover up a murder, but they have maintained their silence for seven years.

Believe all that, and you must then give some credence to the probable existence of the tooth fairy.

Tom Mangold was senior correspondent for BBC TV's Panorama. He is now a freelance reporter and author.

In fact, to invoke Seldes, "Mangold" (predictably, not his real name) is a veteran deep political operative, with a long and squalid record stretching back to the assassination of Dr Stephen Ward. I still recall switching off a piece he did on Kenneth Clarke's visit to Colombia in support of MI6's alleged "war on drugs" (or similar nonsense). His much acclaimed biog of James Jesus Angleton is a laughably crude puff piece for Israeli intelligence.

Peter Presland
07-04-2010, 12:19 PM
In fact, to invoke Seldes, "Mangold" (predictably, not his real name) is a veteran deep political operative, with a long and squalid record stretching back to the assassination of Dr Stephen Ward. I still recall switching off a piece he did on Kenneth Clarke's visit to Colombia in support of MI6's alleged "war on drugs" (or similar nonsense). His much acclaimed biog of James Jesus Angleton is a laughably crude puff piece for Israeli intelligence.

And just look at that ridiculous series of straw men that culminate in his 'Tooth Fairy' put down. Pathetic.

As for his snide:

After seven years, she has suddenly recalled that Kelly could not have cut his wrist because an elbow injury had left his arm too weak. She has also said that he could not have swallowed 29 tablets because he "had difficulty swallowing pills". referencing Mai Pedersons reported 'New Evidence' in yesterday's Mail, She actually made those statements in September 2003 whilst the Hutton Inquiry was in recess - as reported in Norman Baker's book, so there's nothing 'new' about them at all - in spite of the Daily Mail's cheap lazy report. She was of course not called to give evidence and, according to Norman Baker, although the Thames Valley Police travelled to America and interviewed her, her statement to them was not provided to Hutton - or anyone else - either.

Still there's a lot of water muddying going on around this. Jan is probably not far off the mark with his SIS manoeuvrings observations above

Magda Hassan
07-30-2010, 10:38 AM
Law chief to probe KGB agent's claim that David Kelly was 'exterminated'


By Neil Sears (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authornamef=Neil+Sears)
Last updated at 7:26 AM on 26th July 2010
Dr David Kelly: A KGB spy says that the doctor was 'exterminated'

A former Russian spy's dossier which suggests that Government scientist David Kelly was ' exterminated' in a planned assassination is being studied by the Attorney General.
Boris Karpichkov, who fled to Britain after 15 years as a KGB agent, claims a London intelligence contractor linked to MI5 told him Dr Kelly's death was not suicide.
Mr Karpichkov has emailed his evidence to Attorney General Dominic Grieve - who has already said he is 'concerned' by questions raised by doctors who dispute the official suicide ruling over the Iraq expert's death.
Last night a spokesman for Mr Grieve confirmed that the dossier had been received, and that it was being 'considered'.
Dr Kelly's body was discovered in woods close to his Oxfordshire home in July 2003.

Tony Blair's Labour Government had controversially unmasked him as the source of a hotly-disputed BBC news story that claimed a dossier used to justify the war on Iraq had been 'sexed up'.
Lord Hutton's public inquiry ruled that Dr Kelly killed himself, but since the ousting of Labour in May there has been growing pressure from within the coalition Government for a new independent inquiry.
A group of doctors have claimed Dr Kelly could not have died as a result of cutting his left wrist with a blunt garden pruning knife, and it has emerged that his death certificate was left incomplete.
There is also outrage at the fact that full details of his postmortem examination are to be kept secret for 70 years, and that no inquest took place.





http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/07/25/article-1297444-0A8B799F000005DC-376_468x286.jpg KGB claim: Boris Karpichkov had worked as a Russian spy for 15 years before fleeing to Britain


Campaigners also note that on the morning of his death Dr Kelly sent an email warning of 'many dark actors playing games'.
The new allegations from Mr Karpichkov suggest directly that the 'dark actors' could have been British secret agents determined to silence Dr Kelly before he could embarrass the Government.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/07/25/article-1297444-0A89FB39000005DC-800_233x423.jpg Claims: Karpichkov identified this man as MI5 agent Peter Everett

The former Russian spy, who defected from Latvia to Britain in 1998, says the source of his dossier is 'agent' Peter Everett, who lives in Dulwich, South-East London, and until 2006 ran a shadowy firm, Group Global Intelligence Services.
The firm is understood to have employed former MI5 operatives to carry out detective work for corporations.
Mr Karpichkov, who now holds a British passport, claims in his dossier that he worked for Mr Everett too, and that one of their dozens of meetings took place two days after Dr Kelly's body was found.
Mr Everett told him, the former KGB man claims, that Dr Kelly had been ' exterminated' for his ' reckless behaviour'.
Mr Karpichkov says Mr Everett suggested he was himself an 'active field operative' for MI5, and continues: 'He told me that it was extremely uncomfortable, inconsistent and unusual for Dr Kelly to slash his arm in the way he did. He would have lost some blood, but it would not have been fatal.
'He also claimed that it was not a coincidence that Special Branch officers were the ones who first appeared on the scene. They moved Dr Kelly's body to another location, changed the original position of his corpse and took away incriminating evidence.
'He added that the scene where Dr Kelly's body was found was carefully arranged and completely "washed out", including the destruction of all fingerprints.
'When I asked who was behind his death, he [ Mr Everett] answered indirectly, saying the "competing firm", which I took to mean MI6.'


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/07/26/article-1297444-0A9217D9000005DC-247_468x202.jpg
At the weekend, Mr Everett confirmed that he had met Mr Karpichkov, and that he had discussed Dr Kelly's death. But he denied being party to any secret s about the incident.
He refused to comment on whether he had ever worked for MI5, but agreed he had 'spent a number of years working in the world of intelligence'.
Mr Karpichkov's dossier comes on top of a claim by Dr Kelly's colleague Mai Pedersen that the chemical warfare expert had been too weak to slash his own wrist.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1297444/KGB-agent-Boris-Karpichkovs-claim-David-Kelly-exterminated-faces-probe.html#ixzz0ujbGRKxy

Jan Klimkowski
07-30-2010, 04:52 PM
Hmmmm - the Daily Mail again, and now the UK has a Conservative Attorney-General.

The rapid Special Branch attendance has always been a red flashing light, although one might have expected the "cleaners" to have been SIS contractors.

Jan Klimkowski
08-13-2010, 05:21 PM
This medical evidence, which makes the Official Version (that Kelly committed suicide) impossible, has been known for some time by those of us who've studied the evidence.

That said, the list of signatories in this new Times letter is high level legal and medical establishment and it's of interest for that reason.

I'm also intrigued by the MSM response. Murdoch's Sky News ran it as the lead story in their 6pm bulletin. BBC1's 6pm bulletin ran the story at c6:12pm, well down the running order.

:hello:


Experts call for David Kelly inquest

Official cause of David Kelly's death is 'extremely unlikely', say group of legal and medical experts

A group of prominent legal and medical experts today called for a full inquest into the death of the government scientist David Kelly in 2003.

An inquest was suspended by Lord Falconer, then lord chancellor, before the Hutton inquiry into the circumstances of the scientist's death. It was not resumed after Hutton's report in 2004 concluded that Kelly killed himself by cutting an artery in his wrist.

Nine experts including Michael Powers, a QC and former coroner, and Julian Blon, a professor of intensive care medicine, said in a letter to the Times that the official cause of death haemorrhage from the severed artery was "extremely unlikely".

"Insufficient blood would have been lost to threaten life," they said. "Absent a quantitative assessment of the blood lost and of the blood remaining in the great vessels, the conclusion that death occurred as a consequence of haemorrhage is unsafe."

Kelly's body was found in woods close to his Oxfordshire home in 2003, shortly after it was revealed that he was the source of a BBC report casting doubt on the government's claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction which could be fired within 45 minutes.

Lord Hutton concluded that "the principal cause of death was bleeding from incised wounds to his left wrist which Dr Kelly had inflicted on himself with the knife found beside his body".

In January, five doctors who made an application to the Oxford coroner to have the inquest reopened, were told that Hutton made a ruling in 2003 to keep medical reports and photographs closed for 70 years. Hutton responded by saying the documents could be revealed to doctors and that he had made the gagging order to spare Kelly's family "unnecessary distress".

Hopes for a new inquest have been raised by the change in government. Dominic Grieve, the attorney general, said in April, when he was shadow justice secretary, that the Tories would consider a new inquest into Kelly's death. He also called for a review of the government's decision not to release related medical records and postmortem documents.

Grieve is looking at the matter with the justice secretary, Kenneth Clarke. Norman Baker, the Liberal Democrat MP and a junior minister in the coalition government, supports resumption of the inquest. He resigned from the front bench while in opposition to write a book, The Strange Death of David Kelly, which argued that the scientist's life had been "deliberately taken by others".

The Hutton inquiry applied a less stringent test than would have been used in an inquest, where a coroner has to be sure "beyond reasonable doubt" that a person intended to kill themselves.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/aug/13/experts-call-david-kelly-inquest

Malcolm Pryce
08-13-2010, 10:32 PM
Newsnight had Michael Powers QC on and gave it some reasonable air time. It seems to be gathering an encouraging head of steam. I've long suspected the Hutton inquiry - concentrating as it did on the BBC-Gilligan spat - was a piece of misdirection aimed at concealing the fact that due process regarding an inquest was not observed. In which case, will the 'deep state' allow this to carry on?

Peter Lemkin
08-14-2010, 05:25 AM
From above, this popped out at me....."Mai Pederson is a U.S. Army linguist and, despite what she might claim, an American spy. She has hired a lawyer, Mark Zaid, who specializes in intelligence matters."... Those of us who know Zaid and know how he infiltrated the JFK community as a 20-something and then went on to represent the Deep Political Cabal in their 'legal' affairs [as a lawyer], know when a client takes Zaid as their attorney, their affiliations are more than suspect!...... A list of his clients reads like a spooks who's who.

Magda Hassan
08-14-2010, 05:37 AM
!!!
Well spotted Peter. Mae Pedersen has been promoting the no suicide theory though. Her latest thing was to say that Kelly has some thing wrong with his arm/hand and couldn't cut his meat for dinner and needed some one to help him and therefore it is impossible for him to have cut his wrists on his own.

Jan Klimkowski
08-14-2010, 08:53 AM
Newsnight had Michael Powers QC on and gave it some reasonable air time. It seems to be gathering an encouraging head of steam. I've long suspected the Hutton inquiry - concentrating as it did on the BBC-Gilligan spat - was a piece of misdirection aimed at concealing the fact that due process regarding an inquest was not observed. In which case, will the 'deep state' allow this to carry on?

The BBC2 Newsnight piece was a complete disgrace.

The debate was entirely framed to discredit "conspiracy theories", a phrase used several times, that Kelly was murdered.

The thrust of the Newsnight piece was that the precise cause of death might not be as claimed in the Hutton Inquiry, but don't panic sheeple, he did kill himself, we just need to confirm how, and the fact that Hutton has sealed the medical evidence for 70 years is not at all suspicious, it's purely out of respect for Kelly's family.

What a crock.

Malcolm Pryce
08-14-2010, 12:04 PM
Well, maybe my expectations are lower than yours, but I saw it differently. Of course they used the phrase conspiracy over and over again as a synonym for crazy theory that cant be true, but I expect that. For all their framing we were still left with the sight of a coroner disputing the suicide verdict set against a former friend of Kelly claiming that the whole idea was absurd. I think plenty of people are smart enough to know there is nothing absurd about an alleged suicide turning out to be murder and that the opinion of a friend counts for nothing. Equally I think the vast majority of people will know exactly what it means if the suicide verdict is overturned. I think the important thing is the taste left in the mouth by such programmes. For you, it might have been a crock, but I suspect for most people the impression left will be the sight of a former coroner calling for an inquest.

Jan Klimkowski
08-14-2010, 12:47 PM
From above, this popped out at me....."Mai Pederson is a U.S. Army linguist and, despite what she might claim, an American spy. She has hired a lawyer, Mark Zaid, who specializes in intelligence matters."... Those of us who know Zaid and know how he infiltrated the JFK community as a 20-something and then went on to represent the Deep Political Cabal in their 'legal' affairs [as a lawyer], know when a client takes Zaid as their attorney, their affiliations are more than suspect!...... A list of his clients reads like a spooks who's who.

Mai Pederson is discussed at length on the first page of this thread.

The difficulty remains unpicking the disinformation and cover stories to locate the deep black truth.

Jan Klimkowski
08-14-2010, 12:53 PM
Well, maybe my expectations are lower than yours, but I saw it differently. Of course they used the phrase conspiracy over and over again as a synonym for crazy theory that cant be true, but I expect that. For all their framing we were still left with the sight of a coroner disputing the suicide verdict set against a former friend of Kelly claiming that the whole idea was absurd. I think plenty of people are smart enough to know there is nothing absurd about an alleged suicide turning out to be murder and that the opinion of a friend counts for nothing. Equally I think the vast majority of people will know exactly what it means if the suicide verdict is overturned. I think the important thing is the taste left in the mouth by such programmes. For you, it might have been a crock, but I suspect for most people the impression left will be the sight of a former coroner calling for an inquest.

What I saw was an attempt to contain the damage caused by medical and legal experts writing a letter to MSM organ The Times establishing that the medical conclusions of the Hutton Inquiry cannot stand.

However, all that evidence was known within weeks of Kelly's death, and certainly by the time of Hutton.

Let's be clear: Hutton sealed the medical evidence for 70 years. Hutton suppressed that evidence. This is remarkable.

Now the cover-up line is that it isn't important anyway.

Mangold was trotted out as a "family friend" and delivered his standard refrain: that this was done to protect the family's feelings.

This is patent nonsense. The public interest in learning the truth about the death of Kelly, through a multi-million pound, high level public inquiry, must outweigh such concerns.

Malcolm Pryce
08-14-2010, 01:17 PM
I don't disagree with any of that.

Yes, all this was evident at the time for those with the eyes to see.

But sometimes these things have their own season. For whatever reason, the subject seems to be gaining traction.

I agree 'they' are in damage limitation mode; but my feeling is, sometimes in trying to limit the damage you do more damage just by drawing attention to it.

I think also this case feeds into a deep reservoir of disquiet among many people about the transparent crookedness of the Hutton Inquiry.

People who would scoff at, say, 9/11 conspiracy theories, are prepared to buy this one. Like the Daily Mail for example.

Just my ten cents worth.

Magda Hassan
08-14-2010, 01:22 PM
I have a hunch that there is a faction that is quite happy to hang Tony out to dry. Not sure yet who that is though.

Malcolm Pryce
08-14-2010, 01:52 PM
Why, what's he done wrong? :)

Magda Hassan
08-14-2010, 01:58 PM
Yeah, he's their boy who delivered alright. But maybe he delivered the wrong thing to someone. Or they're still waiting.

Malcolm Pryce
08-14-2010, 02:06 PM
I told you before - he's going to be the next Pope. It was the only job 'they' could offer that he really wanted.

Magda Hassan
08-15-2010, 02:23 AM
Dr David Kelly was on a hitlist, says UN weapons expert as calls grow for full inquest


By Miles Goslett (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authornamef=Miles+Goslett) and Arthur Martin (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authornamef=Arthur+Martin)
Last updated at 2:31 AM on 14th August 2010

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/08/13/article-1302939-0AC7C4BD000005DC-288_233x369.jpg 'High target': There are fresh calls for an inquest into Dr David Kelly's death

A leading UN weapons inspector last night added his voice to the growing clamour for a full inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly.
Dr Richard Spertzel claimed Dr Kelly was on a 'hitlist' in the final years of his life.
The former head of the UN Biological Section, who worked closely with Dr Kelly in Iraq in the 1990s, has written to Attorney General Dominic Grieve about the 'mysterious circumstances' surrounding the death.
The weapons inspector's body was found after he was unmasked as the source of a damaging BBC news report questioning the grounds for the Iraq war.

Officially, he took his own life.
Yesterday Dr Spertzel told the Mail that the British authorities were 'intentionally ignoring' the issue.
He believes that there is something 'fishy' and insisted that a coroner should examine the death as soon as possible.
His demands come 24 hours after nine of Britain's leading medical experts wrote an open letter to minsters demanding a full inquest.
Dr Spertzel said: 'I know that David, as well as myself and a couple of others, were on an Iraqi hitlist. In late 1997, we were told by the Russian embassy in Baghdad. I had no idea what it meant but apparently David and I were high on the priority list.'

Scroll down for video report


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/08/13/article-1302939-0ACA13BE000005DC-569_468x230.jpg


He said he and Dr Kelly were told that they were 'numbers three and four' on the list during an inspection trip in Iraq.
'When it first happened I felt right away that David just being associated with the work he'd been doing for the UK government would have made him a high target,' Dr Spertzel said.


More...



Now NINE top doctors demand new inquest into 'suicide' of weapons inspector David Kelly (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1302640/Dr-Kelly-investigation-inadequate-Now-NINE-doctors-demand-inquest.html)


'The Iraqi intelligence service did not take kindly to such action so my first reaction [to Dr Kelly's death] was "we'd better watch our backs".'
No inquest has ever been held into Dr Kelly's death. Instead, a public inquiry chaired by Lord Hutton was set up to investigate the circumstances surrounding it.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/08/13/article-1302939-0AC9D943000005DC-997_233x357.jpg Inquest call: Dr Richard Spertzel claims he and Dr Kelly were on a hitlist

The inquiry ruled that the 59-year-old committed suicide in woodland near his Oxfordshire home in July 2003 by cutting the ulnar artery in his wrist with a blunt pruning knife.
Dr Spertzel, who is based in Washington where he continues to write and lecture on biological weapons, said: 'My concern about David Kelly's death is exactly what the doctors are saying now - that is, it's virtually impossible to commit suicide by slashing your wrist in that way.

'It just doesn't make sense. It seems to me that they [the British authorities] are intentionally ignoring all this. Something's fishy.'
Yesterday some of the doctors who wrote to ministers demanded an end to the shroud of secrecy over the death.
They want the official post-mortem results to be made public and for witnesses to give evidence under oath.
Concern over the cause of death has been mounting after it emerged in January that all medical and scientific records, including the post-mortem report and photographs of the body, were secretly classified for 70 years in 2004.
Sir Barry Jackson, past president of the British Academy of Forensic Science and one of the doctors who wrote to ministers, said yesterday: 'In my experience from 30 years as a practising surgeon I find it difficult to agree with the cause of death as listed on his death certificate.'
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/08/13/article-1302939-0ACA1363000005DC-151_233x229.jpg
Another, Dr Elizabeth Driver, a solicitor and Fellow of the Royal College of Pathologists, added: 'As a pathologist I cannot understand how Dr Kelly could have died from blood loss of a severed ulnar artery. It makes no medical sense. Little is known about the medical facts because the post-mortem has been kept secret.
'There are obvious questions which were not addressed in the inquiry.'
Doubts over the official version of his death have previously been raised by Mai Pederson, a U.S. Air Force linguist who served in Iraq with Dr Kelly's weapons inspection team.
She said he had a painful elbow injury which meant his hand was too weak to cut a steak.
He would have to have been a 'contortionist' to have killed himself in the way the Hutton Inquiry claimed, she said.
She also said he had a disorder that made it difficult to swallow pills, undermining Lord Hutton's claims that he took some himself.

Peter Lemkin
08-15-2010, 05:33 AM
Now, if only the British Sheeple would bleat loudly, they may force an inquiry [which in my mind could go a long way to causing a collapse of both main parties and the status quo of 'ministers, Ministries' and the secret government apparatus in the UK]......wouldn't it be 'lovely'......should happen worldwide!...one nation at a time.

Jan Klimkowski
08-15-2010, 03:29 PM
Very very spooky.

Fellow Tory MP, Ann Widdecombe, famously said that "there is something of the night" about Michael Howard.

I find it hard to believe that Howard's intervention has anything to do with altruism, or truth-seeking, or anything similar. I suspect we're seeing the visible tip of deep politcial machinations.

As I discussed earlier with Peter P, and like Magda, I have a hunch, entirely speculatively, that the ultimate target of this questioning of official (Hutton) reasons for the death of Dr David Kelly may be Tony Blair.

However, this may purely be factional positioning, and there may be no need for the trigger to be pulled and the bullet fired at Blair. The existence of a loaded gun pointed at his head may be enough to achieve whatever this black op is designed to achieve.

Alternately, as per the peice above, it may be Iraq. But there is no particular reason to demonize Iraq now.

:hello:


Michael Howard backs calls for inquest into death of David Kelly

Former Conservative leader says 'growing number of questions' have emerged over death of weapons expert in 2003

The former Conservative leader Michael Howard today backed calls for a a full inquest into the death of the government weapons expert Dr David Kelly.

His call came after a group of prominent experts described the official explanation for the scientist's death in 2003 as "extremely unlikely".

Howard, who is now a Tory peer, said their intervention confirmed his belief that there should now be a proper inquest.

