Dr David Kelly's post mortem to be secret for 70 years

FireGarden

Philosopher
FireGarden
Joined
Aug 13, 2002
Messages
5,047
This seems to be only at the daily mail:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...elly-post-mortem-set-stay-wraps-70-years.html

Other news services mention it, but it seems to be from their article.

The Hutton inquiry ruled Dr Kelly's death was suicide.

Daily Mail said:
It means vital evidence, including the results of Dr Kelly's post-mortem examination - which have never been made public - will remain under wraps until 2073, by which time anyone involved in the case will almost certainly be dead.

[...] Lord Hutton's restrictions - which were imposed immediately after his inquiry in 2004 - came to light in a letter from Oxfordshire County Council to a group of 13 doctors, led by Dr Powers, challenging the Hutton verdict.

It revealed that an order had been imposed which placed a 30-year ban the release of records that were provided to the inquiry but not used in evidence - believed to be witness statements.

In addition, the letter said that medical reports and photographs of Dr Kelly's body would remain classified information for 70 years after his death.

Nicholas Gardiner, chief coroner for Oxfordshire, said the restriction may have been used to protect Dr Kelly's children.

[...] The Ministry of Justice has not explained the legal basis for Lord Hutton's order.

A spokesman said: 'Any decision made by Lord Hutton was entirely a matter for him.'

Lord Hutton was unavailable for comment.
Click to expand...

ETA: The Mirror has it also:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-st...-be-kept-secret-for-70-years-115875-21992989/
 
Last edited:
I can understand details of a postmortem being withheld to avoid further upset to the family. But was this requested by them or done by others making that assumption?

How far does the public right to know trump familial distress in a sensitive issue like this?
 
Last edited:
don't worry about, i'm sure the government had nothing to do with his murder, oops sorry suicide, well suicide for 70 years at least.
 
I suspect that Lord Hutton's "letter" may just have been stating the standard release times for the information the inquiry used, in other words he did not authorize the early release of such documents. Reading between the lines I have sneaky feeling that such post-mortem results may as standard be closed to public inquiry for 70 years, anyone have any knowledge of the usual rules that surround post-mortem results?

Does anyone know if the family wishes the post-mortem results to be public?
 
Darat said:
I suspect that Lord Hutton's "letter" may just have been stating the standard release times for the information the inquiry used, in other words he did not authorize the early release of such documents. Reading between the lines I have sneaky feeling that such post-mortem results may as standard be closed to public inquiry for 70 years, anyone have any knowledge of the usual rules that surround post-mortem results?

Does anyone know if the family wishes the post-mortem results to be public?
Click to expand...

I don't really know but I strongly suspect that the MSM is leading the Truthers by the nose on this one. How ironic!

I've read Norman Baker's book on David Kelly and it seems quite clear that the family wanted to have nothing to do with him so he rustled up a few people from Kelly's local pub who said, "Suicide? He didn't seem the type to do that!"

The Mail article itself does hint at the possibility that the family DIDN'T want people to be picking over his corpse. Hardly surprising given the lengths conspiracy theorists would go to. What do you think they would do with photographs of his body? Post them on the Internet and make all kinds of vacuous speculations about how he got this or that scratch etc...
 
Unless I'm sorely mistaken both the 70 year and 30 year ban on disclosing the contents are fairly normal archival procedure.
 
Moss said:
Unless I'm sorely mistaken both the 70 year and 30 year ban on disclosing the contents are fairly normal archival procedure.
Click to expand...

Certainly the 30 years part is, it's the 70 year part that I haven't been able to find a reference to but it sounds vaguely familiar to me so I strongly suspect that it is quite a usual term for such records. Have to say if something terrible happened to a member of my family I wouldn't want the details of their autopsy to be open to every Tom, conspiracy theory nut, sorry Dick, and Harry to do with as they please!
 
FireGarden said:
RE: Craig Murray... his "sexed up blogpost"
http://www.tomharris.org.uk/2010/01/24/craig-murrays-sexed-up-blogpost/

great title.
I like the way Tom Harris deletes comments he doesn't like. That'll really add fuel to the fire! :D
Click to expand...

Like this?

–THE CONTENTS OF THIS EMAIL HAVE BEEN DELETED ON THE ADVICE OF THE SECURITY SERVICES–

–THE REMAINDER OF THIS EMAIL HAS BEEN DELETED AT THE REQUEST OF DAVID SHAYLER AND URI GELLER –

–THE CONTENTS OF THIS EMAIL HAVE BEEN DELETED ON THE ADVICE OF THE MEALS-ON-WHEELS SERVICES–

Some of Craig Murray's commenters first reactions were, "OMG! OMG! OMG! The security services are doing strange things on his blog!"

Craig Murray himself had to point out that Tom Harris was ridiculing them.

:D
 
Update to this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8481791.stm

...snip....

On Tuesday, Lord Hutton released a statement explaining his decision and revealing that he had written to the Ministry of Justice.

In it, he said: "At the conclusion of my inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly, I requested that the post-mortem report relating to his death should not be disclosed for 70 years as I was concerned that the publication of that report in newspapers, books and magazines would cause his daughters and his wife further and unnecessary distress.

"Much of the material in the post-mortem report had been given in oral evidence in public at the inquiry and substantial parts of that evidence had been set out in my report.

"However, I consider that the disclosure of the report to doctors and their legal advisers for the purposes of legal proceedings would not undermine the protection which I wished to give to Dr Kelly's family, provided that conditions were imposed restricting the use and publication of the report to such proceedings, and I have written to the Ministry of Justice to this effect."

...snip...
Click to expand...

Why oh why haven't they got to him!!!!
 
Darat said:
Anyone with more details? From the article I would say they are trying to create a story out of the "30 year rule" (see: http://www.30yearrulereview.org.uk/background.htm) which means it is a total non-story.
Click to expand...

I did find this in your link Darat. Sounds about right:

"Is everything released to the public at 30 years?

Not everything does get released when transferred to The National Archives. The Freedom of Information Act has reduced the number of records that can stay closed, but a very small proportion of material remains closed for a defined period. Examples include murder files, which remain closed until the children of the victim are 100 years old, in order to protect them from exposure to distressing personal information. Other records which remain closed relate to current defence or security, foreign relations etc.."
 
MostlyHarmless said:
I did find this in your link Darat. Sounds about right:

"Is everything released to the public at 30 years?

Not everything does get released when transferred to The National Archives. The Freedom of Information Act has reduced the number of records that can stay closed, but a very small proportion of material remains closed for a defined period. Examples include murder files, which remain closed until the children of the victim are 100 years old, in order to protect them from exposure to distressing personal information. Other records which remain closed relate to current defence or security, foreign relations etc.."
Click to expand...

Thanks - I missed that. So it would appear that the 70 years was entirely in line with normal practices - so all in all this was a total and utter non-story.
 
What surely has to be a conspiracy is the absolute crap journalism that went into these reports, it's beyond belief that all the journalists were so lazy and sensation seeking ....
 
Darat said:
What surely has to be a conspiracy is the absolute crap journalism that went into these reports, it's beyond belief that all the journalists were so lazy and sensation seeking ....
Click to expand...

As I was saying, it's amazing how some of these CT believers with their wide awake perception can be so credulous when it comes to believing what they want to even if it is shovelled their way by the dreaded mainstream media!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom