It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.



page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 28 2004 @ 09:26 AM
After leaks about the Hutton inquirey verdict (TheMirror, and BBCNews) in which Tony Blair is cleared of all wrong doing, a team of UK medical experts have come forward to challenge the official verdict of DR Kelly's death. Defying the media silence on the subject they refuse to buy the official story, which was that after it was leaked Dr Kelly was the insider who revealed the government "sexed up" the Iraqi dossiers, he went out into some woodland and killed himself.

However, some have called for further investigation. Lib Dem leader Charles Kennedy believes that the whole truth behind this sorry saga can not come forward until a full investigation is done into why we really went to war. These to incidents are connected so the whole truth can not be known without the other.


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

I've always felt that something stank about this "suicide". It was too convenient, and basically removed the only witness ( willing to come forward anyway) of the government's supposed lying.
I doubt we'll never really know though.

[Edited on 28-1-2004 by SkepticOverlord]

posted on Jan, 28 2004 @ 07:14 PM
Is it just me, or has the page been taken off the Guardian website?

posted on Jan, 28 2004 @ 08:06 PM
Here's a link to the article that works:


new topics

log in