"In view of the growing number of relevant questions that have arisen and cast doubt on the conclusions reached by Lord Hutton, I believe it would now be appropriate for a full inquest to be held," he told the Mail on Sunday.

"Recent evidence by the first police officer on the scene, together with new statements by doctors, raise serious questions which should be considered. This has been on my mind for quite a while, and recent events have crystallised my view."

Kelly's body was found in woods near his Oxfordshire home in July 2003 after he was identified as the source of a BBC story claiming the government "sexed up" its dossier on Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction.

In the outcry that followed, Tony Blair appointed Lord Hutton to head a public inquiry into Kelly's death. Unusually, the then lord chancellor, Lord Falconer, ruled it should also act as an inquest.

Hutton concluded that Kelly had taken his own life and that the principal cause of death was "bleeding from incised wounds to his left wrist which Dr Kelly had inflicted on himself with the knife found beside his body".

He also found that the scientist took an overdose of coproxamol tablets ? a painkiller commonly used for arthritis ? and had been suffering from an undiagnosed heart condition.

However, in a letter to the Times last week, the eight experts insisted the conclusion was unsafe. They argued that a severed ulnar artery, the wound found to Kelly's wrist, was unlikely to be life-threatening unless an individual had a blood-clotting deficiency.

The signatories included Michael Powers, a former coroner, Margaret Bloom, a former deputy coroner, and Julian Bion, a professor of intensive care medicine.

Howard's intervention comes as the attorney general, Dominic Grieve, and the justice secretary, Kenneth Clarke, are said to be exploring how best to allay concerns over the official version of Kelly's death.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/aug/15/michael-howard-david-kelly-inquest

Peter Presland
08-15-2010, 04:05 PM
Very very spooky.

Alternately, as per the peice above, it may be Iraq. But there is particular reason to demonize Iraq now.

The 'blame Iraq' meme is not new. Norman Baker spoke to Spertzel by phone several times whilst researching his book and quotes him several times in it. He did not say that Spertzel had made that 'on a hit list' claim but, in light of the article above, and having concluded that ir could not have been suicide, that is clearly where his own speculation about Iraqi agents being responsible comes from.

My own little speculation from post #16 stands:

My own gut feeling about Kelly's murder is that the US SIS's were the instigators - probably without MI5/6 knowledge to make their message doubly clear. It's a vastly complex area but, having read Norman Baker's book (he blames the Iraqi's BTW) and most of the other public domain stuff, my best shot is that the wavering Limeys were 'made an offer they couldn't refuse' with David Kelly's silencing the opportunistic clincher.

Pure speculation I know - but it does have a certain ring to it in keeping with what we know of their modus operandi ... and that in spite of Pederson apparently joining the chorus for a new Inquiry/Inquest.

Jan Klimkowski
08-20-2010, 06:47 PM
Letter in The Guardian:



It is not a question of whether there should or should not be a proper inquest into Dr David Kelly's death (Editorial, 17 August). This is not a matter for debate. The laws of this country state very clearly that there must be an inquest into any death occurring in the manner in which Dr Kelly is said to have died.

Further, before a suicide verdict can be returned, it must be proved beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased intended to kill himself. In the absence of a suicide note, it is extremely difficult to achieve this level of proof. Anyone who examines the transcripts of the evidence heard by Lord Hutton can see that the required level of proof was not attained, even if Lord Hutton had heard evidence under oath, which he crucially did not.

Further, Lord Falconer inappropriately invoked Section 17a of the 1988 Coroners' Act, "ordering" the coroner Nicholas Gardiner to "adjourn indefinitely" his inquest into Dr Kelly's death on 13 August 2003. This intervention by the then lord chancellor surely constituted a blatant subversion of due process of the law.

In the case of Dr Kelly, the suicide verdict of Lord Hutton is clearly unsafe and may represent one of the gravest miscarriages of justice ever to occur in this country. A suicide verdict effectively closes the case for ever, and if the deceased was in fact murdered stops the search for the murderer(s). A suicide verdict should not be reached lightly, and if there is any doubt the coroner should return an open verdict.

The fact that no inquest has been held into Dr David Kelly's death is nothing less than a national disgrace, particularly when one recalls the context in which his death took place.

Dr Stephen Frost

Colwyn Bay, Clwyd

Peter Presland
08-22-2010, 07:03 AM
Home Office Pathologist - appointed through the vetting processes required of senior establishment positions - IOW, in addition to the necessary professional qualifications and experience, he will have been considered 'sound'. Rank position and place are important ... etc etc.

Also, our shiny idealistic new ministers are gradually being initiated into the higher degrees of 'permanent government'. They are having to decide between continued shiny idealism and the seductive possiblities of initiation to even higher degrees. No prizes for guessing which most will choose - with Dominic Grieve QC (Magdalen College Oxford - an establishment clone if ever there was one) least of all likely to value any principle beyond power for its own sake.

For all those reasons, this is educational and thus added as part of the overall picture. From the BBC too (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11050587)- who else?:

The death of Iraq weapons expert David Kelly was a "textbook case" of suicide according to the pathologist who performed the post-mortem examination.
A group of doctors has questioned the suicide verdict by the Hutton Inquiry in 2004 and called for a full inquest.
But Nicholas Hunt said the scientist's death, after he was exposed as the source for a BBC story, was a "classic case of self-inflicted injury".
He told the Sunday Times he would, however, welcome a full inquest.
Dr Kelly's body was found in woods close to his Oxfordshire home in 2003, shortly after it was revealed that he provided the information for a story casting doubt on the government's claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction capable of being fired within 45 minutes.
Instead of a coroner's inquest, then Prime Minister Tony Blair asked Lord Hutton to conduct an investigation, which found Dr Kelly died from blood loss after slashing his wrist with a blunt gardening knife. (http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/)
'Nothing to hide' The details of the post-mortem examination are subject to a 70-year gagging order, and it is understood this is the first time Mr Hunt, who gave evidence at the Hutton Inquiry, has spoken out in defence of his findings.
Mr Hunt told the Sunday Times that during the eight-hour examination he found no signs of murder.
"I felt very, very sorry for David Kelly and the way he had been treated by the government... I had every reason to look for something untoward and would dearly love to have found something," the Home Office pathologist said.
"It was an absolute classic case of self-inflicted injury. You could illustrate a textbook with it.
"If it were anyone else and you were to suggest there's something foul about it, you would be referred for additional training. I would welcome an inquest, I've nothing to hide."
There have been a number of calls for the case to be reopened, most recently from a group of eight doctors who claimed Lord Hutton's conclusions were unsafe.
Earlier this month, they argued the wound to Dr Kelly's wrist was unlikely to have been fatal unless he was suffering from a blood-clotting deficiency.
Their view appears to be supported by the detective who found his body when he said he did not see "much blood" in the vicinity.
But Mr Hunt said: "In actual fact there were big, thick clots of blood inside the sleeve, which came down over the wrist, and a lot of blood soaked into the ground.
"They might not have seen it, but it was there and I noted it in my report."
Mr Hunt told the paper that two of Dr Kelly's main coronary arteries were 70-80% narrower than normal, and his heart disease was so severe that he could have "dropped dead" at any minute.
"With David Kelly, there were three factors that contributed to his death. If you have narrower arteries, your ability to withstand blood loss falls dramatically," he said.
"Your heart also becomes more vulnerable to anything that could cause it to become unstable, such as stress - which I have no doubt he was under massively - and the overdose."
In his report, Mr Hunt found Dr Kelly had taken an overdose of the painkiller co-proxamol but the toxicology reports have also come under scrutiny from those who do not believe the scientist committed suicide.
New evidence The doctors have called for material from the post-mortem examination to be released, and Lord Hutton has said he does not have any objection to them seeing it.
The peer said in January that the purpose of the secrecy order, made at the conclusion of his inquiry, had been to avoid causing distress to Dr Kelly's family.
Attorney General Dominic Grieve told the Daily Telegraph last week that those who felt "Lord Hutton did not tie up every loose end may have a valid point".
But he said he could not apply to the High Court for an inquest on a "hunch" and would have to be shown new evidence before doing so.

Paul Rigby
08-22-2010, 10:02 AM
There has been an entirely spontaneous outbreak of simultaneous voodoo-ism among columnists working for the MI6 Guardian-Observer front:


I won't waste your time with the conspiracy theories that person or persons unknown murdered him. David Aaronovitch tells you all you need to know about their idiocies in Voodoo Histories, his magisterial destruction of conspiracy theory.

Nick Likud, The media's part in the death of David Kelly: The BBC, the press and politicians betrayed the MoD scientist. Trying to blame Tony Blair is ridiculous

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/22/david-kelly-tony-blair-iraq-wmd


But even if he was murdered, as David Aaranovitch asks in his demolition of the conspiracy theory (in Voodoo Histories, Cape 8.99), cui bono? (to whose benefit?). Not Tony Blair and his colleagues, who were accused of hounding Kelly to his grave. A shadowy band of Iraqi exiles who were vengeful because he had exposed the feeble case for war against Saddam Hussein? If so around half the witnesses at the Chilcot inquiry must be expecting the assassin's knock any day soon.

Simon Legover, When Kelly conspiracy theorists met, it was murder: David Kelly's death shows our infinite ability to place significance on any data that may help our case while ignoring the rest

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2010/aug/21/simon-hoggart-week-david-kelly

Peter Lemkin
09-04-2010, 07:12 PM
Doctors call for David Kelly inquest

Group to seek full inquest into 2003 death of scientist who cast doubt on government's claims over Iraq weapons

David Batty and agencies
guardian.co.uk, Saturday 4 September 2010 13.22 BST

The doctors are to submit legal papers to the attorney general, Dominic Grieve (L), requesting his authorisation to seek an inquest into the death of David Kelly (R). Photograph: Katie Collins/PA

A group of doctors is making a fresh bid to force an inquest into the death of the weapons inspector David Kelly.

Legal papers are expected to be submitted to the attorney general, Dominic Grieve, by the end of next week, requesting his authorisation for the five doctors to go to the high court to seek a full inquest into the 2003 death of the scientist.

If Grieve refuses to grant the authorisation, his decision could be subject to a high court appeal.

The doctors have conducted a long-running campaign to overturn the decision of the then lord chancellor, Lord Falconer, to suspend an inquest before the Hutton inquiry into the circumstances of Kelly's death. The inquest was not resumed after Hutton's report in 2004 concluded that Kelly killed himself by cutting an artery in his wrist.

His body was found in woods near his Oxfordshire home shortly after it was revealed he had been the source of a BBC report casting doubt on the government's claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that could be fired within 45 minutes.

The latest move was prompted by an interview given last month by pathologist Nicholas Hunt, who carried out an autopsy on Kelly's body.

Hunt told the Sunday Times that he regarded the case as a "textbook" suicide and disclosed details from his postmortem report, which the Hutton inquiry ordered should be kept secret for 70 years.

He found "big clots" of blood on the inside of Kelly's jacket, contrary to reports that there had been little blood at the scene. There were about a dozen cuts on his left wrist, including shallower cuts made before the main incisions.

Kelly's heart disease was so advanced that he could have died at any moment, according to the report.

Barrister Michael Powers QC, who is acting for the group of doctors, said Hunt's comments gave weight to their argument that Hutton's inquiry did not represent a sufficient examination of the cause of Kelly's death.

Powers said: "The media has now presented evidence which we have never had before. The fact that he felt it necessary to go to the press and say these things proves to us that the inquiry was insufficient."

The doctors are awaiting a decision from the justice secretary, Kenneth Clarke, as to whether the ruling should be overturned to allow them to see the report.

They insist an inquest is needed to clear up any doubt over whether he was the victim of foul play.

Grieve has called for papers relating to Kelly's death and is considering whether he should himself order an inquest.

But Powers said: "We can't wait indefinitely for the government to make a decision. Hence the decision to lay formal papers."

Magda Hassan
09-09-2010, 02:56 AM
An oldie but worthwhile posting here I think. Just to keep it on record.

How the Key Players in the Kelly Scandal Were Rewarded



Jonathan Oliver The Mail on Sunday December 10, 2006

The politicians and officials at the heart of the David Kelly scandal have been showered with honours, promotions or lucrative retirement jobs in the three years since the scientist's death.

While the Kelly family continue to mourn quietly in private, The Mail on Sunday today reveals how the men and women who share the blame for his demise have prospered.

On the eve of the third anniversary of the Hutton Report into the affair, an investigation charts the upward career paths of figures central to the inquiry who were called to give evidence or played a major part from behind the scenes.

The senior officials accused of covering up No10's manipulation of the intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction have gone on to be rewarded with some of the most glamorous jobs in the public sector.

Meanwhile, the Labour chairmen of the Commons committees that failed to probe the bogus Government dossiers on Saddam Hussein have been placed in the House of Lords.

And Alastair Campbell, the spin doctor whom critics accuse of tampering with intelligence and whipping up the hysteria that led to the scientist's alleged suicide, now stands to make an estimated 1 million from his memoirs.

Even junior and middle-ranking officials who were caught up in the political tornado have been recognised by the honours system and given significant promotions.

The research was carried out by Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker, who is probing the circumstances surrounding the death of Dr Kelly in July 2003.

Mr Baker said: "Nobody in Government came out of this episode with any credit or integrity. Yet, three years after the Hutton Inquiry, the principal players in the drama of the death of David Kelly - those who backed the Government or cravenly caved in to No10's demands - have prospered handsomely."

Meanwhile, the men who stood up to the Establishment have not fared so well.

In 2003, Kevin Marsh was the editor of Radio 4's Today Programme and defended his reporter Andrew Gilligan's right to report that Campbell had "sexed up" the WMD dossier. Now he is stuck in a relative backwater as head of the BBC's journalist training school.

Greg Dyke, then BBC director general, was forced to quit following the Hutton Report and has struggled to find a new role.

And what of Lord Hutton? The ex-Law Lord, accused of colluding in an Establishment whitewash, has slipped back into obscure retirement in his native Northern Ireland and has said little on the affair. Last month he defended his report in an article for a legal journal

The Air Marshal
Sir Joe French, 57, was Chief of Defence Intelligence.
Salary: up to 95,000.
Role: Testified before Hutton, defending the notorious - now disproved - claim that Saddam's weapons could be launched within 45 minutes.
Now: Promoted this year to Commander-in-Chief of RAF Strike Command on 154,000 a year.

The MP
Ann Taylor, 59, Labour MP, was chairwoman of Parliament's Intelligence Committee.
Salary: 56,000.
Role: She headed the committee that published a report which exonerated Downing Street over allegations of manipulating the Iraq intelligence.
Now: Ennobled as Baroness Taylor of Bolton. In her first year in the Lords she claimed more than 30,000 in tax-free "subsistence allowances".

The Select Committee Chairman
Donald Anderson, 67, was Labour chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee.
Salary: 56,000.
Role: Caved in to Government request not to ask David Kelly awkward questions about Iraq's WMD. Kelly was found dead two days after he appeared before Anderson's committee.
Now: Elevated to Lords as Baron Anderson of Swansea. Claimed 25,000 last year in tax-free attendance allowances in return for attending Lords on a total of 94 days.

The Defence Secretary
Geoff Hoon, 53, was Defence Secretary.
Salary: 129,000.
Role: Accused of neglecting his duty of care towards MoD employee David Kelly by sanctioning the release of his name to the media. Hoon admitted he could have done more to help the scientist.
Now: Demoted to Europe Minister on 99,000 but considered lucky to keep his Government job. Insiders claim Blair decided against sacking him because of the Iraq secrets he could spill.

The PM's mouthpiece
Godric Smith, 41, was one of the Prime Minister's two Official Spokesmen.
Salary: 80,000.
Role: Announced Kelly's death to reporters on the PM's plane as it arrived in Tokyo - responsible for many subsequent briefings.
Now: Honoured with CBE. Sports-mad Smith landed dream job as chief spin doctor for the 2012 London Olympics. Paid 120,000 a year.

The spin doctor
Alastair Campbell, 49, was Blair's Director of Communications and Strategy.
Salary: 130,000.
Role: Allegedly masterminded the "sexing up" of the official report on Iraq's WMD, author of the second so-called "dodgy dossier", and was the man behind the strategy that led to the public naming of David Kelly.
Now: Quit No10 but new work more lucrative. Charged Labour 40,000 plus VAT for a few weeks as a consultant during 2005 Election. Sports writer for Rupert Murdoch's Times newspaper. Stands to make 1 million for his memoirs.

The PM's other spokesman
Tom Kelly, 51, was the Prime Minister's Official Spokesman (joint post).
Salary: 80,000.
Role: Briefed reporters that David Kelly was "Walter Mitty" character.
Now: Promoted to chief spokesman on 100,000.

The Whitehall intelligence chief
Sir John Scarlett, 58, was chairman of Whitehall's Joint Intelligence Committee.
Salary: 130,000.
Role: Accused of acting as "human shield" for Alastair Campbell. Scarlett insisted he had "overall charge and responsibility" of the Iraq intelligence report - No 10 had not meddled.
Now: Promoted in 2005 to the most glamorous job in British intelligence: Chief of MI6. Known as "C". Salary up to 200,000.

The deputy intelligence chief
Martin Howard, 52, was Deputy Chief of Defence Intelligence.
Salary: 90,000.
Role: Insisted Downing Street had no knowledge that 45-minute claim was wrong.
Now: Still at MoD as Director General of Operational Policy on a salary of 100,000.

The Chief of Staff
Julian Miller, 51, was Chief of the Intelligence Assessment Staff, Cabinet Office.
Salary: 80,000.
Role: Defended Alastair Campbell, suggested David Kelly was too junior to have had access to crucial intelligence.
Now: Made Companion of the Order of the Bath. Director-General of Resources and Plans in the MoD on 100,000.

The Inquiry Secretary
Lee Hughes, late 40s, was Secretary to the Hutton Inquiry.
Salary: 50,000.
Role: Managed day-to-day logistics of the hearing.
Now: Made CBE. Promoted to senior role in Department of Constitutional Affairs, on 60,000.

The MoD Press Officer
Kate Wilson, late 30s, was chief Press officer at MoD.
Salary: 50,000.
Role: Responsible for strategy that led to Kelly's "outing". Journalists were told in advance that if they gave the correct name, the MoD would confirm it.
Now: Honoured with an OBE "in recognition of gallant and distinguished services in connection with operations in Iraq". Still chief Press officer at MoD. Salary around 60,000.

The PM's top foreign adviser
Sir David Manning, 57, was Tony Blair's chief foreign policy adviser.
Salary: 120,000.
Role: Present at all Downing Street sofa summits leading up to the war.
Now: Promoted to Washington Ambassador, the most sought-after job in the diplomatic service. The post comes with armoured Rolls-Royce and sprawling residence. Basic salary 130,000 plus tax-free allowances of 90,000.

The top civil servant
Sir Kevin Tebbit, 60, was Permanent Under Secretary of State at MoD.
Salary: up to 264,250.
Role: Sir Kevin admitted "responsibility" but not "culpability" for Kelly's death.
Now: Enjoying comfortable semi-retirement as non-executive director of the Smiths Aerospace group on 60,000 a year and is also a visiting professor at Queen Mary College, London.

The MI6 supremo
Sir Richard Dearlove, 61, was Chief of the Secret Intelligence Service - MI6.
Salary: up to 200,000.
Role: Insisted to Hutton he was not aware of any unhappiness within the intelligence community over the 45-minute claim.
Now: Living in genteel retirement as Master of Pembroke College, Cambridge, on Civil Service pension of up to 100,000
www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=421572&in_page_id=1770 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=421572&in_page_id=1770)

Peter Presland
09-12-2010, 12:35 PM
From the Mail Online: (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1311255/Dr-David-Kellys-body-obviously-moved-Paramedic-death-scene-reveals-concerns-Hutton-Inquiry.html)


Dr Michael Powers QC, who is leading the group of doctors campaigning for an inquest into Dr Kellys death, described the loss of the paperwork as quite frankly astonishing.
He said: The fact that such an important document has gone missing simply strengthens the case for an inquest.
It was clear to everyone at the time that Dr Kellys death was a very significant event and the value of all contemporaneous documents should have been recognised. All documents should have been carefully copied.
However, the trust says it cant find either the original document or a copy scanned into its computer system, even though it has a policy of storing such documents for ten years.....



The admission follows a year-long wrangle over a Freedom of Information request for documents concerning Dr Kellys death.
They included communications between the trust and the paramedics, minutes of any relevant meetings, and all correspondence with the coroner.
After waiting more than the statutory 20 working days deadline for replies, the trust eventually claimed it held no relevant information. A complaint was then lodged with the Information Commissioner. During the course of these follow-up inquiries the trust admitted it had mislaid the PRF.
In his ruling, which will be made public this week, the commissioner states: [The trust] explained that it would have expected to have had a PRF. It explained that this form would only include clinical assessment information about Dr Kelly and would not contain any other information. It explained that this form had been mislaid.
It explained that the information was usually digitised and held electronically by date in its PRF archives.
However, having checked its system for all the entries on the date of the incident, and the dates one day either side to ensure it was not misfiled, it could not find the relevant form. It was supposed to keep this form for ten years in line with its policy. The Commissioner has checked what this form would contain and is satisfied that it would only contain clinical assessment information.




