Tuesday, 23 August 2011

The Death of David Kelly - Did ACC Page pervert the course of justice?

This post consists largely of an email to the Attorney General's office to be sent today.

On 13th May I drew the Attorney General's attention to evidence suggesting that ACC Page had lied to the Hutton Inquiry.

I can trace no consideration of that potentially important matter in Dominic Grieve's statement of 9th June 2011 or the supporting documentation.

The title of the email is:

David Kelly (3rd appln): Did ACC Page pervert the course of justice?

The content of the email is:

Mr. McGinty,

This email is intended to be considered by the Attorney General in the context of the Third Application to the Attorney General re a possible application to the High Court to order an inquest into the suspicious death of Dr. David Kelly.

On 13th May 2011 I wrote to the Attorney General informing him that it appeared that Assistant Chief Constable Michael Page, formerly of Thames Valley Police, had lied to the Hutton Inquiry.

See http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.com/2011/05/death-of-david-kelly-unreliability-of.html for a copy of that communication.

In that communication I sought to draw the Attorney General's attention to evidence that a senior Police officer had fabricated a sequence of events that did not, in fact, happen and also concealed from the Hutton Inquiry evidence that there were unidentified fingerprints on Dr. Kelly's dental records. (The issues are explained in more detail in the communication of 13th May.)

I am unable to trace any indication in Mr. Grieve's statement to the House of Commons of 9th June 2011 that that hugely important issue was given any consideration whatever.

If I have overlooked mention in his statement or supporting documentation of Mr. Grieve's consideration of that important matter, could you please now draw my attention to the evidence of such consideration of the matter by Mr.Grieve?

In the absence of such consideration by Mr. Grieve prior to 9th June, I ask that it be considered as part of the Third Application to the Attorney General.

In passing I would mention that if I were one of the doctors who might seek to judicially review the Attorney General's decision announced in his statement of 9th June, I would look with interest at the seeming total failure of the Attorney General to examine evidence that a senior Police Officer lied to the Hutton Inquiry while dishonestly attempting to lead the House of Commons to believe that he had carried out a thorough inquiry of the relevant issues.

Given that this communication relates to the Contempt of Parliament by Dominic Grieve QC MP I am copying this email to John Bercow and Kevin Barron.

I am copying this email to chief officers of Thames Valley Police.

I ask those officers to log this matter as the potential crime of perverting the course of justice by former Assistant Chief Constable Michael Page and provide me with a relevant URN.

I am willing to make a formal statement on this matter at my local Police HQ (Grampian). I gave my full contact information to Thames Valley Police in connection with URN 514 of 28/10/10.

Given the evidence that more than one officer in Thames Valley Police may have perverted the course of justice I ask that the statement not be made to Thames Valley Police officers. In that context I invite Chief Constable Thornton to refer this matter to another Police force for investigation.

If Chief Constable Thornton is of the view that the suspected reported crime took place in the area of the Metropolitan Police I specifically ask her to forward this report of suspected crime to the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police for action by him.

I would be grateful if you would confirm receipt of this communication.

I would also ask you to forward this information (and a copy of my communication to the Attorney General of 13th May 2011) to Lord Hutton to seek his view on whether the possibility that ACC Page lied to his Inquiry causes him to change his view as to the safety of his conclusion of suicide.

I also ask the Attorney General's Office to publish Lord Hutton's reply.

I would also ask Chief Constable Thornton to acknowledge receipt of this communication and inform of me what action she is taking in response to this report of what I believe to be a very serious crime by an officer of Thames Valley Police.

In the interests of transparency a copy of this email will be found on my "Chilcot's Cheating Us" blog here:

Thank you

(Dr) Andrew Watt


  1. This is an extract from an interview of Lord Bingham by Stephen Moss


    “The question of what happens if a morally unacceptable government is elected – always remember Hitler was originally voted in – is still bugging me. Surely then the rule of law would have no validity? "We have to have faith in the democratic process," he says. But if the gas chambers are being erected and the railway tracks to them built – what then? "Ultimately, and this is a very extreme situation, rebellion. Supposing a government came into power that wanted to introduce a whole lot of measures borrowed from the statute book of Nazi Germany, we would be justified in rebelling, just as we were against Charles I. Over time the good sense of the people asserts itself." It is not the job of good judges to thwart bad governments, but of good people, the inner Dr Johnson in all of us.”

    The problem we have it is not just Page that is lying; Hutton, Coe and Grieve, all protected by the “system”. “They” have decided the law doesn’t apply to them and they are right if the public allow that situation to remain.

    When Grieve stood up in Parliament and spat in the face of Justice he was not just rubbing the noses of Parliamentarians in the fact that he is empowered to publically announce his contempt of Parliament with impunity; he was also sending a message to the public which was; the rules have changed now and there’s nothing you can do about it.

  2. LL,

    When Page and Hutton lied in 2003 they had every reason to expect that their lies would never seriously be re-examined.

    After all, Hutton's success in concealing murders on Bloody Sunday in 1971 (at least it appeared to be a success in 2003) led them to believe in impunity, at least for their remaining lifetime.

    I find it more surprising that in 2010/11 Grieve expected to get away with his lies to the House of Commons.

    For the moment, we are merely scratching the surface of the murky pond that Grieve inhabits.

    But things change.

    A few weeks back I imagine that Sir Paul Stephenson and John Yates imagined they would continue successfully in their jobs.

    Perhaps Grieve still imagines he can continue as Attorney General and maybe he continues to harbour dreams of high political office.

    It will be fascinating to see how this develops and how it first reaches the national media.

    Kellygate is a far bigger scandal than Wategate was.

    And Kellygate is a far bigger scandal than Hackgate.