Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

The death of Doctor David Kelly

2»

Comments

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,449 ✭✭✭SuperInfinity


    i-dunno-lol.jpg

    It's an impossible question. Anyone voting here is just guessing, unless they've been purposely following this case and building up a "theory" themselves. But I certainly agree that it's a possibility.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,798 ✭✭✭sxt


    Well, Do you believe that independent British Doctors, whom have nothing to gain, and whom should know about more about how a person can and can not die, are lying?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,798 ✭✭✭sxt


    I did them an injustice , they were Doctors who were experts in their fields. http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=460


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,744 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    I've yet to hear a convincing argument as to why the file on his death needs to be sealed for 70 years if the official narrative that he committed suicide is true.

    The Kelly case reminds me of the British frogman that disappeared while spying on a Russian military vessel that was docked in England. The file on his death was also sealed for something like 80 years.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,976 ✭✭✭Brendog


    FearDark wrote: »
    I heard he murdered himself.









    suicide is the word you're looking for...


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 655 ✭✭✭minotour


    I do remember thinking at the time that it was awfully convenient for the UK government and worth a closer look at least.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,526 ✭✭✭m@cc@


    ItsAWindUp wrote: »
    **** know, who cares to be honest?

    F***in' right, it's just taking up precious newstime that could be devoted to Big Brother and Cheryl Cole.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    I think he took his own life but was driven to suicide because he was "asked" to lie.

    I think what he knew was too much for him to cope with.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,474 ✭✭✭drkpower


    Suicide and Murder are not the only two options here. Contrary to popular (and CTer's) belief, the various doctors who have questioned the verdict in this case have not suggested that he was murdered. They have questioned the verdict of suicide and the cause of death primarily as a result of blood loss. That is quite different to saying it was murder.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    He had an off the record conversation with a reporter in which he revealed some classified information. The reporter, having also spoken to another source, published a story with other details and which claimed Alastair Campbell faked a report on Iraq. Kelly was called before parliment and was scapegoated by the reporter and the MoD.

    He was an incredibly depressed man under an abnomal amount of stress. His entire professional life had been pretty much destroyed. Suicide isn't that improbable.

    Also, most people who think he was murdered think that it was the UK government who killed him, but what did they have to gain? Making him a martyr is pointless and they had already pretty much discredited him and destroyed his career. Petty revenge served no purpose. On the other hand, Kelly had made a lot of enemies in Iraqi intelligence and I'd say if it was murder, that they were a more likely culprit.

    As for the findings being locked for 70 years, that's a bit odd (I mean why not just lock them forever?). But I've never thought of Lords as being in tune with the public or the times (like our judges). He could have genuinely not wanted autopsy details and photos being spread around the papers. If I was a family member, I'd probably find that pretty disturbing.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,744 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    humanji wrote: »
    He had an off the record conversation with a reporter in which he revealed some classified information. The reporter, having also spoken to another source, published a story with other details and which claimed Alastair Campbell faked a report on Iraq. Kelly was called before parliment and was scapegoated by the reporter and the MoD.

    He was an incredibly depressed man under an abnomal amount of stress. His entire professional life had been pretty much destroyed. Suicide isn't that improbable.

    Also, most people who think he was murdered think that it was the UK government who killed him, but what did they have to gain? Making him a martyr is pointless and they had already pretty much discredited him and destroyed his career. Petty revenge served no purpose. On the other hand, Kelly had made a lot of enemies in Iraqi intelligence and I'd say if it was murder, that they were a more likely culprit.

    As for the findings being locked for 70 years, that's a bit odd (I mean why not just lock them forever?). But I've never thought of Lords as being in tune with the public or the times (like our judges). He could have genuinely not wanted autopsy details and photos being spread around the papers. If I was a family member, I'd probably find that pretty disturbing.

    it's also possible given his job he had access to and knowledge of more sensitive data that the Intelligence services in Britain might not wish to become public. Given his depressed state they could have deemed him a loose cannon.
    As for the 70 year rule, the way the British Government at the time, in particular Hoon, treated his family after his death i doubt sparing Kelly's families sensibilities were the primary concern in sealing the file. If his death was in fact suicide, would it not be better to release the file to debunk the conspiracy theory that has arisen, thereby finally putting the matter to rest and giving his family peace of mind in the process.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,227 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Why would a weapons expert kill himself using tablets and fecking pruning knife. It would be a lot surer and less drawn out and painful to use something with real fire power. I remember when it happened and I always thought that a couple of someones stood over him with guns and 'encouraged' him to do it that way to make it look like a real suicide.

