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.


Dr David Kelly, inquest refused

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 10:06 AM

Dr David Kelly, inquest refused

A significant amount of people have raised concerns about his (Dr. Kelley) death and the process used to investigate it.

Only the high court can order an inquest, and then only by an application made by ME, or another with MY consent.

No purpose will be served by my making an application to the high court for an inquest.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 10:06 AM
There you have it folks, the classic "nothing to see here, now move along" logical reasoning of politicians who appear to not want all the possible information of a case coming to light.

Even though a "significant amount of people" would like an inquest to shed some light on the exact series of events surrounding the death of Dr. David Kelley, who most of you know was the "whistle blower" who confirmed that there was no evidence to support an invasion of Iraq on the grounds that it had weapons of mass destruction, because HE does not think so... case closed.

Here is the link to YouTube, as the original website is a little "funky"...
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 10-6-2011 by Billmeister because: add YouTube video

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 10:18 AM

Originally posted by Billmeister

"There you have it folks, the classic "nothing to see here, now move along" logical reasoning of politicians who appear to not want all the possible information of a case coming to light."

There we have it indeed . Another one swept under the rug . Eventually that rug has to be removed and we will see all the wrong doings of history !

:At about 15:00, Kelly told his wife that he was going for a walk, as he did every day. He appears to have gone directly to an area of woodlands known as Harrowdown Hill about a mile away from his home, where he ingested up to 29 tablets of painkillers, co-proxamol, an analgesic drug and to have then cut his left wrist with a knife he had owned since his youth.[24] His wife reported him missing shortly after midnight that night, and he was found early the next morning.[25] Questioned on a flight to Hong Kong that day, Blair denied that anyone had been authorised to leak Kelly's identity"

Cause of Death - Suicide: haemorrhage from incised wounds of the left wrist, in combination with coproxamol ingestion and coronary artery atherosclerosis

Suicide hm. I guess that would be the easiest way to get rid of someone with no questions asked.

Our word against Big Brother .

we lose again....
edit on 10-6-2011 by seedofchucky because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 10:21 AM
reply to post by seedofchucky

Yeah you have to find the concept of some of this stuff funny. Not funny to laugh at just funny to think about how it all works!! If "they" don't want you around, notice how you are not around anymore with ABSOLUTELY no investigation at all!! Gotta love the corruption....

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 10:24 AM
The attorney general was probably concerned he too would "commit suicide" if he agreed to an inquest. What a corrupt piece of #.

Another news article:
edit on 10-6-2011 by Firefly_ because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 10:30 AM
I will make a prediction for you...,

Should the community continue to make gains in casting doubt on this event and the way it was presented to them; you will be hearing the most 'trusted' public figures change their stanza from "move along, nothing to see here" to "We must focus our attention and energy on the issues of the presents and not be looking backwards." Meanwhile others will simply decry any attempts to enhance the understanding of the death and those associated with it as "looking to play political blame games" and "detractors from whats really important."

Of course, we all know that it is they who get to define what is important; and if it might cause them shame or grief... we know THAT will be said to be "not important."

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 10:45 AM
Trouble with something like the Dr Kelly case is that there will always be someone not happy with the results of the findings.
Another side of the coin is if enough people demand it no matter what the results, a full, unbiased and independant enquiry MUST and SHOULD be done.
ALL evidence should be investigated fully, but to be honest I cannot help but think there was something amiss with the original enquiry.

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 10:48 AM
David Kelly was not the only potential victim of the Blair government in relation to the Iraq war. Let's not forget Robin Cook Interesting how Tony Blair would rather go on holiday than attend his funeral. Robin Cook was opposed to the Iraq war, and the War on Terror. He was very much needed in government, a conscience, a voice of reason. Maybe the stress got to him, but the government are capable of anything.

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 10:50 AM
reply to post by DataWraith

This is why the whole thing stinks. Because they are refusing to have an inquiry. If there is no evidence then the inquiry will back this up, and that should be that. But because they wont, it suggests they have something to hide, and we know how dirty the government play.

posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:54 AM
There are a multitude of concerns about the death of Dr Kelly. When Mr Grieve made his statement to MPs on the 9th June he mentioned one of these concerns: this was about the possible movement of the body between its discovery at 09.15 on 18/7/2003 and the necessary movement of the body at the time of the forensic pathologist's examination after midday.

In support of the suicide conclusion by Lord Hutton Mr Grieve stated that the body wasn't moved. Here are a few facts:
1 The volunteer searcher (Louise Holmes) whose dog found the body approaches to a distance of about 4 feet from the body. She states in her police witness statement that the body has its head and shoulders slumped against a tree. She says the same thing at the Hutton Inquiry and later in a youtube video.
2. Her fellow searcher (Paul Chapman) is the person referred to by Mr Grieve who changes his statement from lying flat in his police statement to having his back against the tree at the inquiry. However at the Hutton inquiry he says he doesn't get closer than 15 to 20 metres when the body is found (about 50 to 65 feet)
3. At the Hutton Inquiry the first policeman at the scene, Detective Constable Coe, says the body is on its back but in a Mail on Sunday article of 8/8/2010 has his head and shoulders against a large tree.
4. Lord Hutton in chapter 5 of his report of 28/1/2003 says he has seen a photograph of the body with its head slumped against the base of a tree.
5. About 45 minutes after the body discovery an ambulance crew arrives on scene to check the body for life. One of the two crew Dave Bartlett finds there is enough space between the head and the tree for him to stand and operate in this area.
6. Prior to making his statement Mr Grieve had brought in another forensic pathologist Dr Shepherd to produce a Forensic Medical Report. In it Dr Shepherd makes clear that the photographs show a 'significant gap' between the head and the tree.

Someone isn't telling the truth!

top topics


log in