I had assumed that the mysterious "third man" was in Special Branch or one of the security services.
However, this statement, "Although they are not part of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), they are entitled to use the prefix "Detective" in front of their ranks." opens up new possibilities of interpretation. Source: Special Branch.
If the quoted statement is correct then it is possible that "Detective" Constable Coe was in Special Branch.
Equally, it opens up the possibility that "Detective" Constable Shields was in Special Branch.
And, perhaps after all, DC Coe's statement to the Daily Mail is true, "At the Hutton inquiry Mr Coe denied anyone else had been present, but the former Thames Valley Police detective now says there had been a trainee police officer, whom he refused to name and said had left the force.". Source: 'There wasn't much blood about': Detective who found weapons expert David Kelly's body raises questions over his death.
Of course, DC Coe may have been in Special Branch and the "trainee police officer" may have been from the security services.
DC Coe needs to be interviewed on oath.
The Daily Mail article continues,
Mr Coe also acted as 'exhibits officer' in a search of Dr Kelly's home the day after his death.
He recalled: 'We were looking for documents relating to Iraq. No one knew whether he kept any papers of a sensitive nature at home.
'We had to search. If someone writes a suicide note, you'll find it. We were looking for politically sensitive documents.'
Again "Detective" Constable Coe pops up in a situation of substantial interest. Who more natural to entrust with the role of "exhibits officer" in a search for "politically sensitive documents" than a member of Special Branch?
But, if these speculations are correct, it raises a big problem.
It seems that "Detective" Constable Coe lied to the Hutton Inquiry, when he stated that only he and "Detective" Constable Shields were present.
If he lied to Hutton, what was the intent of that lie?
Did that lie "pervert the course of justice"?
If he perverted the course of justice did he act alone or did he lie on orders from above? Perhaps from a senior source in Special Branch?
And, if DC Coe lied, why is it that no individual from Thames Valley Police, Assistant Chief Constable Michael Page for example, corrected the lie?
Either at the time of the Hutton Inquiry or when the issue of the "third man" was being discussed in the media? The Police do want to find the truth about the death of David Kelly? Don't they?
These and other interesting questions must be answered publicly. An inquest is needed to answer the question of how David Kelly died. An investigation of a much more rigorous nature is needed to definitively answer the questions about whether "Detective" Constable Coe (and others) perverted the course of justice in relation to the Hutton Inquiry.