|
Wednesday,
August 09, 2006 |
The David Kelly Story:
The Strange "Suicide" of Dr. Kelly
Questions for the Coroner's Inquest
[Part
3]
by Renan Talieva
|
Last Updated:
Saturday, August 12, 2006 11:14:47 AM |
|
Dr. David Kelly
(1944-2003) |
ith the release of his report last month, Lord
Brian Hutton pronounced the death of scientist David Kelly a
suicide. But the evidence given at the inquiry does not substantiate
the finding. It is not yet known exactly how he died.
Members of the medical community and the general public are
beginning to express growing skepticism about the stated cause of
death. In response to their concerns, Oxfordshire coroner Nicholas
Gardiner will hold a hearing in March to determine if 'exceptional
reasons' compel him to reopen the original inquest. [1]
There is more than adequate cause to question the current
interpretation of the scientist's demise, as set forth by the Hutton
report (HR) and the public record of the Hutton inquiry (HI). The
official version can be summarized as follows.
Between 3.00 and 3.20 pm on 17 July 2003, Dr Kelly left his
Oxfordshire residence after telling his wife he was going for his
regular walk. At about 9.20 am on 18 July, his body was found by
volunteer searchers in a wooded area on Harrowdown Hill. On the body
was a mobile telephone, glasses, key fob, and three 10-tablet
blister packs of co-proxamol with 1 tablet remaining. Near the body
was a Barbour cap, wristwatch, Sandvig knife, and half-litre bottle
of water.
From this it was concluded that although he suffered from no
significant mental illness, by the afternoon of 17 July Dr Kelly was
feeling isolated and hopeless. When he left the house he took with
him several packets of his wife's prescription pain medication, a
gardening knife from his desk drawer, and a bottle of water.
He proceeded to one of his favorite haunts, a peaceful and secluded
spot, where sometime between 4.15 pm and 1.15 am he removed his
watch and glasses, swallowed over 20 pills, and repeatedly slashed
at his left wrist, leaving the radial artery intact but completely
severing the ulnar artery which caused him to bleed to death, most
of the blood soaking into the detritus of the woodland floor.
In the process of stumbling or thrashing about in the undergrowth he
possibly sustained minor abrasions to the scalp and lower lip, along
with bruising to the lower legs and left side of chest. His demise
was further hastened by a less than fatal but more than therapeutic
blood level of dextropropoxyphene and paracetamol, and by clinically
silent coronary artery disease.
It is an odd and illogical tale, notable for its abundance of
conjecture and conflicting witness accounts. The ten questions below
highlight some disturbing anomalies.
Did Kelly cut his own wrist?
Forensic pathologist Nicholas Hunt gave no evidence specifying the
direction in which the wounds were made to support a conclusion of
self-infliction. The presumed scenario is that Dr Kelly drew the
knife with his right hand across his left wrist (thumb to little
finger).
But the location of arteries in the wrist suggests that in so doing
he would have more easily damaged the superficial radial artery on
the lateral aspect. It is not likely he would have left the radial
artery intact while exerting enough pressure to completely sever the
deeper, better protected ulnar artery at the medial aspect.
[2]
And forensic biologist Roy Green observed that finding a bloodstain
on the right sleeve of Dr Kelly's jacket was 'slightly unusual' [HI]
in view of the presumed scenario. The pathologist did not mention
blood on the right sleeve in his evidence.
Dr Hunt also made the questionable inference that the apparent
removal of the watch 'whilst blood was already flowing' [HI], along
with the removal of the spectacles, pointed toward an act of self
harm. It seems more likely Dr Kelly would have removed the watch
before inflicting the wounds and left his glasses on to facilitate
the effort.
Then there is the alleged weapon. If Dr Kelly's intention was to
efficiently open an artery, his choice of an old, blunt* gardening
knife seems highly unlikely. As does the horizontal incision of a
single wrist.
*Bluntness is assumed from the pathologist's description of the
wound's crushed edges.
Did Kelly bleed to death?
Medical specialists have questioned whether the incised wounds as
described by Dr Hunt could have led to fatal haemorrhage. Only the
small ulnar artery was cut which, having been completely transected,
would have defensively retracted and clotted while blood pressure
slowed, thereby greatly inhibiting the flow of blood. [3]
|
