There was a letter in The Times this week (now hidden behind a pay-wall alas) calling for an investigation into the death of the government weapons inspector, Dr. David Kelly. There was another letter today from the former Coroner for North Yorkshire supporting. When the previous government established the Hutton Inquiry into the Iraq War it asked Lord Hutton to look into the facts surrounding Dr Kelly's death. He ruled it was suicide. It is, I believe, the only occasion when a single death has been treated in this way.
It has been the custom under English Law (from the 11th century and possibly earlier) for H. M. Coroner within a County to establish the facts of any sudden death. An Inquest was convened and adjourned into Dr Kelly's death. While one is mindful of the distress reconvening the Inquest might cause to the Kelly Family, it is right and just that this death is properly investigated as is the practise under English Law. One hopes the Secretary of State (in this case Ken Clarke) and the Attorney General will order H. M. Coroner for Oxfordshire to carry on with his work under the law.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/7945075/No-conspiracy-let-David-Kelly-rest-in-peace.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1301227/MAIL-ON-SUNDAY-COMMENT-The-cloud-doubt-Dr-David-Kelly-lifted.html
Yes. The Hutton farce has been used to deflect demands for both an inquiry into the war and a proper inquest into Dr Kelly's death. The first has now been conceded and it's time for the second to take it's proper course.
It seems that the Attorney General agrees, according to The Times. Lord Falconer was wrong to rule that the Hutton findings should act as the Inquest Verdict. I believe that this is the only time where this power has been used for an individual, other than those who died in disasters.
However I am somewhat wary of those who believe (with no evidence) that Dr Kelly was murdered. The conspiracy theory crowd said Hilda Murrell (whom I knew) had been murdered by MI5. She had not.
Do I detect a rare point of agreement between BC and Owly? Are they ice-skating in hell? Because it must have frozen over! :-)
This appears to be no ordinary conspiracy theory about the death of the late Dr. Kelly. Only the British chattering classes could make such a bewildering jump from plain and simple suicide, to possible murder.
The post-mortem on Dr. Kelly revealed that he had taken a fist full of painkillers before he slit his own wrists - that should be end of that story.
But no, like most conspiracy theories there is no evidence that the New Labour party hired some Whitehall ninja's, or anything like it. Normally, conspiracy theories emanate from nut-house sources - not this time...
I tend to agree, but Dr. Kelly's death should be determined by a formal inquest in a Coroners Court. That was the law and our tradition. Reading the exchanges in The Times this past week it would seem that such a court would probably return, or have returned, an open verdict. What I object to is that due process has not been properly followed, and I have never said nor implied that Dr. Kelly was murdered.
The controversy has not been re-ignited by "conspiracy" theorists nor by the "chattering" classes (presumably your chatter is exempt?). It is a group of medical practitioners who have suggested that the forensic evidence has not been properly analysed.
Whatever the facts of the case, the due process has not been followed and needs to be.
New facts published today relating to the death of the late Dr. David Kelly tell us what we had known for over seven years now - that his death was a result of a 'self-inflicted injury'.
However, I don't think this pathology report will stop another round of conspiracy mongering surrounding his death.
Kelly wounds 'self-inflicted', says pathology report.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11603539
Post new comment