Dr David Kelly couldnt have slit his wrist

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by dangerousdave, Jul 1, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Dramatic new testimony has heaped pressure on ministers to reopen the investigation into the death of Dr David Kelly.
    A female colleague claims that the UN weapons inspector could not have committed suicide as claimed, as he was too weak to cut his own wrist.
    Mai Pedersen, a U.S. Air Force officer who served with Dr Kelly's inspection team in Iraq, said a hand and arm injury meant that the 59-year-old even 'had difficulty cutting his own steak'.

    Dr Kelly was found dead in woods near his home in 2003 after the Government exposed him as the source of a BBC report questioning Tony Blair's government's case for war in Iraq.
    In a letter to the new Attorney General Dominic Grieve through her lawyers, Miss Pedersen also said Dr Kelly had difficulty swallowing pills, casting serious doubt on the Hutton Inquiry conclusion that he swallowed 29 painkillers before slitting his left wrist.
    Campaigners hope her extraordinary intervention will convince ministers of the need for a new investigation. Mr Grieve has already indicated that he believes the case could merit a further inquiry.
    Had she testified at the Hutton Inquiry, Miss Pedersen would have revealed that in the months leading up to his death Dr Kelly was unable to use his right hand for basic tasks requiring any strength such as slicing food because of a painful elbow injury.
    Miss Pedersen says he would therefore have had to be a 'contortionist' to have killed himself by slashing his left wrist, as Lord Hutton concluded in 2004.
    She called for a 'formal, independent, and complete' review of the case at the earliest opportunity, saying it was the only way to achieve 'closure'.

    The letter said the absence of a full coroner's inquest into Dr Kelly's death and 'perpetual secrecy' meant it was ' crying out' for further scrutiny.
    Dr Kelly, who worked for both the UN and later the Ministry of Defence, was found dead seven years ago next month in an Oxfordshire wood.
    He was said to be deeply upset after being exposed as the source of a controversial BBC news report questioning Britain's grounds for going to war in Iraq.
    The report, by journalist Andrew Gilligan, stated that Tony Blair's press spokesman Alastair Campbell had 'sexed up' the case for war for political reasons.
    But, unusually for a death of this nature, no full coroner's inquest has ever been held. Instead, Tony Blair appointed retired judge Lord Hutton to chair a non-statutory public inquiry into the circumstances leading to his body being discovered.
    Witnesses, who included Dr Kelly's widow, Janice, and Tony Blair, were not questioned under oath.
    Lord Hutton concluded that Dr Kelly died by haemorrhage after slashing his left wrist but, as the Mail reported last week, his death certificate was officially registered before the Hutton Inquiry ended and it was not properly completed.

    It was not signed by a doctor or coroner and does not state a place of death, as all death certificates should if this information can be established. This leaves open the possibility that he died somewhere other than where his body was found.
    To further deepen the mystery, all evidence relating to the post-mortem has been classified for an incredible 70 years.
    Miss Pedersen's view is significant because she knew Dr Kelly so well, both personally and professionally.
    The pair worked together in Iraq in the 1990s and remained close friends until his death, although Miss Pedersen, 50, has always that she and Dr Kelly were not romantically involved.
    She was initially asked to give evidence to the Hutton Inquiry in 2003 and agreed to do so, but was not called. This was because, it is claimed, the inquiry would not allow her to testify in private.
    Her letter to Mr Grieve, dated June 10, states: 'We understand you have indicated a willingness to consider possibly reopening the investigation into the continuing controversy into the death of Dr Kelly.
    'Given the absence of any coroner's inquest and the perpetual secrecy surrounding the post-mortem examination, it is painfully obvious that this matter continues to cry out for a formal, independent and complete review. Ms Pedersen fully supports and adds her voice to such an effort.
    'The passage of time [does] not diminish either the public's interest or the government's responsibility to ascertain the full truth, whatever that might be.'
    The Hutton Report failed to allay suspicions of foul play in Dr Kelly's death. On the morning of July 17, Dr Kelly mysteriously told a friend by email that there were 'many dark actors playing games'.
    In 2007 it was discovered, through a Freedom of Information request, that the pruning knife he is said to have used to cut his wrist had no fingerprints on it.

  2. It'll not change anything unfortunately.
  3. No it won't. Dr Kelly will still be dead.
    But Mr Blair might have to come up with some creative answers.
  4. I'm surprised his wife never mentioned any of this at the time. Unless she was in on the conspiracy too, of course, or is being impersonated by a shape-shifting lizard.

    Honestly, does anyone think Blair would have the stones to order someone murdered?
  5. He had the stonea to lie through his teeth to take the UK to war in Iraq.
    He has made himself very wealthy from that. Blair has the stones to get somebody else to do anything if it will pay him a big enough return.

    There is lots of evidence to suggest Dr Kelly did not kill himself. Bair got very rich, decide for yourself.
  6. He was playing ducks and drakes with the law for that one, though, as the sneaky little lawyer that he is, getting the law to say what he wanted it to. There's a big step from cherry-picking intelligence to ordering a murder, which would get him life in prison if caught.

    And, little as I care for the toe-rag, I think the suggestion that Iraq was mainly so that Blair could earn a fortune as an after-dinner speaker and general rimmer of the Americans, is a little fanciful.
  7. I'm not saying the main reason for UK participation in the Iraq invasion was for Blair's personal profit, I am saying the snivelling little shite has no moral problem with exploiting it to his own personal gain.
    As to Dr Kelly, suicide has never looked very credible
  8. "Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?" (attrib Henry II)
  9. I still don't see what they would have to gain by killing him; he'd already stirred up the row, the damage was done. Murdering him would not, IMO, achieve enough to be worth the risk incurred.
  10. I'm sure any number of other foreign agencies would have wanted him shut up.
  11. Yes. Just as long as he didn't have to do it himself.
  12. But there was no PROOF, without Dr. Kelly's testimony, that WMD was horseshit.
  13. There is something major that we are not being told about Dr Kelly's suicide. The ambulance crew saying that it didn't feel right to the burying for seventy years of the post mortem report. A thouough and transparent investigation, I think not.
  14. "In 2007 it was discovered, through a Freedom of Information request, that the pruning knife he is said to have used to cut his wrist had no fingerprints on it."

    That alone begs a number of interesting questions.

    Almost as many as the blinding revelation that must enabled Lord Goldsmith to change his mind about the legality of the actions against Iraq having repeatedly expressed doubts even though he had not been asked to express an opinion.

    Iraq inquiry: secret documents showing Tony Blair’s frustration published

    "A note of a meeting held at 10 Downing Street in December 2002 shows that Jonathan Powell, Mr Blair’s chief of staff, assured the then-attorney general that the United Kingdom would not support an American-led invasion of Iraq without the consent of the UN.

    It said: “There would be no question of the UK supporting military action.”

    The minute concluded by stating that the attorney general would not be asked for his formal legal advice.

    A month later, however, Lord Goldsmith personally handed Mr Blair a draft legal note warning that he did not accept that prior UN Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq could be used to justify war."

  15. Having done some more reading on the topic - and having frankly dismissed it before as tinfoil hat stuff - I am starting to change my mind. Something murky is going on there.