The Mail Online report includes extended interviews with the two paramedics who repeat their unvarying observations that: "David Kelly's body had obviously been moved" and includes these telling observations:


The paramedic gave evidence to the Hutton Inquiry, but said: I thought theyd already decided the outcome and wanted someone to confirm it for them. Theyd decided it was going to be suicide and that was all cut and dried.
I wasnt impressed with how it was conducted. It should have been under oath, the photographs of the scene should have been released and they shouldnt have sealed the documents for 70 years.

David Guyatt
09-12-2010, 02:31 PM
The admission follows a year-long wrangle over a Freedom of Information request for documents concerning Dr Kellys death.

If you can't release it - destroy or lose it!

It must have been a damning document that potentially would have vaporized the official Kelly suicide explanation.

Jan Klimkowski
09-12-2010, 09:31 PM
I seem to remember the First Responder report after Tiger Woods' matrimonial tiff involving a fire hydrant, a golf club and a betrayed wife, was broadcast on national and international telly.

Bread and circuses to distract the masses....

Magda Hassan
10-24-2010, 12:44 AM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/interactive/2010/oct/22/david-kelly-iraq1
David Kelly death: postmortem examination report



http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/interactive/2010/oct/22/david-kelly-iraq
David Kelly death: toxicologist's report

Paul Rigby
10-24-2010, 09:17 AM
No question where the brains lie among this pair of Dykes:


Greg Dyke: BBC at fault for the decline in its reputation

Vanessa Thorpe, arts and media correspondent
The Observer, Sunday 24 October 2010

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/oct/24/greg-dyke-bbc-david-kelly

Dyke said that he recalls every moment of the weekend of Kelly's death, and his decision, at the bereaved family's request, to hold back confirmation that Kelly had spoken to BBC journalists. "My wife was convinced that the security services had killed Dr Kelly. But I think the minute Lord Hutton ruled that the medical reports should be kept for 70 years, it was obvious there would be conspiracy theories.

"Why did he do that? Maybe this will be the end of the Kelly affair, but it is interesting that it has come back again," said Dyke. "I am not a conspiracy theorist; I think Dr Kelly killed himself, but I met some Australian spies once who were pretty convinced that MI6 had killed him."

David Guyatt
10-24-2010, 12:03 PM
Nice move by our new Conservative government to release the Kelly post-mortem report which, completely unsurprisingly, brings nothing new to the table.

The fact remains that senior physicians and lawyers who continue to believe the manner of death as officially reported makes no sense at all and have repeatedly called for a full and proper inquest - rather than the political nonsense that we know as the "Hutton Report".

Albert Doyle
10-24-2010, 04:04 PM
If you follow the money on this the world's energy reserves were being compromised at the turn of the millennium. Venezuela's Chavez, Russia, India, and China all stood in a position to dominate the world's oil supply and put the squeeze on the west. The Nixon-era plan to invade the Middle East to secure its energy reserves was put in place. The 1991 Persian Gulf War created just enough pretext to allow America to slip back in there under the guise of fighting Saddam Hussein who had lobbed missiles at Israel. The divide and conquer politics of backing Israel against the arabs was doing its intended job and created the pretext for America to do an outright invasion and occupation under the Project For A New American Century.

WMD, or Weapons Of Mass Destruction, are military nomenclature straight from the Pentagon's playbooks. They really should have disguised the source of the information better because using the word "WMD" showed too easily the source of both it and those from whom it originated. But then again they weren't too bashful about hiding it at that point.

These agencies and their war machines run on oil. Threaten them and they will get very nasty very quickly and without any civilized recourse.

David Guyatt
10-25-2010, 08:19 AM
Using a combination of "follow the money" and "Occam's razor", it is, indeed, very hard not to conclude that Iraq - and now Iran - have been targeted simply because of their massive oil reserves (Saudi and the other big Gulf states are already in the Western bag).

Controlling the world's largest oil reserves mean you control the world.

China & India, the two new emerging super industrial giants would, under this scenario, be almost entirely dependent upon American goodwill for their energy supplies. Go figure.

Magda Hassan
10-25-2010, 08:46 AM
I would also say it was not just the oil but also the currency in which it is paid for that has something to do with being in the crosshairs.

Albert Doyle
10-25-2010, 05:06 PM
Kelly and Litvinenko are expendable at the right political price.


If you remove the politically correct filter from the lens you can see the rift along which Kelly and Litvinenko's bodies lie is a well-defined border between the claim of democracy and rule of law and that which we will accept at the right political price or compromise.


Kelly's and Litvinenko's bodies are out there on the barbed-wire in no man's land. Their corpses are bothering me...

Ed Jewett
11-14-2010, 11:16 PM
Death of Dr. David Kelly: Disinformation, Censorship and Coverup by the British Media

by Dr. Stephen Frost

http://www.globalresearch.ca/coverStoryPictures2/21918.jpg
Global Research (http://www.globalresearch.ca/), November 14, 2010



http://www.globalresearch.ca/site_images/emailfriend.gif Email this article to a friend
http://www.globalresearch.ca/site_images/printfriendly.gif Print this article

0diggsdigg
http://cdn.stumble-upon.com/images/32x32_su_round.gif (http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalresearch.ca%2Fin dex.php%3Fcontext%3Dva%26aid%3D21918) 5Share (http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalresearch.ca%2F index.php%3Fcontext%3Dva%26aid%3D21918&t=Death%20of%20Dr.%20David%20Kelly%3A%20Disinforma tion%2C%20Censorship%20and%20Coverup%20by%20the%20 British%20Media&src=sp)

Global Research Editor's Note

Global Research is publishing what the "progressive" British press has refused to publish concerning the mysterious death of Dr. David Kelly.


DISINFORMATION AND CENSORSHIP AT THE GUARDIAN re DR DAVID KELLY

In August 2010, I sent the letter immediately below in response to a Guardian editorial (see ANNEX 1) and an edited version of my letter was published (see ANNEX 2). In October 2010, I sent a letter (see below the letter immediately below) in response to Vikram Dodd's article (see ANNEX 3) and despite much discussion no response was ever published, even in edited form.


Dear Sir,

In response to today's Guardian editorial:

Why are so many people confused about this? It is not a question of whether there should or should not be a proper inquest into Dr Kelly's death. This is NOT a matter for debate.

The laws of this country state very clearly that there MUST be an inquest into any death occurring in the manner in which Dr David Kelly is said to have died.

Further, before a suicide verdict can be returned, it must be proved beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased not only killed himself but also that he intended to kill himself. In the absence of a suicide note, it is obviously
extremely difficult to achieve this level of proof. Anyone who cares to examine the transcripts of the evidence heard by Lord Hutton (at the Hutton Inquiry website) can see plainly that Hutton could not be satisfied
to the required level of proof, even if he had heard evidence under oath, which he scandalously and crucially did not.

Further, Lord Falconer inappropriately invoked Section 17a of the 1988 Coroners' Act in order to derail the Inquest, "ordering" the Oxfordshire Coroner Nicholas Gardiner to "adjourn indefinitely" his inquest on 13
August 2003. This disgraceful intervention by the then Lord Chancellor, who was unelected and a former flatmate of Tony Blair, constituted a blatant subversion of due process of the law.

In the case of Dr David Kelly, the suicide verdict of Hutton is clearly unsafe and may represent one of the gravest miscarriages of justice ever to occur in this country.

A suicide verdict effectively closes the case for ever, and if the deceased was in fact murdered stops the search for the murderer(s). It also smears the victim (who obviously cannot defend his reputation), his family and his friends. A suicide verdict should not be reached lightly, and if there is any doubt the Coroner should return an open verdict.

The fact that no inquest has been held into Dr David Kelly's death is nothing less than a national disgrace, particularly when one recalls the context in which his death took place.

Yours faithfully,

Dr Stephen Frost



This letter (see below) was submitted to The Guardian in reply to Vikram Dodd's Guardian article (see ANNEX 3). The Guardian despite repeated prompts and discussions has refused or neglected to publish our letter. Right of reply, enshrined in editorial guidelines, has thereby been denied.

LETTER FOR PUBLICATION

Dear Sir,

Vikram Dodd's Comment is Free article of 24 October 2010 has as its headline "The experts are clear on how David Kelly died" followed by "Not a single forensic pathologist has challenged the conclusions of the Hutton inquiry".

The truth is that the experts are far from clear on how Dr David Kelly died, not least perhaps because no inquest has taken place. The continued refusal or neglect to hold an inquest into this important death, which is required by the laws of this country and of Europe, constitutes a blatant subversion of due process of the law. Further, it should be pointed out that forensic pathologists are employed by the Home Office, directly or indirectly.

In January of this year the well known London lawyers Leigh Day & Co., representing five doctors, formally requested that the Ministry of Justice allow the doctors and lawyers sight of all the medical and scientific documents/evidence relating to Dr David Kelly's death which had been secretly classified (at some time unknown in 2004/2005) for 70 years following the publication of the Hutton Report. Despite repeated questions, both before and after the General Election, the Ministry of Justice has been unable to tell us the exact date on which the documents were classified, nor indeed to enlighten us as to the legal basis for classifying the documents, nor for continuing to keep them secret. It is strongly suspected that no such legal basis exists.

On 22 October 2010, our lawyers finally received a reply from Ken Clarke, Secretary of State for Justice, in which he sought to justify not granting our request for sight of all the medical and scientific documents relating to the death. He also informed us that he intended to publish the post-mortem report and the toxicology report on the Internet that very same day. In a long rambling letter he attempted to justify his failure to comply with our lawyers' request by quoting exemptions to disclosure allowed under the Freedom of Information Act. But, we did not seek disclosure under the terms of that Act and that had been made very clear by our lawyers in January of this year. Further, it seemed extraordinary to us that medical in confidence documents should be published on the Internet for all to see, particularly the post mortem report and the toxicology report, especially in view of the previous governments and this government's oft claimed
desire to avoid unnecessary upset to the Kelly family.

It seems to us that this Government, by publishing these two highly sensitive reports, hoped to draw a line under the whole affair. However, it will do no such thing. Some weeks ago a 35 page legal document, known as the Memorial, was submitted to the Attorney General Dominic Grieve by our lawyers outlining the formal legal reasons why we think an inquest should take place. Under Section 13 of the 1988 Coroners Act the Attorney General can grant us permission to apply to the High Court (or he can apply himself) for an inquest to be ordered. In order to do this he has only to be satisfied that, were an inquest to take place, the verdict MIGHT be different NOT that it WOULD be different. Section 13 requires that any ONE of six reasons be satisfied for the Attorney General to allow a formal application to the High Court for an inquest into a death. The six reasons are:

1) insufficiency of inquiry

2) irregularity of proceedings

3) rejection of evidence

4) new facts or evidence

5) fraud (in this context deception)

6) refusal or neglect by a coroner to hold an inquest which ought to be held

We need to provide evidence to satisfy ONE reason but the Memorial contains convincing evidence for ALL SIX reasons.

Notwithstanding the extremely strong case for an inquest which has been submitted to the Attorney General in the form of the Memorial, we intend as a matter of urgency to set up a fund so that we are in a position to contest vigorously any refusal by the Attorney General for us to proceed to the High Court by judicially reviewing any such decision.

It is essential in any democracy that due process of law is followed with the utmost rigour.

Yours faithfully,

Dr Stephen Frost



ANNEX 1

Dr David Kelly's unquiet grave

Editorial

The Guardian

Tuesday 17 August 2010

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/17/dr-david-kelly

"This is the lowest point," Lord Mandelson records Tony Blair as saying after the death of Dr David Kelly. Even those who cannot bring themselves to commend Mr Blair for giving his book income to charity yesterday will find it hard to argue with his grim comment in 2003. Dr Kelly's death, after the weapons expert had been outed and hounded over the "sexing up" allegation against the Iraq dossier, was one of the most abject moments in recent history. The death, the intensely political context, and the much criticised Hutton report into the case together explain why, to this day, so many feel so certain that the truth has not been told. And they explain why, whether the doubters are right or not, it remains so absolutely important that the full facts must be public, which at present they are not, and be above suspicion.

Last week a group of senior doctors called for a full inquest to be held into Dr Kelly's death. They charged that the official verdict bleeding from self-inflicted incised wounds to his left wrist recorded by Lord Hutton (whose inquiry in effect replaced the normal inquest procedure) was "extremely unlikely". Most of the doctors' claims have in fact been made before. Most of them have been challenged before too, as they were once again yesterday in a letter to the Times by a pathologist who cast doubt both on the doctors' pathology expertise and their theory that there was not enough loss of blood to support the Hutton verdict.

The difference this time is less in the substance of the campaigners' arguments than in their context. In spite of the continuing outrage over the Kelly case no new evidence has actually been produced to support any alternative to Hutton's verdict. The Kelly family, moreover, have not so far lent their support to the new inquest campaign. But there is a new government now, which might be more inclined to act on the call than Labour was. And the cause is being more ardently promoted than ever by the Daily Mail group, which first asked Mr Blair back in 2003 whether he had blood on his hands.

It is reasonable to ask whether, at a time of huge public spending cuts, a fresh inquest with attendant lawyers' fees would be justifiable. The more so when a significantly different verdict, let alone one which would satisfy those who believe Dr Kelly was murdered, is extremely unlikely. Some people, it is obvious, will never be satisfied. Against that, however, there is the ineradicable importance of these events and the highly unusual denial of a proper inquest in this case. The need remains to get to the bottom of a great public and private agony. A full inquest should be sympathetically considered. But there can be few illusions that it will ever finally lay Dr Kelly's case to rest.

Comments (151)


ANNEX 2

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/aug/19/david-kelly-inquest-disgrace

Letters

Lack of Kelly inquest is a national disgrace

The Guardian

Thursday 19 August 2010

It is not a question of whether there should or should not be a proper inquest into Dr David Kelly's death (Editorial, 17 August). This is not a matter for debate. The laws of this country state very clearly that there must be an inquest into any death occurring in the manner in which Dr Kelly is said to have died.

Further, before a suicide verdict can be returned, it must be proved beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased intended to kill himself. In the absence of a suicide note, it is extremely difficult to achieve this level of proof. Anyone who examines the transcripts of the evidence heard by Lord Hutton can see that the required level of proof was not attained, even if Lord Hutton had heard evidence under oath, which he crucially did not.

Further, Lord Falconer inappropriately invoked Section 17a of the 1988 Coroners' Act, "ordering" the coroner Nicholas Gardiner to "adjourn indefinitely" his inquest into Dr Kelly's death on 13 August 2003. This intervention by the then lord chancellor surely constituted a blatant subversion of due process of the law.

In the case of Dr Kelly, the suicide verdict of Lord Hutton is clearly unsafe and may represent one of the gravest miscarriages of justice ever to occur in this country. A suicide verdict effectively closes the case for ever, and if the deceased was in fact murdered stops the search for the murderer(s). A suicide verdict should not be reached lightly, and if there is any doubt the coroner should return an open verdict.

The fact that no inquest has been held into Dr David Kelly's death is nothing less than a national disgrace, particularly when one recalls the context in which his death took place.

Dr Stephen Frost


ANNEX 3

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/24/experts-david-kelly-death-clear

The experts are clear on how David Kelly died

Not a single forensic pathologist has challenged the conclusions of the Hutton inquiry

Vikram Dodd

guardian.co.uk

Sunday 24 October 2010

And so it goes on. Despite the release on Friday of the postmortem and toxicology reports into the death of the weapons inspector Dr David Kelly, the claims will continue.

The Hutton inquiry into the factors leading to Kelly's death heard expert evidence and then concluded the weapons inspector had committed suicide.

Not one single party to the inquiry, which was more thorough than any inquest would have been, offered any evidence to the contrary. The inquiry into the death in 2003 was vitriolic at times, and ended up with the BBC and Kelly family joining together in a savage battle against the government.

I sat through Hutton's inquiry, and have sat through many inquests.

Despite Hutton's baffling conclusion that the government bore no blame for pressurising Kelly, his was a more rigorous inquiry into the death than an inquest.

But none of this has satisfied those determined to suggest something more malign was behind Kelly's demise.

Over the years, as new claims have emerged, I have gone back to a group of experts who would be best placed to spot anything untoward, namely forensic pathologists. They are the experts in determining causes of death.

What is striking is their consistency in saying the scientific evidence points to Hutton's inquiry having reached the right conclusion.

The Hutton inquiry found that Kelly, 59, died after cutting an artery in his left wrist, had taken an overdose of Coproxamol painkillers and had heart disease which left his coronary arteries "significantly narrowed".

The doubters, who some call conspiracy theorists, have failed in all the years to produce one single fact to support their claims.

Experts in forensic pathology say that the doubts raised, including those by doctors, were based on partial knowledge or misconceptions.

The critics have claimed that bleeding to death after cutting the ulnar artery was unlikely, and that evidence of large-scale blood loss at the scene was absent.

Dr Andrew Falzon, a consultant forensic pathologist with the Forensic Science Service, said Kelly's heart disease and overdose of Coproxamol meant a smaller loss of blood could kill him than that required to kill a healthy person: "You are going to succumb to a smaller volume of blood loss than if you were a 20-year-old with a healthy heart.

"The heart vessel is already deprived of oxygen because of the blockage of the vessels. With the loss of blood [caused by cutting the ulnar artery], there is less oxygen to the heart. Throw in the toxic level of drug, that makes the heart more sensitive to cardiac arrhythmia [an electrical disturbance] which causes sudden death.

"I'm sure bleeding from the ulnar artery can kill you."

Falzon also said the views of those not trained in forensic pathology, even if they are medically trained, needed to be treated with caution: "People who are not trained to look at causes of death will perceive things differently. It's hard for them to believe certain things can happen."

Professor Peter Vanezis, senior consultant in forensic medicine to the armed forces, said: "These people are more clinicians and are obviously surprised that a person can kill themselves like that." Vanezis said the lack of large amounts of blood in the wood where Kelly was discovered could also be easily explained: "It was outside it could have gone into the soil."

Dr Andrew Davison, a forensic pathologist at Cardiff University, agreed: "You only have so much blood going around. If you have a heart condition you can't afford to lose as much blood as a healthy person."

Professor Derrick Pounder, head of forensic medicine and forensic pathologist at the University of Dundee, said: "It may be that there are several factors in a death. In this case, we know he had taken more than a therapeutic dose of drugs, and that he had some pre-existing heart disease. We have three factors in the death that are known to the public. The cause of death is likely an interplay between the three."

Professor Chris Milroy, now working in Canada, was a pathology professor at Sheffield University. He said: "I've seen nothing yet that proves anything other than Dr Kelly took his own life in the way the Hutton inquiry concluded, by cutting his wrists and taking an overdose."

Kelly's heart condition made him unable to withstand loss of blood to the extent that a fit person could. The death was "multifactoral": due to the cut to his wrist, a toxic dose of drugs and heart disease. The Dextropropoxyphene he took was itself toxic to the heart.

Milroy added: "It is difficult to estimate blood loss from looking at the scene."

Paramedics have claimed there was a lack of blood at the scene where Kelly's body was discovered. Professor Guy Rutty, of Leicester University, said: "The blood could have gone straight into the ground."

Both said paramedics were trained in saving lives, not in the forensic examination of scenes of death, which required a wholly different set of skills and expertise.

The forensic pathologist who examined Kelly's body, Dr Nicholas Hunt, gave the formal cause of death as: "Haemorrhage due to incised wounds of the left wrist", in conjunction with "Coproxamol ingestion and coronary artery atherosclerosis".

No expert in the field of forensic pathology has to date come forward to doubt that claim. Not one.

David Guyatt
11-15-2010, 08:53 AM
In a long rambling letter he attempted to justify his failure to comply with our lawyers' request by quoting exemptions to disclosure allowed under the Freedom of Information Act. But, we did not seek disclosure under the terms of that Act and that had been made very clear by our lawyers in January of this year.

It is such an old political trick to respond to a question that has not been asked in order to shift the emphasis of the arguments to the pols favour.

It is quite clear and obvious that an inquest should've been held. On the other hand the state is more than able to hold an inquest and then hold the same inquest again - changing Coroner's until they suit requirements - until the right verdict is arrived at. The Princess Diana inquest being the case in point.

Magda Hassan
01-27-2011, 01:36 PM
David Kelly death riddle grows as it emerges personal items found on his body did not have fingerprints on them



By Miles Goslett (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authornamef=Miles+Goslett)
Last updated at 1:31 AM on 27th January 2011
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/01/26/article-0-004211EC1000044C-270_233x309.jpg Mystery: Inquiries into the death of Dr David Kelly are incomplete, police have said

Further questions have been raised over the death of Dr David Kelly after police admitted that two personal items found with his body – his mobile phone and a watch – did not have any fingerprints on them.

