On 28th October 2010 I reported to Thames Valley Police my suspicion that Dr. David Kelly had been murdered (Thames Valley Police Unique Reference Number 514 of 28/10/10 refers).
It reamins my considered view that Dr. Kelly was murdered by person or persons unknown.
The email to Thames Valley Police is, I think, self-explanatory.
The title of the email is:
David Kelly - Perversion of the course of justice by Janice Kelly and others
The content of the email is:
Chief Constable Thornton, Deputy Chief Constable Habgood and Assistant Chief Constable Ball,
I write formally to report to you as constables of Thames Valley Police what I believe to be the criminal offences of perverting the course of justice by Janice Kelly and others with respect to the suspicious death of Dr. David Kelly in Oxfordshire in 2003.
I believe that you individually and collectively have a duty as constables to record and investigate this matter promptly and in a competent and diligent manner.
I make this report of suspected crime on the basis of the elements of the crime of perverting the course of justice as published by the Crown Prosecution Service, as I consequently understand them.
I request and require you to record these suspected seroius crimes in accordance with the National Crime Recording Standard.
Thames Valley Police is aware that I believe the suspicious death of Dr. Kelly to have been murder. Thames Valley Police Unique Reference Number 514 of 28/10/10 refers.
Having subsequently carefully considered the many documents released by the Attorney General in June 2011 it remains my view that Dr. David Kelly was murdered by person or persons unknown.
The individuals who I believe to have perverted the course of justice and whose conduct I report herein as suspected crimes are as follows.
1. Janice Kelly
2. Rachel Kelly
3. Dr. Sarah Pape
4. Dr. Malcolm Warner
It is the conduct of Mrs. Janice Kelly which I believe to be the most extensive and serious.
First I will briefly summarise conduct that, broadly speaking, is common to the four named individuals
Then I will briefly outline what I believe to be the more serious conduct of Janice Kelly.
Concealment of Evidence
The "suicide hypothesis" as it applies to David Kelly, in its essentials, is that he held a knife in his right hand.and bled to death after cutting his left wrist.
Each of the four named individuals failed to disclose in their oral evidence to the Hutton Inquiry that Dr. Kelly had sustained a fracture of his right elbow in a riding accident late in 1991 that, if I understand the situation correctly, had required operation.
That injury is variously documented on the Hutton Inquiry site (but in a largely concealed way) here:
and, more openly, in Dr. Richard Shepherd's report to the Attorney General of 16th March 2011 here: http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.uk/Publications/Documents/Forensic%20medical%20report%20by%20Dr%20Shepherd%2016%20March%202011.pdf
Consequent on that serious injury of the right elbow and the subsequent operation Dr. Kelly had pain and significant functional limitation of his right arm. See, for example, the information from Dr. Andrew Shuttleworth referred to in Dr. Shepherd's report.
According to evidence from Mai Pederson that is in the public domain Dr. Kelly, in early 2003, had significant difficulty using a knife to cut steak. I interpret Ms. Pederson's evidence to be highly suggestive of post-traumatic arthritis.
If in 2003 Dr. Kelly had difficulty cutting steak, the credibility of whether or not Dr. Kelly could cut his own left wrist with the results documented by Dr. Nicholas Hunt comes seriously into question.
Each of the four named individuals concealed from the Hutton Inquiry information that I believe must have been in their possession about Dr. Kelly's elbow fracture and the consequent pain and functional limitations.
The effect, I believe, of concealing such information about the injury and its effects is to pervert the course of justice.
Hence my writing to Thames Valley Police to report these suspected crimes.
Had the named individuals disclosed the information about Dr. Kelly's elbow injury it would have been possible for the Hutton Inquiry to make an honest, public assessment of the degree of Dr. Kelly's functional limitations and whether or not it was credible that he (supposedly) held a knife in his right hand and produced the injuries of the left wrist documented by Dr. Nicholas Hunt in his postmortem report of 25th July 2003.
In addition to the preceding matter Janice Kelly acted so as to conceal other matters which I mention briefly in the section which follows.
Untrue statements by Janice Kelly
On 12th June 2011 I wrote to Peter Jacobsen, lawyer for the Kelly family, asking the Kelly family to consider whether they ought to "come clean" about a deception to which I believe the family has been party since 2003.
The content of that communication of 12th June 2011 is online here:
A sample list of what I believe to have been untrue statements by Janice Kelly in her oral evidence to the Hutton Inquiry is to be seen in that communication to Mr. Jacobsen.
Mrs. Kelly has, to the best of my knowledge, failed publicly to remedy the situation which I expressed on 12th June hence my now writing to Thames Valley Police to report these serious concerns.
One might speculate about why Janice Kelly would wish to conceal certain information from the Hutton Inquiry. I believe I understand some of her reasons. However, if my assessment of the situation is correct, a wish for privacy is not a foundation that justifies perverting the course of justice.
Everything stated by me in this communication and in the communication of 12th June 2011 is correct to the best of my belief, having spent many tens of hours studying the publicly available information relating to what I believe to have been the murder of Dr. David Kelly.
I wish to make a formal statement to the Police on this matter. That would most conveniently be done, in the first instance, at Grampian Police HQ. Perhaps Thames Valley Police would be good enough to make contact with Grampian Police to the end that I may make a formal statement at a mutually convenient time. I gave my full contact information to Thames Valley Police in the context of URN 514 of 28/10/10.
In the interests of transparency I am copying this email to Dr. Malcolm Warner, Dr. Sarah Pape and to Mr. Peter Jacobsen who I understand to be the solicitor for the Kelly family.
If any of the four named individuals believes that my concerns are without foundation no doubt they will wish to communicate on the matter with Thames Valley Police.
I am also copying this email to the Attorney General's Office in light of the ongoing public interest in the cover-up of the murder of Dr. Kelly.
I again ask the Attorney General to consider whether he should, ex proprio motu, retract his dishonest statement of 9th June 2011 to the House of Commons before the High Court potentially quashes his dishonest decision.
This email is additionally copied to Professor Keith Hawton for information, given that the "suicide hypothesis" with respect to Dr. Kelly's death is based significantly on Professor Hawton's credulous acceptance of Janice Kelly's uncorroborated evidence of the period around lunchtime on 17th July 2003.
A copy of this email will be placed on my "Chilcot's Cheating Us" blog here: http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.com/2011/08/death-of-david-kelly-perverting-course.html
I look forward to hearing from you on this important matter of great public interest.
(Dr) Andrew Watt