David Kelly Conspiracy

JAStewart

Graduate Poster
JAStewart
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
1,521
Since its on BBC2 right now (Conspiracy Files).

I've never thought about it, has it ever been discussed here? did he commit suicide? did he get killed?
 
If not suicide then what? I'm told that Iraqi secret services did him in - but then why would the British authorities cover it up? I dunno... agitated man takes pills and cuts his wrists doesn't sound like much of a story. I know that Lib Dem MP says his injuries were "unlikely" and "inefficient", but opening veins or arteries is a pretty classic suicide method, and it doesn't need to be efficient, merely sufficient. The fact that it's more popular with teenage girls is not enough reason to rule it out, IMO.
 
My job takes me in contact with a lot of people who cut their wrists. If the main vessels are severed or even nicked and you're on your own somewhere, it's an extremely efficient way to kill yourself.
 
I caught the last half of the show. Suicide was their conclusion as well. They had a pathologist on to say that a fairly elderly man with a heart condition and an overdose of paracetamol wouldn't need to lose a lot of blood to die.
The CTer who claimed to be an MI5 insider with impeccable information that Kelly was murdered with an injection of some untraceable poison (named) was gently shown to be an idiot. First, the interviewer pointed out that the CTer had hundreds of spy novels on his shelves and was an admitted fan of the genre; then he pointed out that a Tom Clancy novel that was prominent in the collection had a plot that involved the secret services murdering somebody with an injection of the same poison. That was all that was said, or needed to be said. Quite a masterly put-down.
 
Wouldn't the pills thin out his blood anyway.. or something. Thats what I thought. A combination of the Pills and the cut
 
JAStewart said:
Since its on BBC2 right now (Conspiracy Files).

I've never thought about it, has it ever been discussed here? did he commit suicide? did he get killed?
Click to expand...

i've not seen the programme or read about kelly much but will do so. it does seem interesting from a CT point of view. the impression i always got was that dr kelly was hounded by elements of the british press and simply cracked...........

anyways, some excellent info about dr kelly's death here (FROM BBC IN DEPTH SECTION ON BBC WEBSITE)..............

THE HUTTON REPORT
Full Report
(PDF file 2MB)
o.gif


inline_dashed_line.gif


Hutton report in full (html version)
Chapter 12: Summary

  • Dr Kelly took his own life and no third party was involved
  • No-one involved could have contemplated that Dr Kelly would take his own life as a result of the pressures he felt
    o.gif
  • Dr Kelly was not an easy man to help or to whom to give advice
  • Can not be certain of factors that drove Dr Kelly to suicide
  • Dr Kelly probably killed himself because of extreme loss of self-esteem and would have seen himself as being publicly disgraced
  • Dr Kelly would have felt his job was at risk and that his life's work could be undermined
BV
 
It wasn't paracetemol he took. If memory serves, it was something called paracodemol.
 
JQH said:
It wasn't paracetemol he took. If memory serves, it was something called paracodemol.
Click to expand...
It was paracetamol and dextropropoxythene, aka "Coproxamol", which was banned here in 2005 (a phased ban, anyway) because it's viewed as potentially dangerous.
 
MikeW said:
It was paracetamol and dextropropoxythene, aka "Coproxamol", which was banned here in 2005 (a phased ban, anyway) because it's viewed as potentially dangerous.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I thought it was banned because of addictive qualities, but you are right.
It's still the subject of a big debate - a Google of "coproxamol ban" brings up many sites supporting its' reinstatement and lots of debate around the whole issue.

And to think, I used to take that stuff in conjunction with Vioxx.
It's a wonder I'm still alive!
 
The first three-quarters of the programme was almost pure CT and I feared it was all going that way, but the BBC redeemed themselves with some masterful debunking at the end. It was quite a different technique from last week's programme where they debunked as they went along, and I don't think this one worked quite as well, but at least the conclusion was right - suicide - no CT.

The CT input was largely provided by a Rowena Thursby who leads some campaign group, and Norman Baker, a Member of Parliament - both strong on rhetoric but neither providing anything to back up their fanciful theories. Just the usual "could have", "might have", "looks suspicious" claptrap. They also dragged in two "experts" who'd clearly gone quite loopy - a surgeon who disingenuously maintained that cutting one's wrist was rarely fatal, and a barrister who claimed to work for the security services and to have a "hot line" which world leaders used to to call him! All the usual CT tricks I remember from the JFK era (and dutifully rehashed for Princess Di and 9/11) were there - lots of imigination but, of course, absolutely nothing supported by one iota of evidence.

The debunking was largely in the hands of a pathologist who showed that Kelly could well have died precisely as the official version maintained, an ex employee of MI5 who showed how ridiculous the various assassination scenarios were, and a friend of Kelly who described Kelly's state of mind following his public questioning by the parliamentary committee. No reasonable person could come to any conclusion other than that described by the Hutton Inquiry - Kelly, publically humiliated and fearing for his career, took his own life by dosing himself with a strong painkiller and cutting an artery in his wrist.

Another nail in the coffin of the CT fraternity.
 
Me: "David Kelly killed himself. It was tragic but it wasn't a conspiracy."