The news brings the number of objects without fingerprints at the site where the weapons inspector’s body was discovered to five – the other three being the knife he allegedly used to slash his wrist, the packs of pills he is said to have overdosed on, and a water bottle.

It had been suggested that the lack of fingerprints on the knife might be due to the presence of gaffer tape on it. But Thames Valley Police have now confirmed that the knife had no tape on its handle.

Dr Kelly is said to have killed himself in 2003 after being named as the prime source of a BBC report accusing Tony Blair’s government of lying to take Britain into war in Iraq. No coroner’s inquest has been held. Instead, a public inquiry found he killed himself in woods near his Oxfordshire home.

In another disclosure, following questions submitted under the Freedom of Information Act, police admitted they still do not know who owned the watch found beside his body. Police did not bother to check with Dr Kelly’s relatives if it belonged to him.

More...



David Kelly's mobile phone logs ignored by detectives (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1344777/David-Kellys-mobile-phone-logs-ignored-detectives.html)


Fingerprint expert Peter Swann last night called for the five items to be independently re-examined. Police have also refused to say if their investigation into Dr Kelly’s death is open or closed, admitting only that their inquiries are ‘substantially complete’.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1350898/David-Kelly-death-Personal-items-fingerprints.html

David Guyatt
01-27-2011, 02:50 PM
The news brings the number of objects without fingerprints at the site where the weapons inspector’s body was discovered to five – the other three being the knife he allegedly used to slash his wrist, the packs of pills he is said to have overdosed on, and a water bottle.



Knacker of the Yard strikes again.

Perhaps the funny handshake section of "Operation Mason" dropped their handerchiefs on him by accident and then accidentally wipe everything in his pockets clean as they were picking them up?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_T3lg6p_ATmc/Seu0_OLbimI/AAAAAAAAETY/7il-p8eXeuo/s200/masonic+handshake.jpg

Wasn't Tony Bliar away at the time Kelly was suicided?

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSPEHATHHJYuWD1orJ2CoFwQiBiDAuX4 rlI3EJ-6rPLLPsLOIdnww

But not his Brother Bill:

http://thumbs2.ebaystatic.com/m/mflOxiJAqPaQzo7-jk8RlbA/140.jpg

Jan Klimkowski
01-27-2011, 05:21 PM
Further questions have been raised over the death of Dr David Kelly after police admitted that two personal items found with his body – his mobile phone and a watch – did not have any fingerprints on them.

The news brings the number of objects without fingerprints at the site where the weapons inspector’s body was discovered to five – the other three being the knife he allegedly used to slash his wrist, the packs of pills he is said to have overdosed on, and a water bottle.

This suggests the presumed hit team was too clever by half.

These are not random, little used, items. These are - mostly - highly personal items, which should have lots of Kelly fingerprints.

The commonsense interpretation of no fingerprints at all, is that the items were professionally wiped down to obliterate the presence of all fingerprints - friend and foe alike.

Malcolm Pryce
01-27-2011, 05:31 PM
There can't be many mobile phones out there without the owner's fingerprints on them.

David Guyatt
01-27-2011, 06:21 PM
I've cleaned mine just in case the police come knocking...:shutup:

Peter Lemkin
01-27-2011, 07:30 PM
Further questions have been raised over the death of Dr David Kelly after police admitted that two personal items found with his body – his mobile phone and a watch – did not have any fingerprints on them.

The news brings the number of objects without fingerprints at the site where the weapons inspector’s body was discovered to five – the other three being the knife he allegedly used to slash his wrist, the packs of pills he is said to have overdosed on, and a water bottle.

This suggests the presumed hit team was too clever by half.

These are not random, little used, items. These are - mostly - highly personal items, which should have lots of Kelly fingerprints.

The commonsense interpretation of no fingerprints at all, is that the items were professionally wiped down to obliterate the presence of all fingerprints - friend and foe alike.

But why is there no outcry in the UK over all this...?! But then there is no outcry over Dallas, 911, 7/7 and so many other things...not to mention that which touches most people's lives - that being the day to day theft of all their money and none of it being returned in services.......very depressing.

Don't forget Kelly's phone may well have recorded calls on it, and it has GPS, which would show where he was his last hours and where he was when he died, perhaps.

David Guyatt
01-27-2011, 08:31 PM
As I have said before, Britain is "secretland". It's civilization has been bred to serfdom for hundreds of years. Things are slowly changing, but many, far too many, still look up to officialdom --- the police, doctors, bureaucrats.

And, I suppose it those changes I speak of, that are taking place, that is the cause of the shift back to serfhood that I believe are taking place.

Ed Jewett
05-15-2011, 02:22 AM
I am way off turf in terms of examining this case, or knowing the media in the UK, so I cannot judge it from any angle, and I post the following here with surprise that no one has yet posted it, and with the understanding that administrartors may position it where it belongs (including in the trash if appropriate).


Mystery of the helicopter that landed at scene of Dr Kelly's death after his body was found

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1386967/Mystery-helicopter-landed-scene-Dr-Kellys-death-body-found.html#ixzz1MNr6bUy7

Peter Lemkin
05-15-2011, 05:41 AM
It is interesting and new to me...though this is not an assassination I've studied more than casually...enough to see it as an assassination, likely connected to many others who worked with anthrax. There already are some threads on the Kelly 'hit' here.

Ed Jewett
05-15-2011, 11:56 AM
It is interesting and new to me...though this is not an assassination I've studied more than casually...enough to see it as an assassination, likely connected to many others who worked with anthrax. There already are some threads on the Kelly 'hit' here.

Yes, and I reviewed two of those threads (are there more?) but saw no recent updates.

Magda Hassan
05-15-2011, 12:20 PM
I'm sure I have posted on the forum about the helicopter at Kelly's death before. The new thing about the article is the FOI about the flight log which has been heavily redacted. Why if it was routine of innocent? It also gives an update on the group of doctors seeking an autopsy. I would have posted this if I had seen it so thank you Ed for finding it and posting :tea:

Jan Klimkowski
05-15-2011, 07:21 PM
See particularly the beginning of this thread containing the Mai Pederson material.

Pederson is most likely US Military Intelligence, and the hypothesis involving her suggests that Kelly was not a "simple whistleblower". Rather he was being played - by US Military Intelligence and possibly by certain influential members of the Baha'i faith which he had adopted in 1999.

And now the chopper. It is intriguing that the helicopter was allegedly "hired by Thames Valley Police".


A helicopter mysteriously landed at the scene of Dr David Kelly’s death shortly after the body was found.

The aircraft only remained on the ground for five minutes before leaving, suggesting it either deposited or collected somebody or something.

Details from its flight log, released under the Freedom of Information Act, show that the helicopter – hired by Thames Valley police – landed at Harrowdown Hill in Oxfordshire at 10.55am on July 18, 2003, 90 minutes after the body was discovered by volunteer search teams.

Significantly, the flight log has been heavily redacted, making it impossible to know who was on board or what its exact purpose was.

The flight was not mentioned in oral evidence at the Hutton Inquiry, set up by Tony Blair to investigate Dr Kelly’s death.

Dr Andrew Watt, who has previously raised questions about the suicide finding reached by Lord Hutton, has written to Attorney General Dominic Grieve drawing his attention to the flight.

Dr Watt, a clinical pharmacologist, said: ‘If the purpose of the helicopter flight was innocent, one has to ask why it was kept secret?"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1386967/Mystery-helicopter-landed-scene-Dr-Kellys-death-body-found.html#ixzz1MRyUJ0ok

David Guyatt and I are especially interested in Operation Mason, the largely suppressed Thames Valley Police critical incident operation, which started before Dr Kelly was reported missing.

Here's a little info about Operation Mason and a speculative analysis at the blog linked below:


The Death of Dr. David Kelly - The enigmatic "Operation Mason"
One of the more opaque mysteries surrounding the death of David Kelly is the enigmatic "Operation Mason".

A post by Brian Spencer on his blog, A comment or two on Dr Hunt's Report, triggered a line of thought in my mind, about something seemingly unconnected - the mysterious Operation Mason (see my comment here on Brian's blog).

We know very little about Operation Mason, since Lord Hutton chose to withhold the information about it.

There are only two references to Operation Mason on the Hutton Inquiry web site, that I can find.

The first is the more informative and is on the Evidence submitted to the Inquiry by Thames Valley Police page. The Operation Mason material is a long way down the page.

The following information appears about Operation Mason on that page on the Hutton Inquiry web site:



TVP Tactical Support Major Incident Policy Book: Operation 'Mason' Between 1430 17.07.03 and 0930 18.07.03, DCI Alan Young - not for release - Police operational information
TVP/10/0099 - 0105

Not much to go on, perhaps.

What does that limited information tell us?

1. Operation Mason has something to do with "tactical support".

2. Operation Mason is, at least in some sense, related to a "major incident".

3. Operation Mason began at 14.30 on 17th July 2003 (about half an hour before Dr. Kelly left his home for the last time).

4. Operation Mason ended at 09.30 on 18th July 2003 (a few minutes after a body resembling that of David Kelly was found at Harrowdown Hill)!

5. DCI Alan Young was, in all likelihood, in charge of Operation Mason.

6. Operation Mason was a police operation, in all likelihood a Thames Valley Police operation.

7. In some sense there was a Thames Valley Police "policy" relating to whatever it was that Operation Mason concerned itself with.

If we spend a moment trying to put those seven points into some sort of coherent whole, some very interesting thoughts arise.

1. A Thames Valley Police major incident started at a time when Dr. David Kelly was still at home (i.e. 14.30 on 17th July 2003).

2. As far as the publicly available storyline from the Hutton Inquiry is concerned there was no incident at all at 14.30 on 17th July 2003.

3. Yet, at a time when there was no incident of any kind (at least reported by the public), that is when Thames Valley Police start a "major incident" following a "policy book".

4. Perhaps most intriguingly of all Operation Mason ended at 09.30 on 18th July.

5. What could be the reason for ending Operation Mason at 09.30? It was only a few minutes since the body had been found at Harrowdown Hill. It wasn't conclusively known if the body was Dr. David Kelly. It wasn't known if the person was alive or dead (other than on the basis of the observation of a lay volunteer searcher, Louise Holmes). Yet, Thames Valley Police (presumably specifically DCI Alan Young) terminated Operation Mason.

You may have alternative hypotheses about what all that means but here's my take on Operation Mason.

Not surprisingly, it raises some very disturbing possibilities about the conduct of Thames Valley Police on 17th and 18th July 2003.

Some of what follows is pretty inescapable from the few facts we know. Some is more conjectural.

1. The initiating person who caused Operation Mason to be started at 14.30 on 17th July 2003 wasn't a member of the public.

2. The circumstances that provided the context for Operation Mason were defined in the Policy Book.

3. The initiating person or organisation had authority to initiate a "major incident".

4. No incident of a conventional kind merited Police action at 14.30 on 17th July 2003.

5. I conclude that Operation Mason was initiated by an agent or agency of the UK Government at 14.30 or thereby on 17th July 2003. I can see no logical explanation for the initiating agent or agency not having the preceding characteristics.

6. The most likely nature of Operation Mason was concern by a security service that Dr. Kelly might release "sensitive information".

7. The possibility exists that Dr. David Kelly was under surveillance by Thames Valley Police from 14.30 on 17th July 2003.

8. Dr. Kelly was reported missing at around 23.40 on 17th July 2003.

9. A body, later identified as Dr. Kelly was found by Louise Holmes at roughly 09.20 on 18th July 2003. (The time of finding the body is something I have questions about but won't pursue here.)

10. Some 10 minutes after a body is found, Operation Mason closes. The body has not been positively identified. Nor has it been confirmed by anyone with appropriate training that the body is a dead body.

11. At around 10.07 the paramedics confirm death of the body, using ECG evidence.

The unwholesome possibility is that someone of significant seniority in or close to the British security service ordered a Thames Valley Police operation, a "major incident" as defined in the Policy Book, at 14.30 on 17th July 2003 and was content that the perceived problem had been solved when David Kelly's body was found at 09.20 or thereby on 18th July 2003.

In all likelihood, Dr. Kelly was under observation by Thames Valley Police from that time point of 14.30 on 17th July 2003, or soon thereafter.

The "fortuitous" meeting of DC Coe and Ms Absalom on the morning of 18th July becomes obvious, if it's true that David Kelly was under observation when he spoke to Ms Absalom, sometime after 15.00 on 17th July 2003.

How is the termination of Operation Mason to be explained? The body that Louise Holmes found wasn't known to be dead and it wasn't known to be David Kelly.

At least those crucial facts weren't publicly known.

The only credible explanation in my view is that Thames Valley Police already knew the identity and location of the body and already knew that the body was a dead body.

It seems to me that three possibilities exist in the light of this consideration of Operation Mason.

1. Thames Valley Police allowed David Kelly to kill himself. Despite knowing his identity and location they allowed him to bleed to death.

2. Thames Valley Police allowed person or persons unknown to murder David Kelly.

3. A member of Thames Valley Police murdered David Kelly.

Of course, none of those possibilities sheds a positive light on Thames Valley Police, to put it at its mildest.

I can put no less unwholesome construction on the available facts. Can you?

See also the comments at the link here (http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.com/2010/11/death-of-dr-david-kelly-enigmatic.html).

Magda Hassan
08-29-2011, 11:02 PM
An older article but I don't think it has been posted here and it is very interesting conjecture. So, just for the record.

The importance of identifying Andrew Gilligan's "original" source (for his infamous BBC Radio 4 Today programme story on the sexing up of the September 2002 dossier, which was later used to justify the UK's, and thereby the US's, illegal invasion of Iraq) is not immediately obvious, but we think, after painstaking research, cannot be over-emphasised.

Suffice to say that the BBC eventually did what the UK Government had wanted them to do all along i.e. name Kelly as their source (the Government seemed determined to make Kelly the source from the moment that Kelly came forward and admitted to the Ministry of Defence that he had talked to Gilligan).

It seems highly likely to us that Kelly was indeed the fall guy, that he was indeed set up, as was suggested to him at the Foreign Affairs Committee when he gave his evidence on 15 July 2003.

On Sunday 20 July 2003, only two days after Kelly's body had been found, the BBC surprised many people by breaking confidentiality (which one could reasonably argue was even more important to observe after death) and volunteering that Kelly was their "principal" source (when Kelly could no longer answer back). Most people took this to mean that Kelly was the ONLY source, when he clearly was not, indeed he was almost certainly not even the "principal" or "main" source. Crucially, the BBC did nothing to correct the almost universal misapprehension caused by their statement.

Thus the BBC (wittingly or unwittingly) assisted the Government in halting the search for the "real" source (or sources), and, in the context of Mr Toad's references (see below) to "civil war within the Cabinet of HMG (Her Majesty's Government)" and "USG's (United States's Government's) plans to help HMG make up its mind with regard to Iraq's WMD", and the connection betwen the two, it is surely not difficult to appreciate the importance of halting that search (for the "real" source of Gilligan's story).

Considerable suspicions have surrounded many aspects of the death of Dr David Kelly in July 2003, including the alleged manner of the death, its subsequent investigation, and the coverage of the whole affair in the mainstream media. Claims of murder by Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker have continued to fuel speculation of foul play. Yet, in the light of these persisting suspicions, little attention has been paid to what could be the most important question of all: if David Kelly was not the only source for Andrew Gilligan’s "sexed-up" story, as he was not, who was the original source?

On Sunday, 20 July 2003, two days after David Kelly was found dead in the woods, Richard Sambrook, Director of BBC News, named Kelly in a statement as the “principal source for both Andrew Gilligan's report and for Susan Watts's reports on Newsnight on 2 and 4 June".[1] Sambrook chose one word carefully, the word "principal". Subsequent reports described the BBC as admitting Kelly was the "main source".[2] "Principal" means first or foremost, or "main". "Principal", or "main", certainly does not mean the one and only source. Unfortunately, this is how the wider world came to understand the Sambrook/BBC statement.

Did Gilligan use Kelly to corroborate information from another source?

Sambrook’s evidence to the Hutton Inquiry clearly suggests the possibility of another source. Gilligan's infamous Radio 4 report is described in an internal report as resulting "from two separate but related information sources".[3] Sambrook goes on to describe the other source as more general, and as "a background of concerns".[4] The fact that he talks about other sources or "concerns" in the context of Gilligan’s story is important. It is surely not unreasonable to consider that out of the "background of concerns" a prime and headline-grabbing piece of information was given to Gilligan, before he had spoken to Kelly, perhaps from a disgruntled person connected with the compilation of the September 2002 dossier. At the Hutton Inquiry, Sambrook also spoke of "unattributable briefings from members of the security services" to a number of journalists at the BBC who were "expressing some unease at the way Intelligence had been presented in public".[5]

Did a prime piece of information come Gilligan’s way through these channels? Did Gilligan take this original source and corroborate it during his conversation with Kelly on 22 May 2003? Kelly came forward voluntarily and always claimed he did not recognise some elements of Gilligan’s story. Kelly was also sure he was not the "main source" of the story, and shortly before Kelly’s death, after Kelly had given his evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC), that committee publicly concluded that Dr Kelly was not the "main source".

Gilligan’s e-mail to Greg Simpson MP

One of the more mysterious and under-reported parts of the David Kelly affair concerns an e-mail sent by Andrew Gilligan to the Liberal Democrat MP, Greg Simpson. It was sent on 14 July 2003, on the eve of Kelly’s televised appearance before the Foreign Affairs Committee.[6]

The subject heading of the e-mail reads "David Kelly – pls onpass David Chidgey'". David Chidgey was also a Liberal Democrat MP, and, more importantly, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee charged with questioning Kelly. In one part of the e-mail, Gilligan refers to "my colleague Susan Watts" having spoken with Kelly, clearly indicating that the BBC were exchanging information internally. Towards the end of the e-mail, Gilligan poses the question: "Is Kelly our source?" and answers his own question with: "we are not ruling anyone in or out as the source", and: "I had many conversations with people inside and outside the Intelligence community about the issue of Iraqi WMD and the dossier. We suspect the MOD of playing games to try to eliminate names."

The existence of the e-mail came close to being exposed three days later, on 17 July 2003, during Gilligan’s oral evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee:

Mr Chidgey: That is good. Thank you. I wonder if you can help me clear up something in the way that Dr Kelly responded to some questions from me. You are, of course, aware that he has spoken to other BBC journalists, in particular Sue Watts, I think.

Mr Gilligan: Sorry?

Mr Chidgey: You are aware that he spoke to...

Mr Gilligan: I am not aware of anything about Dr Kelly's dealings with other journalists, how could I be?[7]
At this point, Chidgey could have told the world about the e-mail, and that Gilligan was indeed "aware" of "dealings with other journalists", thereby providing the committee with a new line of inquiry. Chidgey declined to pursue.


Gilligan later apologised to the Hutton Inquiry for sending the e-mail. More questions need to be asked about this e-mail (along with Gilligan’s oral evidence to the FAC), as it contains leads that suggest Gilligan had an original source BEFORE he approached Kelly.

“I have tried to persuade my source to go on the record, for obvious career reasons he is unable to ... “

At the FAC hearing on 17 July 2003 Gilligan makes some extraordinary and again under-reported remarks:

Gilligan I would respectfully submit to the Committee that anonymous source journalism does have its value and although I have tried to persuade my source to go on the record, for obvious career reasons he is unable to, and I must respect that confidence.

Sir John Stanley: The fact you have just said that is clearly absolute confirmation from you that your source is not Dr Kelly.

Gilligan: I simply cannot add anything at all to the evidence I gave about my source.[8]

Why was Committee member Sir John Stanley so sure that the BBC's source was not Dr Kelly? Because, two days earlier Kelly had gone on the record, in the fall glare of the television cameras and the wider world. So, who was the "anonymous source" who was "unable to go on the record"?

The other sources ...

In Gilligan’s e-mail to Simpson, he says the source is someone "closely involved in compiling the document until a late stage".[9] Previously, he had said that the source was "one of the senior officials in charge of drawing up the dossier".[10] The mainstream version of events says this is David Kelly. The evidence appears to show beyond doubt that Kelly was around at a late stage, and involved in some discussions about the dossier. However there were others around at a late stage, perhaps up to seven or eight. Perhaps one of them spoke with Gilligan?

According to the BBC Conspiracy Files Dr Kelly timeline (online), on 19 September 2002, five days before the September dossier was published, “Dr Kelly takes part in an hour-long DIS meeting reviewing the draft of the dossier, in the Old War Office. Dr Brian Jones chairs the meeting with another seven or eight people present. Four pages of detailed comments were made. Entitled: "Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction Dossier - Comments on Revised Draft (15 Sept 2002)".[11]

"Mr A", revealed in Norman Baker's book as Rod Godfrey, a chemical weapons expert, later told the Hutton Inquiry about 12 comments which were made by Dr Kelly. The DIS drafting suggestions were passed on to the JIO Intelligence staff. None of those suggestions mentioned the 45 minute claim.[12]

Gilligan said he spoke to sources "inside and outside the Intelligence community" and the source was "closely involved in compiling the document until a late stage".[13] Perhaps, one of those ‘seven or eight’, mentioned by Dr Brian Jones, provided Gilligan with some information? Perhaps one of them had a grudge against the Government, did not approve of the "sexing-up" of the dossier?

