This could simply be a tiny, insignificant detail.
Had you noticed that he had two caps wtih him, according to the postmortem report?
The peaked Barbour cap is on the ground and bloodstained?
A flat cap is in the game pocket. NCH/17/5 in the postmortem report.
Of no meaning? He could simply have forgotten about the cap in the game pocket?
Or was the Barbour cap the obvious thing for a third party to put on display, unaware of Dr. Kelly's flat cap in the game pocket?
Saturday, 6 November 2010
The Death of David Kelly - A man of two caps
Posted by Andrew Watt at 14:11
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
I had wondered about the two caps. The overwhelming impression I'm getting from the site of the body is that anything that could be smeared with blood was smeared with blood.ReplyDelete
When Dr Hunt's report is read there seems to be an almost endless list of parts of body, items of clothing and artefacts at the site with evidence of blood covering so much so as to convince some readers of massive blood loss. I suspect the reality is that 95% of the blooded surfaces are only displaying light smearing, in totality amounting to an almost negligible amount of blood.
I would suggest that the Barbour coat, Barbour cap, water bottle, co-proxamol tablets and possibly the knife were all taken from the Kelly household by police officers whilst they (Mother & daughter, I believe) were made to wait outside in the garden, on the date in question, 18th July.ReplyDelete
I find it interesting that blood is so often seemingly smeared or there is blood "staining" but, so far as I can trace, no arterial rain on David Kelly's clothes.
All very odd for a supposed suicide.
You don't need much blood to create a "bloody mess".
200-300ml of blood could be used to create an impressive scene of seeming carnage.
And, of course, in the absence of Mr. Green's report and Dr. Hickey's DNA tets (if they were carried out) we don't even know if the "scene setting" blood belonged to David Kelly.
The early morning turfing out of Janice Kelly and daughter(s) from the Kelly home on 18th July 2003 is a bizarre episode for a supposed "missing person" inquiry.
We simply don't know what the Police (if it was the Police) did during that approximate hour.
It doesn't seem likely that it was routine, legitimate Police activity.
It's all the more bizarre if you consider the timing. It's only, say, 90 minutes since ACC Page was phoned, it's before or during the supposed 05.15 Police meeting.
So who authorised turfing the family out of their home in the middle of the night?
A Police sergeant on a missing person inquiry? I think not.
And what legitimate reason was there for turfing the Kelly women out of the Kelly house? None, I suspect.
Maybe there is mileage in this.
We seem to keep hearing "smeeared".
But don't hear (enough of) "sprayed".
It seems a bizarre scenario for an allegedly fatal arterial bleed.
It doesn't add up.