The CIA and the Death of Dr. David Kelly

[John Simkin]

The death of the weapons inspector Dr David Kelly is considered by many to be "unfinished business". Norman Baker, described as the most honest member of the House of Commons, has spent over a year in active research, receiving much new information from many sources. He shows that the Hutton inquiry verdict of suicide is not credible; he has the determination and courage to get to the truth of what really happened. "The Strange Death of David Kelly" looks in fascinating detail at the motives for the unlawful killing of Dr Kelly and the various possibilities of who could have been involved, before concluding with the most likely scenario. He analyses and criticises the official process after David Kelly's death, and looks into the actions of the UK government, particularly in relation to the Iraq war.

Norman Baker interviewed several members of the forum when writing his book and several of us are quoted in the book. My contribution mainly concerned information about the way the CIA deal with people like Kelly that pose a threat to their activities. I believe the case has close parallels with the JFK case and other CIA operations. It could be argued, that the killing of Kelly was used as a warning to others who might be considering releasing information that would undermine the invasion of Iraq. This could also explain why the “suicide” of Kelly was so badly done. It would have been possible to have killed Kelly to make it look like a death by natural causes. It is clear to anyone who studies the evidence in this case that Kelly was murdered. Yet, it was not in the interests of Tony Blair that Kelly died. He had already provided the information that undermined the invasion of Iraq. His death only drew more attention to what had been going on and Blair was forced to organize a cover-up of the killing. This was the perfect warning to those who also had damaging information. “We will kill you and we will get away with it”. That is a terrifying message for anyone to receive. It would not surprise me if Peter Watt, Jon Mendelsohn, David Triesman and David Abrahams are not all spending sometime thinking about the death of David Kelly at the moment. They are all people who will be tempting into telling the truth about the current investigation into "proxy" donations to the Labour Party.

Norman Baker has agreed to discuss his book on the forum. Please post your questions here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=11738

[Tim Gratz]

John, can you explain what you mean when you say the suicide of Dr David Kelly was so badly done. I assume you mean it was apparent it was not a suicide but rather a homicide.

But since few claim that JFK committed suicide in Dealey Plaza, I am not sure of the nexus to the JFK case. Or to the CIA. Are you claiming the CIA murdered people and claimed it was suicide? If so, what evidence do you have? (I fully understand I annoy people when I ask for evidence of claims that seem outrageous or outlandish.)

Perhaps your claims against the CIA are made to enforce your cover as an agent? If so, it is well done! (But you ought not to have admitted it on Stephen's thread, that was truly a violation of tradecraft.)

[John Simkin]

John, can you explain what you mean when you say the suicide of Dr David Kelly was so badly done. I assume you mean it was apparent it was not a suicide but rather a homicide.

Some medical experts argued that it was highly unlikely that Kelly committed suicide. On 27th January, 2004, The Guardian published a letter written by three doctors: David Halpin (specialist in trauma and orthopaedic surgery), C Stephen Frost (specialist in diagnostic radiology) and Searle Sennett (specialist in anaesthesiology):

As specialist medical professionals, we do not consider the evidence given at the Hutton inquiry has demonstrated that Dr David Kelly committed suicide.

Dr Nicholas Hunt, the forensic pathologist at the Hutton inquiry, concluded that Dr Kelly bled to death from a self-inflicted wound to his left wrist. We view this as highly improbable. Arteries in the wrist are of matchstick thickness and severing them does not lead to life-threatening blood loss. Dr Hunt stated that the only artery that had been cut - the ulnar artery - had been completely transected. Complete transection causes the artery to quickly retract and close down, and this promotes clotting of the blood.

As specialist medical professionals, we do not consider the evidence given at the Hutton inquiry has demonstrated that Dr David Kelly committed suicide.

Dr Nicholas Hunt, the forensic pathologist at the Hutton inquiry, concluded that Dr Kelly bled to death from a self-inflicted wound to his left wrist. We view this as highly improbable. Arteries in the wrist are of matchstick thickness and severing them does not lead to life-threatening blood loss. Dr Hunt stated that the only artery that had been cut - the ulnar artery - had been completely transected. Complete transection causes the artery to quickly retract and close down, and this promotes clotting of the blood.

The ambulance team reported that the quantity of blood at the scene was minimal and surprisingly small. It is extremely difficult to lose significant amounts of blood at a pressure below 50-60 systolic in a subject who is compensating by vasoconstricting. To have died from haemorrhage, Dr Kelly would have had to lose about five pints of blood - it is unlikely that he would have lost more than a pint.

Alexander Allan, the forensic toxicologist at the inquiry, considered the amount ingested of Co-Proxamol insufficient to have caused death. Allan could not show that Dr Kelly had ingested the 29 tablets said to be missing from the packets found. Only a fifth of one tablet was found in his stomach. Although levels of Co-Proxamol in the blood were higher than therapeutic levels, Allan conceded that the blood level of each of the drug's two components was less than a third of what would normally be found in a fatal overdose.

We dispute that Dr Kelly could have died from haemorrhage or from Co-Proxamol ingestion or from both. The coroner, Nicholas Gardiner, has spoken recently of resuming the inquest into his death. If it re-opens, as in our opinion it should, a clear need exists to scrutinise more closely Dr Hunt's conclusions as to the cause of death.

It might interest members that this forum was partly set up as a result of the killing of Dr. David Kelly. At the time I was a member of a forum for history teachers. The day following his death, I claimed on the forum that Kelly had been murdered. This post was deleted and I was warned about speculating about his death. This was not the first time that Andy Walker and myself had been censored on the forum. We therefore decided to set up our own forum where we could enjoy freedom of expression.

[Tim Gratz]

John, that bit of history of the founding of the Forum is interesting.

[John Simkin]

Another letter followed on 12th February, 2004:

Since three of us wrote our letter to the Guardian on January 27, questioning whether Dr Kelly's death was suicide, we have received professional support for our view from vascular surgeon Martin Birnstingl, pathologist Dr Peter Fletcher, and consultant in public health Dr Andrew Rouse. We all agree that it is highly improbable that the primary cause of Dr Kelly's death was haemorrhage from transection of a single ulnar artery, as stated by Brian Hutton in his report.

On February 10, Dr Rouse wrote to the BMJ explaining that he and his colleague, Yaser Adi, had spent 100 hours preparing a report, Hutton, Kelly and the Missing Epidemiology. They concluded that "the identified evidence does not support the view that wrist-slash deaths are common (or indeed possible)".

While Professor Chris Milroy, in a letter to the BMJ, responded, "unlikely does not make it impossible", Dr Rouse replied: "Before most of us will be prepared to accept wristslashing ... as a satisfactory and credible explanation for a death, we will also require evidence that such aetiologies are likely; not merely 'possible'. "

Our criticism of the Hutton report is that its verdict of "suicide" is an inappropriate finding. To bleed to death from a transected artery goes against classical medical teaching, which is that a transected artery retracts, narrows, clots and stops bleeding within minutes. Even if a person continues to bleed, the body compensates for the loss of blood through vasoconstriction (closing down of non-essential arteries). This allows a partially exsanguinated individual to live for many hours, even days.

Professor Milroy expands on the finding of Dr Nicholas Hunt, the forensic pathologist at the Hutton inquiry - that haemorrhage was the main cause of death (possibly finding it inadequate) - and falls back on the toxicology: "The toxicology showed a significant overdose of co-proxamol. The standard text, Baselt, records deaths with concentrations at 1 mg/l, the concentration found in Kelly." But Dr Allan, the toxicogist in the case, considered this nowhere near toxic. Each of the two components was a third of what is normally considered a fatal level. Professor Milroy then talks of "ischaemic heart disease". But Dr Hunt is explicit that Dr Kelly did not suffer a heart attack. Thus, one must assume that no changes attributable to myocardial ischaemia were actually found at autopsy.

We believe the verdict given is in contradiction to medical teaching; is at variance with documented cases of wrist-slash suicides; and does not align itself with the evidence presented at the inquiry. We call for the reopening of the inquest by the coroner, where a jury may be called and evidence taken on oath.

Andrew Rouse

Public health consultant

Searle Sennett

Specialist in anaesthesiology

David Halpin

Specialist in trauma

Stephen Frost

Specialist in radiology

Dr Peter Fletcher

Specialist in pathology

Martin Birnstingl

Specialist in vascular surgery

[John Simkin]

Mr Halpin said that he lost more than 6,000 pieces of correspondence - many relating to Dr Kelly - during his investigation, explaining that the mystery began when the 'firewall' on his computer, which all similar machines are fitted with as a security measure, became inactive without warning.

His emails started disappearing as though they were being sifted remotely. 'I believe this will have been done by a state-sponsored agency and not by an amateur acting singly,' he said.

A close associate of Mr Halpin's who has also taken an active interest in the case confirmed to The Mail on Sunday that at around the same time he, too, fell victim to what he believes was a rogue agent, losing 'somewhere in the region of 2,000 emails', many of which discussed Dr Kelly.

For professional reasons, the individual concerned, a civil servant, said that he could not be identified by name.

He said: 'I have no doubt that my computer was hacked into and I also have reason to believe that both my mobile telephone and my landline have been bugged until fairly recently. It echoes on the end of the line, things like that.

'But if I made an accusation like that in public without being able to prove it, it would compromise me and for the sake of my children I do not want to enter that territory. I cannot say any more about it at the moment.'

Mr Baker, who published a book about Dr Kelly's death in 2007, also believes that his computer was hacked into remotely, leading to the loss of sensitive files about David Kelly from his constituency office in Lewes, East Sussex. 

'I think it is highly likely he was assassinated'

And Mr Halpin added that Rowena Thursby, who helped establish the Kelly Investigation Group which has campaigned for the inquest into Dr Kelly's death to be reopened on several occasions, has also lost scores of emails in a similar, suspicious manner.

A couple of years ago I lost all of my archived emails. This included the emails I had received from Don Bohning about the assassination of JFK. Soon afterwards I received an email from Bohning demanding that I proove that he told me by email that Chi Chi Quintero told him that Carl Jenkins and his confession told to Gene Wheaton was "a joke". This of course had been destroyed when my computer crashed. Did Bohning know that the email had been destroyed by the hacker? Only a few weeks ago Bohning emailed me demanding that I provide him with a copy of this email. If I don't, he is going to write another article attacking me for writing about him that uses a "non-existant" email.