Wednesday, 25 April 2012

Who Killed David Kelly? - Whose body was found at Harrowdown Hill?

This post consists largely of an early draft of a chapter entitled, "Whose body was found at Harrowdown Hill?".

That's a question that a Coroner is required by Law to answer with respect to any death.

The Hutton Inquiry's examination of the question was visibly cursory.

Maybe that doesn't matter.

Maybe it matters enormously. If the Harrowdown Hill body wasn't David Kelly's then a very different scenario comes into view.

As always feel free to contact me privately with comments or other questions you'd like to see covered in the book, "Who Killed David Kelly?".

See Who Killed David Kelly? - Contacting me.

Whose body was found at Harrowdown Hill?

In this chapter I want carefully to look at the evidence about whose body was found at Harrowdown Hill.

I wouldn’t be in the least surprised if your first reaction to that is to wonder if I’m taking a step too far towards a weird and wacky conspiracy theory.

I don’t think I am.

One of the key pieces of information that a Coroner has to establish (or try to establish) is who is the person who died.

With a suspicious death that’s obviously particularly important.

With respect to the Harrowdown Hill body, the question is “Was it David Kelly’s body that was found at Harrowdown Hill on 18th July 2003?”.

And the evidence that it was David Kelly’s body is surprisingly thin on the ground.

At the Hutton Inquiry neither Janice Kelly nor Rachel Kelly was asked about identification of the body.

So no evidence was taken from those who would, assuming the body was David Kelly’s, have been able, in normal circumstances to identify the body.

The only mention at the Hutton Inquiry of anything resembling identification evidence was by Assistant Chief Constable Michael Page.

In response to a question about the mysterious disappearance and reappearance of Dr. Kelly’s dental records we read ( ):

However, upon hearing about
12 this, and again I stress because I am a police officer
13 and probably inherently suspicious, because dental
14 records are a means of identification it did prompt me
15 to take the extra precaution of having DNA checks
16 carried out to confirm that the body we had was the body
17 of Dr Kelly, notwithstanding the fact that that had been
18 identified by his family.

So, ACC Page tells us, in a throwaway line that the body had been identified by the family.

What ACC Page didn’t say was that there was another question about the reliability of identification evidence that hadn’t, at that time, been publicly disclosed.

During the postmortem carried out on the evening of 18th July 2003, Dr. Nicholas Hunt had dissected the soft tissues of the face.

FACE: The facial soft tissues were dissected to the level of the bone and there was no evidence of soft tissue or bony injury.

The postmortem was carried out on the evening of 18th July 2003. The visual identification of the body was carried out on the morning of 19th July 2003.

How different did the face of the Harrowdown Hill body look after the soft tissues had been dissected?

We don’t know.

Was the appearance changed sufficiently to render visual identification unreliable?

We don’t know.

Did Janice Kelly say something clearcut like, “Oh yes, that’s David.” or, as a result of the dissection of the face, something uncertain like “Well, I suppose it is probably David.”?

We’re not told.

Was it the face that was used to identify the body at all?

We’re not told.

Could the unique feature of the body have been the curving scar on the right elbow? (You know the scar resulting from the injury and operation that everybody at the Hutton Inquiry carefully didn’t mention.)

We don’t know if that irony took place or not.

So, there are three sources of doubt at the identification evidence:

1. The visual identification was, in effect, hearsay since no member of the Kelly family stated that they had identified the body
2. The supposed visual identification of the body was carried out after the face was dissected, possibly altering the appearance of the face
3. The dental records were, so it seems, removed and replaced by person or persons unknown

ACC Page told the Hutton Inquiry that he asked for DNA tests on the body and the family.

The results of those tests (or what purports to be the results of those tests) were first disclosed in June 2011 [check] following the Attorney General’s statement to the House of Commons. Appendix 2 where the DNA results are contained was initially not disclosed but after a complaint to the Attorney General’s Office it was added to the documents on the AGO website.

However, Appendix 2 was disclosed only in heavily redacted form.

All the components of the DNA results for Sian Kelly, Ellen Wilson and Janice Kelly are redacted.

The result is that we are asked to take the DNA match on trust.

As I write this chapter, the inquest of the MI6 agent Gareth Williams is taking place. One issue in that connection is that the DNA evidence was messed up. Was that because the DNA database was hacked? We don’t know but we can’t exclude the possibility.

If the LGC Forensics DNA database can be hacked or is otherwise unreliable even the unredacted DNA evidence supposedly identifying the Harrowdown Hill body as Dr. David Kelly may be false or otherwise unreliable.

I started this chapter by asking “Whose body was found at Harrowdown Hill?”.

The strict answer to that question is that we don’t know.

Tuesday, 24 April 2012

Who Killed David Kelly? - 17th July 2003 - The Perfect Day for the Perfect Political Murder?

The bulk of this post consists of the draft text of what may be the first chapter of "Who Killed David Kelly?".

The chapter sets out hugely important questions about whether the death of Dr. David Kelly was an attempt at committing the perfect political murder, rather than the supposed "suicide" that Lord Hutton asked us to believe in.

The quoted material is very much a draft. It is subject to change.

But the draft chapter does reflect my current thoughts and opinion about the true interpretation of the death of Dr. Kelly.

Let me know what you think.

If you don't want to post public comments. You can email me at the address noted here: Who Killed David Kelly? - Contacting me.

17th July 2003 – A perfect day for a perfect political murder?

Imagine the scene.

In early 2003 Dr. David Kelly knows that his life is in danger, telling a colleague and an acquaintance that he might “be found dead in the woods”.

Little does he know just how much his life is in danger.

Plans are being laid for the perfect political murder on the politically perfect day in 2003 – 17th July 2003.

The perfect political murder, of course, is a murder that is never recognized for what it is.

How is it to be concealed from public recognition?

How is it to be concealed from Parliamentary scrutiny?

Timing is key.

What is the perfect day to carry it out?

17th July 2003.

The House of Commons heads off for its summer holidays.

The Press is starting to snooze preparing for the traditional summer “silly season”.

The political atmosphere is poisonous – the Government has taken the country into a war that many believe is illegal.

A mechanism to shut off serious examination of the murder is needed.

And this is what a Machiavellian minds comes up with.

Before the body is seen by a pathologist, someone who I’ll call the Spin Master is to start spinning a suicide story using Thames Valley Police as his mouthpiece. Off the record, of course.

Before the body is examined by a pathologist, the Government is to announce an ad hoc judicial inquiry which will shut down all discussion in the media until the judicial inquiry reports.

Identify and appoint a senior judge who doesn’t need to be leaned on; a judge who knows his duty.

And so we reach, 18th July 2003.

The suicide story is being spun before a doctor first officially sees the body.

A senior judge, a Law Lord no less, is appointed to conduct a judicial inquiry before the forensic pathologist starts to examine the body.

The Suicide Spin has already captured the minds of the media so the real reason for such a precipitate judicial inquiry isn’t recognised.

The media on the 18th July 2003 and the ensuing days is full of the sad “suicide” of Dr. David Kelly.

Not one of the mainstream media outlets questions the Suicide Spin. The Spin Master eases back in his seat, very satisfied.

For the plan to work, he knew that he’d need a network of corrupt officials and professionals.

But he knew that people cooperate with a little pressure. Or sometimes a lot.

It’s not hard to find a corrupt Law Lord.

Nor corrupt Policemen.

But doctors?

Ah! Here is one who will examine the body and fail … or choose to fail … to switch his brain on. Ideal.

But what about the family?

No problem. Just watch.

So there you have it.

A perfectly planned, perfect political murder, perfectly executed.

And the judicial inquiry goes smoothly. OK, a lot of questions weren’t asked. A senior Policeman had to tell a lie or two. The odd piece of key evidence had to be suppressed. The grieving widow put on a stormer of a performance telling that story about 10 minutes to evacuate the house before the media pack arrived. Brilliant.

And the report of the judicial inquiry causes a political storm.

But wait! What is this?

A few doctors start questioning the Suicide Spin. That wasn’t supposed to happen.