Beloved family member: "If you don't mind me saying, I think you are stupid and very naive."

BBC: "David Kelly killed himself. It was tragic but it wasn't a conspiracy."

Thank you BBC!

Oh wait, family member doesn't watch the BBC, because the fricking Daily Mail told him it's biased, liberal, Blair-loving New Labour propaganda. And was involved in the death of David Kelly.
 
NickUK said:
My job takes me in contact with a lot of people who cut their wrists. If the main vessels are severed or even nicked and you're on your own somewhere, it's an extremely efficient way to kill yourself.
Click to expand...

Were Kelly's wounds "down the road" or "across the street"?

(either would work, of course, as you rightly point out, though one is generally more efficient than the other, but I'm just curious about which method was used in this specific incident and I'm too tired to look it up at the moment)
 
Last edited:
The Hutton Inquiry failed (some might say deliberately) to answer many outstanding questions surrounding the suspicious elements of Dr. Kelly's death. Ultimately, however, blame for the tragic death of this decent man has been laid at the door of the scientist himself. Lord Hutton found that the MoD had not failed in its care of duty to the employee and (for the foreseeable future) the case is now closed.
 
I finally saw the program yesterday.

Rowena Thursby came over as quite reasonable, Norman Baker seemed more on a personal trip, and the guy with a "hotline to Kissinger" was totally nuts.

The only question that the program didn't really address were the conflicting testimonies about the position of David Kelly's body. I know that testimonies are unreliable, be here it were testimonies from professionals.

The program made it clear that there was no real motive for a conspiracy, and of course no evidence.

The hearings of David Kelly were quite sad, and reinforced the suicide-hypothesis.

The only conspiracy here seems to be that the government leaked Kelly's name on purpose.
 
Random bump I know, but I was reading a story today about the early draft of the 'sexed up' Iraq dossier, and wondered what jref though about the David Kelly conspiracy.

I haven't watched the program mentioned in this thread, but it seems to have been broadcast a few months before Norman Baker's book on the subject. I've only read reviews of this book, but it seems to leave a lot of questions unanswered, focusing on the anomalies of the case but not providing any evidence for its conclusions. (sound familiar?)

So I wondered why you guys thought of it as of now, and whether any of you have read the book.

Times review -

http://entertainment.timesonline.co...tainment/books/non-fiction/article2828834.ece

Melanie Philips in the Daily Mail, from 2006. There's a lot wrong with this article, one of her weakest to date I think. Oh and check the last comment no it ;)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...rticle_id=397340&in_page_id=1787&in_a_source=

David Aaronovitch on Baker's Book, from Jan 2008

http://timesonline.typepad.com/david_aaronovitch/2007/11/a-weapons-exper.html

There's a great example of how conspiracies grow in that last article, you guys should appreciate it.

I do think the lack of a coroner's inquest was suspicious, and the Hutton report didn't help much. But that doesn't really point to conspiracy.
 
You didn't notice how old this thread was :) Sorry!

Here is an interesting part of the Aaronovitch article:

http://timesonline.typepad.com/david_aaronovitch/2007/11/a-weapons-exper.html

If some of this sounds unplaceably familiar to readers over 35, I may be able to help you. In March 1984 an elderly rose grower, Hilda Murrell, was abducted from her Shrewsbury home and later found dead in a small copse some miles away. The police said it was a bungled burglary, but some in Shrewsbury’s anti-nuclear community suspected a political motive. Miss Murrell was about to publish a paper opposing further development of nuclear power.

These campaigners, and interested journalists, pointed out the many anomalous features of the case, including the time it took to discover the body, the implausibility of a burglar choosing to drive his victim out of town in broad daylight, and the condition of the telephone wire in her house. World in Action on ITV devoted a programme to the possibility that Miss Murrell was the victim of a political murder.

That December the Labour MP Tam Dalyell announced in the Commons that he had been told by two anonymous sources that Miss Murrell had been killed in a botched break-in by people looking for “ Belgrano-related documents” left there by her nephew, who had been in Naval Intelligence at the time of the 1982 sinking of the Argentine battlecruiser. “The searchers were members of British Intelligence, I am informed,” Mr Dalyell said.

There the accusation lay for more than 20 years – with many playwrights and journalists believing that the Thatcherite State was quite capable of such murderousness – until new DNA evidence and a cold-case review established who the Murrell murderer was. He turned out to have been, at the time of the killing, a 16-year-old petty criminal called Andrew George, who lived in a local care home. In 2005 he was imprisoned for life.

The Dalyell idea of a Murrell conspiracy mirrors in almost every important detail the Baker idea of the Kelly murder, with the dismissal of the “official version” as somehow deficient, and in the build-up of anonymous information. And, like Mr Baker’s accusations, Mr Dalyell’s speculations were not victimless. As far as I know Mr Dalyell has never apologised to those police officers, Home Office staff and secret service personnel whom he effectively slandered and whose time he squandered. Mr Baker happily puts the Thames Valley Police, the pathologists and (by implication) Tony Blair in the frame, and once more causes upset to the Kelly family.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom