Arts, Books, Britain, Government, Legal, Politics, Society

Book Review: An Inconvenient Death

REVIEW

Dr David Kelly

July 15, 2003. Microbiologist Dr David Kelly during questioning by the Commons select committee, in London.

Intro: Fifteen years on from the apparent suicide of Dr David Kelly, a government scientist and weapons expert, we still don’t know the truth. Did he really kill himself? Or did he suffer a heart attack under interrogation by our own secret service? A new book reveals startling inconsistencies.

NATURAL conspiracy theorists are in abundance, but I’m not one of them. Maybe some might suggest that this is a weakness – an indication of being willing and ready to accept the official version of events and not to see evil plots lurking in the background.

Nevertheless, after reading Miles Goslett’s masterful book about the apparent suicide of the weapons expert Dr David Kelly in 2003, I am more persuaded than ever that the authorities have not told us the whole truth about this tragic case.

American and British forces invaded Iraq in March 2003. A few months later, Dr Kelly was a source – possibly not the primary one – of the BBC’s Andrew Gilligan’s explosive disclosure that the Blair government had “sexed up” the September 2002 dossier, which wrongly asserted that Saddam Hussein possessed “weapons of mass destruction”.

It raises the question as to whether Gilligan himself may have sexed up what Dr Kelly had told him, since the government scientist went to his death still believing these weapons might exist. Whether that’s true or not, the journalist’s essentially accurate allegation caused angst, panic and fury in official circles. Alastair Campbell, for one – Tony Blair’s spin doctor and media manipulator – strode into the Channel 4 News studio to denounce and heavily criticise the BBC.

Dr Kelly soon admitted to his superiors that he had spoken to Gilligan. In one of the most disgraceful episodes in a shameful saga, a meeting chaired by Blair effectively authorised naming the weapons expert to the Press. The scientist immediately became the centre of a media frenzy.

Just two weeks later, on the morning of July 18, Dr Kelly was found dead in an Oxfordshire wood, a few miles from his marital home. He had supposedly taken his own life, having gone for a walk the previous afternoon. His left wrist had been reported cut, and he had taken co-proxamol tablets.

Some newspapers blamed Blair and Campbell for hounding him to death. But did he kill himself?

An Inconvenient Death painstakingly assesses a vast amount of evidence.

 

GOSLETT is no loopy conspiracy theorist. He never says Dr Kelly was murdered. Instead, he exposes the authorities’ many contradictions and inconsistencies – and urges there should be a full inquest into the scientist’s death. For the extraordinary thing is that there has been no such inquest.

Within hours of Dr Kelly’s body being found, the then Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, had set up an official inquiry with miraculous speed. Falconer was an old friend and former flatmate of Tony Blair, who at that moment was in the air between Washington and Tokyo.

The legal effect of the decision to ask a senior judge – the elderly Establishment figure of Lord Hutton – to chair an inquiry into Dr Kelly’s death was to stop the inquest in its tracks.

But, as Goslett points out, neither Hutton nor his leading counsel James Dingemans QC had any experience of a coroner’s duties. And whereas in an inquest evidence is taken on oath, it wasn’t in the Hutton Inquiry.

The list of its errors and omissions is mind-boggling. A huge number of important witnesses who might have thrown doubt on the theory that a severely depressed Dr Kelly had killed himself were not called.

These included Sergeant Simon Morris, the Thames valley police officer who led the original search for Dr Kelly, and his colleague, Chief Inspector Alan Young, who became senior investigating officer.

Also never questioned was Mai Pederson, a translator in the American Air Force, and a very close friend of Dr Kelly. She later alleged he had a weak right hand, which would have made it more difficult for him to sever his left wrist.

Moreover, the knife he often carried with him – and was said to have used in the suicide – had a ‘dull blade’. She also claimed he had difficulty swallowing pills.

Dr Kelly’s friend and dentist, Dr Bozana Kanas, was also not examined. She discovered on the day his death was reported that his dental file was missing from her Abingdon surgery. This file was inexplicably reinstated a few days later. Police tests revealed six unidentified fingerprints.

Dingemans seemed intent on establishing that Dr Kelly had been downcast once the Press knew his name.

Yet according to the landlord of a local pub and several regulars, on the night the weapons expert discovered from a journalist that he was about to be identified, he happily played cribbage in the Hinds Head.

But neither the landlord nor Dr Kelly’s fellow players were called by Hutton to give evidence. This is particularly strange since at the very time he was said to be in the pub, he was, according to his wife’s evidence to the inquiry, with her in a car on the way to Cornwall, escaping from the media attention. There were other anomalies in her evidence which Goslett details, though he offers no theory to explain them.

Nor did the inquiry grapple with the oddity that in the early hours of July 18 a helicopter with specialist heat-seeking equipment spent 45 minutes flying over the land around Dr Kelly’s house, passing directly over the site where his body was discovered a few hours later.

 

ACCORDING to an official pathologist, Dr Kelly was already dead at the time of the flight, yet the helicopter did not locate his still-warm body. Might it have been moved subsequently to its final position in the wood? Hutton did not examine the pilot or crew.

Perhaps most striking of all was the inquiry’s failure to investigate conflicting medical evidence.

A volunteer searcher who discovered the body at 9.20am on July 18 testified that it was slumped against a tree, and there was little evidence of blood.

Yet police issued a statement asserting that the body was lying ‘face down’ when found, while the post mortem recorded a profusion of blood.

After the inquiry, a group of distinguished doctors expressed concern as to its conclusions. They doubted the severing of the ulnar artery on Kelly’s left wrist could have been responsible, as such an injury would produce relatively little blood. Goslett’s point is that a competent coroner would have picked up on this and the many other inconsistencies.

A properly constituted inquest would also have registered that Dr Kelly’s death certificate didn’t give a place of death. It states he died on July 17, though July 18 is equally plausible. Maladministration or conspiracy? It’s impossible to say. Despite having gathered all this evidence, which he presents in a gripping way, Goslett for the most part resists speculation to a degree – given his enormous accumulation of facts casting doubt on the official version of events – that is almost heroic.

At the very end, he airs the question as to whether Dr Kelly (who according to the post mortem had advanced coronary disease) might have suffered a heart attack under interrogation.

Is it conceivable that undercover intelligence agents panicked and dumped his body in an Oxfordshire wood?

This book by James Goslett does journalism a great service. The author’s forensic skills put the then government’s legal counsel to shame.

In a spirit of even-handedness, it should also be pointed out that it is incorrectly stated that Robin Cook resigned and demitted office as Foreign Secretary days before the invasion of Iraq. He was actually Leader of the House, having been replaced as Foreign Secretary two years earlier. Nevertheless, this is a formidable, and disquieting analysis. We should hope it has the effect of reigniting calls for an inquest. If our rulers believe in justice, they would surely sanction for the establishment of a full inquest with due haste and speed.

Yet, a future coroner would admittedly face a serious handicap: that Dr David Kelly’s body was recently mysteriously exhumed and, according to reports, secretly cremated.

–  An Inconvenient Death by Miles Goslett is published by Head of Zeus for £16.99

Standard
Legal, Science, Scotland, Society, Technology

Forensic Science: Scientists will bring an end to unsolved crime

FORENSICS

SCOTLAND’S top forensics scientist has predicted it will be virtually impossible to get away with a crime within a generation due to advances in DNA technology.

The director of forensic services at the Scottish Police Authority (SPA), Tom Nelson, said rapid improvements made it more likely that criminals would always be found out.

. Related DNA Phenotyping…

He said the SPA was looking at ’12 cold cases’ in which modern techniques were being used to analyse old evidence in an effort to bring offenders to justice.

New methods mean DNA traces can be found on clothing and other materials even when there is no blood – something that would have been impossible in the past.

Mr Nelson said one of the guiding principles of forensic science is ‘every contact leaves a trace’.

He said: ‘We may be recovering material at the moment which doesn’t necessarily allow us to detect an individual but, as science develops in the next 15 years, that will become possible – science is always moving on.’

Mr Nelson said the challenge for police forensics experts was to ‘throw everything that we have in our toolbox’ at securing genetic samples from crime scenes.

He said that thanks to improvements in DNA analysis ‘an individual may commit a crime and think they have got away with it for a number of years, but I believe that individual will be detected’.

The SPA’s current caseload features 12 cold cases, stretching back up to 20 years, in which forensic investigators are analysing evidence to gauge whether new breakthroughs are possible.

Mr Nelson pointed to forensics work which contributed to the conviction of nine members of a gang who were jailed for a total of 87 years in January for drug and gun offences.

Their crimes included the ‘merciless’ torture of a man over a cocaine debt and an arsenal of weapons hidden in a car. A report by Mr Nelson revealed that more than 200 DNA samples were recovered from seized firearms. More than 1,000 DNA samples and 1,000 fingerprints were recovered from various scenes.

The results of these tests identified all of the initial suspects in the case and uncovered an additional six people that were not initially linked to the group until the forensic results were provided.

Mr Nelson’s report states: ‘Criminals should be aware that they cannot escape without leaving traces of material at the scene of their crime.’

Modern forensic techniques include DNA 24, a profile kit which targets 24 parts of a person’s DNA, whereas in the past it was only possible to look at 11 areas.

However, the daughter of a former police officer, who was wrongly accused of perjury when a fingerprint found at a murder scene in 1997 was mistakenly identified as hers, questioned the SPA’s confidence in forensic science.

He said: ‘While forensics has come a long way, they still perpetuate this fiction of perfection which is not true – rubbish in, rubbish out. Human error in the collection of forensic evidence and in its analysis is still a contributor to miscarriages of justice.’

Standard
Arts, Drama, Legal

You Be The Jury: The Case of The Sleeping Prisoner

The Presiding Judge

. Similar The Case Of The Flying Toy…

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY:

Escape from jail is a serious crime, even if the person was first arrested for a minor offence.

Such is the case before you today. Since we are in criminal court, the State is the accuser.

The State contends that Soney Najac, who was arrested for sleeping on a park bench, broke out of jail. But Mr Najac claims his cell door was unlocked. He just pushed it open and walked out.

The police officer, Constable Thomas Nash, testifies as follows:

“It was about two o’clock in the morning and I was making my rounds in Vernon Park. No one is supposed to be there after dark.

“I was walking along when I heard a strange sound. At first, I thought it might be thunder, but it was a starry night without any clouds. Then I realised what the sound was. Someone was snoring. I turned on my flashlight and there was this man on a bench. He was sound asleep.

“I tried to wake him without success. I couldn’t leave him there, so I figured that the best thing to do was to strap him on to my motorcycle and drive down to police headquarters.”

The stranger’s wallet provided more information. His name was Soney Najac and the address inside showed he was from a foreign country.

The constable continues his testimony:

“The man was still asleep when I got to the station, so I carried him into a cell. It was my turn for night duty and I relieved the officer in charge.

“At about six o’clock that morning, I went to the coffee shop around the corner to bring back some coffee and delicacies. It couldn’t have taken more than a few minutes.

“When I got back, I was shocked to find the cell door open. The prisoner had escaped.”

All police were alerted. That afternoon Soney Najac was arrested, but he was looking in a shop window. This time it was a more serious charge: escaping from jail.

The State described its theory of how Mr Najac managed his escape. EXHIBIT A is a diagram showing the inside of the police station. It has two cells. On one wall is a box containing keys. Mr Najac was in the cell nearest the wall.

Two close-up photographs showing the key box are presented as EXHIBIT B. They show the box both open and closed. Each key is hanging on a large ring. If someone in a cell had a long pole, it would be possible for him to reach the key box.

This, the State contends, is how the breakout occurred. It enters as EXHIBIT C a photograph showing a broom that was found near Soney Najac’s cell.

The State believes that the prisoner grabbed the broom, reached over to the box, and caught the keyring on one end. This was his means of escape.

I will now read from the cross-examination of Constable Nash by Mr Najac’s court-appointed lawyer:

Q How can you be sure the cell door was locked?

A I have been a policeman in this town for fifteen years. In all that time I never left a cell unlocked. What makes anyone think I did it this time?

Q Did you find the door to the key box closed following the prisoner’s departure?

A It had to be. The door is on a spring and it swings closed automatically.

Q Then how was it possible for Mr Najac to use the broom to loop the key?

A That’s not hard to do. The ring on the front of the box can be pulled open with the broom handle. Then you can quickly catch the big keyring on the end of the broom before the door shuts. I know it can be done. I’ve tried it myself.

 

Soney Najac testified on his own behalf. Since he could not speak English, his testimony was presented through an interpreter.

“My name is Soney Najac. I arrived in your country just two weeks ago. A friend told me I might find a job in this area. So, I took a bus to your town.

“I was tired from the trip and didn’t have much money. When it got dark, I walked into the park and saw a bench. I hadn’t had much sleep for the past few days, so I lay down on the bench for the night.

“When I woke up, I didn’t know where I was. All I knew was that I was in this room with bars. No one else was around.

“I stood up and leaned against the door. It started to move, so I pushed it open and walked out. I never knew I had been arrested.”

Mr Najac’s lawyer continues his defence:

“As proof that Mr Najac did not use a key to escape from his cell, your attention is again drawn to EXHIBIT B. This photograph was taken shortly after the alleged breakout occurred.

“You will note the keys to both cells are hanging on their hooks. If Mr Najac had used the key to escape, it is unlikely that he would have taken the time to put it back on its hook.

“The State’s theory of the escape is hard to believe. The truth is simply this: Soney Najac woke up, didn’t know where he was, found the cell door open – and just walked out!”

 

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY:

You have just heard the Case of The Sleeping Prisoner. You must decide the merit of the State’s accusation. Be sure to carefully examine the evidence in EXHIBITS A, B, and C.

Did Soney Najac escape from jail using a key? Or, did he just walk out through the unlocked door?

EXHIBITS:

 

Standard