Dunblane secret documents contain letters by Tory and Labour ministers
Investigation: By Neil Mackay, Home Affairs Editor
LETTERS between Labour and Tory ministers and correspondence relating to Thomas Hamilton’s alleged involvement with Freemasonry are part of a batch of more than 100 documents about the Dunblane mass murder which have been sealed from public sight for 100 years.
The documents include a letter connected to Hamilton, which was sent by George Robertson, currently head of Nato, to Michael Forsyth, who was then Secretary of State for Scotland.
Until now it was thought that a 100-year public secrecy order had only been placed on one police report into Hamilton which allegedly named high-profile politicians and legal figures. However, a Sunday Herald investigation has uncovered that 106 documents, which were submitted to the Dunblane inquiry in 1996, were also placed under the 100-year rule.
The Scottish Executive has claimed the 100-year secrecy order was placed on the Central Police report, which was drafted in 1991 five years before the murders, to protect the identities of children named in the report. Hamilton had allegedly abused a number of children prior to his 1996 gun attack on Dunblane primary school in which 16 primary one children and a teacher died before Hamilton turned his gun on himself.
However, only a handful of the documents, which the Sunday Herald has discovered to be also subject to the 100-year rule, relate to children or name alleged abuse victims.
The most intriguing document is listed as: ‘Copy of letter from Thomas Hamilton to Dunblane parents regarding boys’ club, and flyer advertising Dunblane Boys’ Sports Club. Both sent to Rt Hon Michael Forsyth, MP, Secretary of State for Scotland, by George Robertson MP.’ Also closed under the 100-year rule is a ‘submission to Lord James Douglas Hamilton, MP, Minister of State at the Scottish Office, concerning government evidence to the Inquiry’.
Another document relates to correspondence between the clerk of the Dunblane inquiry, which was presided over by Lord Cullen, and a member of the public regarding ‘possible affiliations of Thomas Hamilton with Freemasonry … and copy letters from Thomas Hamilton’.
SNP deputy justice minister, Michael Matheson, said: ‘The explanation to date about the 100 -year rule was that it was put in place to protect the interests of children named in the Central Police report. How can that explanation stand when children aren’t named? The 100-year rule needs to be re-examined with respect to all documents.’
Matheson has written to the Lord Advocate, Colin Boyd, asking why the 100-year rule applies and how it can be revoked. He has so far had no response. He also asked First Minister Jack McConnell to explain the reasons for the 100-year order but received ‘no substantial answer’. Matheson is to write to Colin Boyd a second time, in the light of the discovery that more than 100 other documents are also sealed, asking him to account for the decision.
A spokeswoman for the Crown Office said: ‘In consultation with the Crown Office and the Scottish Office, Lord Cullen agreed that in line with the age of some of the individuals involved and named in the inquiry, the closure period would be 100 years. The Lord Advocate is considering issuing a redacted copy of the productions, which would blank out identifying details of children and their families. A decision on this has yet to be made.’
Other sealed key reports on Dunblane include:
A ‘comparative analysis of Thomas Hamilton’ by Central Scotland Police
Information about Hamilton’s ‘use and possession of firearms’
Pathology reports, Hamilton’s autopsy report, and analysis by Glasgow University’s forensic science lab on blood, urine and liver samples from Hamilton’s body
Details on firearms licensing policies
A review by Alfred Vannet, regional procurator fiscal of Grampian, Highland and Islands, of ‘reports and information in respect of Thomas Hamilton submitted to the procurator fiscals of Dumbarton and Stirling by Strathclyde Police and Central Police’
A psychological report on Hamilton
Guidance from the British Medical Association on granting firearms licences
‘Transcript of and correspondence relating to answering-machine tape which accidentally recorded conversation between police officers at the scene of the Dunblane incident’
Correspondence and witness statements ‘relating to allegations of sexual abuse made against Hamilton’
02 March 2003
Tuesday, 11 February, 2003, 08:12 GMT
Father’s plea over Dunblane papers
Floral tribute after Dunblane tragedy
The father of a child killed in the Dunblane tragedy has called for police information on the killer to be made public.
Scotland’s most senior law officer has been urged to explain why documents on Thomas Hamilton were banned from publication for 100 years.
The Crown Office denied that they have been suppressed because they revealed links between the killer and a number of prominent Scots.
Charlie Clydesdale, whose daughter Victoria was killed, said an explanation should be given.
I would really like to see what was in it
And Scottish National Party MSP Michael Matheson wants the ban reconsidered in light of the new freedom of information legislation.
Forty-three-year-old Hamilton, broke into Dunblane Primary School on 13 March, 1996 and opened fire on a class in the gym, killing 16 children and a teacher.
In addition to those killed, he injured 12 other children and two teachers before killing himself.
Mr Clydesdale questioned the length of the ban and described his family’s frustrations.
He said: “I’m not going to be around and my children aren’t going to be around.
“I would really like to see what was in it, but I’m surprised there was one and shocked there was such a length of time put on it.”
Michael Matheson: “Secrecy order”
Mr Matheson said he has sought clarification from the Lord Advocate Colin Boyd QC.
The MSP told BBC Scotland: “I think it’s surprising that in this day and age we find ourselves with 100-year secrecy order being applied to a police report.
“Keeping in mind that Cabinet papers are only classified for 30 years, I want to find out what the legal status of this act is.
He said: “There are more documents covered by the 100-year rule than this police report. Some of them have nothing whatsoever to do with children. We need to look at why such a lengthy ban has been imposed on them.
“I have been contacted by a number of families affected by the tragedy who are anxious to ensure this information becomes public. And so far we have no guarantee that it will. We only have a review.”
The report banned under the 100-year rule was com piled by Paul Hughes, then a detective sergeant with Central Scotland police, and concerns Thomas Hamilton’s activities at a summer camp in Loch Lomond in 1991, five years before the shootings.
Selected extracts published during the Cullen inquiry revealed it recommended that Hamilton should be prosecuted for his activities at the summer camp and that he should have his gun licence revoked.
The report, however, was ignored. Although Lord Cullen referred to it in his inquiry, it does not feature in the index or appendices to his final report.
Consent from Lord Cullen is not needed to overturn his ruling. “The decision is a matter for the lord advocate,” said a crown office spokesman.
