| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
DeFecToR
Moderate Poster
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 782
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:17 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Does anyone remember the C4 news report that mentioned that his body was found with some of (not sure what they're called) those sticky circular things that are used to monitor heart rate etc? What was that all about? I only ever heard it mentioned once on that one news report.
_________________
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Garrett Cooke
Minor Poster
Joined: 07 Aug 2005
Posts: 85
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Flamesong,
Yes it did seem strange. the following testimony given by the forensic botanist Roy Green indicates that the use of that tent was for changing purposes and another (blue) tent contained Dr Kelly's body within the woods. Mr Digemans asking the questions.:
1 Q. What did you see when you arrive?
2 A. Well, immediately we went to a tent to put on protective
3 clothing and so forth.
4 Q. Right.
5 A. And I was then shown through a taped common access path.
6 Q. Yes. Leading up to?
7 A. Leading up into the wood; and there was a blue tent
8 there, which contained the body of Dr Kelly.
9 Q. When you arrived at the body, what did you do?
10 A. Well, basically the start of it is just to have a look
11 and see -- just to take it all in and make notes and
12 measurements and try to get some sense of what could
13 have happened.
14 Q. How long were you doing that for?
15 A. It was sort of a gradual process. As I say, I arrived
16 at just gone 2 and left at about 7, so it was quite
17 a while. But during that time I will have gone back to
18 the original tent, the changing tent, to report what
19 I was seeing to DCI Young.
I hope this is helpful.
Defector,
This is from Vanessa Hunt's testimony to Hutton (she was a member of the ambulance crew). Mr Digemans asking the questions
A.....so we said to the police
6 officers would it be possible to place four sticky
7 electrodes on to the chest, to verify that life was
8 extinct.
9 Q. What did the police say to you?
10 A. Could they just take some more photographs before we
11 undid the shirt, which they then did. My colleague
12 unbuttoned the shirt and I placed the four electrodes on
13 to the chest, two on the upper part of the chest and two
14 underneath the rib cage area.
15 Q. Did you connect those electrodes to anything?
16 A. To the heart monitor.
17 Q. What did that show?
18 A. That showed asystole which is a flat line.
19 Q. What does that mean?
20 A. It means there is no cardiac output and life is extinct.
21 Q. Did you declare life extinct?
22 A. We pronounced we were unable to certify but we said,
23 yes, that, you know ...
24 Q. What did you do with the strips from the machine?
25 A. Took three strips and handed them all to the police
75
1 officer.
2 Q. And what did the strips show?
3 A. Just a flat line.
4 Q. And having carried out those activities, what did you do
5 then?
6 A. I said would they like us to leave the electrodes in
7 situ, they requested that we did, remove the leads from
8 the chest and left the shirt unbuttoned
A priori it would seem that there was no mystery here with regard to the 'sticky pads'. I do not know if this is normal procedure to leave them in place.
Garrett
Last edited by Garrett Cooke on Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:55 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Garrett Cooke
Minor Poster
Joined: 07 Aug 2005
Posts: 85
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 29, 2006 10:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
More comment from the Daily Mail. Note the comments from readers which follow the piece.
| Quote: | Why I believe David Kelly's death may have been murder, by MP
By DAN NEWLING, Daily Mail
David Kelly did not commit suicide and may have been the victim of a murder and subsequent coverup, according to a campaigning MP.
Norman Baker has spent six months investigating the death of the Government weapons expert, found dead in an Oxfordshire wood three years ago.
Mr Baker - who stepped down from the Liberal Democrat front bench to carry out his investigation - published his preliminary results and called for a new public inquiry.
His concerns begin with the method of Dr Kelly's supposed suicide, cutting a minor artery with a blunt gardening knife.
He would have been the only person that year to have successfully killed themselves that way in the UK.
The scientist's family and friends insist he had shown no sign of feeling suicidal. Emails and the minutes of meetings he attended also showed him behaving perfectly normally - and he was looking forward to his daughter's wedding.
Mr Baker also questions the painkillers Dr Kelly is said to have taken, not least because the levels found in his stomach were incompatible with his supposed consumption.
There are also basic questions about the police investigation - including the appearance beside Dr Kelly's body of a bottle of water, knife and watch which the people who found him say they did not see.
On the Hutton Inquiry itself, Mr Baker - whose conclusions were outlined in the Mail on Sunday - says Lord Hutton was completely out of his depth.
He had never chaired such an important inquiry and had a history of making pro-Government decisions as a judge. The MP claims Hutton was personally selected for the job by Tony Blair's close friend Charles Falconer, the Lord Chancellor.
The tragic story began in May 2003 when BBC radio journalist Andrew Gilligan alleged that the Government had deliberately 'sexed up' a dossier on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction to justify an invasion.
The Government went on the offensive and eventually exposed Dr Kelly as the BBC man's source, a move which thrust the publicity-shy scientist into a media storm.
Days later, the 59-year-old father of three was found slumped under a tree five miles from his home in Abingdon, Oxfordshire.
'More than enough cause to reopen the inquest' - Baker
The Government immediately set up an inquiry under Lord Hutton to investigate the death. The two-month probe concluded that the scientist had taken his own life.
Mr Baker has consistently been a thorn in the Government's side. He previously revealed former minister Peter Mandelson's links to the Hinduja brothers, who were granted British passports shortly after investing money to the Millennium Dome.
He claimed that since the Hutton Inquiry concluded, there has been 'growing public disquiet' about Dr Kelly's death.
He said: "Any reasonable person looking at the evidence would, at the very least, agree that further investigation is necessary.
"If it wasn't suicide, then clearly Dr Kelly was bumped off. My aim is to find out exactly what happened. Frankly, there is more than enough cause to reopen the inquest."
Mr Baker's investigation comes after three senior doctors claimed the official cause of death - a severed ulnar artery in the wrist - was extremely unlikely to be fatal.
David Halpin, Stephen Frost and Searle Sennett said: "Arteries in the wrist are of matchstick thickness and severing them does not lead to life-threatening blood loss."
Mr Baker said that, according to the Office for National Statistics, Dr Kelly was the only person in 2003 to kill themselves that way. He says a scientist would have cut a larger artery, ensuring a swift death.
Although Dr Kelly was facing intense pressure over his exposure as the BBC source, Mr Baker produces evidence that he did not appear depressed.
Two days before his death, he made jokes at a Government committee meeting. On the day he disappeared, he spoke of returning to Iraq in the future.
He was a member of the Baha'i faith, which forbids suicide, and one of his daughters was about to marry. Dr Kelly's sister Sarah Pape, a consultant plastic surgeon, told the Hutton Inquiry: "In my line of work I deal with people who may have suicidal thoughts, and I ought to be able to spot those even in a phone conversation.
"But I have gone over in my mind the two conversations we had and he certainly did not betray to me any impression that he was anything other than tired.
"He certainly did not convey to me that he was feeling depressed and absolutely nothing that would have alerted me to the fact that he may have been considering suicide."
An inquest into Dr Kelly's death was opened, but never concluded as the Hutton Inquiry was deemed to have served the same purpose. Mr Baker criticises this decision, arguing that, unlike an inquest, the Hutton Inquiry did not have the power to subpoena witnesses or make them give evidence under oath.
He says: "What was the point of setting up an inquiry to look into the circumstances of Dr Kelly's death when the facts had, it appeared, already been decided?"
Peter Jacobsen, solicitor for Dr Kelly's widow, said the family would not comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
Find this story at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?
comments (46)
46 people have commented on this story so far.
Say what you think by going to
http://www.dr-david-kelly.blogspot.com/
I tend to agree, I was never happy with the story of suicide, it did not add up.
- John, exeter, England
When Tony Blair meets his maker, he has a lot to as forgiveness for - I hope he is not forgiven.
- Karen, Ex Pat
This whole affair stinks from start to finish. A lot of reasonably intelligent people in the UK probably feel the same way.
- Darren Marsh, Chessington, Surrey
I never believed in the Hutton report. Dr Kelly was viewed as the culprit by the government and yet they are the ones appointing an investigator. Fox guarding the hen house.
- Nathan, Milwaukee,Wisconsin
Norman Baker's points are all very good but one thing has been left out. In a special report published by the Daily Mail on Saturday 6th March 2004 by Sue Reid it stated in the third paragraph: 'Even before Lord Hutton's historic judgment, Mai Pederson, an American army intelligence officer and confidante of Dr. Kelly, said the scientist would never have taken his own life. More intriguingly, she explained that he hated all types of pill. He even had trouble swallowing a headache tablet.'
- Louise Mclean, London
Norman Baker MP gives a series of compelling reasons for doubting that Dr David Kelly committed suicide. But who murdered him? Who stood to profit from his death? The government certainly did not. The immediate result was an acute political crisis for Tony Blair. Even with the appointment of the "safe" Lord Hutton in charge, Blair had no guarantee that the Hutton inquiry would clear him and as it happened the evidence given to the inquiry did lasting damage to his reputation. Moreover, if a professional killer had murdered Dr Kelly would he not have made a more convincing appearance of suicide?
- Richard, London, England
With plausable deniability and spin I wouldn't put anything past this Blair Government.
- Mike, Denia,Spain
The truth will never be known.
- Peter, London
How obvious was it that Dr Kelly's death was not suicide.
- Helen, uk
The whole episode is indeed a bit 'smelly' and should be independently investigated.
- Freddie, Northants
Considering how much blood this government has on its hands through incompetence and design, a lot of people might figure this was murder.
- Ryk, London
One poster asks what would the Government have to gain. Dr Kelly was not a 'middle' ranking civil servant he was depicted as in the 'spin'. He was the worlds expert on WMD, who had sat alongside Tony Blair in briefings. He was privy to vasts amounts of information on The Russians, the Iranians, as well as Iraq. When someone is cornered and has integrity they will come out fighting. Whilst the enquiry did some damage, further disclosures by Dr Keyy would probably have destroyed Blairs Government. I have no doubts he was murdered, at the behest of who? Make your own minds up.
- Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon, England
I totally agree with the above as I considered from the first sighting of the Hutton report that it was complete whitewash. I was also appalled at the manner of questioning when Dr Kelly was before the original committee. Those who questioned him ought to hang their heads in shame.
- J.Fleming, St.Neot, Cambs.
I agree with Mr Baker too many things dont add up. Sadly I doubt if the truth will ever come out and we have lost a very clever man to help keep this trash running the country in office. It is my opinion that they where afraid of what may come out through Dr Kelly so he was killed like many of our troops on Blairs orders in a unjust war.
- K Harrop, herts;
Yes, let's have an independant enquiry, Mr Baker should press for this. If the Government have nothing to hide then they have everything to gain.
- Brian, England
This case just stinks from top to bottom.
- Gordon Myatt, Swansea UK
If it was not suicide, then it can only have been a murder! If it was murder, who would have the motive and opportunity?