At 14.58 on 25 September 2002, Mr A sent an e-mail to David Kelly pointing to a mistake relating to the al-Qaeda plant: "Another example supporting our view that you and I should have been more involved in this than the spin merchants of this administration. No doubt you will have more to tell me as a result of your antics today. Let's hope it turns into tomorrow's chip wrappers ..."[14]

Mr Toad: "This from my friends on the river bank ..."

Andrew Gilligan may have received some prime information from a source inside or outside the Intelligence services, and Dr Kelly was used to corroborate it. Any research into the mysterious death of Dr David Kelly entails encountering many sources of information. One particularly plausible scenario was described by a "Mr Toad" in his one and only post on the Guardian Talk forum website. We reprint the post below and in full. We do not consider Mr Toad’s version to be definitive, but we do conclude that it provides leads worth exploring. It outlines a version of events which could be argued was unravelling before our eyes in July 2003, but was stopped by the death of Dr David Kelly.

Mr. Toad posts on the Guardian Talk forum on 30 December 2003:

"This from my friends on the river bank:

Hutton is a jigsaw puzzle. And like all the best puzzles there was a piece missing. Some people have found the missing piece, but they keep trying to put it in upside-down.

1998 - Mai Pederson attached to Kelly as UNSCOM translator.

1998 - UNSCOM out of Iraq

1998 - Tom Mangold presents Panorama documentary revealing extensive infiltration of UNSCOM by national security services.

1998+ Pederson / Kelly relationship remains close

2000-2003 MoD becomes suspicious of Kelly's relationship with Pederson. Begins moving Kelly towards the door marked 'exit', but does it quietly so as not to alarm Kelly or his friends overseas. No grading increase, retirement age reduced from 65 to 60, moved to PR role with no access to classified information.

May 2003 Gilligan interviews senior member of HMG, who makes the Campbell 45 minute claim 'off the record'. Gilligan cannot run the story without a creditable source, so is pointed to Kelly as 'unattributable' MoD source. Gilligan goes to Kelly, tells him he knows the 45 minute claim is fictitious and plays the 'name game', then goes home and writes up his piece overnight using info from source 1 effectively attributed to Kelly. Kelly is baffled by Gilligan's interview, but once Gilligan's piece goes out he realises he has been set up. He writes to MoD to admit the unauthorised interview but denies he is the original source of Gilligan's information. Kelly is called to meeting with line managers and told that orders from on high dictate that he will be the 'fall guy' or will lose his pension and find his relationship with Pederson plastered across the front page of the Telegraph and tv news. What Kelly did not realise was that this was a bluff. MoD were well aware of Pederson's actual role and would never have allowed the name to come out in this way at the time. Kelly does as he's told and goes before the parliamentary committee and ISC. This should be the end of it, except that Kelly broods on it and decides he will take steps to clear his name. Unfortunately, to do this he has to admit to the Pederson relationship. throughout the whole saga Kelly has been in close touch with Pederson, who has been reporting back to her masters. On July 17th Kelly tells Pederson he is going to leave his wife and going to the press to clear his name. Pederson reports immediately to her managers, the alarm bells go off in Washington as they believe she is about to be 'outed' and it's 'goodnight Vienna'.

Here's why:

The CIA did to Kelly what they did to everyone, lied to him about Iraq's WMD. The difference is that they thought Kelly's position as MoD bio-weapons expert would allow him to influence the policy of HMG. Here's how it was done: Pederson was a US airforce translator working from Arabic to English. After the removal of UNSCOM from Iraq in 1998, evidence of WMD capability came from satellites and smuggled documents. These would land first on the desk of Ms Pederson and her colleagues for translation, before passing to the scientists for analysis, who then advised USG. In the case of Pederson, however, the documents did not come from Iraq, but from the CIA. Pederson 'leaked' fake intelligence to Kelly over an extended period, which she claimed came from smuggled Iraqi documents indicating the existence of WMD.

By 2003, Kelly was completely convinced not only of the existence of WMD in Iraq, but also believed he knew what they were and where they were. However, when Kelly attempted to go to Iraq (post invasion) to locate them, he found his was mysteriously barred. On a first occasion his official visa proved worthless and he was turned back at Kuwait. On a second occasion he found himself confined to an airbase for the duration of his stay on security grounds.There may be some evidence that shortly before his death, Kelly became aware of the nature of Pederson's information.

In preparation for his next planned visit to Iraq Kelly appears to have shared informaton from Pederson with Gabriele Kraatz-Wadsack, a German army weapons inspector and biological weapons expert. It appears from her reply, however, that she was less than convinced as to the veracity of the information, as made clear by the 'concerns' she expressed. In short, Kelly's death was the result of two conspiracies colliding. The first being the civil war within the cabinet of HMG, which nearly resulted in the exposure of the second, USG's plans to help HMG make up its mind with regard to Iraq's WMD.Ultimately, it wasn't murder or suicide, but a series of unfortunate accidents. Trouble with this jigsaw puzzle is, once you put it together, you realise it's just a part of a much bigger puzzle."[15]

NOTES

[1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3081529.stm
[2] http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/20/newsid_3798000/3798761.stm
and http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2003/s906298.htm
[3] 112, 13 at http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/content/transcripts/hearing-trans07.htm
[4] 113, 9 at http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/content/transcripts/hearing-trans07.htm
[5] 112, 25 at http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/content/transcripts/hearing-trans07.htm
[6] Andrew Gilligan e-mail to the Liberal Democrat MP, Greg Simpson http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Politics/documents/2003/08/20/gilligan_chidgey.pdf
and http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Politics/documents/2003/08/22/GUfac_6_0003.pdf
[7] Q228, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmselect/cmfaff/uc1025-ii/uc102502.htm
[8] Q342, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmselect/cmfaff/uc1025-ii/uc102502.htm
[9] See note 6
[10] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3090681.stm
full text of defence correspondent Andrew Gilligan's original report on BBC Radio 4's Today programme from 29 May, 2003.
[11] 19 September 2002 - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/6380231.stm
[12] See note 11
[13] See note 6
[14] 25 Septemeber 2002 - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/6380231.stm
[15] Mr Toad transcript taken from http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2004/01/david-kelly.html
Source (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8146)

Jan Klimkowski
08-30-2011, 07:50 PM
An older article but I don't think it has been posted here and it is very interesting conjecture. So, just for the record.


Hi Magda - the Mr Toad, Mai Pederson, multiple sources other than Kelly material, etc, has been discussed in the original DPF thread on David Kelly here (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?1802-13-doctors-demand-inquest-into-Dr-David-Kelly-s-death). I agree that it's significant.

Unfortunately, our search engine was fucked when we were hacked, so it took me ages to find this older thread.

If you' agree, I propose a merge of the two threads, as there's lots of excellent material in the original.

Magda Hassan
09-04-2011, 08:52 AM
Kelly 'never opened reprimand letter'

Dr David Kelly never opened an official letter reprimanding him for secretly briefing BBC journalist Andrew Gilligan.
The weapons expert left the letter from MoD personnel director Richard Hatfield - which stopped short of formal disciplinary action - unopened in a briefcase on his desk at home.
It was only found - and first read - by police searching Dr Kelly's office after his death, the inquiry set up to investigate his apparent suicide heard on Tuesday.
Detective Sergeant Geoffrey Webb of Thames Valley Police told the Hutton Inquiry that he travelled to Dr Kelly's house in Southmoor, Oxfordshire, on July 18 to inform the family that a body had been found.
He said he spent much of the day there and carried out a "very cursory search" of Dr Kelly's study.
Inside a closed briefcase which he opened he found a letter in a sealed envelope dated July 9 2003 and addressed to Dr Kelly from Mr Hatfield, headed: "Discussions with the Media."
Det Sgt Webb said he opened the letter and accepted he was the first person to see it.
The document, which had already been published on the Hutton Inquiry website, told Dr Kelly that he would not be formally disciplined for his unauthorised contact with journalists.
But Mr Hatfield wrote: "These are serious breaches of standard departmental procedure and you were unable to give me any satisfactory explanation for your behaviour.
"Your contact with Mr Gilligan was particularly ill-judged. Your discussion with him in May has also had awkward consequences for both yourself and the department which could easily have been avoided."
Mr Hatfield went on: "I have concluded that although your behaviour fell well short of the standard that I would expect from a civil servant of your standing and experience, it would not be appropriate to initiate formal disciplinary proceedings. You should, however, understand that any further breach of departmental guidelines in dealing with the media would almost certainly result in disciplinary action, with potentially serious consequences."


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-194640/Kelly-opened-reprimand-letter.html#ixzz1WyKEH2N5

Magda Hassan
09-05-2011, 02:03 PM
25
JUN
2011
Episode 192 – Requiem for the Suicided: Dr. David Kelly
Posted by Corbett

Podcast: Play in new window | Download
http://www.corbettreport.com/episode-192-requiem-for-the-suicided-dr-david-kelly/
Famed microbiologist and UN weapons inspector Dr. David Kelly became the centre of a dispute between the BBC and the UK government over claims that the government had “sexed up” its dossier on Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction in order to sell the Iraq war to the public. He was found dead on Harrowdown Hill on July 18, 2003. It was ruled a suicide. Today we look at the troubling discrepancies, inconsistencies and questions surrounding that official verdict, and broach the question of what secrets Dr. Kelly may have taken to the grave…

For listeners with limited bandwidth, you can download a small, low-quality version of this episode here (http://www.corbettreport.com/mp3/episode192-lq.mp3).


Documentation
Documentation – David Kelly BBC Profile
Time Reference: 02:28
Description: A brief summary of David Kelly’s life and work.
Link To: BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3076869.stm)


Documentation – David Kelly Commits Suicide
Time Reference: 07:15
Description: Sky News report on Kelly’s death that implants the main memes of the “official narrative” of the “suicide.”
Link To: YouTube.com (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVnPcO-ssDw)


Documentation – Hutton Inquiry Web Site
Time Reference: 17:00
Description: An archival page maintained by the MoJ containing the evidence and findings of the Hutton Inquiry into David Kelly’s death.
Link To: the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk (http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20090128221550/http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/)


Documentation – Conspiracy Files
Time Reference: 18:05
Description: Home page for the BBC Two “Conspiracy Files” program.
Link To: BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/default.stm)


Documentation – Conspiracy Files: David Kelly
Time Reference: 19:00
Description: Official page for this episode of the program, including a transcript.
Link To: BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/6213898.stm)


Documentation – Conspiracy Files: David Kelly (video)
Time Reference: 19:10
Description: Watch the program online.
Link To: Google Video (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1236026913411489909#)


Documentation – The Strange Death of David Kelly by Norman Baker
Time Reference: 37:22
Description: A review of Baker’s book on the Kelly case, that includes such tidbits as the fact that the police investigation into Kelly’s death — named “Operation Mason” — actually began 9 hours before he was reported missing.
Link To: Times Online (http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/non-fiction/article2828834.ece)


Documentation – Dr David Kelly: The damning new evidence that points to a cover-up by Tony Blair’s government
Time Reference: 39:08
Description: Police felt compelled to strip David Kelly’s wallpaper in the hours after he was reported missing and before his dead body was found.
Link To: Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1289692/Dr-David-Kelly-The-damning-new-evidence-points-cover-Tony-Blairs-government.html)


Documentation – Doctors say government scientist David Kelly was murdered
Time Reference: 39:54
Description: A report from PressTV in 2009.
Link To: YouTube.com (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6yXt3iEWes)


Documentation – Detective who found weapons expert David Kelly’s body raises questions over his death
Time Reference: 43:15
Description: The man who found Kelly did not see much blood at the scene.
Link To: Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1301210/Detective-Dr-David-Kellys-body-raises-questions-death.html)


Documentation – Paramedic at death scene reveals concerns over Hutton Inquiry
Time Reference: 43:38
Description: Paramedic at the scene of the death says the body had obviously been moved.
Link To: Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1311255/Dr-David-Kellys-body-obviously-moved-Paramedic-death-scene-reveals-concerns-Hutton-Inquiry.html)
Documentation – Drug expert claims David Kelly was murdered as he could not have taken overdose
Time Reference: 43:59
Description: “Dr Andrew Watt, an experienced clinical pharmacologist, says he has told Thames Valley Police it is not possible Dr Kelly could have swallowed more than a ‘safe’ dose of two coproxamol tablets because there was so little in his system after death.”
Link To: Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1329272/David-Kelly-murdered-taken-overdose-claims-drug-expert.html)
Documentation – Mystery of the helicopter that landed at scene of Dr Kelly’s death after his body was found
Time Reference: 44:39
Description: The flight logs of the helicopter’s journey have been heavily redacted.
Link To: Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1386967/Mystery-helicopter-landed-scene-Dr-Kellys-death-body-found.html)
Documentation – David Kelly post mortem to be kept secret for 70 years as doctors accuse Lord Hutton of concealing vital information
Time Reference: 47:10
Description: Hutton tries to seal up the Kelly post-mortem until all of us are long dead.
Link To: Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245599/David-Kelly-post-mortem-kept-secret-70-years-doctors-accuse-Lord-Hutton-concealing-vital-information.html)
Documentation – David Kelly postmortem reveals injuries were self-inflicted
Time Reference: 48:15
Description: The Guardian reports on the UK government’s decision to release the post-mortem that Hutton had tried to seal. You can read the document via this link, and discover that it contains no breakthrough information about the case.
Link To: Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/oct/22/david-kelly-postmortem-self-inflicted)
Documentation – Kelly’s friend reveals he had a disabled right hand and had difficulty taking pills
Time Reference: 49:29
Description: More reasons why David Kelly could not have killed himself in the manner we are led to believe.
Link To: Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1050919/David-Kellys-closest-female-confidante-COULDNT-killed-himself.html)
Documentation – No need for inquest on Dr Kelly says PM, leading to anger as Cameron appears to pre-judge review
Time Reference: 50:09
Description: Cameron pre-empts Grieve.
Link To: Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1388387/David-Cameron-Full-inquest-David-Kellys-death-unnecessary.html)
Documentation – Tony Blair on David Kelly murder
Time Reference: 51:00
Description: War criminal Blair being his usual slimy self.
Link To: YouTube.com (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXQfifR6kYM)
Documentation – Dr David Kelly inquest refused
Time Reference: 52:16
Description: Surprise, surprise.
Link To: YouTube.com (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbQf_oSYNZM)
Documentation – Anthrax War: The Kelly Cover-up
Time Reference: 57:43
Description: Excerpt from a documentary that posits some of the possible reasons why Kelly may have been murdered.
Link To: AnthraxWar.com (http://www.anthraxwar.com/1/?p=317)
Documentation – Anthrax War (video)
Time Reference: 59:53
Description: Your homework and mine: watch this documentary to see if it contains more pieces of the puzzle.
Link To: YouTube.com (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaD0g2T3o-M)

Peter Lemkin
12-30-2011, 05:53 PM
Dr David Kelly inquest ruling challenge fails
19/12/2011

BBC

A bid to bring a High Court challenge over the attorney general’s refusal to give his consent for a new inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly has failed.

Government scientist Dr Kelly was found dead in July 2003 aged 59 after he was exposed as the source of a BBC story about Iraq intelligence. . . .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16249783

Magda Hassan
12-31-2011, 01:44 AM
Dr David Kelly inquest ruling challenge fails
19/12/2011

BBC

A bid to bring a High Court challenge over the attorney general’s refusal to give his consent for a new inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly has failed.

Government scientist Dr Kelly was found dead in July 2003 aged 59 after he was exposed as the source of a BBC story about Iraq intelligence. . . .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16249783
Yes, a great shame but not unexpected.
I've passed Dr Cyril Wecht's contact details along to Dr Halpin and the other doctors who are working on getting a proper coronial inquest in to Dr Kelly's suspicious death.

Charles Drago
12-31-2011, 01:49 AM
Convene a People's Inquiry. Enlist the finest forensic pathologists in the world. Manipulate the media as never before.

Stop waiting for benediction from the unholy. REDEFINE holy. REDEFINE the paradigm.

The temple is toppled by chipping away not at its tower, but rather at its foundation.

Magda Hassan
12-31-2011, 03:06 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JBYAy1eyZI
David Halpin reacts after a judge refuses his case for a judicial review of the UK gov's decision to refuse to re-open the inquest into Dr David Kelly's death. Interviewed by Hassan Ghani.

Magda Hassan
12-31-2011, 03:10 AM
Convene a People's Inquiry. Enlist the finest forensic pathologists in the world. Manipulate the media as never before.

Stop waiting for benediction from the unholy. REDEFINE holy. REDEFINE the paradigm.

The temple is toppled by chipping away not at its tower, but rather at its foundation.
I've sent this along to Dr Halpin. perhaps a New Year's project? The court of public opinion can be very influential. It is good to do justice ourselves and to show that the organs of justice and law are not doing their job.

Why the coronial inquest is wanted is because it is legally binding. The Hutton Inquiry which the government gave instead of (and to avoid the consequences of) the standard official protocol of an inquest has no legal binding.

Peter Lemkin
12-31-2011, 07:12 AM
Great interview with Halpin. He is a true Patriot and believer in Law and Justice. Those at the top in the UK are [much as their current masters in the USA] really a lawless and tyrannical lot, sadly, for the world and the populations of both countries. If, as I suppose, there is no further legal routes to an inquiry [short of a Public uprising demanding one], then, yes, the next best thing would be a 'Bertrand Russell-type Inquest' with the best international forensic and other specialists - finally issuing a report that just [might] force the Government there to do their own - but even if they [likely] choose not to [because they know damn well their own agents (or allied sister agencies) murdered Kelly to silence him], the World will have a scientifically done analysis/forensic study of the cause of death - and perhaps some speculation on the why it was done! Besides being a gross injustice to Dr. Kelly, allowing such to go undisclosed [to most] allows for it to continue as a means of silencing others in the future. Rather sad that much of the English-speaking world after fighting fascism 60+ years ago, now is embracing it. Very sad. I personally believe Kelly knew not only about things related to Iraq, but things related to the impossibility of a non-governmental anthrax attack in the USA. He was one of the few top World experts on Anthrax and a few other weapons systems. Many of the top anthrax experts are now all dead. Our governments are run by thugs of the worst type.

Magda Hassan
02-04-2012, 04:58 AM
Rowena Thursby and MP Norman Baker on the death of weapons inspector David Kelly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=HdfuMW-tvuc#!

Albert Doyle
02-05-2012, 04:49 AM
Thanks Magda. I love these phony government psychiatrists who come in and make condemning observations about people who can't defend themselves. This thing has a real bad smell to it. I read reports that said the small vein that was cut was barely cut, so any blood loss was suspect.

If you put conspiracy-oriented psychologists on those people we would see that they don't fare very well either. This whole thing smacks identically of the framing of Lee Harvey Oswald and how it was assured with the same equal confidence seen here.


One thing that disturbs me is the obvious inserted classic clunky psy-op tactic of saying Dr Kelly killed himself over worry that he would be exposed for lying. Well, that's a real ballsy reversal isn't it? Seeing how Kelly was the one witnessing major government members as having committed serious lies. This one thing alone practically screams deliberately-inserted textbook intel psy-op defamation tool. This was probably inserted into the BBC program by MI-6 members working at the news service. It is the perfect, exact example of a predatorily Warren Commission-like obscene travesty that is the sign of such pernicious ruses. This alone tells you the purpose of the program.

Though the program tries to suggest the opposite, after watching it I'm now certain Dr Kelly was killed by Nazi western intel services.

Magda Hassan
02-05-2012, 05:41 AM
Yes Al, the whole thing reeks. The people about to be exposed for lying were very worried and not just Dr Kelly. I thought the same about the shrink. I doubt that Dr Kelly was such a shrinking violet myself given his role as weapons inspector and facing down dictators over many years. Sure, he was going through a difficult time but there are no indication if suicidal intent. He was planning ahead. Making travel arrangements and was attending his daughters wedding. If worst came to worst and he was sacked he could still teach science at a high school. It's not like there was no future outside the DoD. I can only imagine a man of Dr Kelly's understanding of anatomy would have come up with a more reliable manner of suicide as well. The supposedly chosen manner of death was extremely unlikely to be effective on its own what was concluded in the Hutton Report. The cut wrist could be to conceal other things such as puncture marks from a syringe. And the man from the Minstry of Defense saying that there was no motive......give me a break. The marriage between Mr and Mrs Kelly was less than wonderful and I really don't rely Mrs Kelly to be forcoming with much. She too can be leant on to stick to some official line. I expect she has had to sign some sort of Official Secrets oath at some stage too. He was surrounded by spooks. Judith Miller of NYT infamy as well as Mae the Bahai with who he may have been intimate and whom Mrs Kelly seems not to have liked. The moving of the body. The men seen in the area just before. Operation Mason. The sealing of the documents for 70 years. The denial of a coroners inquest. None of these have been answered at all adequately and point to things other than suicide.