    Why would someone help the people trying to make him commit suicide? Whats the worst they could do to him? kill him? Better off refuseing, getting the bullet in the head then everyone knows you were murdered.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,604 ✭✭✭Kev_ps3


    He was murdered by the fascist Brits of course. No better than the Nazis.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 190 ✭✭Donne


    humanji wrote: »
    He was an incredibly depressed man under an abnomal amount of stress. His entire professional life had been pretty much destroyed. Suicide isn't that improbable.

    From Wikileaks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_David_Kelly#Death

    He had no previous psychiatric history.
    Although suicide was officially accepted as the cause of death, some medical experts have raised doubts, suggesting that the evidence does not back this up. The most detailed objection was provided in a letter from three medical doctors published in The Guardian,[24] reinforced by support from two other senior physicians in a later letter to the Guardian.[25] These doctors argued that the autopsy finding of a transected ulnar artery could not have caused a degree of blood loss that would kill someone, particularly when outside in the cold (where vasoconstriction would cause slow blood loss). Further, this conflicted with the minimal amount of blood found at the scene. They also contended that the amount of co-proxamol found was only about a third of what would normally be fatal. Dr Rouse, a British epidemiologist wrote to the British Medical Journal pointing out that the act of committing suicide by severing wrist arteries is an extremely rare occurrence in a 59-year-old man with no previous psychiatric history.[26] Nobody else died from that cause during the year.

    Dave Bartlett and Vanessa Hunt, the two paramedics who were called to the scene of Kelly's death, have since gone public with their view that there was not enough blood at the location to justify the belief that he died from blood loss. Bartlett and Hunt told the Guardian that they saw a small amount of blood on plants near Kelly's body and a patch of blood the size of a coin on his trousers. They said they would expect to find several pints of blood at the scene of a suicide involving an arterial cut.[27][28]
    So to say the very least, certain questions remain.

    Personally I think he was bumped off, for fear of futher revelations that would embarass the Blair government.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,798 ✭✭✭sxt


    Having "discussed this with his ministerial colleagues", Atorney General Dominic Grieve has decided not to open the secret files, which are to remain locked up for 70 years.


    Attorney-General-refuses-open-secret-David-Kelly-files.html?ITO=1490


  • Posts: 31,828 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    sxt wrote: »
    Having "discussed this with his ministerial colleagues", Atorney General Dominic Grieve has decided not to open the secret files, which are to remain locked up for 70 years.


    Attorney-General-refuses-open-secret-David-Kelly-files.html?ITO=1490

    I suspect the principle reason for this is to spare the government embarrasment over the Iraqi supergun and the reason for going to war.
    The suspicious death of this individual is meaningless in the grand scheme of things.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,207 ✭✭✭meditraitor


    80% murder........


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,798 ✭✭✭sxt


    I suspect the principle reason for this is to spare the government embarrasment over the Iraqi supergun and the reason for going to war.
    The suspicious death of this individual is meaningless in the grand scheme of things.

    The embarrassment was that there was absolutely no threat from "weapons of mass destruction" has been common knowledge for years. The British and American Goverments have tried their best to limit the political effect of this, but every dog on the street knows what went on...


    This guy wasn't the only "weapons inspector", but he was the only one that was publically identified, and therefore publically outspoken.


    It is the post mortem records of the death of this man that the government are holding back for 70 years.

    Which is odd in itself and unprecendented.... but then when take into account that a large amount of independant, "expert" doctors i.e doctors that are fully qualified in this area", are saying that the official cause of death is "impossible"...


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    I've been quietly following this story for a long time now.
    A lot of the raw data is not hitting the tabloids who are really choosing to pick out what they see as the juicy bits and using them to hit out at whatever's on their agenda that month or week.

    The fact is that the following needs to be answered:

    1. A severed ulnar artery that was cut was less than likely to be life threatening for a number of reasons. (a) because the artery when actually cut, retracts itself and clots very fast. (b) the artery is actually smaller than even a basic one that is used to find a pulse, thinner than a match stick, that's how weak that cut artery was. Eight of Englands top specialists totally agreed with these two points alone when they all signed a letter to the editor of the British Times stating this and putting their names and reputation on the line.

    2. What was the real reason for the 70 year gagging order? To protect someone obviously. So who?
    (a) Someone in Iraq? No, whatever the truthful outcome of an autopsy, that full true report was not going to make a blind bit of difference to front or back-line soldiers or to intelligence matters.
    (b) The family? No, they wanted to know either by private or public means, the true cause of his death - note: now they are so sick of the twisted goings on, they just want the matter to die away - and that alone is a disgrace that they have been put in that position.
    (c) The government or someone in it? Well lets think about that. Kelly openly admitted that he was forced to "sex up" reports. Obviously such orders/requests/pressure comes from above - not below - for such pressure to work and for he to be made do what he was told to do.
    So who was above him bending his ear and subsequently, his writing skills? Who had the most to gain by finding a justification for war - and in the long run claim they were doing right and possibly avoid an international war crimes charge? Who indeed?

    3. Why did Dr Kelly predict previously that if Iraq was invaded "I will probably be found dead in the woods" ?

    4. How did Dr Kelly cut his left wrist when in actual fact - born out by his doctor - that he had damaged his right arm and was even incapable of cutting steak, never mind digging into skin and bone to cut a minor artery?
    We won't here even get into the amounts of blood he even lost - MUCH less then what is required normally to kill someone (see Times reports below).

    5. Why did he take 29 non-lethal tablets when its well recorded that he had an aversion/problem to swallowing medicine?

    6. Why was there NO fingerprints on the supposed cutting knife when he was NOT wearing gloves?

    There are other questions but those are the first six main ones.

    Here are a couple of the Times reports - they are posted as jpegs as the Times site is pay per view and as such, posting links to them wouldn't work for most readers here who don't have an account with the Times (I do):

    http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/1002/wwwthetimescoukttonewsp.jpg
    http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/1475/wwwthetimescoukttonewspk.jpg
    http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/1002/wwwthetimescoukttonewsp.jpg


  • Posts: 31,828 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The diversion tactic is working very well, plenty of talk about a suspicious death. Little about what he was dealing with before his death!


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    Nicholas Hunt spent eight hours examining the body of the government weapons inspector for signs of foul play but found none.

    Swabs taken from his body for DNA testing failed to find evidence of the involvement of a third party.

    The Home Office pathologist has disclosed details from his post-mortem report for the firs time, which the official inquiry into Dr Kelly's death banned from publication for 70 years.

    Conspiracy theorists have come up with a number of reasons why they think Dr Kelly was murdered by shadowy government figures after revealing his concerns over the war in Iraq.

    Dominic Grieve, the attorney general, has said they "may have a valid point" and that he is prepared to apply for a full inquest if convincing new evidence emerges.

    The doubters point to the apparent lack of blood found at the scene but Mr Hunt said he found "big clots" on the inside of Kelly's Barbour jacket and soaked into the ground and noted them in his report.
    Dr Kelly had about a dozen cuts on his left wrist of varying sizes, he said, including "hesitation" cuts — shallow cuts that he made as he tried to summon the resolve to kill himself.

    The conspiracy theorists – including a number of doctors who wrote to a national newspaper earlier this month - say that the cuts would not be enough to kill because the ulner artery would clot.

    But Mr Hunt said Dr Kelly’s wrist was red from where he had been rubbing it to keep the blood flowing.

    “Every forensic pathologist has had cases where [severance of the ulnar artery] has been the sole cause of death," he added.
    But there were other contributing factors, particularly that two of Dr Kelly's main coronary arteries were 70 to 80 per cent narrower than normal and his heart disease was so severe that he could have "dropped dead" at any moment.

    The heart condition may have been exacerbated by an overdose of co-proxamol, a strong pain killer withdrawn from sale in 2007 after it concerns that it caused arhythmia in some patients.

    The conclusion of the autopsy was that the primary cause of death was haemorrhage due to the incised wounds of his left wrist, with the co-proxamol overdose and coronary artery atherosclerosis listed as secondary causes.

    His findings were reviewed by Nat Cary, one of the country's most senior forensic pathologists, who came to the same conclusion.

    Mr Hunt added: "I felt very, very sorry for David Kelly and was horrified by the way he had been treated by the government ... I had every reason to look for something untoward and would dearly love to have found something," he said.

    "It was an absolute classic case of self-inflicted injury. You could illustrate a textbook with it. If it were anyone else and you were to suggest there's something foul about it, you would be referred for additional training. I would welcome an inquest, I've nothing to hide."

    Dr Kelly was found dead in woods near his Oxfordshire home in July 2003, a week after having been exposed as the source of a BBC story that the government had "sexed up" a dossier on the threat posed by Iraq.

