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.
For some time I've been intrigued by the date of Dr Kelly's death. As you point out Andrew on the 17th July 'The House of Commons heads off for its summer holidays'.
ReplyDeleteIf Parliament had still been sitting on the following day then I think it would have been difficult not to have a formal inquiry under, for instance, the "Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act 1921". My understanding is that it requires both Houses of Parliament to OK its use in enquiring about a particular event. Furthermore it would have these powers:
(a)The enforcing the attendance of witnesses and examining them on oath, affirmation, or otherwise;
(b)The compelling the production of documents;
(c)Subject to rules of court, the issuing of a commission or request to examine witnesses abroad;
I think that the "otherwise" in (a) is to accommodate those of religions where oath or affirmation doesn't apply.
Of course the Opposition for the usual political reasons tried to get Blair to recall Parliament but as had arrived in Japan on the 18th that never was going to happen.
Getting the suicide spin started on the 18th and the Hutton Inquiry announced on the same day were I believe Blair's two priorities.
Lord Falconer had a "lucky" break on Frioday 18th ... he phoned Lord Hutton who was in his chambers at the House of Lords. Fortunately he wasn't judging at that particular moment, otherwise there might have been some considerable delay in asking his Lordship to chair the Inquiry.
ReplyDeleteWhat was the rigor mortis situation ? Matron McGill Decd (a worse case of cover up) features a rigor mortis timing anomaly. It also features an early attempt to gain knowledge from Matron McGill's New Zealand GP records. Not by theft but by a con phone call from Sue Ryder.
ReplyDeleteAre you aware of USA research into brain chemistry of suicide victims. I was told about it some years ago. 95% shew a brain chemistry aberration I think Seritonin but I am not a doctor.
The conclusion was that the other 5% were more likely to be unsafe verdicts.
This research, I was told, shew a pattern that women attempt suicide four times more than men but that men die of suicide four times more than women do. And the explanation women use passive means that can be reversed by medical intervention. IE the idea of making fake suicide bids to call attention seems a myth.
Men use more violent means hanging, shooting etc
Professional women (EG Dr Isobel Barnett) tend to use masculine methods.
As I understand it the aberrant brain chemistry (of depression) does not change personality. So it is unlikely a suicide would be by a phobic method. I am thinking of one in which the woman died with a plastic bag of chloroform soaked cotton wool balls over her head. But she had a phobia of plastic bags.
Kelly was on Iraqi Death list ? So he and his family would have known and been told who to watch for (such as IRA assets in UK used to acquire information of use to Soviet)
Govt orchestrated a cover up but that does not imply govt did the killing.
For 42 years MI6 have suspected a "Third Party conspiracy" in the death of Matron McGill (suicide verdict at secret inquest 3 days after death) The cover up definitely involves govt.
Plum Island 2002
ReplyDeleteWould you know if Dr Kelly was asked to advise HMG on the threat inherent in this ?
You do know that Blair cocked up leaving sabotage out of Good Friday Agreement and that in 2003 General De Chasterlain sent a report of concern to Northern Ireland Office ? I infer that was March 2003 when Sir David Phillips suddenly left the position of Kent Chief constable. Aided into a civilian sinecure by Home Sec Blunkett.
Two significant USA backup genny failed operations being 9.11 and Plum Island.
Perhaps the most significant in UK was 1998 at Dounreay leading to ten billion pound decommissioning.
Arrogant Blair had ignored warnings about lack of resilience and sabotage in the backup power infrastructure but still snuck former Soviet weapons grade material to Dounreay for re-processing.