Albert Doyle
02-05-2012, 04:44 PM
Yeah, I was thinking good thing he had a wife like that to back him!

Magda Hassan
04-24-2012, 01:06 AM
Suspicious Death of Dr David Kelly: Doctors Seek New Death Inquest


by Dr. Stephen Frost




Global Research (http://www.globalresearch.ca/), April 23, 2012





DOCTORS SEEK DAVID KELLY DEATH INQUEST - NEW APPLICATION TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL



I am one of the doctors who have been fighting for an inquest into the suspicious death of Dr David Kelly in July 2003, pointing out that due process of the law has been subverted by four successive UK governments, including the present, by their not allowing, using a variety of highly dubious tactics, the legally required inquest to take place.



Because of the increasingly obvious anxiety, even desperation, of successive governments to block a formal inquest and the disingenuous reasons given for not holding an inquest, many fear that there has been a cover-up of epic proportions and many others have wondered what it is that is so important to hide that precludes an inquest taking place.


There are some who suspect that Dr Kelly was murdered and of course without an inquest that possibility has not been excluded. If he was murdered by the state, or with the knowledge of the state, and the murder has been covered up, that would constitute criminalization of the state and would fatally undermine trust, and the notion of democracy, and the delicate relationship of those who govern and those who allow themselves to be governed.


In normal circumstances, in England and Wales, a coroner holds an inquest into a suspicious death. There appears to be no intention to hold an inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly. This is a unique and unacceptable state of affairs. At medical school we were taught that without coroners and inquests nobody is safe. The Coroner speaks for the dead to protect the living.


In the context of all the above (and much more), Dr Andrew Watt and Brian Spencer lodged on Wednesday 18 April 2012 another application, to Dominic Grieve QC Attorney General, for an inquest into Dr Kelly's death. According to an April 20 Press Association wire:


"A group of doctors campaigning for a fresh inquiry into the death of government scientist David Kelly have submitted a new application calling for Attorney General Dominic Grieve to ask the High Court to order an inquest, it emerged today.



Mr Grieve rejected calls for an inquest last June following a lengthy review of the case of Dr Kelly, whose body was found near his Oxfordshire home in 2003, shortly after he was identified as the source of a BBC report about the Government's dossier on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.



The Attorney found there was no possibility that an inquest would reach a different conclusion from the Hutton Inquiry, which found in 2004 that Kelly committed suicide.



But the new application submitted by Dr Andrew Watt and Brian Spencer argues that Mr Grieve relied on a "misleading and inadequate assessment" of evidence that Dr Kelly's body may have been moved in the hour after its initial discovery by volunteer searchers.



The first people to see the body described the weapons expert's head and shoulders as being propped against a tree, but when photographs were taken about an hour later there was a clear gap between the body and the tree, and no adequate explanation has ever been given for the discrepancy, said the application, submitted on Wednesday.



"On the single ground of the evidence that the body was moved then it is evident 'in the interests of justice' that an inquest is needed," said the application. "There are, however, many other grounds for doubt about the safety of Lord Hutton's conclusion."




A spokeswoman for the Attorney General's office confirmed that the application had been received and a response was expected within the next few days."
Below that, please see the covering letter sent by Dr Watt with the hard copy of the formal legal document (Section 13 application) to the Attorney General.



And below that, please see the full text of the new Section 13 application, published for the first time on Global Research. The reader will I am sure be rewarded by a careful reading of this meticulously researched document.


(Dr) Stephen Frost BSc MB ChB Specialist in Diagnostic Radiology (Stockholm, Sweden) . .







LETTER TO ATTORNEY GENERAL


20th April 2012

Dominic Grieve QC MP
Attorney General’s Office
20 Victoria Street
London
SW1H 0NF

Dear Mr Grieve,

Enclosed with this letter is hard copy of the 18 page Application dated 18th April 2012 to the UK Attorney General in terms of Section 13 of the Coroners Act 1988, seeking that the Attorney General apply to the High Court to seek an Order that an inquest be held into the death of Dr. David Kelly.

Briefly, the document shows that the body of Dr. David Kelly was in one position at 09.15 on 18th July 2003. An hour or so later it was in a different position. The evidence indicates that the body was moved by person or persons unknown.

It seems to me that any rational consideration of this important matter, in all the circumstances, must lead an honest Attorney General to acknowledge that an inquest might return a different verdict.

Such an assessment would lead to an application to the High Court seeking an Order that an inquest be held into the suspicious death of Dr. Kelly.

You are aware that I have been severely critical of your handling of the Section 13 application initially lodged by Dr. Stephen Frost and colleagues.

I view your consideration of Dr. Frost’s Section 13 application as having been deficient and dishonest.

Those causes for concern were obvious to me during your statement to the House of Commons on 9th June 2011.

On 12th June 2011 I invited you to resign as Attorney General.

I again suggest that you consider your position.

Given the serious implications for your political and legal career it occurs to me that you may wish to “tough it out”.

In that eventuality, it is my considered opinion that, given what I believe to be the biased and dishonest assessment you carried out in response to Dr. Frost’s Application, it is highly questionable whether you can fairly conduct an independent review of this present Application in the manner which an honest Attorney General has a duty to do in the public interest.

You may also wish carefully to consider the implications for your credibility as Attorney General of your concealing the serious questions put to you by me on 13th May 2011 about the veracity of ACC Page at the Hutton Inquiry. Serious questions which you concealed from the House of Commons on 9th June 2011.

Mr. Brian Spencer, co-applicant, is writing to you separately to give you signed confirmation that the Application is in our joint names.

In the first instance, I would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this letter and its attachment.

I look forward with interest to learning how you propose to proceed.

Yours sincerely





(Dr) Andrew Watt












Application




to



The Attorney General



in terms of Section 13 of the Coroners Act 1988



with respect to an inquest into the suspicious death of


Dr. David Christopher Kelly CMG



by



Dr. Andrew Watt

BMedBiol MBChB MD(Hons) FRCP(Ed) DipPharmMed BA



and



Mr. Brian Spencer



18th April 2012






We formally seek that the Attorney General apply to the High Court for an Order that an inquest be held into the suspicious death of Dr. David Kelly in Oxfordshire in July 2003, by virtue of Section 13 of the Coroners Act 1988.

This Section 13 Application examines in detail only one of the multiple causes for concern regarding the suspicious death of Dr. Kelly – the evidence that a person or persons unknown moved Dr. Kelly’s body on 18th July 2003.

Executive Summary



At 09.15 on 18th July 2003 the body of Dr. Kelly was found with head and shoulders against a tree.
Around an hour later the head was at some distance from the tree, sufficient for an ambulanceman to stand between the tree and the head.
Given the evidence indicating that Dr. Kelly had been dead for some hours one can reasonably exclude the possibility that he moved himself.
We conclude that one or more third parties were present at the scene at Harrowdown Hill and moved the body.
We conclude that the likely purpose of moving the body was to create a false impression of suicide in order to conceal the murder of Dr. Kelly.
We conclude that the “suicide” conclusion of the Hutton Inquiry is unsafe and untrue.
In the interests of justice an inquest is required into the suspicious death of Dr. David Kelly.


Our approach to the evidence on the positions of the body

We consider evidence relating to the positions of the body and the implications of that evidence under these headings:



The position of the body at 09.15 on 18th July 2003
The evidence of Detective Constable Graham Coe
The position of the body after 10.10 on 18th July 2003
The misleading nature of the document “Annex TVP 3”
Paragraph 151 of the Hutton Report
Conclusions regarding movement of the body
Implications
Other issues of concern
Legal Issues
Action required of the Attorney General


In this document we use the terms “09.15 position” and “10.10 position” to refer to two positions of the body. We recognise that there is minor uncertainty about the exact time that the body was found (approximately 09.15) and the exact time that the paramedics first approached the body (approximately 10.10).

The uncertainties regarding time are of the order of a few minutes, at most. We therefore use the times 09.15 and 10.10 in this document to ease expression of the more important issue of whether the body of Dr. Kelly was moved.


1. The position of the body at 09.15 on 18th July 2003

The publicly available evidence is that around 09.15 on 18th July 2003 a body was found at Harrowdown Hill, Oxfordshire by two volunteer searchers, Louise Holmes and Paul Chapman.

According to the evidence given to the Hutton Inquiry the searchers were not accompanied by any other person.

Nor, we are informed, did Louise Holmes or Paul Chapman take any photographs at the scene.

Therefore the only evidence that exists as to the position of the body at 09.15 is the testimony of Louise Holmes and Paul Chapman.

We consider the evidence of Ms. Holmes and Mr. Chapman separately.

The evidence of Louise Holmes

Louise Holmes (or more specifically her dog, Brock) found the body at Harrowdown Hill at approximately 09.15 on 18th July 2003.

Ms. Holmes approached to a distance of some four feet from the body.

She stated in her Police Statement:

“I saw that this person was slumped against the base of the tree with his head and shoulders resting against the trunk.”

Similarly in her evidence to the Hutton Inquiry she stated,

“He was at the base of the tree with almost his head and his shoulders slumped back against the tree.”

Ms Holmes’ Police statement and oral testimony are consistent. The head and shoulders of the body were against the trunk of the tree.

Given that she viewed the body from a distance of about four feet the possibility of her confusing the position she described at 09.15 in both her written and oral evidence with the position that we later refer to as the “10.10 position” is, we suggest, essentially zero.

There has at no time been any suggestion put forward that Ms. Holmes’ evidence was dishonest.

Given the consistency of her evidence, the improbability of honest error and the absence of any suggestion of dishonesty, we conclude that at 09.15 on 18th July 2003 Louise Holmes saw the head and shoulders of the body against the tree from a distance of some four feet.

The evidence of Paul Chapman

The second person present at Harrowdown Hill at 09.15 on 18th July 2003 when the body was discovered was the volunteer searcher Paul Chapman.

Mr. Chapman was considerably further from the body than Ms. Holmes. Mr. Chapman, in his oral testimony to the Hutton Inquiry, when asked how close he got to the body, stated

“I probably reached about 15 to 20 metres from it.”

There are differences in wording in the evidence given by Mr. Chapman in his Police Statement and in his oral testimony to the Hutton Inquiry.

In his Police Statement Mr. Chapman stated,

“He was lying on his back with his feet towards me with blood covering his left arm. He was flat on the ground.”

In his Hutton Inquiry oral testimony Mr. Chapman stated that he saw,

“The body of a gentleman sitting up against a tree.”

and later in his oral testimony Mr. Chapman stated,

“He was sitting with his back up against a tree”.

The wording used by Mr. Chapman in his two pieces of evidence has been interpreted by some as meaning that he changed his evidence.

An alternative interpretation is that both forms of words Mr. Chapman used describe a single position of the body. In other words, Mr. Chapman saw a body lying flat on its back on the ground but with the head and shoulders against the tree.

We would point out that at no time in his evidence, as disclosed publicly, did Mr. Chapman ever say anything to the effect that the head was at some distance from the tree.

It, therefore, remains credible that Mr. Chapman’s evidence, when correctly understood, is wholly consistent with Ms. Holmes’ evidence viz that Dr. Kelly’s body was found at 09.15 on 18th July 2003 with the head and shoulders against the trunk of the tree.

Weight is added to that interpretation of Mr. Chapman’s words by the evidence of DC Graham Coe which we consider in more detail in the next section of this document. We note that in 2003 DC Coe similarly referred to the body “lying on his back” but also, in 2010, clarified that he saw the body “with his head and shoulders against a large tree”.

In the absence of any evidence to the contrary we conclude that the most likely interpretation of Mr. Chapman’s evidence is that he saw Dr. Kelly’s body flat on its back but with the head and shoulders against the tree.

We are not aware of any evidence that contradicts the evidence of Ms. Holmes and Mr. Chapman as to the position of the body at 09.15 on 18th July 2003.


2. The evidence of Detective Constable Graham Coe

In the preceding section we summarise the evidence of the position of the body at 09.15.

In this section we deal with the evidence about position of the body at approximately 09.40 on 18th July 2003 from the now retired Detective Constable Graham Coe.

In his written statement to Thames Valley Police DC Coe refers to the body of Dr. Kelly as,

“lying on his back”

and in his oral testimony to the Hutton Inquiry states,

“the body was laying on its back by a large tree, the head towards the trunk of the tree”.

Given that DC Coe doesn’t specify if the head and shoulders were against the trunk or if the head was at some distance from the trunk then it is unclear from his written statement and oral testimony to the Hutton Inquiry whether he saw the body in the 09.15 position or the position we will call the 10.10 position (and which is considered in detail in the next section of this document).

In an interview with the Mail on Sunday published on 8th August 2010 DC Coe is quoted as stating,

“I could see Dr Kelly’s body sideways on, with his head and shoulders against a large tree. He wasn’t dead flat along the ground.”

If one assumes that DC Coe is telling the truth in his 2010 statement there can be no doubt that he saw the body with the head and shoulders against the trunk of the tree.

He saw the body “sideways on”, removing any uncertainty about interpretation that might occur if the body had been viewed from the direction of the feet.

We would draw attention to how DC Coe in his written statement and Hutton testimony used terms such as “lying on his back” yet, according to his statement in 2010, he states that he saw the body with head and shoulders against the tree.

As is the case with the evidence of Paul Chapman, DC Coe has at no time in his publicly available statements indicated that the head was some distance from the tree.

If DC Coe was telling the truth in 2010 then the body position at 09.40 on 18th July 2003 was the same position as at 09.15 i.e. with the head and shoulders against the tree.

3. The position of the body after 10.10 on 18th July 2003

From 10.10 on 18th July 2003 the evidence is that the body is in a different position from the position in which it was found at 09.15.

The evidence after 10.10, from both photographic and witness evidence, is that the body was at some distance from the tree.

The first photographs taken of the scene where the body was found were taken by PC Sawyer at approximately 10.10 on 18th July 2003 (assuming that the times on his digital camera were correct). See Thames Valley Police Freedom of Information Response RFI2011000524 for the times of the photographs (online at http://www.thamesvalley.police.uk/aboutus/aboutus-depts/aboutus-depts-infman/aboutus-depts-foi/aboutus-depts-foi-disclosure-log/aboutus-depts-foi-disclosure-log-investigate/aboutus-depts-foi-disclosure-log-item.htm?id=191239 (http://www.thamesvalley.police.uk/aboutus/aboutus-depts/aboutus-depts-infman/aboutus-depts-foi/aboutus-depts-foi-disclosure-log/aboutus-depts-foi-disclosure-log-investigate/aboutus-depts-foi-disclosure-log-item.htm?id=191239) ).

At the time of taking those initial photographs PC Sawyer was accompanied by two ambulance staff, Vanessa Hunt and Dave Bartlett.

Mr. Bartlett was not asked in detail at the Hutton Inquiry about the position of the body when he was checking for signs of life. An important piece of new evidence emerged in a newspaper interview published in the Mail on Sunday on 12th September 2010.

Mr. Bartlett stated,

“He was lying flat out some distance from the tree. He definitely wasn’t leaning against it”

adding,

“When I was there the body was far enough away from the tree for someone to get behind it. I know that because I stood there when we were using the electrodes to check his heart. Later I learned that the dog team said they had found him propped up against the tree. He wasn’t when we got there. If the earlier witnesses are saying that, then the body has obviously been moved.”

The position of the body as being at some distance from the tree as described by Mr. Bartlett at around 10.10 is not disputed by any witness evidence to the contrary at later times on 18th July 2003. (We treat the statement of Lord Hutton at Paragraph 151 of the Hutton Report separately later in this document.)

After 10.10 on 18th July 2003 there was a significant distance between the head and the tree.

This is a different position to that observed at 09.15 and 09.40.

We conclude that the body was moved by person or persons unknown.


4. The misleading nature of the document Annex TVP 3

We briefly examine the content of the supposed “Annex TVP 3” published by the Attorney General in June 2011 (http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.uk/Publications/Documents/Annex%20TVP%203.pdf (http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.uk/Publications/Documents/Annex%20TVP%203.pdf) ) in light of its misleading and inadequate assessment of the evidence regarding the position of the body when found.

The document purports to be an Annex to a Thames Valley Police report. A recent Freedom of Information request has revealed it not to be a Thames Valley Police document but one drafted by Mr. Kevin McGinty of the Attorney General’s Office.

We here note simply that such misrepresentation of the provenance of the supposed “annex” labelled “TVP 3” is a cause for concern.

In the context of this Section 13 application, a crucially important inadequacy of the document is that it does not consider the time of the body positions documented by various individuals.

It is self-evident that a rational assessment of whether the body had been moved would compare the position of the body at an initial time point with the body position at a relevant later time point.

Worryingly, whether “Annex TVP 3” is a Thames Valley Police document or a document from the Attorney General’s Office it spectacularly fails to carry out such a basic analysis of the body position at different time points.

Mr. McGinty’s failure to consider such a basic issue demonstrates that his document is, at best, grossly inadequate to address the question at hand.

The structure of Mr. McGinty’s document subtly and unfairly undermines the evidence of the two volunteer searchers.

For example, in Comment i. on page 6 of Mr. McGinty’s document we read the following:

“The position of the body is consistently described by those who saw it in situ as “lying on his back”. The initial exception to this was Louise Holmes.”

This has the effect of unfairly devaluing Louise Holmes’ evidence that the “head and shoulders” were against the tree.

Mr McGinty’s document ignores, when it ought not to have done, these important factors:



Louise Holmes was one of only two people who found the body.
Louise Holmes approached to some four feet from the body. She saw it much more clearly than did Paul Chapman from a distance of 15 to 20 metres.
That Paul Chapman, the only other person who saw the body at 09.15, also gave evidence consistent with the head and shoulders being against the tree.
That nobody else saw the body at 09.15 (at least if the Hutton Inquiry narrative is true).
At 09.40 on 18th July 2003 DC Coe also saw the body “sideways on” with the head and shoulders against the tree.
Before 10.10 there is no evidence that the body was “some distance” from the tree.


Mr. McGinty’s document totally fails to examine the implications of the statement in 2010 by DC Coe that he saw the body “sideways on” with the head and shoulders being against the trunk of the tree.

This is wholly unacceptable and visibly inadequate for an analysis carried out in 2011.

DC Coe made his newspaper statement in 2010. Thames Valley Police seemingly failed to include that information in the report that underlies “Annex TVP 3”, despite reviewing the newspaper report in question in connection with “Annex TVP 1”. Given that Thames Valley Police were aware of the controversy about the position of the body it is remarkable that any competent Police officer could overlook the significance of DC Coe’s 2010 statement about the position of the body.

We conclude that Thames Valley Police chose to ignore that evidence since it raised serious doubt about the Thames Valley Police investigation in 2003 and, in addition, risked drawing attention to failures on the part of current Chief Officers of Thames Valley Police (specifically Chief Constable Sara Thornton, Deputy Chief Constable Francis Habgood and Assistant Chief Constable Helen Ball) in connection inter alia with the formal report to Thames Valley Police that Dr. Kelly may have been murdered (URN 514 of 28th October 2010 refers).

Thames Valley Police also failed to resolve the controversy by the simple expedient of showing photographs taken at 10.10 (or later) on 18th July 2003 to Ms. Holmes, Mr. Chapman and DC Coe and asking “In this photograph is the body in the position at which you saw it at 09.15 (or 09.40, as applicable) on 18th July 2003?”.

Was the failure in 2003 and 2011 to ask such a basic question because Thames Valley Police wished to conceal that the body had been moved?

We conclude that the gross inadequacies of Mr. McGinty’s “annex” labelled “TVP 3” render it wholly unreliable as a fair assessment of whether or not Dr. Kelly’s body was moved.


5. Paragraph 151 of the Hutton Report

Lord Hutton’s Paragraph 151 raises important questions not considered by the Attorney General in his statement on 9th June 2011. Not least is that it raises questions about the veracity of Lord Hutton and, as a consequence, calls into question the integrity of the Hutton Inquiry.

In 2004 Lord Hutton’s Paragraph 151 statement appeared to solve a problem for those who wished to conceal the possibility of David Kelly having been murdered, in that it concealed the fact that the body had been moved after 09.15 on 18th July 2003.

In 2012, when we know that photographs exist showing a “significant gap” between the head and the tree, Paragraph 151 of the Hutton Report raises immensely important questions about the integrity of the Hutton Inquiry.

The decision of the Attorney General with respect to the Second Section 13 Application (by Dr. Stephen Frost and colleagues) makes the assumption that the body of Dr. Kelly was in the same position throughout. And that position, as indicated on page 5 of Dr. Richard Shepherd’s report of 16th March 2011 is a position with a “significant gap” between Dr. Kelly’s head and the base of the tree. In other words the body was in what we earlier termed the 10.10 position.

However, there is one important discrepancy from the otherwise seemingly consistent situation with respect to body position after 10.10 on 18th July 2003.

In the Hutton Report, at Paragraph 151 Lord Hutton states the following:

“I have seen a photograph of Dr Kelly's body in the wood which shows that most of his body was lying on the ground but that his head was slumped against the base of the tree”.