Doesn't bear thinking about does it.
- Thomas, Dubai
Dr Kelly had the 'guts' to speak out. That alone makes nonsense of his so called suicide.
I feel so sad for his family.
- Molly, Oxford
We will never know what actually happened but one thing is for sure, with such a corrupt Goverment in place, anything is possible.
- B.Baker, Spalding, England
I've always believed this scientist was murdered by the establishment. Tony Blair was proved a liar when he denied he had anything to do with the naming of this man and then admitted it under pressure from a journalist. Like this lying incompetent government the whole thing is a charade!
- Brian James, Alhaurin El Grande, Spain
I agree that the Inquest into David Kelly's death should be re-opened. The Hutton Inquiry was a total whitewash. The two people who discovered David Kelly's body stated it was slumped against a tree. Shortly after the discovery three policemen appeared who were not part of the official search team. The three policemen stayed with the body until more police arrived. From then on everyone who saw the body stated it to be in a supine position with the head at the base of the tree. Why had the body been moved? At the Hutton Inquiry one of the three policemen stated there was only one other person with him. Who was the third person? The two paramedics who attended the site were concerned about the lack of blood at the scene. There are too many inconsitencies concerning this case, so keep on pushing Mr Baker.
- Stuart Jessop, Bradford, West Yorkshire, England
Just another cover up by the 'mafia' of a government. How much longer are we going to put up with lies and deciet?
- Jacqueline Butterworth, England
Only a haemophiliac would bleed to death from a severed artery in the wrist. The body has wonderful mechanisms in place to deal with that type of injury and would have stopped the bleeding very quickly indeed. To my mind the crucial, yet unanswered question is, 'How much blood did Dr Kelly actually lose'? The painkillers certainly didn't kill him therefore the area around him would have had to be positively swimming in blood.
- Midge Curry, Bakewell, England
There is definitely more than reasonable doubt that Doctor Kelly's death was suspicious.
- Frank Sweeney, Chalgrove Oxfordshire
It's very doubtful if the general public will ever find out the true facts surrounding David Kelly's death.
The whole thing stinks of a cover up from on high. Blair and his cronies picked Hutton to lead the investigation into the death was because they knew he would reach the "right" conclusion.
- Stratford, Hants.
This is most likely another example of what I know as "the time value of the truth".
Most enquiries of this nature are now aimed at simply putting off the time when the truth might out. That is why semi-competent procrastinators are usually chosen to lead them (with as little knowledge of the issues as possible), difficulties are thrown in the way about access to witnesses etc. The theory is that a holding exercise will satisfy the great British public and it usually does. By the time a report is produced, many people have forgotten the issues. Lots of rumblings take place, but a form of investigation has been followed.
Then several years later the truth starts to seep out. But it is usually too late for a real investigation to take place and the guilty get away with it.
That is our cynical shadowy democracy in action and how many times have we seen it recently? Until we manage to recover our democracy we are probably all at risk.
- Tom, Bedfordshire
If there is any doubt whatsoever with how this poor man died it should be investigated and whoever was responsible charged and brought before a court. If a mans life has become so unimportant in this country we have allowed ourselves to be lead to a sorry place. It's time that the truth surrounding Dr Kelly's death together with the connection to the war in Iraq was made clear.
- Mike, Coventry
As was said sometime ago about a certain other matter, there are dark forces about of which we have no knowledge.
- Sandra, Grimsby
The death of David Kelly is a tragedy - for his family, for his country and for the world. As much as I understand the interest in his death for those of you that never had the honour of knowing him, I would like to remind you that above all, David was a human being and not just a great dinner conversation topic.
- Anonymous, Durham
Having watched Dr Kelly being 'grilled' by the Select Committee before his death, I was extremely distressed and disturbed at the appalling way he was being questioned. His name should never have become public; Andrew Gilligan was right in what he said and the BBC gave in to the Government bullies. Yes, there is something deeply suspicious about Dr Kelly's demise and the 'smoking gun' points straight at the Government.
- Anne Smith, France
This has a ring of "Who will rid me of this troublesome scientist?" about it.
- Steve H, London
The past 4 years would be enough to make any thinking person give up on the political processs. But then people like Norman Baker come along and restore your faith in the human race a little more. David Kelly was also one of those people. The day I heard of his death will go down as one of those days you remember exactly where you were and what you were doing. I don't think the leaders of this government know the meaning of the word shame but fortunately some of us still do. I wish with all my heart that the truth of this matter is exposed - together with the real reasons we went to war in Iraq!
- C Duval, Windsor
How long now before Norman Baker has a mysterious 'accident'?
- Jan, London
I remember quite a few months ago, on a Sunday, two ambulance personnel appeared on the evening news stating that they did not belive Dr Kellys death was suicide. They were the two personnel who attended the scene. I never saw any follow up news reports on this matter, neither did I see follow up newspaper reports. They stated that the amount of drugs taken by Doctor Kelly was not enough to kill him, even with the wrist wounds. I remember thinking how admirable it was for them to come out fighting and how sad it was that it would not come to anything.
It is an absolute travesty to say that this man committed suicide.
- Alex, Reading
The enquiry skated over any reconciliation between the number of Coproximol tablets missing from Mrs Kelly's bathroom and such residue remaining in Dr Kelly's system, not withstanding that this was brought to their attention. The enquiry should be reopened.
- Paul Irby, London, United Kingdom
Anonymous I am sure I am not alone in being surprised at your post. You are correct we did not have the privilege of knowing Dr Kelly, but there is not a post on this article, that in anyway makes him any less than a hero to stand up to Government. We are all calling for justice for him and his family. This is not dinner party gossip this is real concern for a man who we all believe was murdered for knowing too much.
- Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon, England
In "The Gathering Storm" a film about Churchill between the wars, a Civil Servant giving him information to use in Parliament against the Government is given the ultimatum by a superior. Commit suicide and your widow will receive a pension. If we prosecute she will not. When I saw the film a few months ago the apparent parallel to Dr Kelly was unmistakable.
- Stephen Argles, Bromborough, Wirral
I watched with disgust the harassment of Dr. Kelly by some bullies on the Select Committee and I saw how superior he was, both in intellect and integrity, to his tormentors. After that display, I didn't expect any report emanating from an inquiry set up by the government to be impartial, so I did not believe it - neither did anyone else I spoke to at the time. I really hope Mr. Norman Baker will receive the support from MPs necessary to establish another, independent, inquiry into the matter. Only greater transparency
concerning the activities of our government will restore confidence in the democratic system, dented by the presidential style of the prime minister at No.10.
- Eric, Swansea
What the pro-war lobby hoped for from Kelly was that his appearance in front of the committee would establish that (a) he was the Gilligan source and that (b) Gilligan had misrepresented his views.
When Kelly denied that he was the source he became instantly nothing but a liabilty to those who wanted us to go to war. Ironically Kelly was pro-war, and furthermore in a BBC interview which pre-dates Gilligan's he was recording using the phrase 'made sexier'.
The suspicious circumstances of his death demand a proper inquest.
- David Cox, London, England
When Dr. Kelly died, Mr. Blair was somewhere in the 'far-east'. He was giving an interview at the time the news broke and a reporter asked the Prime-Minister "Have you got blood on your hands?". The look on Blairs face, was that of the boy caught with his hands in the biscuit tin.
- Mike Thompson, UK
I have watched the dramatised story of Dr Kelly, read several articles about him and seen him being interviewed on TV.
I have to ask why would an educated man with a analytical mind, decide to end his lfe in such an haphazard way? I am sure he would have thought of a more certain and speedily way to die. And walking five miles to do it?
Who would benefit from his death? Why would it be necessary to silence him?
Dark conspiracies or bungling on a lethal scale? This case should be fully investigated, openly, but that may never happen.
- John Knowles, Canada
We've never had an answer to the question about the phone call he received just before he went out... was he lured to the spot?
- Samantha Jones, Bucks
Well said Alex !
I too saw the paramedics on TV a while ago and was impressed with their obvious sincerity and total bewilderment at the 'wrong' conclusions being brought in.
This alone demands a proper inquiry.
- Evelyn Arslan, England
Nothing would surprise me about how low this government would stoop to cling on to power.
- Robert Newton, UK
Totally agree with the comments made on this board. A proper enquiry must be demanded.
- Carol Gibbs, Northern Cyprus
Norman Baker is correct in doubting the "suicide" of Dr David Kelly.
An initial report transmitted in France showed the "scene of crime" tent about 5 to 10 metres from the wooded area. There was an un-cordoned space between this tent and the tree-line where anybody could have interfered intentionally or accidentally.
Subsequent reporting from paramedics and others cast doubts on the whole scene and findings!
The Hutton Enquiry "scope was Establishment dictated" and needed the "witnesses" under oath.
Certain persons were permitted to give their accounts via video links but Dr Kelly's widow made to appear in person. She behaved impeccably and very composed. Unlike the professional politicians and spin-doctors.
It was inevitable that the resulting findings would be "as required by the Establishment".
Keep digging Mr Baker and uncover the truth! The probability of suicide is as probable as WMD's in Iraq or of pigs flying.
- Ian, Letchworth UK |
Look at http://www.dr-david-kelly.blogspot.com/ for more information.
Garrett |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Garrett Cooke
Minor Poster
Joined: 07 Aug 2005
Posts: 85
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
The following piece from the Sunday Mirror with an introductory comment by Rowena Thursby:
| Quote: | Below is the latest attempt to discredit Norman Baker's genuine investigation. Dr David Kelly -previously Head of Microbiology at Porton Down - had top security clearance. We have no way of knowing the secrets he was privy to. Thus the real reason for his death may remain hidden. What we do know is that the manner of his death makes no sense either logically or medically. Until this has been fully addressed and explained by those qualified to know, the attempt to uncover the truth will continue. -- RT
30 July 2006
BEWARE THIS MP'S 'DOSSIER'
Stotty
IT is a sad fact of life that when a horrible and unexpected death occurs there are always those who will not accept anything except conspiracy and murder. It happened to Diana and it is happening now to Dr David Kelly, the scientist who killed himself after being revealed as the weapons expert contact of the BBC's Andrew Gilligan.
A "dossier" of half-baked detail has been produced by the self-important Lib Dem MP Norman Baker which actually doesn't add up to a row of beans. Except some people will believe anything if it suits their purpose.
For Baker to get off square one he has to show two things. One, that somebody or some organisation would have benefited from Kelly's death. Two, there was no reason for him to take his own life and little prospect of him doing so. Neither is the case.
The Government, security services, Prime Minister etc. were the last people to want Dr Kelly dead because he discredited much of what Gilligan said and was in no position to know detail of the rest. His death plunged Blair and his government into a major crisis.