If the report is published – as now seems likely – the names of the politicians and lawyers it contains will not be blanked out.
“It is important we make available, if it is at all possible, any information that is available about people in the public eye,” said the Scottish first minister, Jack McConnell.
There has been much speculation about the identity of the politicians in the report. It is known that in June 1996 Michael Forsyth, then Scottish secretary and MP for Stirling, congratulated Hamilton on running a boys’ club in Dunblane.
George Robertson, now general secretary of Nato, withdrew his son from a club run by Hamilton amid concern about its militaristic nature.
No time frame has been given for the lord advocate’s review, but campaigners say he must publish it in as full a form as possible. “I don’t know whether this is cover-up or just a culture of secrecy, but we need to publish this report to put everyone’s minds at rest,” Mr Matheson said.
OPERATION ORE…PAEDOPHLIE COVER UP
Operation Ore, the United Kingdom’s most thorough and comprehensive police investigation of crimes against children, seems to have uncovered more than is politically acceptable at the highest reaches of the British elite.
In the 19th of January edition of The Sunday Herald, Neil Mackay sensationally reported that senior members of Tony Blair’s government were being investigated for paedophilia and the “enjoyment” of child-sex pornography:
“The Sunday Herald has also had confirmed by a very senior source in British intelligence that at least one high-profile former Labour Cabinet minister is among Operation Ore suspects. The Sunday Herald has been given the politician’s name but, for legal reasons, can not identify the person.
There are still unconfirmed rumours that another senior Labour politician is among the suspects. The intelligence officer said that a ‘rolling’ Cabinet committee had been set up to work out how to deal with the potentially ruinous fall-out for both Tony Blair and the government if
The allegations are the most serious yet levelled at an administration that prides itself on the inclusion in its ranks of a high quota of controversial and flamboyant homosexual men, and whose First Lady, Cherie Blair, has come under the spotlight for her indulgence in pagan rituals that resemble Freemasonic rites. Unconfirmed information also suggests that the term “former Labour Cabinet minister” is misleading and that the investigation has identified a surprisingly large number of alleged paedophiles at the highest level of British government, including one very senior cabinet minister (known to Propaganda Matrix.com).
The Blair government has responded by imposing a comprehensive blackout on the story, effectively removing it from the domain of public discussion. Attempts on the part of this journalist to establish why the British media has not followed up on the revelations have met with a wall of silence. Editors and journalists of The Times, The Daily Telegraph, The Guardian, The Independent, The Sunday Times, The Observer, The Sunday Telegraph, The Daily Mail, The Daily Express, The Mirror, The Sun, the BBC, Independent Television News and even The Sunday Herald have refused to discuss the matter.
Speaking from London, freelance journalist Bob Kearley told me: “Whether or not a D-Notice has been issued is not clear. But based on some of the feedback I’ve been getting it’s apparent that editors and media owners have voluntarily agreed not to cover the story at this time. Operation Ore is still being reported, but not in regard to government ministers, and it’s taking up very few column inches on the third or fourth page. Don’t forget that the intelligence services are involved here, and Blair is anxious to ensure that the scandal does not rock the boat at a time when the country is about to go to war.”
“You can imagine the effect this would have on the morale of troops who are about to commit in Iraq. In fact morale is reportedly quite low anyway, with service personnel throwing their vaccines into the sea en route to the battlefront and knowing how unpopular the war is with the British people. And a lot of squaddies I’ve met think there’s something weird going on between Bush and Blair. If you’re then told that the executive responsible for the conduct of the war is staffed by child-molesters … well, then Saddam suddenly looks like the sort of bloke with
whom you can share a few tins [beer].”
[In an E mail to Paul Joseph Watson, Mike James identified his sources as “people I knew in London who used to work for the Treasury department throughout the 1980s, one being a private secretary at a senior level….my sources will definitely refuse to support my claims – both are doing extremely well financially and career-wise.”]
DOING THE WORK THE MEDIA DOES NOT!
It becomes increasingly clear that a massive cover-up has and is taking place.
There is every reason to believe that this orchestrated cover-up is with the collusion of parties producing Lord Cullen’s Report, for which Lord Cullen is personally responsible.
Further this cover-up has required the collusion of senior Police Officers.
Further the cover-up has required the collusion of Senior Government Ministers.
Further the cover-up has required the collusion of the Cabinet.
Further the cover-up has required the collusion of the Home Secretary.
Further the cover-up has required the collusion of the Prime Minister.
QUESTION: Do the people of Britain pay for a Report of this stature to be cover-up?
QUESTION: Who is of such a stature that members of the House of Lords, senior Police, Cabinet Ministers, the Home Secretary, the Prime Minister and others would ‘spirit away’ documents?
QUESTION: Who else was implicated in Mr. Hughes’ Production, which senior politician(S) is being sheltered by this cover-up and was named by Mr. Hughes, of Central Police, into Thomas Hamilton; listing all the charges to which he recommended consideration for prosecution?
QUESTION: Was there a case pending against a senior politician linking him with Thomas Hamilton and paedophile activities, which was suppressed ‘because’ of the election?
QUESTION: Did George Robertson MP., now Lord Robertson head of N.A.T.O., as is alleged, support the application for a Firearms Certificate for Thomas Hamilton, stating him to be a man ‘suitable and of good character’. George Robertson was at the time an MP.
Should this be established.
QUESTION: Was George Robertson ‘leant on’ to make the support.
QUESTION: Would this explain the ‘over the top’ vociferous activities of George Robertson MP, AFTER the Dunblane tragedy, against legal firearms and in breach of The Bill of Rights and existing legal legislation.
QUESTION: What documents are being suppressed?
QUESTION: Was there any connection between any of the following eg. membership of the same Masonic Lodge:
Thomas Hamilton, any Police Officer in the case, any Cabinet Minister, any MP or Lord Cullen?
QUESTION: Did then Sergeant, now Inspector, Hughes write a report [believed to be 7 pages long] condemning Hamilton as unsuitable as a Firearms Certificate holder.
QUESTION: Was Mr. MacMurdo, the Assistant Chief Constable of Central Police, responsible for the rejection of recommendations that Hamilton should not be issued a Firearms Certificate.