In 2004 Lord Hutton’s statement in Paragraph 151 might have seemed to be believable.

In 2012, considered with current knowledge of the background evidence, the quoted Paragraph 151 statement raises important problems for those, such as Mr. Grieve, who contend that the body wasn’t moved and that there was no cover-up.

First, we’ll consider the possible interpretations if a Paragraph 151 photograph should exist.

If a Paragraph 151 photograph exists and was taken at 10.10 or later then it is evidence that the body was in two positions after 10.10 (since, according to page 5 of Dr. Shepherd’s report of 16th March 2011, some photographs show a “significant gap” between the head and the tree). In other words, the body was moved by person or persons unknown after 10.10 on 18th July 2003.

If a Paragraph 151 photograph exists and was taken before 10.10 then the existence of any such photograph has been concealed. If such a photograph exists and was available to Lord Hutton then it was available to Thames Valley Police and likely to the Attorney General. But both Thames Valley Police and the Attorney General have claimed that the body was not moved.

If such a photograph exists, whether before or after 10.10, showing the head against the tree and that photograph was concealed from the Public and Parliament then that is prima facie evidence, we suggest, of an intention to pervert the course of justice by Thames Valley Police, the Attorney General or both.

Second, we’ll consider the possible interpretations should a photograph such as that mentioned by Lord Hutton in Paragraph 151 not exist.

If a Paragraph 151 photograph did not exist, why might Lord Hutton have claimed to have seen such a photograph? The most credible interpretation we can identify for such a hypothetical action on the part of Lord Hutton is that he intended to conceal the fact that the body of Dr. Kelly was moved. In other words Lord Hutton’s quoted words in Paragraph 151 of his report were intended to conceal what we term the 09.15 body position, to conceal that the body had been moved and to pervert the course of justice.

Another interpretation if a Paragraph 151 photograph does not exist is that Lord Hutton couldn’t correctly interpret the photographic evidence. Dr. Shepherd saw one or more photographs with a “significant gap” between the head and the tree. Did Lord Hutton not see such photographs? Did he repeat the mistakes of Lord Widgery and just not bother looking at all the evidence available to him? If Lord Hutton’s assessment of the photographic evidence was so grotesquely inadequate that he failed to observe, in other photographs, a “significant gap” between the head and the tree then it raises questions about his competence to assess the totality of the photographic evidence.

In passing we mention that it is our considered opinion that, on the basis of the totality of publicly available evidence, the Paragraph 151 photograph does not exist and that Lord Hutton premeditatedly lied in his report.

6. Conclusions regarding movement of the body

Only two people saw the body when it was found around 09.15 on 18th July 2003 – Louise Holmes and Paul Chapman.

The weight of their evidence is that at 09.15 on 18th July 2003 the body of David Kelly was slumped against a tree with the head and shoulders against the trunk of the tree.

Neither Thames Valley Police nor the Attorney General’s Office has presented any evidence to the contrary with respect to the body position at the 09.15 time point.

The statement in 2010 of the former DC Coe further strengthens the interpretation that the body was found with head and shoulders against the tree, given that it remained in the same position at 09.40 as it had been at 09.15.

The evidence relating to the position of the body after 10.10 on 18th July 2003 is that the body was seen and photographed at some distance from the tree. The ambulanceman Dave Bartlett, for example, stated that he stood in the gap between the head and the tree.

The body was found around 09.15 in one position and seen and photographed after 10.10 in another position.

No evidence has been presented to indicate that the body was capable of moving itself. Given the perception that Dr. Kelly was dead for some hours before his body was found, it is not credible that he moved his own body. We know of no evidence to support such a “Lazarus hypothesis”.

There is no credible evidence to support any hypothetical suggestion that the body moved spontaneously to the 10.10 position, at some distance from the tree.

The only credible conclusion, in the light of the above evidence, is that one or more third parties moved Dr. Kelly’s body at some time between 09.15 and 10.10 on 18thJuly 2003.

If a third party (or third parties) moved the body then we believe that the motive for so doing was to create a credible scenario (at least for the credulous) that Dr. Kelly committed suicide when, in fact, he was murdered.



7. Implications

The evidence, summarized earlier in this document, that Dr. Kelly’s body was moved has profound implications for the “suicide” conclusion adopted by Lord Hutton.

Among the implications are the following:



If the body was in different positions at 09.15 and 10.10 then a third party (or parties) was present at Harrowdown Hill.
The Thames Valley Police investigation and the Hutton Inquiry failed to identify the presence of the person or persons in question.
Further, at a minimum, the suicide conclusion of the Hutton Inquiry is called seriously into question since, in significant measure, it relied on the supposed exclusion of the presence of a third party (or parties) at Harrowdown Hill.
Vomit trails from Dr. Kelly’s mouth indicate that Dr. Kelly died on his back. Who then sat him up against the tree after his death? What motive for so doing can there be other than to conceal a murder by faking a supposed “suicide”?


In our submission Lord Hutton’s conclusion of suicide visibly lacks credibility given the evidence that we have presented.

8. Other issues of concern

This document applies its primary focus to our concerns regarding the evidence that the body was moved. We would not, however, wish the Attorney General or any other reader of this document to come to the mistaken conclusion that that is the only issue of concern regarding the suspicious death of Dr. David Kelly.

The two lists which follow exemplify additional concerns, respectively, raised with the Attorney General in the context of the Second Section 13 Application (by Dr. Stephen Frost and others) and issues raised with the Attorney General subsequent to the Second Section 13 Application.

The first list contains what we believe to be demonstrable continuing concerns re the Attorney General’s consideration of the Second Section 13 Application. We ask the Attorney General now to fairly and thoroughly assess these unresolved issues as part of his consideration of this Third Application.




The Attorney General (written statement of 9th June 2011 page 14) recognised that in recent case law “the test was whether it was possible (though not necessarily probable) that a different verdict would be returned”. In his letters to Dr. Shepherd and Professor Flanagan the Attorney General failed to express that test and thereby deprived those supposed independent experts of a fair opportunity to express a view about whether other interpretations of the data are possible. Given that the Attorney General failed to ask that key question of independent experts how can his consideration of the Second Section 13 Application be viewed as being fair? The question as to whether it is possible that another interpretation of the data exists should now fairly be put to genuinely independent experts in the fields of forensic pathology, toxicology, psychiatry, forensic biology and forensic engineering.
The Oxfordshire Coroner correctly pointed out that Lord Hutton and a Coroner apply “different tests” with regard to a potential suicide verdict. See page 3 of the transcript of the hearing of 16th March 2004 conducted by Mr. Gardiner. If “different tests” are applied then, in the absence of a compelling argument to the contrary, it is inescapable that a different verdict might result. In other words, the Attorney General was wrong, on this ground alone, in concluding that it was not possible that an inquest could arrive at a verdict different from the conclusion of the Hutton Inquiry.
In addition, a Coroner has different verdicts available to him. The Hutton Report indicates that Lord Hutton considered the conclusions of natural causes, accident, murder or suicide. There is no indication that he considered a possibility equivalent to an “open verdict”. A Coroner not only would have such a verdict open to him but in the absence of evidence beyond reasonable doubt in favour of “suicide” or “unlawful killing” he would, in the circumstances of this case, be required to record an “open verdict”. The Attorney General’s conclusion expressed on 9th June 2011 is visibly in error. It is possible that a Coroner could reach a different conclusion, since he has a verdict available to him which Lord Hutton did not seriously consider.
In his consideration of the Second Section 13 Application (from Dr. Frost and others) Mr. Grieve unfairly applied a bias to his consideration of discrepancies in the evidence. It is, of course, correct to state that two honest witnesses may give different accounts of an event. But Mr. Grieve repeatedly failed fairly to assess discrepancies in the evidence since other explanations of discrepancies in evidence are also possible. For example, one witness may be truthful and the other dishonest. Or the two witnesses may be describing what they saw at two time points between which the scene changed – the important evidence that the body was moved is a case in point. Given such a systematically biased assessment of the discrepancies in evidence during the Attorney General’s consideration of the Second Section 13 Application we consider that the assessment of all discrepancies in the evidence must be repeated in a fair, rather than a biased, manner.
Serious concerns were expressed to the Attorney General regarding the reliability of the opinion of Professor Hawton. The matter was, for example, communicated to the Attorney General on 21st February 2011 (seehttp://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/02/death-of-david-kelly-need-for-expert.html (http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/02/death-of-david-kelly-need-for-expert.html) ). The Attorney General failed to seek expert review of the validity of such concerns. Without a fair assessment of the credibility of Professor Hawton’s evidence Mr. Grieve has no sound basis to exclude the possibility that an inquest would reach a different verdict.
The hypothesis put to the Attorney General by various correspondents in relation to the Second Section 13 Application is, in effect, that Dr. Kelly was murdered and that that murder was made to look like suicide. Mr. Grieve totally failed to ask how such a scenario can rationally be distinguished from a true suicide. Such a failure of analysis on the part of Mr. Grieve renders his conclusion of 9th June 2011 wholly unsafe. Mr. Grieve and appropriate independent experts must now, in our view, give this issue serious thought.
The evidence of Mr. David Broucher is that in February 2003 Dr. Kelly commented that he expected he might be “found dead in the woods”. This matter was drawn to the attention of the Attorney General on 27th January 2011. Seehttp://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/death-of-david-kelly-insufficiency-of.html (http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/death-of-david-kelly-insufficiency-of.html) . Dr. Kelly’s comment was made in February 2003. Dr. Kelly died in July 2003. There was ample time to plan a sophisticated faked “suicide”. Dr. Shepherd was aware of faked “suicides” (seehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/tx/perfectmurder/stories/ (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/tx/perfectmurder/stories/)). Dr. Shepherd, knowing that suicides can be faked and supposedly acting as an independent expert, failed even to ask this important question, raising serious doubts about the validity and integrity of his report of 16th March 2011 to the Attorney General.
There are unanswered technical questions about whether and how Dr. Kelly allegedly incised his own left wrist. A rigorous assessment is needed of concerns such as those which were communicated to the Attorney General on 12th April 2011 (seehttp://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/death-of-dr-david-kelly-important.html (http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/death-of-dr-david-kelly-important.html) ). A detailed assessment of such questions by a forensic engineer is required. Issues such as the sharpness of the knife point, bracing positions, direction of the cuts must be considered in detail.
The Attorney General claims (House of Commons Hansard 9th June 2011, Column 302,http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm110609/debtext/110609-0002.htm (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm110609/debtext/110609-0002.htm) ) that he found no evidence of a cover-up. He failed to consider that members of the Kelly family and Dr. Malcolm Warner failed to disclose Dr. Kelly’s right arm injury and its functional aftermath in oral testimony to the Hutton Inquiry. He further failed to consider the evidence in Answer 44 of the Attorney General’s Schedule of Responses which indicates that ACC Page and Lord Hutton may have suppressed important evidence. The matter of the functionality (or lack of it) in Dr. Kelly’s right arm is pivotal in any honest consideration of a situation where a knife, supposedly held in the right hand, is used supposedly to incise the left wrist.
Mr. Roy Green, forensic biologist, states in his report of 27th September 2003 that he cannot exclude the possibility that Dr. Kelly died at the hands of another. This comment should have been given more attention prior to 9th June 2011. In light of the evidence regarding the movement of the body it now requires a less cursory assessment than Mr. Grieve has hitherto given it.
Dr. Alexander Allan, toxicologist, told Lord Hutton in terms that the co-proxamol tabletshad to be ingested. That is untrue. Two other possibilities exist – administration of co-proxamol by nasogastric tube and injection of paracetamol and dextropropoxyphene (the components of co-proxamol). These other possibilities require careful assessment, not least in the context of a possible faked “suicide”.
To the best of our knowledge there is no direct evidence of “intent” on the part of Dr. Kelly to kill himself. In the absence of such evidence it is, at a minimum, possible that an inquest would return a verdict other than suicide.


The second list illustrates a range of questions and/or concerns which have, to the best of our knowledge, never been satisfactorily investigated but which did not form part of the Second Section 13 application, so far as we are aware. We ask the Attorney General now to fairly and thoroughly examine these issues in the context of this Third Section 13 Application.



Concerns exist regarding the reliability of the evidence given to the Hutton Inquiry by Janice Kelly. The Attorney General was made aware of such concerns in his copy of an email of 12th June 2011. For example seehttp://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/death-of-david-kelly-peter-jacobsen.html (http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/death-of-david-kelly-peter-jacobsen.html). Questions regarding the evidence of Janice Kelly impact on the credibility of Professor Hawton’s evidence (mentioned in the preceding list) since Professor Hawton seems to have relied on Janice Kelly’s evidence.
The Attorney General was presented on 8th June 2011 with evidence that a suicide story was being “spun” in the morning of 18th July 2003, when there was no legitimate basis for a suicide conclusion. See http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/death-of-david-kelly-spinning-suicide.html (http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/death-of-david-kelly-spinning-suicide.html) .We do not seek to argue that the Attorney General ought to have included consideration of that matter in his statement of 9th June 2011. We now ask him to give careful consideration as to the implications of “suicide spin” on the morning of 18th July 2011. We believe that careful examination is required of the possibility that the “suicide spin” may have originated in the highest echelons of the Blair Government.
In the report by Mr. Roy Green of 27th September 2003 it is indicated that Mr. Green observed “arterial rain” at Harrowdown Hill. He appears to have assumed that the only explanation of such “arterial rain” was bleeding from a transected ulnar artery. He did not appear to consider the possibility that the supposed arterial rain at Harrowdown Hill could have been simulated. We ask that the possibility of simulation now be fully investigated. See http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/death-of-david-kelly-simulating.html (http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/death-of-david-kelly-simulating.html)for some relevant background.



9. Legal Issues

There is, we suggest, no serious legal barrier to the High Court granting an Order that an inquest be held into the death of Dr. David Kelly.

On the single ground of the evidence that the body was moved then it is evident “in the interests of justice” that an inquest is needed. There are, however, many other grounds for doubt about the safety of Lord Hutton’s conclusion, some of which we have listed in the section “Other issues of concern”.

We consider that in pages 11 to 14 of the Attorney General’s Written Statement of 9th June 2011 (online athttp://www.attorneygeneral.gov.uk/Publications/Documents/Attorney%20General%20Dr%20Kelly%20written%20statem ent%209%20June%202011.pdf (http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.uk/Publications/Documents/Attorney%20General%20Dr%20Kelly%20written%20statem ent%209%20June%202011.pdf) ) the Attorney General misdirected himself, effectively providing a legal smokescreen whose effect is to defeat the interests of justice.

We consider, for example, that the Attorney General was in error on two points with regard to the possibility that the Oxfordshire Coroner, Nicholas Gardiner, had misdirected himself.

Mr. Gardiner stated on 16th March 2004 (page 3 of the transcript) that no public inquiry would take evidence on oath:

“Many of those who have written to me have pointed out that the Public Inquiry does not hear evidence on oath and has no powers to compel the attendance of witnesses or summon a jury, some also add that a Judge is not a Coroner. All that may be true, but it does apply to any Public Inquiry. I took the view that if it applies to any Public Inquiry one cannot suggest it is exceptional.”

He misdirected himself on that point since a public inquiry, such as the Hutton Inquiry, could have been established in 2003 under the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act 1921 (since repealed) which provided for evidence being taken under oath.

The effect of the Oxfordshire Coroner’s misdirecting himself with regard to the possibility of taking evidence on oath in a public inquiry is that he failed to recognize an “exceptional reason” which would allow (and in the light of Section 8 of the Coroners Act 1988 arguably require) him to resume the inquest.

Further, by virtue of Section 8 of the Coroners Act 1988 the Oxfordshire Coroner has a legal duty to conduct an inquest into Dr. Kelly’s death.

No such inquest has taken place which has produced an inquisition.

Mr. Gardiner misdirected himself in that he failed on 16th March 2004 to consider the implications of the obligation imposed on him by Section 8 to conduct an inquest into the suspicious death of Dr. Kelly.

There is nothing in Section 17A of the 1988 Act which, in the exceptional circumstances of this case, removes the duty placed on the Coroner to conduct an inquest.

We conclude that as a result of misdirecting himself the Oxfordshire Coroner neglected to conduct an inquest which he ought to have conducted, by virtue of the existence of two“exceptional reasons” to resume an inquest. First with respect to misdirecting himself re the taking of oath in public inquiries and second by failing to consider the duty placed on him to conduct an inquest by virtue of Section 8 of the Coroners Act 1988.

Given that no inquest was completed then we believe that Section 13(1)(a) of the 1988 Act, at least arguably, applies. The Coroner had a duty under Section 8 to conduct an inquest. He failed to do so as a result of misdirecting himself.

On the foregoing grounds we believe that, in all the circumstances, the High Court could readily grant an Order for an inquest into the death of David Kelly, on the grounds expressed in Section 13(1)(a) of the 1988 Act.

Alternatively, the High Court could readily grant an Order in terms of Section 13(1)(b).

It is clear that Nicholas Gardiner opened an inquest on 21st July 2003. However, it can be argued that that “inquest” demonstrated gross “insufficiency of inquiry”, not least in the fundamental sense that no “inquisition” resulted.

The additional points we raise in this Application add further grounds in support of a Section 13(1)(b) application.

We consider that it can be cogently argued that either Section 13(1)(a) or Section 13(1)(b) of the Coroners Act 1988 applies to the circumstances of this case.

Section 13(1)(a) applies if the deficiencies of the inquest, started on 21st July 2003 and required by Section 8, are such as to lead the High Court to a conclusion that ipso facto “no inquest” took place when an inquest ought to have been held. Alternatively, if the Court accepts that an inquest was begun then Section 13(1)(b) applies since the inquest demonstrated gross insufficiency of inquiry not least in that no inquisition was produced.

The kafkasque framework implicit in pages 11 to 14 of Mr. Grieve’s written statement of 9thJune 2011 to the effect that, at the same time, neither section 13(1)(a) nor Section 13(1)(b) applies would, we anticipate, be thrown out by the High Court or on Judicial Review following this Section 13 Application.

We consider that the evidence that Dr. Kelly’s body was moved outweighs any arcane theoretical abstraction about how Section 13 applies in the highly unusual circumstances of this case.

The interests of justice must come first.

A proper inquest conducted by an honest Coroner is the first step towards belated justice for Dr. Kelly.

10. Action required of the Attorney General

We consider that the Attorney General has a duty, in the interests of justice, to apply to the High Court for an Order that an inquest be held into the death of Dr. David Kelly.

We further consider that a refusal by the Attorney General to seek an order from the High Court is irrational whether in the Wednesbury sense of the term or common usage. It is, at a minimum,possible that an inquest might return a different verdict.

The evidence that the body was moved (even when considered in isolation) means that, at a minimum, an honest and diligent inquest might return a verdict other than suicide.

It is not necessary for us in this Section 13 application to prove that such an alternative verdict of Open Verdict or Unlawful Killing would be reached by an honest and diligent inquest. It is sufficient to demonstrate that it is possible that such a different verdict might be reached.

We recognize that it is potentially embarrassing for the Attorney General to seek an Order from the High Court that an inquest be held into the death of Dr. David Kelly, following his unambiguous and misguided statements to the House of Commons on 9th June 2011.

We further recognize that it is particularly embarrassing for the Attorney General to seek an Order from the High Court in a situation where he concealed, from Parliament and from the public on 9th June 2011, evidence suggesting that Assistant Chief Constable Michael Page had lied to the Hutton Inquiry about one aspect of forensic evidence. He was informed of those concerns on 13th May 2011. See http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/death-of-david-kelly-unreliability-of.html (http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/death-of-david-kelly-unreliability-of.html) .

On 12th June 2011 the Attorney General was invited to consider his position in view of the abject deficiencies of his consideration of the Second Section 13 Application. Seehttp://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/death-of-david-kelly-i-invite-attorney.html (http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/death-of-david-kelly-i-invite-attorney.html) . We repeat that invitation to Mr. Grieve and Mr. Garnier to consider their positions.

In the interest of justice an honest and diligent inquest is necessary.

However, given the prima facie evidence of a criminal conspiracy to pervert the course of justice viz to conceal the murder of Dr. David Kelly we consider that a public inquiry significantly more diligent and significantly more honest than the Hutton Inquiry is also required, with powers to compel witnesses to attend and to take evidence under oath.

Peter Lemkin
04-24-2012, 05:45 AM
The problem is that those who don't want an inquest [or a REAL one] know DAMN WELL that there was murder and deception involved, and by whom and why! Further, they don't want this information to be made public.....they will have to be forced, and that will not be easy. Polite entreaties are nice, but they won't do the trick - without massive public outrage and support, IMHO. Ditto JFK, RFK, MLK, 9/11, 7/7 and SO many other such. 'Will no one rid us of these damn 'priests'?' :hitler:

Albert Doyle
04-24-2012, 02:46 PM
Looks like we Jimi Hendrix justice people will have to get in line behind the Daniel Morgan, Dr Kelly justice people...