But a nice, friendly Coroner closes down the possibility of more honest investigation of the death. The Spin Master views Mr. Gardiner in a warm glow.

But the doctors have connected with an instinct of the British public that knows that something about the death of David Kelly stinks, despite the brilliance of the Suicide Spin, despite the cooperative and corrupt Law Lord.

And now an iconoclastic MP gets in on the act. And, worse, writes a book.

And, worse still, the MP puts in a formal application to the Attorney General asking for an inquest.

But a few quiet words and that’s closed down. Phew!

But the irritating public and medical interest in the case goes on.

A second application to the Attorney General is sent in.

How are we going to fix this one? It’s getting dangerous. The Truth could come out.

Never fear, a cooperative Attorney General produces rafts of documents. And a forensic pathologist wanders up prepared not to see glaring flaws with his colleague’s work in 2003. Yes, that’s the key. A reassuring report from a cooperative “independent expert”.

We’re almost there. We’ll make it go away for ever.

Confidence in delivery to the House of Commons by the Attorney General. And a deluge of written responses and other documentation.

Nobody will find their way through that haystack of information to the needle of the murder of David Kelly.

Surely not?

But one stubborn doctor seeks Judicial Review of the Attorney General’s refusal to seek an inquest

And as a bit-part player along comes a High Court Judge who takes a deferential approach to the views of our friendly, corrupt Law Lord and a “never mind the quality feel the width”approach to the evidence that an inquest is needed into the suspicious death of Dr. David Kelly.

Case closed.

Or so it seems.

Is that narrative fact or fantasy?

Was David Kelly murdered for political motives?

Did political, medical, police and judicial personalities act corruptly in the way I’ve suggested?

Did David Kelly’s family betray him by inventing a flight from the media pack on the evening of 9th July 2003? And by concealing evidence of his past right arm injury that made it difficult or impossible for him to cut his own left wrist?

Did the Scene Setter make some vital mistakes at Harrowdown Hill? Requiring some dangerously late tweaks, including a readjustment of the position of Dr. Kelly’s body.

Did the Spin Master leave a few too many clues to his activity on the morning of 18th July 2003?

Answering questions such as those is what the rest of this book is about.

I’ll present the evidence that leads me to lay out a scenario of a perfect political murder.

I’ll present my analysis of the evidence that’s already in the public domain.

And point you to some of the important questions that have yet to be answered.

Am I fantasizing?

Or calling attention to a political scandal that dwarfs Watergate?

A scandal in which the perfect political murder was attempted.

A scandal that involved the UK Government of the time, senior Police officers in 2003 and in 2011, forensic pathologists and forensic scientists. Oh yes, and a nice friendly Law Lord who long, long ago learned how not to see evidence after watching how Lord Widgery put a lid on the murderous events of Bloody Sunday.

Thanks Lord Hutton.

A scandal that raises serious doubts about the foundations of British justice. If you can’t trust a Law Lord, can’t trust senior Police officers and can’t trust forensic pathologists, the credibility of British Justice lies in deserved tatters.

Fact or fantasy?

You can make up your own mind.

Did David Kelly kill himself?

Was David Kelly killed by person or persons unknown as part of the perfect political murder?

Who killed David Kelly?

You decide.

Who Killed David Kelly? - Request to Malcolm Bruce MP to ask the Prime Minister if COBRA was activated on 17th or 18th July 2003

The Cabinet Office is being visibly evasive about whether or not the COBRA procedure (the UK Government's Emergency Reponse procedure) was activated on 17th or 18th July 2003 in relation to the disappearance and death of Dr. David Kelly.

See The Death of David Kelly - A coy Cabinet Office on COBRA for some relevant background.

Today I sent an email to my MP, Malcolm Bruce, asking him to table a written question to the Prime Minister as to whether or not COBRA was activated on 17th or 18th July 2003.

The title of the email was:
PQ to the Prime Minister - COBRA on 17th/18th July 2003

The text of the email was:

Mr. Bruce,

I write further to our meeting some months ago and your subsequent correspondence with the Attorney General.

I write to request that you ask the following written question of the Prime Minister.