QUESTION: Why was Hamilton granted a Firearms Certificate when he was KNOWN to be of unsound and unstable character?
QUESTION: Why was this not shown in detail in Lord Cullen’s Report? Surely this was a major constituent point that such a Report should have addressed.
DEDUCTIONS: We believe we know the identities of ALL concerned in terms of incriminated by this information.
We believe that Lord Cullen has by virtue of the cover-up in the Report on the Dunblane Tragedy in which it is possible that Politicians and Police were responsible, albeit indirectly, for the death of:
should be precluded from heading or participating in the Report on the Paddington Rail Tragedy.
We believe that ALL documents, evidence and pertinent data should immediately and forthwith be released to the public domain as the head of N.A.T.O. seems to be in some way embroiled in the matter and this could prove to be a risk to the safety and security of the N.A.T.O. Alliance and the Western World.
We believe that ALL documents, evidence and pertinent data should immediately and forthwith be released to the public domain as as it seems that a PUBLIC Enquiry has been suborned.
We believe that ALL documents, evidence and pertinent data should immediately and forthwith be released to the public domain as there seems to be a cover-up relating to senior Ministers of Her Majesty’s Government.
Should anyone reading this have ANY contribution of fact or evidence material to this apparent cover-up please take one of two actions:
1. IF YOU WISH to remain anonymous please contact me direct with any information you may wish to impart.
2. IF you are happy to be linked to the ongoing investigation PLEASE join and post your information to with a copy direct to me( Greg.)
PLEASE whatever you do distribute this ‘e’mail as widely as you can – the British Public should be made aware that there would seem to be solid evidence of a cover-up sheltering senior Government Ministers and employees of the crown.
PLEASE also be mindful of the security of Britain, N.A.T.O. and the Western World, in the light of the FACTS above and acquit your duty to defend your Country by ensuring that this information is thoroughly brought to light.
Thank you ALL for helping to disseminate this information.
House of Lords Official Report Vol. 589 – No. 151 – 12th. May 1998 – WA113 & WA114
Thomas Hamilton: Inspector Hughes’ Report
Lord Burton asked Her Majesty’s Government:
TODAY WE FIND OUT- THAT BACK IN 2004 NOTHER GAGGING ORDER WAS ISSUED TO COVER UP THE MURDER OF DR DAVID KELLY- 70 YEARS’ TO PROTECT THE GUILTY!
Monday, April 06, 2009
In memoriam Dr. David Kelly. RIP
Today is the fifth anniversary of publication of the Hutton Report into the circumstances surrounding the death of Dr. David Kelly, CMG. This was the biggest load of whitewash for government disgrace in a generation. It was a massive cover-up from start to finish. Unfortunately the media seemed not to notice. And they still haven’t noticed.Dr Kelly was the leading weapons inspector in Iraq. He had made numerous inspections, and he knew what weapons capability Saddam Hussein had.
One of the reasons for starting war in Iraq was a sordid little document known as the Iraq Dossier. It was produced for Tony Blair and claimed four times that Saddam had WMD that could be set off within 45 minutes of an order to go. Dr Kelly, and others, didn’t think much of this claim. After the war in Iraq was ‘over,’ commentators were getting more and more surprised that no WMD had ever been found. Dr Kelly talked to the BBC journalist Andrew Gilligan about the infamous 45-minute claim. Gilligan made a broadcast in which he said that the government probably knew the claim was false when they put it in the dossier. So there was a big hoo ha, and everyone was trying to find the source for Gilligan’s story.
There was a lot of speculation about the identity of the bloke who blabbed. In the end Dr Kelly wrote a long letter to his boss…. Eventually he had to appear before a televised House of Commons committee meeting, and he did not look very happy.
Having heard his story the committee decided to agree with Dr Kelly that he was not the source. Two days later, on 17 July at five past three he went for a walk from his house in Oxfordshire, and was never seen again, apart from one chance meeting with a neighbour en route. On 18 July he was found dead in the woods on Harrowdown Hill. Apparently he had killed himself because of the stress he was under. Apparently he cut his wrist with a blunt knife he’d had for 40-odd years, and took some of his wife’s Coproxamol tablets.
As soon as his death was announced, journalists were clamouring to say it was suicide without waiting for any evidence. An inquest should have been held into his death, but surprise surprise, the case was taken away from the Corner. Why? Well, in a Coroner’s court a verdict of suicide has to satisfy the test of beyond all reasonable doubt. The evidence put to Lord Hutton didn’t satisfy any kind of test at all, apart from the gullibilty of credulous fools in the Fourth Estate.
Firstly, there was hardly any blood, and absolutely none on Dr Kelly’s clothes. Oh, yes, there was a stain the size of 50p on his right knee. You’ll never guess how that got there – Dr Kelly got up and knelt in a pool of his own blood – like you do.
Also he had a bottle of water to take his tablets with. It was found on the left of his body, quite a way from his arm. Dr Kelly was right-handed, or so we were told. So how, or why, come to that, does a right-handed man drink from a bottle and then put it down over to his left when he couldn’t lean on his left wrist without causing himself pain? You tell me, because Hutton couldn’t.
Another funny thing is the time of death. Dr Kelly was found at 9.10 on the morning of 18 July. According to the paramedics who examined the body there were no signs of rigor mortis. They also said there wasn’t enough blood for an arterial bleed. So he hadn’t been dead for all that long when he was found.At the time there were several letters in the press from the Kelly Investigation Group – mainly from experienced doctors who said it was damn near impossible to die of blood loss from cutting the ulnar artery, which is what Dr Kelly is claimed to have done.
Another piece of evidence against the Hutton tale was also published in these letters. Acetone was found in Dr Kelly’s blood, and one of the doctors reported that this only appears about 12 hours after your last meal. We were told that Dr Kelly had a few sandwiches for lunch on 17 July at about 1.00, so that means he didn’t die till about 1.00 a.m. So what the hell was he doing between about 3.30 when he happened across his neighbour going away from Harrowdown Hill, and the time he died? Lord Hutton didn’t bother to ask.
