I initially wrote to the Attorney General about the need for an inquest into the death of Dr. David Kelly on 25th October 2010, Open Letter to the Attorney General regarding the need for an inquest into the death of Dr. David Kelly.
In the light of further exploration of the available evidence I concluded there was prima facie evidence that Detective Constable Graham Coe may have lied to the Hutton Inquiry.
The text of my email of 26th October 2010 to the Attorney General is set out below.
FAO Attorney General
[This email is an addendum to the Recorded Delivery letter to the Attorney General of 25th October 2010, entitled, "The Death of Dr. David Kelly – information indicating that a Coroner-led inquest, taking evidence on oath, is needed. Please collate with the previous correspondence.]
In that letter I raised questions about the evidence that DC Graham Coe gave to the Hutton Inquiry.
I have subsequently located a recent newspaper article which provides prima facie evidence that DC Coe lied to the Hutton Inquiry.
The article in question is located here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1301210/Detective-Dr-David-Kellys-body-raises-questions-death.html
I quote the relevant text (which appears immediately below a photograph of Dr. Kelly's home):
"Mr Coe also confirmed the disputed existence of a 'third man' with him and his partner DC Colin Shields that day.
Critics who believe Dr Kelly was murdered have claimed that the suited figure mentioned in the accounts of volunteer searchers could have been from the security services.
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."
Given the evidence of the two volunteer searchers, Louise Holmes and Paul Chapman, that they met three individuals it is now clear that there is a high likelihood that DC Coe lied to the Hutton Inquiry!
An unidentified person was present in close proximity to Dr. Kelly's body before it was examined by Scenes of Crime Officers, the forensic pathologist or the forensic biologist. I view this as a matter of the utmost seriousness. As a matter of urgency, it requires further investigation.
The "third man" was present at the scene before the Common Approach Path to Dr. Kelly's body was established by PC Franklin. The opportunity for this unidentified individual to contaminate the scene or otherwise act improperly is evident.
Further, a policeman has, so it seems, lied to the Hutton Inquiry with the effect of concealing that individual's presence at the scene. The reasons for that dishonesty require to be inquired into.
Additionally, the actions of that "third" individual at the scene require to be established.
This new information adds, in my view, to an already strong case that an inquest is needed with respect to the death of Dr. David Kelly with all evidence taken on oath.
(Dr) Andrew Watt