"To ask the Prime Minister if the COBRA (Cabinet Office Briefing Room A) procedure was invoked at any time on 17th and/or 18th July 2003 in relation to the disappearance and death of Dr. David Kelly and if he will make a statement."

The reason for requesting that you table that as a written question is the obstructive response of the Cabinet Office who currently claim that "the Cabinet Office, which includes the Prime Minister's Office, does not hold information relevant to your request."

I find that response from the Cabinet Office wholly unacceptable and evasive.

If COBRA was activated in the context of the disappearance and death of Dr. David Kelly I think that would be a matter of considerable public and media interest.

I hope you will agree that it is important to establish the truth regarding this matter.

I am now engaged in writing a book entitled, "Who Killed David Kelly?".

In the interests of transparency I am posting a copy of this email on the "Who Killed David Kelly?" blog here:

Please let me know how you intend to proceed.

Thank you

(Dr) Andrew Watt

Who Killed David Kelly? - Copyright and such stuff

I'm maybe at risk of stating the obvious here.

Original material on this site is my copyright.

Or (c) Dr. Andrew Watt 2012, if you want the formal version.

Any quoted material in draft chapters posted online remains the copyright of those quoted.

I know. You didn't really want to know that, did you?

Monday, 16 April 2012

Who Killed David Kelly? - Which past presidents of the BAFM offered support to Dr. Nicholas Hunt?

The bulk of this post is the text of an email sent today to Dr. John Clark of the British Association in Forensic Medicine.

Dr. Nicholas Hunt claimed that the three immediate past presidents of the BAFM offered their "express support" to him.

I would like to know who those individuals were and what was the substance of the "express support".

The title of my email to Dr. Clark was:
BAFM - Past presidents

The text of the email to Dr. Clark was:

Dr. Clark,

I wonder if I might trouble you for minor pieces of factual information relating to the British Association in Forensic Medicine.

Dr. Nicholas Hunt has stated in a letter to the Attorney General's Office that three past presidents of the BAFM had been supportive of him with respect to the matter of the suspicious death of Dr. David Kelly.

See page 1 at

There is no information on the BAFM web site (at least that I can find) that names the three individuals from whom Dr. Hunt claims to have received "express support" re his findings on the suspicious death of Dr. Kelly.

Could you please supply me with the names of the three presidents of BAFM who preceded Dr. Cary?

I ask in the context of a book provisionally entitled "Who Killed David Kelly?".

In that context a copy of this email will be placed on the "Who Killed David Kelly?" blog here:

I look forward to hearing from you.

Thank you

(Dr) Andrew Watt

Thursday, 12 April 2012

Who Killed David Kelly? - Contacting me

I can readily understand that, in view of the political and other sensitivities surrounding the death of Dr. David Kelly, some readers may not wish to leave attributable comments on the blog.

If you wish to contact me by email simply use the letters of the four word title of this blog in sequence but without the question mark, add an @ sign and then add gmail, a dot then com.

Hopefully that description should be transparent for human beings and opaque to spambots.

Who Killed David Kelly? - Request to Julie Flint for copy of her secret submission to the Hutton Inquiry

The bulk of this post consists of an email sent earlier today to Julie Flint, a friend of Dr. Kelly's who provided a secret submission to the Hutton Inquiry.

Ms. Flint's submission to the Hutton Inquiry may or may not shed light on the cause of Dr. Kelly's death.

I believe it is inappropriate that it continue to be secret.

The title of the email was:

Secret Julie Flint submission to the Hutton Inquiry

The content of the email was:

Ms Flint,

The Hutton Inquiry website indicates that you provided a secret submission to it.

It is referenced here:

The document is labelled, "Julie Flint: not for release - submission to the inquiry".

I am in the early stages of writing a book provisionally entitled "Who Killed David Kelly?" and would like to receive a copy of your submission.

The content of this email will be copied to my "Who Killed David Kelly?" blog here:

It would be helpful if you were able to provide an early reply indicating whether or not you are willing that your secret submission be made available to me.

Thank you

(Dr) Andrew Watt