Some comical evidence was given about this by Professor Hawton, a very distinguished psychiatrist. His evidence runs as follows: I have never clapped eyes on Dr Kelly, but I get the very strong feeling that he killed himself. He felt increasing distress and was worried he was going to lose his job. I know that none of his bosses in the MoD said they were going to sack him, but what the hell? That’s what I’ve been asked to say. Oh and that photograph of the knife you showed me? That is definitely a photograph of the knife that Dr Kelly used to keep in his drawer in his study. Of course I’ve never seen the knife, but you know, I just have this gut feeling.
On 17 July Dr Kelly was writing an e-mail to his bosses with a list of journalists he had met over the years. This had been asked for by a member of the House of Commons Committee which interviewed him. It included the name Susan Watts, another BBC hack who he’d spoken to about the 45-minute claim. According to Wing Commander Clark, one of Dr Kelly’s colleagues, he rang and spoke to Dr Kelly at about five to three. According to him he asked Dr Kelly’s permission to change the position of the name Susan Watts in the letter to go to the House of Commons. In view of what the MoD did to Dr Kelly without his permission it’s not likely they would bother asking about that. But they say they did.
Immediately after that call, Dr Kelly left his house for the last time. This just doesn’t ring true. According to Hawton, Dr Kelly has pondered his situation and decided he had just one way out – suicide. Hawton said that Dr Kelly was content with this decision. So if Dr Kelly had his penknife and the tablets all ready to go, why the hell would he have bothered to answer the phone?
Long after the appearance of Lord Hutton’s Report Norman Baker MP decided to get involved. He made some interesting discoveries. He found out that the Coroner had in fact given a death certificate for Dr Kelly about two weeks in to the Hutton Inquiry. Of course, Hutton never told us that. Norman Baker MP also found out that there were no fingerprints on Dr Kelly’s water bottle or his penknife. However, there was some of Dr Kelly’s blood on the bottle. Nice trick if you can manage it. So he picks up his bottle without touching it with his finger ends, smears it with blood from God knows where and then puts it down again as far as he can from a point where it would be simple to pick it up again. And the press just lapped it up.
In November 2006 Lord Hutton took the unusual step of trying to explain his decision. He wrote an article for some learned journal. One thing he said – there was no need to find out if the 45-minute claim was accurate. Oh yeah? Well now, if he found out it was false it would put Dr Kelly’s statements in a whole new light, so dead right we don’t want that. Leave it out. Funny thing is, there was another Inquiry – by Lord Butler, and he reported in July 2004. He said, although he wasn’t very clear about it, that the 45-minute claim was withdrawn in July 2003. Oh what a shame – just six months too late to help Dr Kelly.The strange thing is that two senior blokes to give evidence to Lord Hutton in August and September both said that the claim was still valid. That means they were telling porkies. Did you ever. They were trying to make sure that no one queried the report. Now what do you suppose they got up before Hutton said we decided this claim was crap in July 2003, don’t you think at least one journalist might have popped a question in – like what day in July 2003? Seem to remember that Dr Kelly went missing in July 2003 could there be a connection eh?
Another strange thing is how late the Kelly family called up the police. Dr Kelly had his mobile with him but he didn’t call home. Apparently – we were never shown his phone bill. Mrs Kelly didn’t call Dr Kelly. Apparently – we were never shown his phone bill. So the police came round at about midnight. They were told that Dr Kelly had gone for a walk at five past three, and his walk normally takes about 30 minutes. So he was about eight hours overdue.
Now you and me, we’d probably ask his family where he usually went when he was on one of his walks. But our Oxford plods weren’t up to it. They only thought of this question at about seven in the morning. Shame! So what did our buoys in blue actually do? Why, they went looking around his house and grounds. They also turfed Mrs Kelly into the garden at one point to shove a dog through the house. There was a very special reason for this, as we’ll see later.
A police helicopter was sent up as well. But heres a strange thing – it did not use its searchlight. Yeah, right on. If your’e looking for someone at night you don’t use your searchlight – got to save energy. But the heat seeker should have found him, but it didn’t. There’s a little clue there.
Norman Baker MP wrote a book about Dr Kelly’s death. He reckons to have spent a lot of time investigating the case. Funny thing, he manages to show two different groups of people actually killed Dr Kelly. Now me, I only think that one group could of done it. Also Norman Baker MP managed to miss out some very important documents from the Hutton website, which seems kind of careless. And they are just the ones that show a completely different story and lead to the real truth about where and why it all went horribly wrong for a brave and principled man. Watch this space.
THE INQUIRY INTO DR KELLY’S DEATH- WAS SET IN MOTION HOURS BEFORE HIS DEATH HAD OCCURED- AKIN TO THE TOWER HAVING BEEN REPORTED AS FALLING WHILE IT WAS CLEARLY STANDING ON THE BBC REPORT ON 9/11
“Anthrax War” – a new documentary by Bob Coen and Eric Nadler links Dr Kelly with Wouter Basson, former head of South Africa’s secret bioweapons programme, and highlights an unfinished book Dr Kelly was writing – a book confiscated by agents of the British state, hours before his body was found.
Mai Pederson, a close confidante of Dr Kelly’s, instructs her lawyer to write to Britain’s attorney general to press for inquest
He could not have died from loss of blood, say the expertsThe draft version of the doctors’ dossier – a final version, including diagrams and a copy of Dr Kelly’s death certificate, is being prepared for lawyers this week – concentrates on the ulnar artery, a blood vessel in the forearm.
The Hutton Report quoted Dr Nicholas Hunt, the forensic pathologist who examined
Dr Kelly’s corpse, as seeing ‘evidence of a significant incised wound to his left wrist, in the depths of which his left artery had been completely severed…
‘The arterial injury had resulted in the loss of a significant volume of blood, as noted at
But the doctors draw on their specialist knowledge of human anatomy to argue in detail that a wound to this artery could not have resulted in enough blood loss to cause his death.
‘This artery has the width of a matchstick in its constricted state,’ they write.
‘It is not easily felt on the little finger side of the wrist… on the contrary, the radial artery
pulse is easily felt beneath the skin on the opposite side of the wrist. It is thus more
difficult to cut the ulnar artery.’
They go on to argue that, according to the evidence given by Dr Hunt to Lord Hutton’s
inquiry, Dr Kelly’s blood would have quickly clotted, thus stemming the flow and preventing his death.
