The public narrative from the Hutton Report about the death of Dr. David Kelly simply doesn't make sense.
The more you look at the detail, the less credible Hutton's conclusions become.
It's supposed to be suicide but, for example, he was supposed to have swallowed 29 co-proxamol tablets using less than 500ml of water. Something that is, practically, ridiculous.
Some of the "facts" must be wrong.
The crucial question is which "facts" are unreliable and which "facts" are reliable.
And, being honest about it, deciding which "facts" are reliable and which are unreliable isn't an easy process.
If a mysterious Someone has faked a suicide they didn't do it on the spur of the moment and they didn't do it without some measure of skill.
The Hutton Inquiry was, I increasingly believe, an elaborate charade.
What was the purpose of the Hutton Inquiry?
In my view, the purpose of the Hutton Inquiry was to conceal the truth about the death of Dr. David Kelly.
By combining the examination of a political furore with the supposed investigation of a death, it was possible to conceal a bizarrely slapdash investigation into the death of David Kelly.
As far back as 1972, a now deceased Lord Chief Justice (Lord Widgery) produced a report, the Widgery Report, that exonerated British troops in the 1st Parachute regiment.
It took over 30 years for a much more exhaustive (and much more honest) inquiry, the Saville Inquiry, to conclude that, in effect, soliders in the 1st Parachute Regiment has murdered unarmed civilians on Bloody Sunday.
The undeserved credibility of the Widgery report lasted some 38 years.
The undeserved credibility of the Hutton report will endure for a much shorter period.