Dr David Kelly post mortem to be kept secret for 70 years

reply to post by thoughtsfull

Hampton died in an apparent fall from the 17th floor of his workplace, Building E, at the Vienna International Centre in Vienna Austria. According to a UN spokesman, he was found dead at the bottom of an internal stairwell

Sounds like how they killed off some CIA dude in the latest series of Spooks

I shall look into this

[edit on 25-1-2010 by Pockets]

[edit on 25-1-2010 by Pockets]

when did he die? and whos making it secret for 70 years?

reply to post by cdn_infanteer


He died 17 July 2003 and the information is being blocked By Lord Hutton , it's all in the thread, maybe if you are going to participate in it, you should first read it

reply to post by Pockets


how do we go about that?

The Guardian covered it today:
Hutton inquiry closed David Kelly medical reports for 70 years

"If a matter as sensitive as this was not made public … it raises questions as to what else was withheld," said Powers. "You can't help but suspect that the legal advisers to the Oxfordshire coroner disclosed it inadvertently, thinking that it was already known that this material was being kept secret for such a long period."

Questions have remained around the death of Dr Kelly after an initial inquest into his death was never resumed. Instead, the Hutton findings were said to be sufficient. But the inquiry applied a less stringent test than would have used in an inquest, where a coroner has to be sure "beyond reasonable doubt" that a person intended to kill themselves.

"There should be a full inquiry. We need a proper answer," said Powers. "The medical evidence doesn't add up. I have yet to meet a doctor that will say it was even possible, let alone likely."

Still not a peep out of the BBC as far as I'm aware, but that particular organ of state propaganda has already nailed its colours to the mast. The BBC's Conspiracy Files series covered 7/7, 9/11 (twice), Lockerbie, the Oklahoma Bombing and David Kelly. Using the disingenuous propagandist techniques of omission and distortion and providing unchallenged audience to government mouthpieces, they conclude in each case that the official story is probably true.


[edit on 25-1-2010 by EvilAxis]

Originally posted by alienesque

Originally posted by Pockets


people should simply not vote at the next election....

not voting wont do a thing, voting is worthless anyway and not voting will only help them stay in power.

Originally posted by EyeOnYou
reply to post by Pockets

 

how do we go about that?

About what? please explain yourself

Originally posted by Pockets people should simply not vote at the next election....

I did not say that ^^^

[edit on 26-1-2010 by Pockets]

[edit on 26-1-2010 by Pockets]

Originally posted by EyeOnYou

Originally posted by alienesque

Originally posted by Pockets


people should simply not vote at the next election....

not voting wont do a thing, voting is worthless anyway and not voting will only help them stay in power.

i dont think so..it would cause chaos if we went on vote strike...it would be a clear message that we demand a change...voting means you accept the status quo

[edit on 26-1-2010 by alienesque]

reply to post by alienesque


Why is this saying I said

people should simply not vote at the next election....

I did not say that, and do not agree

Originally posted by Pockets
reply to post by yzzyUK

 

No it isn't, it's a white wash by "TPTB" so they can't prosecute anyone involved, they murdered the man...did you know he was a spook with PC's for MI5 and MI6? he was a scientist ringleader/handler

Actually (not that I am defending the action) but it is "normal practice" for Governments to do this. Many, many things have been classified in this way so that when information is released, those concerned are long dead. A cursory glance of British political history would show many cases of this being done, especially during the 50's and 60's...

reply to post by stumason

"normal practice" for Governments to do this

So you'd think they'd of made it law then?

"Last night, the Ministry of Justice was unable to explain the legal basis for Lord Hutton’s order."

This is not "normal"

[edit on 26-1-2010 by Pockets]

reply to post by stumason


As much as you are right, I do find the whole thing rather puzzleing.. is there really a need to keep this under wraps? or is this being done to protect a wrong doing..

I guess any indication that there was more to this than it seems undermines the whole approach this government has taken over the last few years.

The silience for me speaks volumes more than a report that could be doctored. This is the bit that I find puzzeling, that they could release a doctored report, yet haven't.

It is almost as tho they want to keep the idea there is a conspiracy going, it's that or the system they operate in is not as corrupt as it appears, and thus they have to hide the evidence.

perplexing

To anyone interested, this story is changing and has been updated HERE....Dr David Kelly's post-mortem results CAN be seen by doctors, Lord Hutton rules

Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker, who has conducted his own inquiries into Dr Kelly's death, said: 'It's astonishing and unheard-of for material of this nature to be hidden away for any length of time, let alone 70 years. 'Coroners' inquests are held in public. Lord Hutton's inquiry was unique in its format and unique in requesting restrictions of this nature. 'His statement today undermines the validity of his own inquiry and gives further justification to the case being made by many for a proper inquest to be held into this most public of deaths.