They write: ‘Dr Hunt describes complete severance of this artery, ie transection. This
means the elasticity of the artery would have caused it to retract within its sheath.
‘Contraction of the circular smooth muscle within the arterial wall would have narrowed the artery, thus reducing or stopping blood flow.
Blood clots would have formed in the wound, but also within the narrowed artery.
‘That clotting within the artery would have happened more speedily because the cutting was done with considerable trauma, thus causing more damage to the lining membrane, the intima.
Damage to the cells of the intima causes aggregation of blood platelets, thus
hastening clotting within the vessel.’
The doctors cite a number of studies which they say prove for ‘all practical purposes’ that suicide using the means allegedly adopted by Dr Kelly ‘does not exist in Britain’.
Although the doctors do not believe the painkillers taken by Dr Kelly contributed to his
death in any way – as argued by Lord Hutton – they have restricted the scope of their dossier to refute the reasoning he used on the question of haemorrhage.
USING HIS RIGHT HAND- WHICH COULD NOT EVEN CUT HIS MEAT UP AT DINNER- AFTER AN INJURY HE SUSTAINED AS WEAPONS INSPECTOR IN IRAQ.
HOW DID DR KELLY WIPE THE KNIFE’S HANDLE WHICH WAS FREE OF ALL FINGERPRINTS’?
The developments come as investigative journalist Bob Coen prepares to screen a 90-minute documentary, Anthrax War, in London on the sixth anniversary of Dr Kelly’s death, this Friday.
The film claims that Dr Kelly’s death may have been linked to the secret world of germ warfare research.
Until his death Dr Kelly was privy to some of the state’s most sensitive information and worked closely with the intelligence services of all the major industrialised countries.
Among notable claims in the film, which was made over four years, is Dr Kelly’s connection with Dr Walter Basson, whose work for the South African apartheid regime used chemical and biological weapons research destined for extrajudicial execution, and whose goals included ethnic cleansing.
The film also suggests that Dr Kelly was preparing to write a book that would have breached the Official Secrets Act.
Speaking out: David Halpin, pictured with his wife Sue, is among the doctors behind the legal challenge
‘We advise the instructing solicitors to obtain the autopsy reports so that the concerns of a group of properly interested medical specialists can be answered.’
The doctors do not say how, or why, they believe Dr Kelly did die but they have worked closely with campaigning Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker, who believes that the scientist was murdered by enemies he made in the course of his work as a weapons inspector.
And two of the doctors have added to the sense of persistent intrigue surrounding Dr Kelly by claiming that thousands of emails relating to the case had ‘vanished’ from their computers, in what one claimed was an act of ‘state-sponsored sabotage’.
A coroner’s inquest into Dr Kelly’s death was suspended before it could begin by order of the then Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer. He used the Coroners Act to designate the Hutton Inquiry as ‘fulfilling the function of an inquest’, but as a judicial investigation it had no power to make witnesses give evidence under oath.
After taking evidence from – but not cross-examining – Dr Nicholas Hunt, the pathologist who carried out the post-mortem examination, Lord Hutton concluded that ‘the principal cause of death was bleeding from incised wounds to the left wrist’ combined with the consumption of painkillers and ‘silent coronary artery disease’.
Not forgotten: The sign marking Dr Kelly’s grave in an Oxfordshire churchyward
The doctors also say that the level of the painkiller co-proxamol in Dr Kelly’s blood was about one third of that required to produce death and point to Dr Hunt’s comments at the end of giving evidence to Lord Hutton.
Asked if there was anything further he would like to say on the circumstances leading to Dr Kelly’s death, he said: ‘Nothing I could say as a pathologist, no.’
After the report was published, Dr Hunt added to the doctors’ suspicions by telling Channel 4 that he thought a full coroner’s inquest should be held.
The doctors have hired solicitor Martin Day, of Leigh Day and Co, and received advice from barrister Richard Hermer, QC, both of whom have a strong track record in civil liberties actions, including winning nearly £3million in compensation from the British Government for the family of Iraqi Baha Mousa, who died while being detained by UK troops.
They intend to use the Coroners Act to challenge Lord Falconer’s suspension of the inquest.
One of the doctors, David Halpin, told The Mail on Sunday that they had argued their case in the legal document in ‘microscopic’ detail.
He said: ‘We reject haemorrhage as the cause of death and see no contrary opinion which would stand its ground. I think it is highly likely he was assassinated.’
Mr Baker said: ‘The fact that eminent medical experts feel so strongly that the official explanation for Dr Kelly’s death cannot be sustained and are now taking legal action against the Government to secure a proper inquest demonstrates both how suspect Lord Hutton’s conclusions were and how this dark chapter cannot be closed unless Sir John Chilcott’s inquiry into the Iraq war addresses this issue.
‘A proper inquest into Dr Kelly’s death must take place.’
Among the doctors is Christopher Burns-Cox, 71, the former senior consultant physician for the Frenchay Healthcare Trust, Bristol, and current co-chairman of the NHS consultants’ association.
WHEN ASKED BY HIS FRIEND OF MANY YEARS- WHAT WOULD HAPPEN SHOULD WE GO TO WAR IN IRAQ- DR KELLY SAID- YOU’LL FIND MY BODY IN SOME WOOD’S
NOT CALLED AS A WITNESS!!
THE BRITISH PUBLIC AS USUAL COULDN’T GIVE A TOSS!
The only official verdict has come from the Hutton Inquiry, commissioned by Tony Blair, which concluded that Dr Kelly, 59, died from loss of blood after cutting his wrist with a blunt gardening knife.
Critics regarded the report as a ‘whitewash’, and Mr Blair remains acutely sensitive to the accusation that he has ‘blood on his hands’ over the scientist’s death.
But now a team of 13 specialist doctors has compiled a detailed medical dossier that rejects the Hutton conclusion on the grounds that a cut to the ulnar artery, which is small and difficult to access, could not have caused death.
It will be used by their lawyers to demand a formal inquest and the release of Dr Kelly’s autopsy report, which has never been published. It will also be sent to Sir John Chilcot’s forthcoming inquiry into the Iraq War.
The 12-page opinion, a copy of which has been seen by The Mail on Sunday, concludes: ‘The bleeding from Dr Kelly’s ulnar artery is highly unlikely to have been so voluminous and rapid that it was the cause of death.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
LORD HUTTON INSTRUCTS DAVID KELLY’S POST MORTEM TO BE KEPT SECRET FOR 70 YEARS (for full report, click on title)
Not only the post-mortem report – all medical reports.
Access to unpublished evidence, including dozens of witness statements will be denied for 30 years.
If Dr Kelly took his own life, why would all medical details need to be kept secret?
Why keep them secret for 70 years?
On what date did Lord Hutton make this ruling, and how?
What justification did Lord Hutton use?
Why was this ruling kept secret?
Has such a ruling ever been made before in a case of this nature?
Under what circumstances?
How might this ruling be overturned?
January 23, 2010
70-year gag on Kelly death evidence (Dr. David Kelly)
Well this latest news won’t fuel any conspiracy theories (cough) or bring even more serious questions about the alleged murder (not suicide) of former UN weapons’ inspector Dr. David Kelly (cough).
Before we get into the latest astonishing developments, here is a quick summary of who Dr. Kelly was and what happened to him:
1. Dr. David Kelly worked for the Ministry of Defense/U.K. as an expert in bio-weapons. He was also one of the key UN weapons inspectors in Iraq.
2. He became concerned about the US/UK claims of WMD in Iraq in the build-up to the Iraq war in 2003. Much the same way that former US Ambassador Joseph Wilson became concerned about US claims of yellowcake uranium purchases by Iraq from Niger. Like Wilson, Dr. Kelly became an anonymous source for a journalist. In Kelly’s case, he met with BBC journalist Andrew Gilligan.
3. The MoD leaked Kelly’s identity (just like Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity was leaked) to the press.
4. A Parliamentary committee tasked with investigating the planted intelligence on Iraq asked Kelly to testify, which he did.
5. Several days after his testimony and while preparing for a trip with his wife, Dr. Kelly was found dead in a park nearby his home, which was ruled a suicide. On the day he “committed suicide” he had sent an email to New York Times reporter Judith Miller in which he said “many dark actors playing games.”
6. Leading physicians and first responders who arrived at the park and inspected Kelly’s body did not think he committed suicide, even going so far as to sue the British government to prove their case.
Now here is the latest:
“Evidence relating to the death of Government weapons inspector David Kelly is to be kept secret for 70 years, it has been reported.
A highly unusual ruling by Lord Hutton, who chaired the inquiry into Dr Kelly’s death, means medical records including the post-mortem report will remain classified until after all those with a direct interest in the case are dead, the Mail on Sunday reported.
And a 30-year secrecy order has been placed on written records provided to Lord Hutton’s inquiry which were not produced in evidence.
The Ministry of Justice said decisions on the evidence were a matter for Lord Hutton. But Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker, who has conducted his own investigations into Dr Kelly’s death, described the order as “astonishing”.
Dr Kelly’s body was found in woods close to his Oxfordshire home in 2003, shortly after it was revealed that he was the source of a BBC report casting doubt on the Government’s claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction capable of being fired within 45 minutes.
An inquest was suspended by then Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer, who ruled that Lord Hutton’s inquiry could take its place. But in the event, the inquiry focused more on the question of how the BBC report came to be broadcast than on the medical explanation for Dr Kelly’s death.”
No credible expert believes that Kelly killed himself. Yet Lord Hutton continues to not only force the suicide claims down the throats of the medical experts who examined Kelly’s body and of the British public, he has also now sealed all of the records. If Kelly killed himself, then why are the medical records being sealed?
The question remains: just how far were the Blair/Bush administrations willing to go in order to fabricate a reason for the Iraq war? The Bush administration was at the very least willing to out a covert CIA officer, committing treason in the process. What was Tony Blair willing to do?
It is very simple. If Dr. Kelly committed suicide, then his medical records should not be sealed as there is no reason to seal them. If, however, Dr. Kelly was murdered, then the sealing of the medical records only adds more weight to what most reasonable people already suspect actually happened.
Ultimately, what must really be asked is if anyone from the Blair/Bush administrations will ever be held to account for anything. The answer seems to be a solid no.
‘He told me that some time ago he had broken his right elbow and it was never fixed properly, so he had real problems with it. It was painful and it never regained its strength.
‘I just don’t see how he could have used his right hand to cut through the nerves and tendons of his left wrist – especially as the knife he supposedly used had a dull blade.’
Sunday, August 31, 2008
David Kelly’s closest female confidante on why he COULDN’T have killed himself
By Sharon Churcher
31st August 2008
A female confidante of Dr David Kelly raised disturbing new questions last night over how the Ministry of Defence weapons inspector was able to kill himself.
After his body was discovered in woods near his Oxfordshire home in July 2003, a Government inquiry led by Lord Hutton ruled that he committed suicide by slashing his left wrist with a knife and taking an overdose of co-proxamol, a painkiller commonly used for arthritis.
He was said to be anguished about being named as the source of a BBC report, which alleged that Tony Blair ‘sexed up’ a dossier justifying the invasion of Iraq.
Mystery death: Professor David Kelly appearing at the House of Commons during the Iraq inquiry
But five years after his death at 59, his close friend, American military linguist Mai Pederson, has come forward to dispute this account.
The Hutton inquiry heard that he died after making several cuts to his left wrist, which severed the ulnar artery, buried deep in the tissue on the side of the hand nearest the little finger.
An earlier coroner’s inquest was halted when the Government used an obscure law to turn the investigation over to Lord Hutton. His inquiry concluded that ‘there was no involvement by a third party’ in the scientist’s death, which was said to be caused primarily by the cut artery and hastened by the painkillers.
Ms Pederson, a former US Air Force officer, met Dr Kelly when she was assigned to work in 1998 as a translator for the UN weapons inspection team in Iraq.
And she revealed in an interview with The Mail on Sunday that, in the months leading to his death, the right-handed scientist was unable to use his right hand for tasks requiring strength because of a painful injury to his right elbow.
According to Ms Pederson, when she dined with Dr Kelly at a Washington restaurant in the spring of 2003, the hand’s grip was so weak that he struggled to get a knife through a steak he had ordered.
The linguist, who counselled Dr Kelly during his conversion to the Baha’i religious faith that she follows, says he had begun to favour his left hand for even relatively minor tasks, a tendency she observed on numerous other occasions.
‘He couldn’t cut a steak’: Mai pederson is unconvinced David Kelly took his own life
‘David would have had to have been a contortionist to kill himself the way they claim,’ she said.
‘I don’t know whether he was born right-handed but by the time I first met him he favoured his left hand for any task that required strength, like opening a door or carrying his briefcase.
‘When he embraced friends at the beginning and end of Baha’i meetings, it was his left arm that you felt hugging you and you could tell his right arm hurt him because he rubbed the elbow a lot.
‘I didn’t want to pry but he finally told me the reason in the spring of 2003. It was the last time I saw him before he died. He was visiting America on business and we went out to dinner.
‘He ordered steak and he was holding his knife very oddly in the palm of his right hand, with his wrist crooked, trying to cut the meat.
‘He told me that some time ago he had broken his right elbow and it was never fixed properly, so he had real problems with it. It was painful and it never regained its strength.
‘I just don’t see how he could have used his right hand to cut through the nerves and tendons of his left wrist – especially as the knife he supposedly used had a dull blade.’
Ms Pederson said she believed she was familiar with the knife Dr Kelly is said to have used.
‘He always wore a Barbour jacket and he kept a knife in his pocket,’ she said. ‘It had a folding blade and I remember him telling me he couldn’t sharpen it because his right hand didn’t have the strength to hold a sharpener.
‘It would have taken him a long time to reach the artery that was severed and it would have been very painful.
‘As a scientist, David had no need to kill himself that way. I don’t understand why the British Government isn’t thoroughly investigating this. Logically, he cannot have committed suicide.’
David kelly gave evidence during an inquiry into whether the Government had ‘sexed up’ the reasons for going to war with Iraq
Ms Pederson, 48, whose military duties have included intelligence assignments, has avoided the spotlight since Dr Kelly’s death. But she says she is perturbed by mounting evidence that he may have been murdered.
The Mail on Sunday revealed last week that after his disappearance, a heat-seeking search helicopter flew over the exact spot where his corpse was later discovered. Yet the thermal-imaging equipment picked up no sign of a body – which some experts say suggests he was killed elsewhere.
Moreover, a group of doctors, surgeons and anaesthetists has called for a new inquiry into his death, contending that a cut to the ulnar artery would not cause catastrophic bleeding. Little blood was found at the scene.
They also maintain that the 29 or so painkillers Dr Kelly supposedly swallowed were only one-third of the dosage normally considered as lethal.
Even more mysteriously, there were no fingerprints on the knife he allegedly wielded nor on the bottle from which he supposedly drank water to wash down the tablets.
But perhaps most key is the information that Ms Pederson provided to Thames Valley Police, who were assisting the Hutton inquiry.
When officers flew to meet her in America in August 2003, she says she told them during two days of interviews that she was baffled about how Dr Kelly could have killed himself.
‘The facts just don’t add up,’ said Ms Pederson. ‘The more I have heard about this, the more I have thought about the significance of his weak right hand. I told the police about it when they interviewed me. I said, “How could David have cut his left wrist using a dull knife with his weak right hand?”
‘They said, “It wasn’t a straight cut. It was jagged.”
‘When I heard nothing more about it, I assumed they had come to an informed decision – that it was suicide. But now, knowing all that we do, I feel it is time for a disinterested public inquiry.’
Copies of the Hutton report into the events surrounding Dr Kelly’s death
Ms Pederson has been one of the more elusive figures in the mystery of Dr Kelly’s death.
There have been rumours that she might have been romantically involved with the married scientist.
However, the vivacious brunette strongly denied this in a previous interview with The Mail on Sunday, pointing out that both her religion and military rules prohibit adultery.
Ms Pederson, who is fluent in Arabic, German and French, met Dr Kelly when she was seconded to the UN team in Iraq as a translator. In the tense atmosphere, she developed a close bond with him. They had long conversations about her devout beliefs in the ecumenical teachings of the Baha’i faith, to which he converted a year later.
She recalled: ‘He was like my big brother. I was the only linguist on the team and I would work until 11 or 11.30 at night and then go for a walk to get rid of the stress and the pressure. Other team members would walk with me but eventually it was mostly David because of his British passion for his daily constitutional.
‘The only time it was safe to talk about anything important was when we were walking. At our hotel, the Iraqis monitored us. The only place to change our underwear and not be filmed by their surveillance equipment was behind the shower curtains in our rooms.
‘The desk clerk at the hotel constantly called me, saying he was enamoured by me. I later discovered he was a lieutenant in the Iraqi military and I think it was a clumsy effort to elicit information from me.
‘One night, a group of us were out walking and suddenly a red laser shone out. It went from David’s heart to his head and it pretty much stayed on the middle of his forehead.
‘The inspectors said it happened all the time. The idea was to intimidate David, showing they could pick him out as a target even in the dark.’
Enraged, Ms Pederson insisted that the Russian inspector heading the team complain to General Amer Al-Saadi, Saddam Hussein’s British-educated weapons adviser.
‘The general said it was children playing,’ she said derisively. ‘The other thing that bothered me was that key people on the team were constantly getting sick.
‘The symptoms were very similar to anthrax. We joked that they were poisoning us so we couldn’t finish our job. David pretty much lived on Vegemite and bread.’
After Ms Pederson returned to America, she was stationed at the Defence Language Institute in California. It has been described as a spy school but she says she worked as a personnel officer. The US Air Force often sent her on assignments that required a linguist, which she is not permitted to discuss.
She met Dr Kelly again after she was transferred to the Pentagon. ‘It was October 2002 and he was visiting Washington,’ she said. ‘He told me that the Iraqis had drawn up a hit list of people to be killed.
‘He said, “I am number three and you also are on it.” At the time, it didn’t really bother either of us. We understood there was a danger because of our jobs.
‘He also told me that if we invaded Iraq, he would be found dead in the woods. He loved to walk in the woods near his home. But he knew that walking alone made him vulnerable. The Iraqis wanted him dead.’
