As One Door Closes … Another Opens

Thanks to Janet Bayley below, who writes in support of the strenuous efforts many of us made to have a full inquest resumed.

We have pit our wits against a system that shuts out ordinary people, a system that leaves us merely to witness the trappings of a judicial “show”. The crucial question raised by medical experts – how a man could have bled to death from a small artery which would have retracted and clotted within minutes – remains unanswered. No one has told us how Dr Kelly’s body managed to be against the tree (shown in a photograph) and yet not touching the tree (according to the forensic pathologist). We still don’t know the identity of the missing detective, whose existence was denied by DC Coe. “Operation Mason” has not been explained. Dozens of witness statements have been withheld, and not a single witness has been cross-examined.

No intelligent person is going to be content with the reassurance of one man – an establishment man – who tells us he has reviewed the evidence and is “satisfied”. Without answers, we are not satisfied. Next legal steps will be looked into and the process of gathering evidence will go on.
– RT 18/3/04

Another Opens…

Dear Rowena

Firstly many thanks to you and all the Kelly Investigation Group for all the time, work and effort you put in to trying to the get the Inquest re-opened. It was a valiant attempt -and showed a dedication and integrity that is rarely evident in present circumstances.

After the Hutton Report was published I felt very uneasy at the process and what it had dealt with. There was widespread public distrust and several legal opionions expressing concern regarding the report. However, it was only through your letters in the Guardian that I discovered that there were also medical matters which had not been fully addressed.

As I learnt more about the purpose of a formal Inquest and the jurisdiction of the coroner it became increasingly clear that the Hutton Inquiry and Report fell far short of a formal inquest in terms of content and rigour.

If it had not been for the focus given to the issue by your letters in the Guardian – and Michael Powers publically expressed opinion – there would have been none of the scrutiny which has now been given to the matter.

This is not the first time that I have witnessed that due process and procedures have not been pursued as one would expect. There were very similar parallels during the Foot and Mouth epidemic when the Government took unto itself powers which were not founded in legislation.

What has now emerged is the consensus from both sides of the medical debate relating to Dr Kelly that an inquest would have addressed the unresolved issues. Also from Press Reports I see that Tom Mangold – while rather disparaging about the medical aspects – also feels that the matter has not been satisfactorily dealt with.

Like you I feel recourse to a TV programme does not provide the right forum to take the matter forward. As for Judicial Review I am always worried about the cost implications. At least on Tuesday one did not have this aspect to contend with as well as the disappointment of the decision.

I am continuing to consider what other action might be open to us to follow. In the interim the recurring thought is this. “Why did one of the most high profile deaths not undergo the due process, rigour and scrutiny of a formal Inquest? If ever that legislative process was needed to determine reasons and cause of death – it could not be more so than in the circumstances relating to Dr Kelly”.

Finally why did the Lord Chancellor need to express a view as to whether the Inquest should be re-opened?? as reported by Nicholas Gardiner in his statement.

If you have it I would be very grateful to receive a copy of Nicholas Gardiner’s full statement.

Many thanks again to you and your colleagues and do keep in touch.
Kind regards
Janet

Thanks to all those who have sent similar messages. It’s heartening to know that intelligent people across the world refuse to allow the truth to be buried along with Dr Kelly. — RT

See Also:
Coroner rejects inquest into death of Dr. David Kelly

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=1621

Fanning the Flames of Conspiracy

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=1615

Was Dr Kelly Murdered?

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=1597

‘Kelly was murdered’ says UK intelligence insider
“http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=1558″
Kelly “Taken Out” By Assassination Team
“http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=1556″
More Doctors Dispute Dr. David Kelly’s “Suicide”
“http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=1466″
Dark Actors at The Scene of Dr Kelly’s Death
“http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=1164″
Kelly: ‘I’ll probably be found dead in the woods’
“http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=1023″
The Murder of Dr. David Kelly
“http://www.rense.com/general43/kelly.htm”
The New Alchemy: Turning Murder into Suicide
“http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=1296″