    An inquiry by Lord Hutton into the death was held instead of an inquest. It concluded that the father of three had committed suicide.

    Andrew Davison, a fellow Home Office pathologist, said last week that the controversy over the weapons inspector's death was being fuelled by those without the "relevant pathology expertise".

    "This is not a game of Cluedo, and it is beginning to look suspiciously like a crusade for some individuals," he said.

    Source


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    If it was a "text book case" as its put by one person - fair enough - what is bewildering though is why if its so clear cut (honestly no pun intended), was there put a 70 year gagging order put on the autopsy and the inquiry suddenly shut down?

    That is very, very strange indeed and indicates there is more here that just a straight death!

    ...I guess we will never know.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,626 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    Biggins wrote: »
    If it was a "text book case" as its put by one person - fair enough - what is bewildering though is why if its so clear cut (honestly no pun intended), was there put a 70 year gagging order put on the autopsy and the inquiry suddenly shut down?

    That is very, very strange indeed and indicates there is more here that just a straight death!

    ...I guess we will never know.

    It could be for the benefit of the family. Have they said they disagreed with the findings being withheld?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    It could be for the benefit of the family. Have they said they disagreed with the findings being withheld?


    I have participated in a number of inquiries that involves deaths.
    At the court room stage and by the judge/person presiding, the family are asked the equivalent of "do you wan the full details or just a summary?"
    This is asked to spare the family any further harshness just in case.
    At that stage they can opt for one or the other.
    At no death inquiry that I've attended or heard of, has there never been a long term in years gagging order placed on a case.

    The family at this stage are tired and stressed of all the goings on and now just want to be left alone.
    I'm guessing they know they will never know the full truth, that has sunk in and they wish to move on.
    I can't blame them for thinking that. They have been through hell and back.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    Just to play devils advocate here:
    Biggins wrote: »
    1. A severed ulnar artery that was cut was less than likely to be life threatening for a number of reasons. (a) because the artery when actually cut, retracts itself and clots very fast. (b) the artery is actually smaller than even a basic one that is used to find a pulse, thinner than a match stick, that's how weak that cut artery was. Eight of Englands top specialists totally agreed with these two points alone when they all signed a letter to the editor of the British Times stating this and putting their names and reputation on the line.
    According to his doctor he had heart disease and in that case, even a small amount of blood loss could possibly be fatal.
    Biggins wrote: »
    2. What was the real reason for the 70 year gagging order? To protect someone obviously. So who?
    This is the baffling part. Lord knows what they were thinking.
    Biggins wrote: »
    3. Why did Dr Kelly predict previously that if Iraq was invaded "I will probably be found dead in the woods" ?
    Does it matter? It neither proves his fear of being murdered, or his resignation to suicide.
    Biggins wrote: »
    4. How did Dr Kelly cut his left wrist when in actual fact - born out by his doctor - that he had damaged his right arm and was even incapable of cutting steak, never mind digging into skin and bone to cut a minor artery?
    We won't here even get into the amounts of blood he even lost - MUCH less then what is required normally to kill someone (see Times reports below).
    We don't know how the wounds were, though. He could have just kept cutting away. And as I said above, even a small amount of blood could be fatal. Also, the coroner has said that there was in fact plenty of blood in his clothes and on the ground.
    Biggins wrote: »
    5. Why did he take 29 non-lethal tablets when its well recorded that he had an aversion/problem to swallowing medicine?
    The pills were painkillers, which would have made it easier for him to cut into his wrist. Also they had an affect on his heart as well. Also, if you're resigned to killing yourself, would you not force yourself to take the pills anyway?

    Also, if it was murder, someone broke into his home, went upstairs to the bathroom, took the pills and went after Kelly, all while the wife was in thr house. That seems less likely than he took them with him.
    Biggins wrote: »
    6. Why was there NO fingerprints on the supposed cutting knife when he was NOT wearing gloves?
    Were there no fingerprints, or were they just not able to get a clean set of prints off it? If the knife had been used many times over the years then there would be smudged prints all over it and it wouldn't be any use to anyone. Also, what was the handle like? It was a gardening knife, so it could have had a textured grip like some garden tools have and if so, you wouldn't be able to get prints from it.

    And I don't know about anyone else, but if I was a hitman and had the sense to wipe my own prints off the knife, how could I not think of putting his prints on it after?

    I think I read somewhere that the parliment are considering reopening the case, so hopefully they will and answer some of the questions people have.


Advertisement
Advertisement