David Guyatt
04-13-2016, 04:03 PM
The medical and scientific records of Dr. David Kelly's death were secretly sealed for 70 years. Most unusually in such cases, the inquest into his death was indefinitely adjourned by Lord Falconer after three weeks. Falconer was a close friend of Tony Blair favoured a less rigorous public inquiry chaired by a compliant judge (Lord Hutton) chosen by Lord Falconer within three hours of Kelly's death. Hutton returned a verdict of suicide --- to everyone's evident relief.

From the Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2367671/STEPHEN-GLOVER-Ten-years-ago-today-Dr-Kellys-body-The-subsequent-cover-great-scandals-age.html#comments)



Ten years ago today, Dr Kelly's body was found. The subsequent cover-up is one of the great scandals of our ageBy STEPHEN GLOVER FOR THE DAILY MAIL (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/columnist-244/Stephen-Glover-for-the-Daily-Mail.html)
PUBLISHED: 00:31, 18 July 2013 | UPDATED: 00:31, 18 July 2013










132View comments (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2367671/STEPHEN-GLOVER-Ten-years-ago-today-Dr-Kellys-body-The-subsequent-cover-great-scandals-age.html#comments)
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/18/article-0-0D96126100000578-57_306x423.jpg
Dr David Kelly, a weapons expert working for the Ministry of Defence, was found dead ten years ago with his left wrist slashed. To this day, we still do not know for certain why or how Dr Kelly died

Ten years ago this morning, the body of a man was discovered in a wood near his Oxfordshire home.
His name was Dr David Kelly, a weapons expert working for the Ministry of Defence. His left wrist had been slashed.
Six weeks earlier, a BBC reporter called Andrew Gilligan had alleged that the Blair Government ‘sexed up’ its dossier making the case for war against Iraq. The Ministry of Defence subsequently identified Dr Kelly as his source. Days before his death, government spokesmen effectively revealed his name to the media.
Ten years have passed, and we still do not know for certain why or how Dr Kelly died. The official verdict of suicide was delivered not by a coroner, as should have been Dr Kelly’s right under English law, but by a judge, Lord Hutton, in an inquiry set up by the Blair Government.
There are many anomalies, inconsistencies and dark passages in this story — so many that I have to pinch myself to remember that it did not happen in China or Russia but in Britain, where the rule of law, and decency, are supposed to prevail.
An inquest did open into Dr Kelly’s death, on July 21, 2003. But three weeks later, the then Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, ordered it to be adjourned indefinitely.
This is the same Lord Falconer who, so Lord Hutton has just confirmed, telephoned the judge only three hours after the discovery of Dr Kelly’s body to ask him to chair an inquiry into the scientist’s death.
And it is the same Lord Falconer who that same morning of July 18 had two telephone conversations with his former flatmate, patron and friend, Tony Blair, who was on an aeroplane from Washington to Tokyo.
Lord Falconer correctly believed he had identified a tame judge friendly to the Establishment. In due course, Lord Hutton returned his verdict of suicide, absolved the Government of any responsibility for Dr Kelly’s death, and declared that Mr Blair, and his sidekick Alastair Campbell, had not exaggerated the case for war.
RELATED ARTICLES

Previous (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2367671/STEPHEN-GLOVER-Ten-years-ago-today-Dr-Kellys-body-The-subsequent-cover-great-scandals-age.html#)
1 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2367671/STEPHEN-GLOVER-Ten-years-ago-today-Dr-Kellys-body-The-subsequent-cover-great-scandals-age.html#)
2 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2367671/STEPHEN-GLOVER-Ten-years-ago-today-Dr-Kellys-body-The-subsequent-cover-great-scandals-age.html#)
Next (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2367671/STEPHEN-GLOVER-Ten-years-ago-today-Dr-Kellys-body-The-subsequent-cover-great-scandals-age.html#)




http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/17/article-0-0D96126100000578-761_87x84.jpgIraq weapons expert Dr David Kelly was victim of... (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2367641/Iraq-weapons-expert-Dr-David-Kelly-victim-Hillsborough-style-cover-say-doctors-campaigning-probe.html)http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/13/article-2362659-00422EC51000044C-669_87x84.jpgRevealed: How a Blair fixer picked the judge for the David... (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2362659/Revealed-How-Blair-fixer-picked-judge-David-Kelly-Inquiry-just-hours-weapons-inspectors-suicide.html)
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/06/30/article-2351769-0EFF151A00000578-178_89x88.jpgChurchill was a bigger wartime liar than Blair, says... (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2351769/Churchill-bigger-wartime-liar-Blair-says-Alistair-Campbell-deeply-insulting-jab-World-War-2-hero.html)


SHARE THIS ARTICLEShare


That last contention is now disbelieved by about nine-tenths of sentient beings. I suspect that when Sir John Chilcot finally delivers his report into the Iraq war next year — it has been delayed by obstructive civil servants defending Mr Blair’s interests — the remaining one-tenth will be forced to come around.
But the lack of an inquest into Dr Kelly’s death (which forms no part of Sir John’s remit) remains an outrage. Only in a handful of previous cases has a public inquiry overridden an inquest, and then only when there have been multiple deaths, such as in a rail crash.
Lord Hutton is not a coroner, and in the view of many observers he did not investigate the causes of Dr Kelly’s death as thoroughly as a practised coroner would have done. For example, he did not call the police officer heading the investigation into Dr Kelly’s death, Chief Inspector Alan Young.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/18/article-2367671-05D681F70000044D-564_634x368.jpg
An inquest did open into Dr Kelly's death, on July 21, 2003. But three weeks later, the then Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, ordered it to be adjourned indefinitely


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/18/article-2367671-0DCA946A00000578-74_634x470.jpg
Lord Falconer correctly believed he had identified a tame judge friendly to the Establishment. In due course, Lord Hutton returned his verdict of suicide, absolving the Government of any responsibility for Dr Kelly's death

Nor did he summon the scientist’s close friend, Mai Pedersen, who would have been able to tell him that Dr Kelly had a weak right arm. In her opinion he was incapable of cutting steak, let alone his left wrist.
My point is not that Lord Hutton would have returned a different verdict had he weighed the evidence more exhaustively. It is that the scientist’s death was not examined as it should have been, and so there must be a proper inquest. Unfortunately, the Attorney General, Dominic Grieve, sympathetic to the idea in opposition, has changed his mind — or had it changed for him.
On the whole, I don’t think Dr Kelly was murdered. I say that because even in Blair’s and Campbell’s and Falconer’s Britain I don’t believe that agents of the State went around bumping off patriotic and decent civil servants who knew embarrassing secrets.
But perhaps I am being hopelessly naive. It has to be conceded that, in addition to Mai Pedersen’s testimony, there are several fragments of evidence which are not easy to explain away, and should therefore be scrutinised in a coroner’s court.
For example, doctors challenging the suicide verdict have argued that Dr Kelly could not possibly have bled to death by severing the tiny artery he supposedly cut with a blunt knife. Two ambulance crew members early on the scene have testified that there was very little blood when they arrived.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/18/article-2367671-0A74C552000005DC-882_634x418.jpg
The lack of an inquest into Dr Kelly's death remains an outrage. Only in a handful of previous cases has a public inquiry overridden an inquest, and then only when there have been multiple deaths, such as in a rail crash

Freedom of Information requests carried out since Lord Hutton’s inquiry have established that there were no fingerprints on the five items found by Dr Kelly’s body, including the knife. No gloves were found on his body, or in the vicinity.
One theory is that spooks arriving to find Dr Kelly dead cleaned up the crime scene, and tampered with the evidence. That possibility obviously prompts a new set of disturbing questions.
It may well be, of course, that there is an answer to all these and other oddities, and that Dr Kelly, shocked by being suddenly thrown into the limelight, and devastated after being disowned by his employers at the Ministry of Defence, did take his own life.
But only a myopic Blair stooge could dismiss this evidence without it being tested by a coroner. Is it possible that the ‘dark forces’ to which the Queen allegedly once referred in the context of Princess Diana’s death were at work in respect of Dr Kelly?
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/18/article-2367671-00422EC51000044C-107_306x423.jpg
Lord Hutton is not a coroner, and in the view of many observers he did not investigate the causes of Dr Kelly's death as thoroughly as a practised coroner would have done

Interestingly, a freelance journalist called Miles Goslett, who has unearthed much useful information about this case, has discovered that all the medical and scientific records relating to Dr Kelly have been secretly sealed for 70 years. That seems a bit over the top, even in secrecy-obsessed Britain.
As I say, I’m not a natural conspiracy theorist, and I can’t easily accept the idea that this loyal civil servant was murdered by the British State. Much more likely, it seems to me, he was at least partly driven to suicide after being disowned by the MoD, and outed by spin doctors answerable to Alastair Campbell.
They couldn’t bear that he had told the truth to a BBC journalist, and one way or another they were determined to destroy him. If he wasn’t murdered, he was effectively hounded to his death.
David Kelly lies in a perfect English churchyard in a lovely Oxfordshire village, far from the machinations of spooks and the lies of politicians. One way or another, this decent man was betrayed by the government for which he worked.
He’s not the only victim. His unexplained death, and the lies of Blair and Campbell which lured us into a futile and probably illegal war, have contributed greatly to the public’s disenchantment with politicians and the political process.
Perhaps Sir John Chilcot will eventually tell us the truth about Iraq. But the full truth of this tragic episode in our history will not be revealed unless there is an inquest into David Kelly’s death.
The Government or spooks or dark forces continue to resist. Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell continue to be treated as respectable figures. And David Kelly, a man who served the State, which killed him in one way or another, continues to be betrayed.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2367671/STEPHEN-GLOVER-Ten-years-ago-today-Dr-Kellys-body-The-subsequent-cover-great-scandals-age.html#ixzz45itX9F00
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=MailOnline) | DailyMail on Facebook (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=DailyMail)

Paul Rigby
05-10-2016, 04:39 PM
The medical and scientific records of Dr. David Kelly's death were secretly sealed for 70 years. Most unusually in such cases, the inquest into his death was indefinitely adjourned by Lord Falconer after three weeks. Falconer was a close friend of Tony Blair favoured a less rigorous public inquiry chaired by a compliant judge (Lord Hutton) chosen by Lord Falconer within three hours of Kelly's death. Hutton returned a verdict of suicide --- to everyone's evident relief.

The betrayal of Dr David Kelly, 10 years on

Andrew Gilligan, the journalist at the centre of the 'dodgy dossier’ row, reflects on the shocking facts that have emerged since Dr David Kelly’s death

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10192271/The-betrayal-of-Dr-David-Kelly-10-years-on.html

By Andrew Gilligan, 7:00AM BST 21 Jul 2013


I still remember, of course, how I heard about David Kelly’s death. It started with an early-morning phone call from my friend Mick Smith, then defence correspondent of The Daily Telegraph. Dr Kelly had gone missing, and the police were looking for a body.

Even then, I couldn’t really believe that he had died. Surely it was some sort of misunderstanding? Perhaps he’d just decided to go off for a few days and would turn up in some hotel, à la Stephen Fry? As soon as I got to the BBC, the director of news, Richard Sambrook, called me to his office. While I had been on the way in, he said, not sounding like he believed it himself, Dr Kelly’s body had been found, and it looked like suicide. He’d taken painkilling tablets and slashed one of his wrists.

If Sambrook sounded shaken, it was nothing to how I sounded. He had to get me a glass of water to calm me down. But as well as being upset, I was very, very surprised. I hadn’t known David all that well, but he didn’t strike me as the suicidal type, if there is such a thing.

He was quite used to confrontation and pressure: he’d been a weapons inspector in Iraq, for goodness’ sake. I thought his famous grilling by the Foreign Affairs Committee had been distasteful, and symptomatic of the committee’s stupidity, but it hadn’t been that bad. And the affair was tailing off. Politics was breaking for the summer, both the BBC and I had refused to confirm or deny whether David was my source, and the battle between us and Downing Street had essentially reached stalemate.

What a lot I didn’t know. Even now, almost precisely 10 years since David Kelly’s last journey, we are still learning just how extraordinary and inexcusable the behaviour of our rulers was – both towards him, and in the wider cause, defending the Iraq war, for which he was outed and died. On July 18 2003, I did not consider myself a shockable person; I was an experienced, sceptical journalist with, I thought, a realistic idea of how politicians, intelligence officers and civil servants behaved. But over the months and years that followed, my views, and those of most of the country, changed. To borrow the famous words of David Astor over Suez, we had not realised that our government was capable of such folly and such crookedness.

You probably remember Dr Kelly’s main contention, which became the centrepiece of my BBC story – that a government dossier making the case against Iraq had been “transformed” at the behest of Downing Street and Alastair Campbell “to make it sexier”, with the “classic example” being the insertion in the final week of a claim, based on a single source, that Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction could be deployed within 45 minutes. The intelligence services were unhappy about the 45-minute claim, David said. They believed it was unreliable. In the first of my 18 broadcasts on the story, I added a claim, mistakenly attributing it to David, that the Government probably knew the 45-minute claim was wrong.

What we now know is that at precisely the same moment as the Government was launching hysterical attacks on the BBC and on me for reporting this, Whitehall had quietly conceded that it was true. In July 2003, literally as David Kelly was outed, MI6 secretly withdrew the 45-minute intelligence as unreliable and badly-sourced.

What we now know is that according to Major General Michael Laurie, the head of the Defence Intelligence Staff at the time of the dossier, “we could find no evidence of planes, missiles or equipment that related to weapons of mass destruction (WMD). It was clear to me that pressure was being applied to the Joint Intelligence Committee and its drafters. Every fact was managed to make the dossier as strong as possible. The final statements in the dossier reached beyond the conclusions intelligence assessments would normally draw from such facts.”

What we now know is that, according to an MI6 officer working on the dossier, the 45-minute claim was “based in part on wishful thinking” and was not “fully validated”. Another MI6 officer said that “there were from the outset concerns” in the intelligence services about “the extent to which the intelligence could support some of the judgments that were being made”.

What we now know is that on September 17 and 18 2002, a week before the dossier was published, Alastair Campbell sent memos to its author, Sir John Scarlett, saying that he and Tony Blair were “worried” that on Saddam’s nuclear capability the dossier gave the (accurate) impression that “there’s nothing much to worry about”. On September 19, Campbell emailed Scarlett again, suggesting the insertion of a totally false claim that, in certain circumstances, Saddam could produce nuclear weapons in as little as a year. This fabrication duly appeared in the dossier.

What we now know is that in his September 17 memo, Campbell suggested 15 other changes to the text of the dossier. Most were accepted; their effect was to harden the document’s language from possibility to probability, or probability to certainty. Campbell lied to Parliament about the content of this memo, giving the Foreign Affairs Committee an altered copy which omitted his comments on the 45-minute claim and played down his interventions on most of the other issues.

And what we now know is that, contrary to his campaigning certainty at the time, Blair admits in his memoirs that he privately saw the case for war against Iraq as “finely balanced”. No wonder a little tipping of the scales was needed – or, as Blair also put it in his book, “politicians are obliged from time to time to conceal the full truth, to bend it and even distort it, where the interests of the bigger strategic goal demand that it be done”.

We knew nothing of this then. Indeed, in his evidence to the Hutton inquiry, Sir Richard Dearlove, the head of MI6, described the 45-minute claim, straight-faced, as “a piece of well-sourced intelligence”, two months after his own service had discredited it. Despite his key role as Dearlove’s military counterpart, General Laurie was never called to Hutton at all; his explosive statement, and that of the two MI6 people, emerged only in 2011, at the Chilcot inquiry.

I don’t blame you if you knew nothing of all this until now; most of it, by happy coincidence, came out only long after public attention had moved on, and the government could no longer be damaged.
But the government knew – and this is what makes its behaviour towards the BBC and David Kelly so incredible. He came forward to his bosses as my source under a promise that his identity would be kept secret, but was effectively given up to the world after Campbell, in his words, decided to “open a flank on the BBC” to distract attention from his difficulties over the dossier.

Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee, the FAC, was inquiring into the dossier. After it failed to denounce me to Campbell’s satisfaction, he confided to his diary that “the biggest thing needed was the source out”. That afternoon, on Downing Street’s orders, Ministry of Defence press officers announced that a source had come forward, handed out clues allowing anyone with Google to guess who he was, then kindly confirmed it to any reporter who guessed right. One newspaper was allowed to put more than 20 names to the MoD before it got to Dr Kelly’s.

Once outed, Dr Kelly was openly belittled by the foreign secretary, Jack Straw. The FAC, by the way, didn’t want to question him – its inquiry had finished and its report had already been published – but Downing Street forced it to hold a special hearing anyway. The day before, for several hours, he was intensively coached in the need to “f---” me. Under great pressure, he blurted an untruth in the glare of the TV lights; an untruth which, on the morning of his death, his bosses told him they would investigate.

Dr Kelly defined himself by his work and his reputation for integrity. The fear of losing it must have been terrifying, even if it was almost certainly unfounded. Understanding that is one reason why I am certain that he did indeed kill himself, for all some people’s obsession to the contrary.

They’ll hate this comparison, but there’s an odd symmetry between the Kelly conspiracy theorists and Mr Blair. In both cases, their convictions seem to require them to fit the facts into unusual shapes. For Dr Kelly to have been murdered, as the pathologist’s report makes clear, it would have needed someone to force 29 pills down his throat, making him swallow them without protest. Then they would have had to get him to sit on the ground without any restraint, making no attempt to defend himself, while they had sawn away at his wrist with a knife. That knife, by the way, came from the desk drawer in Dr Kelly’s study, so they’d also have had to burgle his house to get it.

The even more telling question, though, is what motive anyone could have had for murder. Even if you believe the British government goes round bumping off its employees in cold blood, killing David Kelly would simply not have been in its interest. It was guaranteed to create a scandal and a crisis, as anyone with an iota of sense would have known. There’s no need to claim that David Kelly was murdered; his suicide is scandal enough.

Ten years on, there are some Groundhog Day elements. Over successive crises, the BBC’s management has been as incompetent as ever. Politicians still appear to think that set-piece inquiries are worth the paper they’re written on – despite the evidence from Lord Hutton’s and Sir John Chilcot’s efforts on Iraq, the latter entering its fifth year with few signs of a report.

Whatever Chilcot may eventually say, the debate on the war appears to have been decided. Few would now dispute the dossier was sexed up. But there is still a fascinating degree of dispute about David Kelly. I have sometimes asked myself why the self-inflicted death of one scientist should matter to us as much as, if not more than, the violent deaths of perhaps 120,000 Iraqis (535 of them this month alone, by the way – so much for making Iraq safe for democracy).

I think it’s partly because there may still be some excuses for what the Government did in Iraq. They expected it to be like Kosovo: the operation would succeed, the troops be welcomed and the predictions of doom confounded. They expected, too, that a few barrels of WMD would probably be found that could have been cast as a threat. Even the charge of “lying” about those weapons is not quite cast-iron: I prefer the charge I made, of sexing-up, or exaggeration. I and most others always thought Iraq had something in the WMD line; the exaggeration lay in the fact that it was nowhere near threatening enough to justify a war.

But there are no excuses for what the government did to the BBC and to Dr Kelly. He was outed to further a series of denials which we can, quite plainly, call lies. An explanation, if not an excuse, may rest in Campbell’s mental state: even Blair, in his memoirs, called him a “crazy person” who by that stage “had probably gone over the edge”. But that doesn’t explain the really scary part: how the machinery of government, in a mature democracy such as Britain’s, allowed itself to be captured by someone in that state.

Sir Richard Dearlove, the former MI6 chief responsible for the dossier, was once asked what he thought of me. Flatteringly, he said: “I wouldn’t want you to print my views on Andrew Gilligan.” My own views on Sir Richard, Sir John Scarlett and the other distinguished knights of Iraq who got too close to New Labour are perfectly printable: they failed catastrophically in their duty, bringing their professions, their services – and their country – into deep, possibly permanent, disrepute.

David Guyatt
05-11-2016, 06:48 AM
The problem with Gilligan's argument that Kelly killed himself is that I don't think it accounts for the medical evidence - at least that part we know, because the government has sealed it all for 70 years, itself an indicator, for me, that there is something to hide.

I was a member of the Kelly Investigation Group until I had to leave due to time constraints at the time, and the doctors who were part of this private investigative group - especially David Halpin, a one time trauma surgeon, regarded the wounds on his wrist to be de facto neglible and impossible for the exsanguination necessary to result in death, and that because of their small size clotting would have quickly occurred and the wounds shut down and closed.

My guess is that we're not going to know the reality until the 70 years is up. If then.

Michael Barwell
05-12-2016, 04:23 PM
Seems the Telegraph picks'n'chooses as it likes - they've just given a resounding two-fingers to an Orgreave clear-up inquiry - There is no case for an Orgreave inquiry - TELEGRAPH VIEW - 6 MAY 2016 • 6:21AM - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2016/05/06/there-is-no-case-for-an-orgreave-inquiry/
How they can think "justice delayed is justice denied" on the one hand, and "stuff the miners" on the other, is something of a curiosity.