In May 2003, journalist Andrew Gilligan reported on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that a source had disclosed that the Blair administration had ‘sexed up’ the dossier, accusing Saddam of harbouring weapons of mass destruction.
Dr Kelly was subsequently named as the source and the Hutton inquiry concluded that this plunged him into depression
Ms Pederson concedes that he was ‘upset’ by the episode but says that he brushed it off, insisting he had been misquoted.
And far from being opposed to the Government’s dossier, she says he was convinced that Saddam lied when he told the UN that he was no longer developing WMDs.
She said: ‘David believed the Iraqis were not being forthcoming during our inspections about their potential for making weapons. If they weren’t up to anything, why did we have to be accompanied by minders? And why were people scared to talk to us?
‘David’s position on the invasion was that it was regrettable but necessary because UN sanctions had failed. He said he was misquoted and his words were twisted and taken out of context.
‘He wasn’t depressed. He was upset. I have taken courses on suicide prevention and he exhibited none of the signs.
‘He was planning for his retirement. He wanted to make more money to provide for his family and he’d had job offers in the States as well as Europe. Also, he was excited that one of his daughters was getting married. He said, “The controversy will blow over.” ’
Ms Pederson claims that at the time of his death, Dr Kelly was looking forward to returning to Iraq. ‘Had he been alive, he finally would have been free to look for evidence of WMDs,’ she said. ‘If anyone could have found them, it would have been David.
‘I am not saying that the Iraqis killed him. But that is one possibility that should be investigated. All the facts suggest that David did not kill himself. It is against our Baha’i faith.
‘But for David there were also personal reasons – he believed his mother’s death was suicide. Research shows that suicide runs in families and I asked him if he would ever do that. I said, “Hypothetically, if you are ever at your wit’s end, promise me that you will seek help.”
‘He said, “I don’t see the relevance. I would never take any life, let alone my own.” He finally did say that if he was ever desperate, he would get help. That’s important because he was a man of his word. He could never hurt his wife and daughters the way that he was hurt by his mother’s death.’
Ms Pederson’s Washington DC lawyer, Mark Zaid, has made available to The Mail on Sunday parts of her final statement to Thames Valley Police, given on September 1, 2003.
A red rose lies on the David Kelly’s grave. But the story behind his death is not yet ready to rest in peace
Its ten pages would appear critical, since they describe Iraqi death threats and the incident with the laser. She also stated that she was bewildered about how Dr Kelly could have taken an overdose, as he suffered from a disorder that made it difficult for him to swallow pills.
‘I was so confused when I heard he had swallowed a load of painkillers,’ she told the officers.
She also emphasised in the statement that he suffered from pain and problems ‘grabbing things with his right hand, which he attributed to breaking his elbow’.
Police have implied that she did not give them permission to give her statement to the Hutton inquiry. But in fact she stipulated: ‘If specific information [in the statement] is deemed relevant to the coroner’s inquiry into the death of David Kelly, I am willing for Thames Valley to reveal the information in a non-attributable way.’
However, her statement was never given to the inquiry. The then Assistant Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police, Michael Page, testified that it ‘contained nothing of relevance’.
After the inquiry, Ms Pederson started to get death threats. ‘Some were from nuts,’ she said. But others, she believes, may have been related to her sensitive work with Dr Kelly in Iraq. And she spoke on condition that we do not reveal her whereabouts.
‘I can’t say for sure that David was murdered,’ she said. ‘But his life had been threatened because he strived to do what was best for humanity.
‘He deserved more from his country than an investigation that overlooked the fact that his right hand was so weak that he had problems cutting a piece of steak.’
PLEASE GO TO THE BLOG AND LEAVE YOUR COMMENT:
IT’S EASIER BY FAR TO LOOK THE OTHER WAY…………OUR MASTERS KNOW THIS TOO!
WILL UNMANNED DRONES IN THE SKIES CAUSE THE BRITISH TO RE-ACT- OF COURSE NOT- WHY WOULD IT?
KENT IS A TORY COUNCIL WHERE THE DRONE’S ARE TO SPY OVERHEAD- SO NO CHANGE THERE THEN- VOTE TORY CHANGE NOTHING!
Drones could be used for civilian surveillance in the UK as early as 2012. Source: BAE
Police in the UK are planning to use unmanned spy drones, controversially deployed in Afghanistan, for the ”routine” monitoring of antisocial motorists, protesters, agricultural thieves and fly-tippers, in a significant expansion of covert state surveillance.
The arms manufacturer BAE Systems, which produces a range of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for war zones, is adapting the military-style planes for a consortium of government agencies led by Kent police.
Documents from the South Coast Partnership, a Home Office-backed project in which Kent police and others are developing a national drone plan with BAE, have been obtained by the Guardian under the Freedom of Information Act.
They reveal the partnership intends to begin using the drones in time for the 2012 Olympics. They also indicate that police claims that the technology will be used for maritime surveillance fall well short of their intended use – which could span a range of police activity – and that officers have talked about selling the surveillance data to private companies. A prototype drone equipped with high-powered cameras and sensors is set to take to the skies for test flights later this year.
The Civil Aviation Authority, which regulates UK airspace, has been told by BAE and Kent police that civilian UAVs would “greatly extend” the government’s surveillance capacity and “revolutionise policing”. The CAA is currently reluctant to license UAVs in normal airspace because of the risk of collisions with other aircraft, but adequate “sense and avoid” systems for drones are only a few years away.
Five other police forces have signed up to the scheme, which is considered a pilot preceding the countrywide adoption of the technology for “surveillance, monitoring and evidence gathering”. The partnership’s stated mission is to introduce drones “into the routine work of the police, border authorities and other government agencies” across the UK.
Concerned about the slow pace of progress of licensing issues, Kent police’s assistant chief constable, Allyn Thomas, wrote to the CAA last March arguing that military drones would be useful “in the policing of major events, whether they be protests or the Olympics”. He said interest in their use in the UK had “developed after the terrorist attack in Mumbai”.
1984 ANOTHER STEP CLOSER!!
NOTHING TO HIDE NOTHING TO FEAR…………..BUT DOESN’T APPLY TO THE COMMIE REGIME!