There was, however, a reason why Dr Kelly was desperate following his appearance before a House of Commons select committee. He did not tell MPs the truth about his own dealings with journalists. They knew that because he had been betrayed by Gilligan. He realised his future was in serious jeopardy and with it much of his life's work compromised.
Kelly was an intensely private man and could see the whirlwind about to strike. He decided not to wait for it. It is a tragedy that the meanderings of a bit-part MP should bring the pain back to Dr Kelly's family. He was a good man who made one mistake and decided to pay for it his way. Norman Baker should let it go.
http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=17472416&method=full&si teid=62484&headline=beware-this-mp-s--dossier---name_page.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
For more information go to:
http://www.dr-david-kelly.blogspot.com/
Above site regularly updated so check back frequently.
See archived material here:
http://www.deadscientists.blogspot.com/ |
Garrett |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leiff
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 509
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Stotty wrote:
'IT is a sad fact of life that when a horrible and unexpected death occurs there are always those who will not accept anything except conspiracy and murder. It happened to Diana and it is happening now to Dr David Kelly, the scientist who killed himself after being revealed as the weapons expert contact of the BBC's Andrew Gilligan.'
To use the fact that there are many unanswered questions and suspicious circumstances in relation to the death of Diana as justification for not believing that Dr Kelly was murdered is preposterous! Maybe the reason for the intrigue surrounding both deaths is because both deaths are suspicious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Garrett Cooke
Minor Poster
Joined: 07 Aug 2005
Posts: 85
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Leiff you are of course correct. The article copied below - from the Daily Express no less - is extremely good and factually correct. It makes the point, referring to the way the death certificate was issued before Hutton had completed, that (my emphasis): | Quote: | This level of evasion increases speculation about the only British
individual not to have an inquest into his unexplained death - despite the
fact that the pathologist who carried out the post mortem now says he would
be more comfortable if the inquest were re-opened. |
Of course the Diana inquest is yet to complete and the coroner has excused himself from the job - I wonder why?
| Quote: | 31 July 2006
The Daily Express
Three years after the apparent suicide of the weapons expert who blew the
whistle on the 'dodgy dossier' that took us into the Iraq War, we reveal how
the Government still avoids answering crucial points about his death
IT WAS the late summer of 2003 and all eyes were on the Royal Courts of
Justice in central London. Day after day, witnesses to the Hutton Inquiry
revealed how Tony Blair's fixers had pressed the intelligence services to
deliver the reports he wanted in order to justify the invasion of Iraq.
Lord Hutton was also set to piece together the final hours of Dr David Kelly,
the internationally respected weapons expert whose shock death had triggered
the inquiry.
Elsewhere, a less transparent process was under way. On August 11, 10 days
after the Hutton Inquiry opened, Home Office officials were holding a secret
meeting with Nicholas Gardiner, the Oxfordshire coroner. It was he who had
begun the formal inquest into Dr Kelly's death following the discovery of
the body on July 18. The inquest had then been adjourned on the orders of
the Lord Chancellor - the Prime Minister's exflatmate Lord Falconer -
because establishing what happened was now the remit of Hutton.
But Mr Gardiner, based in the village of Cumnor near Oxford, was continuing
his work anyway. Contrary to normal practice for such matters, he was doing
it in private.
On August 14, he met the pathologist who performed the post mortem and the
toxicologist who examined Dr Kelly's body for drug poisoning - weeks before
either man was due to testify to Hutton. Then, on August 18, he issued a
death certificate. A full month before the public inquiry was due to hear
any of the evidence from the beauty spot where the 59-year-old
father-of-three had apparently committed suicide, Gardiner registered a
precise cause of death. In other words, the case was effectively closed
before it had been opened.
This revelation, apparently now conceded by Constitutional Affairs Minister
Harriet Harman under pressure from Lib Dem MP Norman Baker, has given
further weight to the concerns of a growing group of senior medical and
legal professionals - previously aired in the Daily Express nearly two years
ago - that the suicide conclusion cannot be justified on the available
evidence.
"I find it most peculiar that the Oxfordshire coroner felt able to issue a
full certificate giving reasons for death without taking formal evidence
from those who were able to help determine the causes of death, " says Mr
Baker, who last weekend became the highest-profile figure to challenge the
conclusion of the Hutton Inquiry that Dr Kelly killed himself.
"The coroner issued the certificate when the inquiry set up to find the
causes of death had barely started, and when his own inquest had been
suspended. I also find it disturbing that the coroner should have met Home
Office officials shortly before deciding to issue a certificate. That seems
to border on the improper."
Questions are also raised by Michael Powers QC, a leading expert on
coroner's law. "There is provision for a coroner to issue an interim death
certificate confirming that the person has died, where the precise cause of
death will be established later. I would have thought that, given the
circumstances, issuing a full death certificate giving the cause of death is
a bit unusual, " he says.
Dr Kelly was the country's foremost expert on the dismantling of biological
weapons and regarded as having safeguarded the future of the planet with his
painstaking work decommissioning lethal stocks built up by the former Soviet
Union. He had been honoured in 1996 for his services to the UN and the UK,
and was being considered for a knighthood.
He was unknown to the public until he was revealed as the whistleblower in
the row about the Government's "dodgy dossier" on Iraq. He admitted briefing
BBC reporter Andrew Gilligan, who had accused the New Labour spin machine of
inserting false information into the dossier to boost the case for invasion.
When Dr Kelly told his bosses at the Ministry of Defence that he had spoken
to Gilligan, he was assured his anonymity would be preserved.
Instead, he was thrown to the wolves.
Two days after a humiliating appearance before a committee of MPs, he went
for an afternoon walk near his Oxfordshire home, and never returned.
HE WAS found the next morning in circumstances which suggested he had
committed suicide. There was no sign of struggle.
His left wrist had been slashed with a gardening knife he had owned since
boyhood and he had apparently taken an overdose of painkillers prescribed to
his wife Janice. She testified that, on the morning of his death, she was
physically sick when she saw how desperate and "shrunk" her husband looked.
After hearing the evidence and seeing only a fraction of the witness
statements taken by the police, Lord Hutton concluded that Dr Kelly had
taken his own life. He said the principal cause of death was bleeding from
the wound to his wrist, accelerated by an overdose of Coproxamol tablets and
a pre-existing case of coronary artery disease. Mr Gardiner had the option
to resume the inquest once Hutton had issued his report but chose not to do
so - not least because Mrs Kelly and her three daughters have repeatedly
said they are satisfied with the cause of death.
However, many objective observers are not. A number of medical professionals
and others have said that the cut to Dr Kelly's wrist had severed the
smallest artery in the wrist, which in their view could not cause death. The
paramedics said there was much less blood than they would have expected to
see from a spurting artery. The toxicologist admitted there was not enough
Coproxamol in Dr Kelly's system to kill him. While it might look as if Dr
Kelly had been trying to kill himself, the method he had chosen, experts
argued, would not have succeeded.
Another oddity was the position of the body, said by the searchers who found
it to be leaning against a tree but which later ended up lying flat some
distance away. Lord Hutton was satisfied the different witnesses were
describing the same sight but dissenters complained that Hutton did not hear
evidence under oath and had no power to subpoena witnesses or have them
rigorously cross-examined.
Mr Baker says that a proper inquest would have more likely got to the bottom
of such puzzles.
"There are the basic questions that went unasked, or at least unanswered, "
he says. "Whose fingerprints were on the knife? Was there any DNA other than
Dr Kelly's in the blood samples taken? Was Dr Kelly's watch, which lay
beside him, broken or intact? What time did it show? What were the last
calls made to the mobile phone he had on him? We do not know and Lord Hutton
did not ask."
Michael Powers says part of the problem was that the overwhelming focus of
interest was the political background to the affair, such as the alleged
"sexing-up" of the dossier and the question of whether the Prime Minister
had lied in taking the country to war.
"I have a feeling that it was taken for granted that this was suicide and it
was just reaffirmed by Hutton that it was, " he says. "But in law there is a
presumption against suicide. You have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that
is what happened. On the evidence I have seen there is reasonable doubt, so
there should be an open verdict." He stresses this does not mean there was a
conspiracy to kill Dr Kelly. "There is no doubt that he may have committed
suicide. The question is, can we be sure that he did?" The irregular
behaviour of the Oxfordshire coroner merely adds to the sense that all is
not as it should be - particularly since requests for clarification are
stonewalled. The Daily Express asked Mr Gardiner for an assurance that the
proper procedure was followed in all respects over the issuing of a full
death certificate. He has yet to provide one.
Mr Baker has drawn a similar blank. When he asked Ms Harman why the coroner
issued a full death certificate barely a week after Lord Hutton began taking
evidence, she said: "The Hutton Report obviously ranged much more widely,
which is one of the reasons why a further inquest by the Oxfordshire coroner
was not necessary."
When Mr Baker asked what was discussed when the Home Office officials met
the coroner, Ms Harman confirmed the date of the meeting but avoided any
mention of the content. The Government has also refused a number of
applications under the Freedom of Information Act to see documents relating
to the case.
This level of evasion increases speculation about the only British
individual not to have an inquest into his unexplained death - despite the
fact that the pathologist who carried out the post mortem now says he would
be more comfortable if the inquest were re-opened.
Mr Baker says that a man of Dr Kelly's stature deserves to have his death
fully investigated but the country also has a right to know precisely what
happened in an incident central to one of the most important episodes of
recent British history.
"We owe it to him and to ourselves, " he says. "So far, I haven't speculated
on what might have happened but I will carry on asking questions until we
can be sure we know the truth."
http://www.dr-david-kelly.blogspot.com/
http://www.deadscientists.blogspot.com/ |
Garrett |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Garrett Cooke
Minor Poster
Joined: 07 Aug 2005
Posts: 85
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 10:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have only just seen the following article from the London Evening Standard dated 24th July and written by Andrew Gilligan. Curiously (to my mind) he is satisfied with the suicide conclusion...
| Quote: | Copyright 2006 Associated Newspapers Ltd.
All Rights Reserved
The Evening Standard (London)
July 24, 2006 Monday
SECTION: A MERGE; Pg. 16
LENGTH: 1448 words
HEADLINE: Those who say David was murdered are so wrong;
An MP has produced a dossier that claims to show the death of Dr David Kelly was not suicide. But the man at the heart of the story disagrees
BYLINE: ANDREW GILLIGAN
BODY:
I STILL remember, of course, how I heard about David Kelly's death. It started with a phone call, fairly early in the morning, from my friend Mick Smith, then the defence correspondent of the Daily Telegraph. Kelly had gone missing, and the police were looking for a body.
Even then, as I sat worrying on the train into work, I couldn't really believe that he'd died. It must have been one of those muddles. Maybe he'd stayed over with a friend. Maybe he'd had an accident and hadn't been able to get help. Maybe he'd just decided to go off for a few days to relieve the pressure and would turn up in some hotel, a la Stephen Fry.