Nice, looks like enough people have made enough noise about this to actually make a difference

Originally posted by nerbot
To anyone interested, this story is changing and has been updated HERE....Dr David Kelly's post-mortem results CAN be seen by doctors, Lord Hutton rules

Thanks nerbot-Any idea if the doctors who view said results are bound by a gag order?
Or are they free to publish their observations on the results I wonder?

There sure are a lot of things that just don't add up or "sound right" surrounding Dr. Kelly's "suicide", ...

THE STRANGE "SUICIDE" OF DAVID KELLY

It has been estimated that for a person of Dr Kelly's size to die of haemorrhage, he would need to lose about five pints of blood But witness accounts did not indicate anything near that amount at the scene.

Paramedic Vanessa Hunt volunteered the observation that there was 'no obvious arterial bleeding. There was no spraying of blood or huge blood loss or any obvious loss on the clothing. ... As to on the ground, I do not remember seeing a sort of huge puddle or anything like that.' [HI] This was seconded by ambulance technician David Bartlett, who commented 'we was surprised there was not more blood on the body if it was an arterial bleed.' [HI]
******SKIP******
Although the secondary cause of death was determined to be coproxamol ingestion, forensic toxicologist Alexander Allan reported finding merely 67 milligrammes of paracetamol in the stomach contents (equivalent to one-fifth of one tablet of coproxamol), and blood level concentrations per millilitre of 97 microgrammes for paracetamol and 1.0 microgrammes for dextropropoxyphene (equivalent to approximately 20 tablets).

Dr Allan acknowledged this amount to be three to four times lower than the medically accepted level for fatal overdose. Dr Hunt offered no post mortem evidence of respiratory depression or heart failure consistent with dextropropoxyphene overdose, or of liver damage from paracetamol overdose.
******SKIP******
On the morning of the day he went missing, Dr Kelly sent an e-mail message to Judith Miller, a journalist acquaintance with the New York Times, containing the line: I will wait until the end of the week before judging - many dark actors playing games.' [HI exhibit COM/1/15]
******SKIP******
David Broucher, British ambassador to the disarmament conference, reported to the inquiry a conversation he recalled having with Dr Kelly at a Geneva meeting in February 2003 (the date and location of which are subject to debate). Broucher had asked Kelly what would happen if Iraq were invaded, and Kelly had replied, 'I will probably be found dead in the woods.'

Thank you for your request for information dated 24/01/2010 which for clarity I repeat below.

I would like to Request a file By Detective Chief Inspector Alan Young titled Operation Mason. I would like a hard copy please.

Your request for information has now been considered on the assumption that all material contained within the file is requested.

The cost of providing you with the information is above the amount to which we are legally required to respond i.e. the cost of locating and retrieving the information exceeds the “appropriate level” as stated in the Freedom of Information (Fees and Appropriate Limit) Regulations 2004. It is estimated that it would cost more than £450 to comply with your request.

Section 12(1) of the Freedom of Information Act allows that public authorities do not have to comply with section 1(1) of the Act if the cost of complying would exceed the “appropriate limit”. It is Thames Valley Police’s general policy to reject but cases will be assessed individually to consider the implications.

In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this letter acts as a Refusal Notice for your request.

We have considered, in accordance with section 16 of the Act, whether we could assist you by providing an indication of what material could be provided within the appropriate limit. However, given the volume of material, and the difficulty in ascertaining on whose behalf we hold it, we do not believe that would be feasible in this case. We would also regard it as inappropriate given the likely application of the number of exemptions.

We have refused this request because we are not obliged to comply under section 12(1); we would say that on a preliminary consideration, we believe that much of the material you seek is likely to be subject to the exemptions provided for by one or more of the following sections of the Act: s.21, s.30, s.31, s.38, s.40, s.41, s.44.

Following the public enquiry Lord Hutton did allow certain information to be made available to the public, and you may find this helpful and fulfil your requirements. To assist you in this matter I have provided the following web link.

www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk

Please contact me quoting the above reference number is you wish to discuss this matter further and may I take this opportunity to thank you for your interest in Thames Valley Police.

Yours sincerely,

Malcolm Hopgood | Freedom of Information Officer

WHITEWASH

[edit on 11-2-2010 by Pockets]

[edit on 11-2-2010 by Pockets]

reply to post by Pockets


Yeah Gordon Thomas thinks Bin Laden is still alive! Thomas is on coasttocoastam.com... right now.

silliest thing ive read in a long time , talk about denile in high places ,

during my second round in the service we had a lecturer that spoke a whole 40 min and explained the absurdity behind it all , it was nice to see that a 1/3 had some recollection of the fellow in question.,

but post mortem or not , that was headline news domesticly and internationaly when it happened , it still wont change that whats been told.

Wow. Interesting article.

Someone like Dr Kelly speaking out and ending up on youtube would have been disasterous!