When I walked in to the office of Richard Sambrook, the BBC's director of news, he got up, closed the door and told me to sit down. While I had been on the way in, he said, not sounding like he believed it himself, Kelly's body had been found, and it looked like suicide. He had taken painkilling tablets and slashed one of his wrists.
If Sam brook sounded shaken, it was nothing to how I sounded. He had to get me a glass of water to calm me down.
As well as being upset, I was very, very surprised. I hadn't known David all that well - I'd never met his family, for instance - 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 anyway, the affair was basically over: Parliament was about to break for the summer recess, the BBC had refused to confirm or deny whether David was my source, and the battle between Downing Street and the BBC had reached stalemate. Politics was closing down for a month. The row between the Government and BBC was essentially a diversion. All those spin-doctors, toady New Labour journalists and compliant MPs who had helped to keep it bubbling for the previous few weeks were about to disperse to Tuscan poolsides.
All David had to do was keep his head down and it would go away. The Government, I thought, was unlikely to discipline him for the partial admissions he had made about his contacts with me. They needed him more than he needed them. If anyone was going to find Tony Blair some weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, it was David Kelly.
Such were my thoughts on that morning of 18 July 2003, thoughts that made me, at first, question whether David did actually kill himself. Now, almost exactly three years later, the indefatigable Lib-Dem MP, Norman Baker, has added some political weight to those questions.
Baker has produced what the Mail on Sunday describes as a "dossier" - not a good choice of word - which is said to "raise new questions" about the accepted cause of death.
I like Baker. I think he is one of the very few MPs who gets his teeth into ministerial legs. If there are grounds for supposing that David Kelly was indeed killed by somebody else, I do not believe that considerations of taste or offence to his family should prevent it being investigated. But I say to the world what I said to Baker when he asked me about it last year: I am pretty sure that David did commit suicide.
Baker and the conspiracy theories are wrong.
Even if the motives for David to kill himself do not, on the face of it, seem quite strong enough, the motives for anyone else to kill him are far, far weaker. In whose interests can it possibly have been to murder David Kelly? The Government's? But his death plunged the Government and New Labour into the greatest crisis in its history, a crisis from which it has still not recovered, a crisis that has some claim to be the turning point in the Blair premiership.
The intelligence services? But even if you accept the (wildly false) premise that MI5 and MI6 are rogue states within a state, popping off their own citizens whenever they feel like it, why on earth would they want to kill Kelly? His death didn't do them much good, either.
The Iraqis? The Saddam regime had dissolved weeks before and its members were hiding in holes. The Americans? Not without British permission, surely - and, again, where's the motive?
Looking at Baker's dossier, I notice that most of the "new questions" it raises are actually quite old. The most important piece of evidence questioning the official explanation is a letter written by three (later five) doctors to The Guardian newspaper as long ago as January 2004, providing statistics which showed that it was unlikely for death to be caused by slashing a minor artery, as David had done, and questioning the toxicity of the co-proxamol painkillers in his blood.
Baker has gone a little further, revealing the important fact that only one person - David Kelly - died in this way in the UK during the whole of 2003.
However, Chris Milroy, professor of forensic pathology at the University of Sheffield, points out that "the problem with the use of statistics in any single case is that 'unlikely' does not make it impossible". Furthermore, he said, "the toxicology [on Kelly] showed a significant overdose of co-proxamol".
There is also the argument that there was very little blood around David when he was discovered. Two ambulance workers who attended him, Dave Bartlett and Vanessa Hunt, said they would expect to find several pints of blood around someone who had died through slashing a wrist. They believe it "incredibly unlikely" that David died from the wound they saw.
David Kelly's place of death was, however, a field. Professor Milroy and another forensic pathologist, Professor Guy Rutty, suggested that the blood could easily have seeped into the ground.
Another explanation, said Professor Milroy, might be that David's heart condition may have made it difficult for
murdered are so wrong him to sustain any significant blood loss.
Baker also says that calls to David's mobile were not checked by the police.
If the evidence of the police to Hutton is to be believed, they were checked. There is also some confusion about the position of the body, with different accounts from different witnesses. But eyewitnesses, as we know from the Jean Charles de Menezes case, are seldom consistent and not always reliable.
Anyone who has been involved in a court case or criminal trial knows that minor anomalies and inconsistencies often arise, and are not necessarily suspicious. Given the fallibilities of human memory, a set of neat, perfectly consistent accounts may actually be more suspect.
Baker is right to criticise the Hutton Inquiry; I was not alone in feeling that the tragedy at the centre of the piece was the one thing on which Hutton never really shed direct light.
But there were indirect shafts. We learned far more of the Government's extraordinary and contemptible behaviour towards David Kelly; the promises to protect him, the name game played to expose him, the offering him up to parliamentary committees, neither of whom actually wanted to see him until prodded by Downing Street. And all this in the service of a complete lie - that my famous story was "100 per cent wrong".
AFTER learning about everything Kelly went through - the pressure, the endless interviews, the coaching sessions in what to say, the demands for a complete accounting of his contacts with journalists - it is easier to understand the road which led him to that Oxfordshire hillside.
And I think the evidence to Hutton did show me, and the other journalists who dealt with David Kelly, that we really knew rather little of him. We had no idea about his worries about his employment status. We knew nothing (why should we?) of his relationship with his wife - who, we discovered during the inquiry, was not even told he had taken up the Baha'i faith until nearly two years afterwards.
I came to the view after the inquiry that David was somebody - a type not entirely unknown in journalism, either - who defined himself almost entirely by his work. The fear of losing that work must have been terrifying to him, even if it was not a well-founded fear.
We learned that he was much more vulnerable than we had supposed. With the support of the UN and the Government in his weapons inspector role, he was a man of major achievement, and the confident, authoritative contact we had all known. Stripped of that support, isolated, furious at his treatment by his superiors, he did not realise that a lot of the whirlpool swirling around him was essentially Westminster chest-beating, political rhetoric. That was why the words turned deadly.
Lord Hutton had many failings. But the verdict of suicide on David Kelly was almost certainly one of the few things he got right.
|
Garrett |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Very curious.
He also omits to mention another group who would benefit from his "suicide". They would not suffer any fallout either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Garrett Cooke
Minor Poster
Joined: 07 Aug 2005
Posts: 85
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I sent this letter to the Evening Standard regarding the Gilligan piece:
| Quote: | Dear Sir,
Someone should tell Andrew Gilligan that suicide must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. His attempt to demolish the doubts and discrepancies outlined by Norman Baker in his Mail on Sunday article was feeble.
Moving from a personal impression, ‘I am pretty sure the David did not commit suicide’; to a categorical assertion, ‘Baker and the conspiracy theorists are wrong’, Gilligan offers no concrete evidence for his views. He talks of a lack of motive for murder as though it is evidence for suicide. It isn’t. He refers to some of the questions raised in Norman Baker as ‘old’. Being old doesn’t make them less relevant.
He makes reference to Dr Kelly’s ‘overdose’ of co-proxamol. But, according to the forensic toxicologist who gave testimony to Hutton, the amount in his blood was insufficient to cause death. As for his ‘heart condition’, atherosclerosis is not something people die of, and the forensic pathologist presented to Hutton no evidence of cardiac arrest.
Gilligan’s assumption that the blood would have seeped away is just that – an assumption; where is the evidence that it did? None was presented to Hutton.
Eyewitnesses, says Gilligan, are ‘seldom consistent’. But the two people who saw the body before the police took charge agreed the body was against a tree; and those who witnessed the body after the police took charge agreed it was lying on its back. No doubt about it.
Yours Faithfully, |
Garrett |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andrew Johnson
Mighty Poster
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1919
Location: Derbyshire
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Garrett,
That's a super response. Well done!
_________________
Andrew
Ask the Tough Questions, Folks! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Agreed, very good letter Garrett.
What's happened to Andrew Gilligan ?
The reporter that brought us "the sexed up dossier" and the Alistair Campbell WMD's in 45 minutes claim now writes this piece of garbage ?
This volte-face is exemplary of the what passes for "journalism" in Bliar's Britain.
If you step out of line we don't need to discredit you, we'll just make you do it yourself.
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Justin
9/11 Truth Organiser
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 500
Location: Cumbria / Yorkshire Dales
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Very good letter. Hopefully we will get Norman Baker and Andrew Gilligan to see David Ray Griffin either at the Conway Hall or at the Frontline Club. We're working on it.
_________________
Connect to Infinite Consciousness - enjoy the ride! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
utopiated
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 645
Location: UK Midlands
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One element I've struggled in the past to substantiate is the reference made on infowars.com that states people were seen fleeing the David Kelly scene in "black ski-masks".
Now as much as Alex Jones is pretty good [and ahead of most of us] at documenting and sourcing his claims and evidence most articles that mention this pretty important item end up linking back to some infowars type resource. Until we find a primary or support source for this info it's difficult to use it.
If anyone has located another source for this, please post it.
_________________
http://exopolitics.org.uk
http://chemtrailsUK.net
http://alienfalseflagagenda.net
-- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Garrett Cooke
Minor Poster
Joined: 07 Aug 2005
Posts: 85
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Utopiated,
I don't know about men in ski masks but there was this exchange at the Hutton Inquiry pm on 23rd September 2003, with My Digemans asking the questions of Assistant Chief Constable Page (the line and page numbers refer to the Hutton Inquiry transcript):
| Quote: | 201
15 Q. In the course of your inquiries were you contacted by
16 a person who suggested there had been three men dressed
17 in black wandering around at the time that Dr Kelly's
18 body was found?
19 A. Yes, I think both we and the Inquiry received
20 a communication from a gentleman who expressed concern
21 that he had noticed three individuals dressed in dark or
22 black clothing near the scene where Dr Kelly's body was
23 found. I am speaking from memory, but I think the
24 sighting was at somewhere between 8.30 and 9.30 in the
25 morning, something like that.
202
1 Q. Did you follow up that sighting?
2 A. Yes, we undertook some fairly extensive work. We got
3 statements from all our officers who were at the scene
4 and that was in excess of 50. We plotted their
5 movements on a map and eventually were able to
6 triangulate where the writer was talking about and
7 identify three of our officers, so I am satisfied that
8 I am aware of the identity of these three individuals. |
It always sounded to me like an evasion to discredit the witness who saw the men and make the whole idea that they were anything but policemen seem ridiculous. However, of course, as I have posted earlier on this thread the first police officer to take charge of the body (DC Coe) had two 'officers' with him (according to all witnesses except himself) and these were plain clothes (according to all witnesses except the police). One was described as wearing black which was interepreted (by the witness) as 'search and resue'. My guess is these three men (DC Coe and his 'colleagues') were the 'men in black' as dismissed by Page above.
Garrett
Last edited by Garrett Cooke on Sun Aug 13, 2006 5:56 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Garrett Cooke
Minor Poster
Joined: 07 Aug 2005
Posts: 85
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 5:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was sent the following article today. I don't believe that it has been published.
| Quote: | Kelly and dark media games
If you consider only the bare facts of the Kelly case and disregard the wild presumptions of the media, it is pretty clear in which direction they point.
Dr Kelly’s email to a journalist only hours before his death, with its chilling warning of ‘dark actors playing dark games’, is clearly indicative not of suicide but of murder, and reveals that Kelly was well aware of the danger he was in.
Yet the media interpreted ‘dark actors playing dark games’ as alluding to the threat of depriving the man of his pension or some other punitive measure. This ought to strike us as odd, since ‘dark’ is quite inappropriate as a term to describe disciplinary action, no matter how harsh; it is a term used to denote something that is evil and covert, and it is barely conceivable that the articulate Dr Kelly, whose use of language was so semantically precise, would have used these words in so careless a manner.
Equally strange is the stark fact that, despite the paucity of evidence to support the hypothesis that Kelly had taken his own life, no one suggested it might be anything other than suicide. Right from the start and without exception all of the press and broadcast media implied – even when it did not explicitly state - that Kelly had been so stressed by recent events that he had killed himself. No one pointed out the blindingly obvious: that if you are in fear of your life, you are quite naturally going to be…er…well, stressed.
And no one ventured to suggest that Kelly might – just possibly - have been murdered. That in itself is curious considering the media’s usual appetite for sensationalism. Make no mistake about it, murder and intrigue make good copy! But most extraordinary of all is that even before details of how he had died had been released by the police, the media was doing its best to plant in the public’s mind the idea that Kelly had committed suicide!
Here’s the BBC, for instance. At 19.54 hrs on 18 July after a body ‘matching the description of Dr David Kelly’ had been found but before police had released details of the manner in which he had died, the BBC News website updated a report which ended with the following quotation from an MP:
“He is not used to the media glare, he is not used to the spotlight he has been put under.”
It’s a standard technique in manipulative or ‘persuasive’ journalism: the quotation from a figure of authority strategically placed at the end of a piece, ensuring that the reader is left with the intended impression - in this case that Kelly couldn’t handle the stress of being in the public eye and therefore had probably killed himself.
This is what SKY News had to say after Kelly went missing:
“The disappearance of Kelly has raised concern over the way he was treated by MPs…We ask you… [the public]… to say if you think Dr Kelly was put under too much pressure.”
Note how even at this early stage, viewers are being invited to focus their mind on suicide. They are not being asked to say whether they think Dr Kelly knew too much for his own good, or whether there were people who might want to get rid of Kelly. Here’s SKY quoting the Prime Minister, again before the police had released details of slashed wrists:
“Dr Kelly’s death…is an absolutely terrible tragedy…”
Note the use of the word ‘tragedy’: it is a perfectly apt term to describe a suicide, but quite inappropriate to use in the context of a possible murder.
Here’s what the Edinburgh Evening News had to say on 18 July. This issue went to press after the body had been found but before there was any information released on how Kelly had died.
“Whitehall insiders said the possible suicide of Kelly would make Campbell’s future….”
Of course, it’s only possible suicide – but why not possible murder?
And this is the Guardian (18 July), even before Kelly’s body had been found, doing its best to imply that Kelly had committed suicide :
“[Recent events] would put personal pressure on him…the man has been treated in a way that is absolutely inexcusable”. ..[and in another report in the same issue]… “Andrew Gilligan will be feeling worried, frightened and pretty sickened by the news that…Dr Kelly may have taken his own life”.
When in due course a post-mortem report declared the cause of death to be ‘haemorrhaging from a wound to the left wrist’, nobody acknowledged that evidence for suicide and evidence for murder made to look like suicide is identical. Nobody pointed out, either, how odd it was that Kelly, a microbiologist who must have been familiar with any number of methods of killing oneself that were both rapid and painless, should have chosen one that guaranteed unnecessary physical suffering and a lingering death. From that point onward, presumption became fact and all media debate centred around why Kelly had committed suicide and who was to blame.
It is a measure of the persuasive power of the media that everyone – with the exception of the few impervious to its influence – now believes that Kelly committed suicide, and they do so despite all evidence to the contrary. What is particularly disturbing is the apparent ease with which a whole nation can be made to believe something so implausible. None of the evidence was hidden; it was all out in the open.
We knew that Kelly’s mood was upbeat and ‘combative’ hours before he died, that he was looking forward to returning to Iraq, that he was waiting ‘until the end of the week’ even before forming an opinion on how his committee appearance had gone, that he was seen smiling as he left for his customary walk (and how in heaven’s name can a man smile just before he kills himself), that he actually chatted for five minutes with a neighbour during his walk, that he had been described by a colleague as mentally tough and a man of principle who had endured years of confrontation and harassment in Iraq, that he was devoted to his wife and family yet left no suicide note …
We knew all this and more, and still thought Kelly killed himself because he couldn’t handle the stress. We believed it against all reason purely and simply because the media persuaded us that he did, all of us except those who could see through their dark linguistic games - those so easily dismissed ad hominem (but not by argument) as ‘conspiracy theorists’.
I do not profess to know the exact nature of the relationship of the British media with the government and Whitehall, though I do understand and can identify the linguistic techniques of persuasion used to ensure that the people of this ‘democratic’ nation of ours do not think thoughts that could be a threat to the dominant order. The press and the broadcast media are free only within certain constraints. The D-notice system ensures that the media do not publish ‘sensitive’ government information and refrain from airing views that might incite civil disobedience or challenge the power of the state; and while it is not legally binding, failure to comply can be costly.
Above and beyond the D-Notice, however, is the absolute authority of the Home Office to circumscribe what material can and cannot be publicised and this extends not only to newspaper and broadcast media but to publishing firms as well. The power of the government over the media and the media over the minds of the people is the most effective way of - in Chomsky’s phrasing - ‘deterring democracy’. That is why, if Kelly was murdered, it will never become public knowledge.
Joseph Dormer
The author invites anyone who is interested in how the media impacts the Kelly story to contact him:
josephdormer@whsmithnet.co.uk
If you wish to copy Rowena Thursby then she would also be interested.
RowenaThursby@onetel.com
Kelly Investigation Group
http://www.dr-david-kelly.blogspot.com/ |
Garrett |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Garrett Cooke
Minor Poster
Joined: 07 Aug 2005
Posts: 85
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This was sent to me today by Rowena.
| Quote: | WANTED:
INSIDE INFORMATION
ON DR KELLY'S DEATH
Tuesday 29 August 2006
Interest in Dr Kelly's death remains high. People want to know if in the same way 'intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy' , this troublesome scientist's demise was fixed according to the government's wishes.
After hundreds of hours spent analysing evidence given to the Hutton Inquiry and questioning witnesses, the Kelly Investigation Group has all but overturned the three official causes of death.
It has been established:
1. Dr Kelly could not have bled to death from the wound in his left wrist. From a single transected ulnar artery one would lose about a pint of blood; to die of haemorrhage one has to lose 4 to 5 pints. One of the paramedics at the scene, shocked at the absence of blood, remarked to his colleague:
'Whatever he died of, he didn't die of that'.
2. Contrary to the impression given at the Hutton Inquiry, forensic toxicology cannot accurately ascertain the level of medication a person has taken before death. After death, over time, concentrations of a drug can increase as much as tenfold. The toxicologist stated, based on measurements done at least 30 hours after death, the amount of co-proxamol in Dr Kelly's bloodstream was a third of what is normally a fatal amount. If measured at the time of death, the actual amount could have been a tenth of that - in other words, Dr Kelly may only have taken 2 or 3 tablets - little more than the therapeutic dose.
3. The forensic pathologist offered no evidence that the atherosclerosis found post mortem played a significant part in Dr Kelly's death. He did not die from cardiac arrest; if he had, the forensic pathologist would have said so at the Hutton Inquiry.
So how did Dr Kelly die? We have yet to discover.
We know that Dr Kelly's body was moved: once before it was discovered by two search volunteers, and once after it had been discovered -- during the half hour a police detective was supposedly guarding it.
A dead body that moves suggests, at the very least, some kind of illicit activity.
Through parliamentary questions, MP Norman Baker has uncovered a clandestine meeting that took place between the Coroner Nicholas Gardiner and figures at the Department of Constitutional Affairs - long after the inquest had been subsumed into Lord Hutton's inquiry and Gardiner had been relieved of his duties in the case. The idea behind this meeting was apparently to organise a full death certificate before the Hutton Inquiry had started to examine the death itself. (Normally an inquest is adjourned and a temporary death certificate issued until an inquiry confirms the cause of death).
An intelligence figure has come forward to say Dr Kelly's death was a 'wet disposal' (assassination made to look like suicide) - hastily performed.
Establishing the true means by which Dr Kelly met his death however, will require hard evidence.
We have shown there is a case to be answered, but much more can be achieved. With MP Norman Baker at a critical stage in his investigation, NOW is the time for anyone who knows anything that sheds light on how Dr David Kelly died to share what they know. If this British government scientist was 'removed' for being a thorn in the side of those intent on mounting a full scale invasion of Iraq to gain control of the region, it must be exposed.
If you worked with Dr Kelly, knew him, were part of the police or forensic investigation - or know someone who might have direct knowledge about his death - explain your concern in confidence now. Please phone 01425 638409 or 01425 620297 - or e-mail RowenaThursby@onetel.com
COPY THIS MESSAGE AND PASS IT AROUND
For recent articles see: http://dr-david-kelly.blogspot.com/
Some early articles archived here: http://www.deadscientists.blogspot.com |
Please pass on the request for information to anyone that is interested.
Garrett |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ianrcrane
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 352
Location: Devon
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 12:09 pm Post subject: Wanted: Info' on Dr. Kelly's Death |
|
|
My attention was drawn to the following blog by Dr. David Halpin, one of the three signatories to the Letter, published in The Guardian in January 2004, questioning the veracity of the official account of Dr. Kelly's death.
See: www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,3604,1131833,00.html
A further letter, published in September 2004, highlighted additional evidence justifying their continued concern.
See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/hutton/story/0,,1314212,00.html
WANTED: INSIDE INFORMATION ON DR KELLY'S DEATH
Interest in Dr Kelly's death remains high. People want to know if in the same way 'intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy' , this troublesome scientist's demise was fixed according to the government's wishes.
After hundreds of hours spent analysing evidence given to the Hutton Inquiry and questioning witnesses, the Kelly Investigation Group has all but overturned the three official causes of death.
It has been established:
1. Dr Kelly could not have bled to death from the wound in his left wrist. From a single transected ulnar artery one would lose at the most, one pint of blood; to die of haemorrhage one has to lose 4 to 5 pints. One of the paramedics at the scene, shocked at the absence of blood, remarked to his colleague,"Whatever he died of, he didn't die of that".
2. Contrary to the impression given at the Hutton Inquiry, forensic toxicology cannot accurately ascertain the level of medication a person has taken before death. After death, over time, concentrations of a drug can increase as much as tenfold. The toxicologist stated, based on measurements done at least 30 hours after death, the amount of co-proxamol in Dr Kelly's bloodstream was a third of what is normally a fatal amount. If measured at the time of death, the actual amount could have been a tenth of that - in other words, Dr Kelly may only have taken 2 or 3 tablets - little more than the therapeutic dose.
3. The forensic pathologist offered no evidence that the atherosclerosis found post mortem played a significant part in Dr Kelly's death. He did not die from a heart attack; if he had, the forensic pathologist would have said so at the Hutton Inquiry.
So how did Dr Kelly die? We have yet to discover.
We know that Dr Kelly's body was moved: once before it was discovered by two search volunteers, and once after it had been discovered -- during the half hour a police detective was supposedly guarding it.
A dead body that moves suggests, at the very least, some kind of illicit activity.
Through parliamentary questions, MP Norman Baker has uncovered a clandestine meeting that took place between the Coroner Nicholas Gardiner and figures at the Department of Constitutional Affairs - long after the inquest had been subsumed into Lord Hutton's inquiry and Gardiner had been relieved of his duties in the case. The idea behind this meeting was apparently to organise a full death certificate before the Hutton Inquiry had started to examine the death itself. (Normally an inquest is adjourned and a temporary death certificate issued until an inquiry confirms the cause of death).
An intelligence figure has come forward to say Dr Kelly's death was a 'wet disposal' (assassination made to look like suicide) - hastily performed.
Establishing the true means by which Dr Kelly met his death however, will require hard evidence.
We have shown there is a case to be answered, but much more can be achieved. With MP Norman Baker at a critical stage in his investigation, NOW is the time for anyone who knows anything that sheds light on how Dr David Kelly died to share what they know. If this British government scientist was 'removed' for being a thorn in the side of those who had mounted a full scale invasion of Iraq to gain control of the region, it must be exposed.
If you worked with Dr Kelly, knew him, were part of the police or forensic investigation - or know someone who might have direct knowledge about his death - explain your concern in confidence now. Please phone 01425 638409 or 01425 620297 - or Email RowenaThursby@onetel.com
PLEASE COPY THIS MESSAGE AND PASS IT AROUND.
For more information on the strange and unusual circumstances surrounding the death of Dr. David Kelly, go to: www.dr-david-kelly.blogspot.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Garrett Cooke
Minor Poster
Joined: 07 Aug 2005
Posts: 85
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The following article sent to me by Rowena describes the formation of the Kelly Investigation Group (KIG) and the progress that has been made to date in the (real) investigation of the death of Dr David Kelly. I will not have the time to put in all the hyperlinks to other articles that are available in the original but no doubt you can look at http://dr-david-kelly.blogspot.com/ to get them.
| Quote: | The article below describes how the Dr David Kelly truth movement evolved. It was written at the request of a journalist who wanted to know more about the Kelly Investigation Group.
You can also find it on the Kelly blog at http://dr-david-kelly.blogspot.com/
Rowena Thursby
RowenaThursby@onetel.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
UNCOVERING THE TRUTH ABOUT
DR DAVID KELLY’S DEATH 17 September 2006
The Kelly Investigation Group (KIG) is a loose affiliation of professionals and laypeople from all walks of life; it includes nine doctors, four of them surgeons, and a QC. Medical and legal expertise has ensured our objections to the the official line on Dr David Kelly’s death are taken seriously by the media and public, even if the authorities affect to ignore them. Our aim is to ensure agents of the state do not bury the truth, along with Dr Kelly.
SUSPICIONS FROM THE START
During 2002/3 it was obvious to many that the search for WMD in Iraq was a disingenuous ploy to secure regime change. Blair and his aides had claimed that it would take only 45 minutes for Saddam to launch a CBW attack on British bases, and that mobile laboratories found in Iraq were for the purpose of making chemical/biological weapons. In asides to journalists Dr David Kelly had shot both assertions down in flames. So when he was found ‘dead in the woods’ three days after being hauled before a televised government committee, many of us were highly suspicious.
Why were Thames Valley police labelling Dr Kelly’s death a ’suicide’ before his body had been examined? At the age of 72, judge and law lord Brian Hutton had never before chaired a public inquiry - so why did the prime minister’s old friend Charles Falconer appoint this safe establishment figure at such extraordinary speed*?
As the Hutton Inquiry got underway in August 2003, I pored over the transcripts in an attempt to understand exactly how Dr Kelly had died. I listed aspects of the case that did not add up, and joined an internet forum to correspond with others working in a similar vein. One was IT expert Garrett Cooke.
INITIAL PLEA TO THE CORONER
On 20th November 2003 Garrett and I wrote a letter to coroner Nicholas Gardiner explaining our concern that the inquest had been subsumed into the Hutton Inquiry. In particular, we listed the reasons why we felt a full inquest with powers to subpoena witnesses and hear evidence under oath should be held:
Dr Kelly’s body appeared to have been moved - twice
the knife, bottle of water, glasses, and cap reported beside the body by later witnesses, were not seen by the two volunteer searchers who first discovered it
DC Coe was with the body at the time its position changed from sitting to lying
DC Coe claimed he was with one other officer yet five witnesses said he was with two
the primary cause of death was given as haemorrhage from an incised wound to his left wrist, yet the amount of blood at the scene was, according to the paramedics, extremely sparse
vomit stains from the corners of his mouth to his ears suggested Dr Kelly had died on his back, yet his position when found was slumped against a tree
the puzzling nature of the wound: the severing of a single artery deeply embedded in the left wrist and total avoidance of the more superficial radial artery
We received no response.
‘SECTION 17A’ MISAPPLIED
Later we discovered that to avoid an inquest, Lord Chancellor Charles Falconer had invoked Section 17a of the Coroner’s Act of 1988, citing as his reason avoidance of duplication (having both an inquest and an inquiry) and consequent distress to the Kelly family.
However, Section 17a was introduced in 199 at his instigation to avoid unnecessary repetition (and mounting costs) in cases of multiple deaths with a single known cause, e.g. a train crash or a ferry disaster; Dr Kelly’s was a single, high profile death of unknown cause. In view of the political manoeuvres preceding this high-profile death, one suspects the avoidance of ‘distress’ to the family was a very British excuse masking the real reason: that the authorities did not want witnesses subpoenaed and giving evidence on oath.
Had the scientist’s close female friends, Mai Pederson, Gabriele Kraatz Wadsack and Judith Miller been subpoenaed we might have been provided with a much more intimate portrait of events leading up to his death.
BUILDING A MEDICAL CASE
Faced with the Coroner’s wall of silence, I decided to try to secure medical support. I started a blog listing a number of KIG concerns and wrote two articles for the internet entitled - ‘Dark Actors at the Scene of Dr Kelly’s Death’ (October 2003) and ‘The David Kelly Story: Turning Murder into Suicide‘ (28 November 2003.) The latter was a critique of the forensic pathologist’s evidence to the Hutton Inquiry; for to me, his reasoning seemed in places, quite farcical.
On 29 November 2003 Dr Searle Sennett, a specialist in anaesthesiology from Johannesburg, responded to these articles by e-mail as follows:
Dear Rowena
I have just read your piece at rense.com and also the one at propaganda matrix.com and I complement you on both of these articles but, more importantly, on your guts and preparedness to take on the Establishment. I am a retired specialist anaesthetist and I too, without knowing the details of the Kelly incident that you do, considered the whole “suicide” story to be phoney in the extreme. I am quite satisfied that cutting the ulnar artery in the manner described could not have been fatal.
He was clearly murdered in some other manner and, in my opinion, there are a variety of ways in which it could have been done.
You did mention the use of a chloroform-like substance, of which there are many, and I can assure you that the modern volatile anaesthetic agents are extremely potent. They would not necessarily kill but could certainly cause unconsciousness in less than a minute especially if applied in high concentration. The subject could then be asphyxiated by means of a plastic bag over his head which, in fact, could also contain the agent. To show this technique is distinctly feasible, I mention the incident where a potent anaesthetic agent was introduced into the air-conditioning system of a Moscow theatre and which incapacitated and, indeed, killed the Chechen terrorists and some of their hostages.
Injectible muscle relaxants which paralyse all muscles within seconds and stop the breathing of the subject receiving them. Although normally intravenous, the injection could, in fact, be given into any muscle or even under the hair of the scalp, or elsewhere, so as to avoid subsequent detection. Muscle relaxants are part of the lethal cocktail injection used in many US prisons to carry out the death sentence.
It will be very interesting to see what approach Lord Hutton takes concerning the inquest and whether he, too, attempts to cover up the obvious murder. Meanwhile, I am not surprised that Tony Blair is suffering from a variety of stress-related disorders!
Keep up the good work.
Your sincerely
Searle Sennett
Johannesburg
Anomalies continued to accumulate, but things were set alight when a friend sent me a letter published on 15 December 2003 in the Morning Star from orthopaedic and trauma surgeon, David Halpin. Here was a surgeon, a man with intimate knowledge of arteries, and how they behave, saying he did not see how Dr Kelly could have died of haemorrhage from transection of a single ulnar artery:
I write to enquire as to the status of the coroner’s inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly. I hope that it has not been subsumed within the Hutton Inquiry.
He had been put through the psychological mincing machine of the elite running this country and it is easy to imagine his sense of failure as well as betrayal in both directions. We have been told that he died from a cut wrist and that he had non-lethal levels of an analgesic in his blood.
As a past trauma and orthopaedic surgeon, I cannot easily accept that even the deepest cut into one wrist would cause such exsanguinations that death resulted.
This one point was key: the primary cause of death could not have been haemorrhage because it is virtually impossible to bleed to death from severing a single ulnar artery. Over the ensuing weeks we honed and refined our case to include arguments against the second and third causes of death cited - poisoning by co-proxamol and atherosclerosis. With Dr Sennett and David Halpin’s continued input and support, the KIG was able to develop a strong medical case against suicide.
Around this time we were joined by Jim Rarey, an ex-newspaper editor from the US, who wrote seven articles for the internet on a number of aspects of Dr Kelly’s death.
KELLY’S DEATH A PHENOMENON ACCORDING TO STATISTICS
In January 2004 we were contacted by Dr Andrew Rouse, Senior Lecturer in Public Health and Dr Yaser Adi, from the Dept of Public Health & Epidemiology at the University of Birmingham, who three months earlier had submitted a letter to national newspapers:
IS DR KELLY A STATISTIC OR A PHENOMENON?
The pathologist who performed Dr Kelly’s autopsy reported that “The features… of Dr Kelly’s wounds… were quite typical of self-inflicted illness”. Unfortunately he did not report that it is almost unheard of for such wounds to result in death.
Suicide associated with wrist-slashing is extremely rare - so rare that the Office of National Statistics does not report wrist slashing as a specific cause of death; it groups such deaths with other uncommon suicide methods such as belly and abdomen stabbings and throat cuttings (see table)
This table shows that fewer than five 55-50 year old men use cutting and piercing instruments to commit suicide annually. This statistical evidence, combined with the fact that even after searching the medical literature and speaking to medical and surgical colleagues we have not been able to document that wrist slashing can lead to successful suicide, suggests that for all practical purposes wrist slashing suicide does not exist in Britain.
Suicide and self inflicted injury by cutting and piercing instruments amongst males in England and Wales
Year 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69
1991 2 4 9 8
1992 5 6 4 1
1993 7 4 6 4
1994 2 3 3 6
1995 6 5 3 5
1996 6 4 4 5
1997 8 4 3 1
1998 7 7 2 8
1999 5 4 5 3
2000 9 3 2 4
Av 5.5 4.4 4.1 4.5
Data from: Twentieth Century Mortality, Office of National Statistics, London 2003
We must also remember that Dr Kelly was a first rate researcher. As such, before making a suicide attempt, he would surely have done an internet or library search into the success of various suicide methods. He would have learnt that - since it invariably fails - wrist slashing is not a recommended suicide method. There fore why would Dr Kelly slash his wrist in the first place and against, all odds, actually die?
MORE DOCTORS CHALLENGE OFFICIAL SUICIDE RULING
As the medical case challenging suicide became stronger, we were happy to welcome in a new doctor - Chris Burns-Cox, and two more surgeons - Martin Birnstingl and William McQuillan. Birnstingl, a retired specialist in vascular surgery from London responded enthusiastically to a Kelly article with “Count me in”. He was a foundation member of the Vascular Surgical Association of GB and Ireland and President in 1986. In private e-mails he wrote:
Vascular surgeons deal with vessels of all sizes but I have never seen or heard of anybody dying from a cut wrist artery even when both ulnar and redial have been cut
Dr Kelly did not “slit his wrists” as suggested by Professor Milroy. The evidence is that one wrist was cut, dividing only one of the four main wrist arteries, which is very unlikely to have been fatal.
During 2004 I made contact with a Dr C Stephen Frost who had written a list of 35 questions about Dr Kelly’s death on the Independent internet forum . Working together, and liaising with the rest of the medico-legal team, we managed to get five letters published in the Guardian:
1. OUR DOUBTS ABOUT DR KELLY’S SUICIDE 27 January 2004 signed by David Halpin, C Stephen Frost, Searle Sennett
2. MEDICAL EVIDENCE DOES NOT SUPPORT SUICIDE BY KELLY 12 February 2004 signed by Andrew Rouse, Searle Sennett, David Halpin, C Stephen Frost, Peter Fletcher, Martin Birnstingl
Our arguments met with a blustering emotional response from Professor Chris Milroy in a letter entitled:
FANTASISTS & DR KELLY14 February 2004
3. QUESTIONS STILL UNANSWERED OVER DR KELLY’S DEATH 19 February 2004 signed by Andrew Rouse, Searle Sennett, David Halpin, C Stephen Frost, Peter Fletcher, Martin Birnstingl
4. NEW DOUBTS OVER KELLY 28 September 2004 signed by C Stephen Frost, David Halpin, William McQuillan, Searle Sennett
5. QUESTIONS OVER KELLY 28 December 2004 signed by Dr Michael Powers QC, Martin Birnstingl, Chris Burns-Cox, C Stephen Frost, David Halpin, William McQuillan, Andrew Rouse, John Henry Scurr, Searle Sennett
The first letter, published on 27 January to coincide with the publication of the Hutton Report, caused a media storm, and we were inundated with requests for radio and TV appearances. David Halpin appeared on TV and radio in the UK, and Dr Sennett gave newspaper interviews from his home in Johannesburg. The Evening Standard ran a headline on the evening prior to the publication of the Hutton Report: “Was Kelly Murdered?” But since ‘The Sun’ chose to leak the Hutton Report a day ahead of publication - and we think this may have been a deliberate tactic - the angle of possible murder was not pursued in the media the following day.
On 21 January 2004 five of us - David Halpin, Dr Searle Sennett, Dr C Stephen Frost, Garrett Cooke and myself - wrote an eleven-page letter to the Coroner setting out our concerns in detail. He failed to respond. A month later I phoned him to ask if he had received the letter - he said he had noted the contents but did not think these were sufficient grounds for concern. He had seen a police report and was satisfied everything was in order.
On 31 January highly qualified pathologist Dr Peter Fletcher wrote a letter to the Daily Telegraph:
Sir,
As a retired pathologist, I have been dismayed by the lack of information on the precise circumstances of the discovery of Dr David Kelly’s body. It is claimed that the major cause of death was blood loss from a severed wrist artery, possibly complicated by the ingestion of an unstated number of co-proximal tablets. An adult human body contains about 10 pints of blood, of which about half has to be lost to cause death. Anybody who has seen five pints of blood spurted forcefully out of a severed artery will know that there is one hell of a mess. The two searchers who found the body did not even notice that Kelly had incised his wrist with a knife. The two paramedics who arrived at the scene later apparently stated that there was remarkably little blood around the body.
Something, somewhere is seriously wrong. Either Dr Kelly did not die of blood loss or it occurred at some place distant from where the body was found. It is, of course, possible that blood was spattered everywhere, which four witnesses failed to notice.
A coroner has the power of subpoena, witnesses give testimony under oath and a jury is usually involved. Lord Hutton was denied these requirements for his inquiry.
Dr A Peter Fletcher, Pathologist, Halstead, Essex
I contacted him and he too agreed to lend his support to the KIG.
I was put in touch with lawyer Michael Shrimpton by an e-mail correspondent and he joined the cause on 29 January 2004. The following month he was invited onto the Alex Jones Show, one of the top conspiracy radio programmes in the US. Unfortunately the slant he put on Kelly’s death - that it was a ‘hit’ performed by the French DGSE - was not one shared by the rest of the KIG; although allegedly received from intelligence sources, there was no way of corroborating it. We were frankly uneasy with his strong bias towards the US’s ‘neocon’ administration.
On 8 February 2004 Andrew Rouse and Yaser Adi submitted an adapted version of their original letter entitled ‘Hutton, Kelly and the missing Epidemiology’’to the British Medical Journal. They called for readers to send in details of any 55-65 year old males who had committed suicide by slashing their wrist, during the previous 10 years.
Professor Milroy responded to their report by saying, 'The problem with use of statistics in any single case is that unlikely does not make it impossible.’ In his view the combination of all three causes on the death certificate was sufficient to account for Dr Kelly’s death. This had been the key tactic of KIG opponents: not to examine one cause of death at a time, but if one cause did not stand up, hop on to the next one, or even cite all three as ’somehow’ working together -- hardly a scientific way to proceed.
Another surgeon - John Scurr - was quoted in a Washington Post report, 21 February 2004.
I looked up his details and found him to be a practising vascular surgeon, also London-based. David Halpin wrote to him and he too become a willing participant in the KIG. He has since appeared on Channel 4 News and in a US documentary to be screened in 2007 - in both cases explaining in his professional capacity why Dr Kelly is highly unlikely to have bled to death from a single transected ulnar artery. He put us on to his friend and lawyer, QC Michael Powers. Once he had reviewed all evidence accumulated by the KIG, it was his view that there should have been a full inquest into Dr Kelly’s death.
On 29 February 2004 Renan Talieva, an e-mail correspondent from the US, wrote a long and detailed article derived from KIG discussions and her own assiduous research entitled “The Strange Suicide of David Kelly.”
CORONER SHUTS THE DOOR
Before the Coroner returned to court after reviewing The Hutton Report, a letter from Michael Powers was published by ‘The Times’ declaring:
Suicide cannot be presumed. Even evidence pointing to the likelihood that Dr Kelly took his own life is not sufficient. Suicide has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.
After reviewing the Hutton Report, coroner Nicholas Gardiner returned to court on 16th March 2004 to announce his decision on whether to re-open the inquest into Dr Kelly’s death.
The same day David Halpin was interviewed by the Today programme, and when Gardiner declared his satisfaction with the Hutton Inquiry‘s ruling of suicide, was asked to comment.
Around this time, practising vascular surgeon John Scurr and QC Michael Powers made separate appearances on Channel 4 News. Mr Scurr explained why, in his view, one cannot bleed to death from full transection of a single ulnar artery while Michael Powers stated that by law, suicide must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, and an inquest was the only forum equipped to provide this degree of rigour. In his view the medical evidence provided since the Hutton Inquiry was sufficient to warrant a full inquest. When phoned by the Channel 4 News team, Dr Nicholas Hunt, the forensic pathologist to the Hutton Inquiry, said that he too would be ‘more comfortable’ with a full inquest.
On 13 May 2004 Renan Talieva answered the Coroner’s refusal to reopen the inquest with an excellent and thoroughly researched critique of the coroner’s actions in “The Coroner and David Kelly”.
In response to the KIG’s medical arguments, Professor Robert Forrest, forensic toxicologist at Sheffield University, set up the ‘International Toxicology Advisory Group’ and on 18 September 2004 had an article published in the BMJ entitled ‘Forensic science in the dock’. The Hutton Inquiry had conveyed the impression that Dr Kelly may indeed have taken the 29 tablets missing from the blister packs in his pocket, even though the toxicologist stated that the amount he measured was only a third a what is normally a fatal amount. But in this article Forrest et al listed reasons why forensic science was unable to specify the amount of drug a person had taken prior to their death.
“Post-mortem measurements of drug concentration in blood have scant meaning except in the context of medical history, the sequence and circumstances surrounding death, and necropsy findings. The paucity of evidence based science, coupled with the pretence that such science exists in regard to post-mortem toxicology, leads to the abuse of process…’
In December 2004, in a 'Daily Mail' article entitled ‘Specialists demand a new Kelly inquiry’ it was reported that medical and legal experts in the KIG were arguing that it was vital to have an inquest. Michael Powers called for backers to help him fund a legal challenge against the coroner’s decision not to reopen the inquest. It was discovered however, that without a ‘properly interested person’ to call for a judicial review of the coroner’s decision, the KIG could not proceed.
A ‘properly interested person’ is a legal term for what in Coroner’s Law has to be someone who stands to gain or lose by the death in question. In practise, that could only have been Mrs Kelly, and she made it clear in a private phone call that she did not want the inquest re-opened because she was convinced her husband had committed suicide. She claimed to have studied the KIG’s doubts about the official reason for her husband’s death, but gave few reasons for her thinking it was suicide other than her husband’s anguish at the time. This was a blow which appeared to shut the door on further progress. However we persevered.
PARAMEDICS UNHAPPY WITH OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH
I contacted the two paramedics who had attended the scene of Dr Kelly’s death and put them in touch with Antony Barnett of the Observer. They arranged to meet Barnett in the presence of their solicitor and gave him the material for his 12 December 2004 article, ‘Kelly Death Paramedics Query Verdict’ where their shock at the general absence of blood at the scene and scepticism over the official cause of death was described in detail. When the press arrived on their doorsteps, they gave a televised press conference.
MP NORMAN BAKER BEGINS HIS PRIVATE KELLY INVESTIGATION
it was not until MP Norman Baker came forward this year (2006) to announce that he had resigned his seat on the front bench to pursue a private investigation into Dr Kelly’s death that the case was injected with new life. According to a Guardian report:
Mr Baker said he wanted to return to the issue because the 2003 Hutton inquiry had "blatantly failed” to get to the bottom of matters. He vowed to question ministers and to unearth new facts in a bid to establish the "truth" of the case.
After a few months on the case he wrote a major article for the ‘Mail on Sunday’ vowing to prove Dr Kelly’s death was not suicide. His new finding was that the Coroner had irregular and clandestine meetings with Department of Constitutional Affairs officials and representatives of the forensic staff just prior to the issuing of a full death certificate - before Lord Hutton had even started to examine the details of Dr Kelly’s death. Normally a temporary death certificate is issued pending a full inquiry. In this case it seems, the rules were bent.
In 2006 the KIG launched a NEW DR DAVID KELLY BLOG and is now working in conjunction with Mr Baker. Significant progress is being made. Watch this space…..
* Dr Kelly was found dead on 18th July 2003; Lord Hutton was appointed only a few days later - on 22nd July. |
Garrett |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Garrett you and your team are to be applauded for your efforts.
I thought I had been following Dr Kelly's murder quite closely but reading your post shows me not closely enough.
I had not realised that Norman Baker had resigned his front bench position or Mrs Kelly's reluctance.
With full respect to Mrs Kelly, I am astonished that she is currently unwilling to consent to being party to a legal petition.
Truly gobsmacked by that news.
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xmasdale
Angel - now passed away
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1959
Location: South London
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This looks like excellent work. Congratulations Garrett; I had no idea you were involved in this.
The public have recently been exposed to so many instances of cover-up and apparent cover-up that I can't help thinking people must be sensing that there has been multifaceted campaign of dishonesty to get backing for the War on Terror. Apart from 9/11 itself we have had: weapons of mass destruction, yellow cake uranium from Niger, Saddam’s ability to strike at us within 45 minutes, Saddam’s mobile chemical bomb factories, Downing Street’s dodgy dossier, the "ricin conspiracy" in which no ricin was ever found, the "suicide" of Dr David Kelly, the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, the Forest Gate raids, the 7/7 London bombings, the recent airport bomb scare in which the public were greatly inconvenienced but offered no information whatsoever, and more.
You can explain away two or three such incidents as dishonesty by just a few people, but when so many incidents are suspicious you begin to feel there is a corrupt, co-ordinated secret campaign for war penetrating most powerful insitutions.
Perhaps exposure of the Kelly case will lead to unravelling of many more. We are reaching the stage when the public no longer trust politicians or the media.
Noel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The David Kelly "Dead in the Woods" PSYOP
by Rowena Thursby
October 20, 2006
GlobalResearch. ca
British diplomat David Broucher describes to the Hutton Inquiry a meeting he had with David Kelly in February 2003. An audible gasp goes up when he recalls how the government scientist apparently predicted his own suicide. But evidence subsequently unearthed by Kelly's daughter, shows their one and only meeting actually took place in February 2002 - a whole year earlier. It would have made perfect sense in February 2003 for them to have discussed Resolution 1441, the September dossier and ‘the 45 minutes’ as Broucher claims; but wind back the clock to February 2002 and what do we find? None of them were in existence. Was the whole Broucher-Kelly conversation a fabrication? Had this civil servant been sent to help contrive one of the biggest cover-ups in British history?
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=200610 20&articleId=3549
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackbear
Validated Poster
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 656
Location: up north
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 9:48 am Post subject: "Suicide" knife...No Fingerprints. |
|
|
Police could not find any fingerprints on Dr Kelly's 'suicide' knife
By ANDY DOLAN
14th October 2007
Fresh doubts were raised over the suicide of Dr David Kelly after it emerged that no fingerprints were found on the knife he supposedly used to kill himself.
The Hutton Inquiry into the death of the Ministry of Defence weapons expert ruled that he slashed one of his wrists with a blunt garden knife and took an overdose of pills.
But the campaigning Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker has carried out his own investigation after forensic experts questioned the official version of events.
He has called for the case to be re-opened after Thames Valley Police revealed that no fingerprints were found on the knife.
The Lewes MP made the discovery after submitting a Freedom of Information request to the force.
The lack of fingerprints is especially strange as police records also revealed the germ warfare expert was not wearing any gloves when he died – nor were any found at the scene of his death.
Mr Baker said: 'It is one of the things that makes me think Dr Kelly was murdered.
'The angle you pick up a knife to kill yourself – there would be fingerprints. Someone who wanted to kill himself wouldn't go to the lengths of wiping the knife clean of fingerprints.
'And wearing gloves would seem very odd when you are about to cut your own wrists. It is very strange.'
Mr Baker is also suspicious about the cut to Dr Kelly's wrist.
It completely severed a tiny blood vessel called the ulnar artery, which is deep in the wrist and protected by nerves and tendons.
It is highly unlikely anyone without a blood-clotting defect would bleed to death from a single cut to this artery.
It would have required unusual force to cut through the tendons, particularly with a blunt gardening knife, and it would have been very painful.
To ascertain just how unusual the injury was, Mr Baker asked the Office of National Statistics how many people in the UK died in 2003 from a cut to the ulnar artery.
He was told that Dr Kelly was the only one. The scientist was found dead in woodland near his home in Southmoor, Oxfordshire, in July 2003 after becoming trapped at the centre of a vicious war of words between the Government and the BBC.
His death came days after he was unmasked as the source of a Today programme report alleging Labour had 'sexed up' a dossier outlining the case for war in Iraq.
The document had famously claimed that Saddam Hussein could launch a nuclear or biological weapons strike on Britain within 45 minutes.
Dr Kelly, a father of three, was grilled on TV by MPs on the Foreign Affairs Select Committee.
His widow, Janice, claimed her husband had been put under 'intolerable pressure'.
But Lord Hutton exonerated the Government and ruled that Dr Kelly's death was a suicide – leading to accusations that the inquiry had been a whitewash.
Independent doctors have pointed to discrepancies in the post-mortem examination results.
They say neither the cut to Dr Kelly's wrist nor the drugs he took were enough to kill him.
Friends and relatives said the doctor had shown no suicidal tendencies, and had been looking forward to his daughter's wedding.
However, Mrs Kelly remains convinced that her husband killed himself and refused to comment on the latest development.
A Thames Valley Police spokesman said: 'It has been confirmed that there were no fingerprints on the knife whatsoever. This however does not change the official explanation of his death.'
Gosh......2.54 million.....cost of the Huttin Inquiry....lies + bull don't come cheap.!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_artic le_id=487627&in_page_id=1770#StartComments
28 comments..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2279
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This always reminds me of the case of the journalist for the LA Times who uncovered the close links between the US army and crack dealing in the poor ghettoes of the USA.
He was found to have committed suicide with two bullets to his head!!!
The whole of Britain knows Dr Kelly was bumped off. Only the Hutton inquiry thought otherwise.
Last edited by conspiracy analyst on Tue Jan 12, 2010 10:53 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
datman
Minor Poster
Joined: 18 Oct 2006
Posts: 20
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thermate911
Angel - now passed away
Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 1451
Location: UEMS
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 12:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"made to look like a suicide"
Now who are the likeliest suspects with such a modus operandi?
I wonder how long it will take to finger Challabi or the Mossad...
And when will we see a similar 'case re-opening' for dear departed Robin Cook?
. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ravenmoon
Validated Poster
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 410
Location: Sheffield
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2279
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I like the bit that he booked a flight, and then committed suicide with his left hand and he was right handed.
A bit like the alleged suicide bombers of 7/7 who bought parking tickets presumably to return from heaven with the women the media say they were promised to go ...clubbing?
Most people I have spoken to know Dr. Kelly was bumped off. Even the Hutton Inquiry knew that. Almost all MP's know it.
What is at stake is that the system requires death as a form of sanctions to keep people in their place. Step outta line, you will get the VAT people after you, or a made up heart attack, or a suicide.
Gangsterism for war and oil have gone mainstream. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tomcatma
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 20
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One thing. after the hutton report Blair was due to speak in Parliament. It was a thursday, early september. on the day he was due to speak in parliamnet there was a massive power outtage, mainly in south and east london. it struck me as rather convenient.
i was talking about this to a complete stranger at a party the following Saturday. he bent double holding his belly laughing after i told him that i thought the power outtage was suss. he told me that he worked for an auditing company for several electricity corporations. he said the rumour in his office was that it was a back scratching exercise between private leccy and Blair gov. the leccy companies were not sure if they had 'made' enuff leccy for the following winter, which was predicted as being very parky indeed, so they wanted to practice a power outtage to prepare themselves (ie, effects on infrastructure, keeping the meat machine going). they asked the Lair gov for this and they got given the day that lair was going to make his speech on Hutton/Kelly. pretty obvious to me, if you take your nose out of the trough. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karlos
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Norman Baker is one of a tiny tiny handful of MPs who is actually a proper MP.
He has quite singlehandedly brought this search for Kelly's killers to the mainstream and hopefully will achieve justice.
All of us know that Kelly was murdered because he proved the WMDs was a lie and there was no reason to invade Iraq and kill a million people.
Jenny Tonge was another good liberal.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Reflecter
Validated Poster
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 486
Location: Manchester
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For anyone that missed the hardcopy of the DM's coverage I have scanned the coverage into a perfectly readable rar file on jpg's found here;
DAVID KELLY daily mail article.rar (15.53 MB)
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=VKSXS61J
The full account includes a 3 page excerpt from his book and details of where and when you can get it, or pre order it.
I suggest we book him for a speaking tour to help promote his work asap and I'm sure he'll be agreeable. He does indeed appear to be an MP of rare integrity and has certainly gone farther than any others.
To the current moderators, is there any chance of re-linking the audio from his I believe Ipswhich campaigns appearance and the BBC's Conspiracy files programme into this thread? Would seem a good idea for any visitors to find these available in light of his recent reappearance in the MSM.
_________________
The Peoples United Collective TPUC.ORG
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
