The email was sent to Mr. Kevin McGinty of the Attorney General's Office.
As indicated in the email to the Attorney General I believe that there are several relevant strands to that cover-up and I expect to send further communications to the Attorney General laying out the relevant summary evidence of cover-up.
The title of the email was:
The David Kelly Cover-up - Overview
The text of the email was:
This email is intended for the attention of the Attorney General in connection with a possible application to the High Court that an inquest be held into the suspicious death of Dr. David Kelly.
In this email I express outline concerns that the murder of Dr. David Kelly in 2003 has been covered up. I anticipate providing detailed supporting evidence in subsequent communications.
In an interview in August 2010 the Attorney General expressed the following directly relevant comments:
"I have no reason to think, absolutely no reason to think, and there is not a shred of evidence to suggest, that there has been some cover-up in respect of the circumstances of Dr. Kelly's death."
I hope, in this and succeeding emails, to persuade the Attorney General that his former view was incorrect.
The Attorney General went on to say in the same interview:
"If there is evidence [of a cover up] then my office is the place to send it to."
The interview with the Attorney General to which I refer is available online here:
In sending to the Attorney General this email and others in the "David Kelly Cover-up" series, I'm taking the Attorney General at his word and sending to him what I believe to be evidence of the cover-up of the murder of Dr. David Kelly.
I ask the Attorney General to review the evidence of a cover-up in 2003 and 2010/11 that I submit here and in accompanying emails with a view to a formal investigation or investigations which may include consideration of criminal proceedings against a number of individuals (some of whom I can name on the basis of available evidence and some of whom are currently not readily identifiable) for perversion of the course of justice and/or conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.
In addition, a thorough fresh Police investigation into the murder of Dr. David Kelly is, in my view, essential.
I have previously sent a significant number of communications to the Attorney General laying out detailed evidence indicating defects in the Hutton Inquiry which may designated as "insufficiency of inquiry" and "rejection of evidence".
In those communications I have also expressed how, on the basis of detailed consideration of the totality of the evidence, I have reached the conclusion that Dr. David Kelly was murdered.
See, for example my communication to the Attorney General of 22nd November 2010 entitled "Death of Dr. David Kelly - Evidence that it was murder" (online at http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.com/2010/12/death-of-david-kelly-evidence-that-it.html ) and "David Kelly - Blood distribution indicates it was murder" of today's date (online at http://chilcotscheatingus.blogspot.com/2011/06/death-of-david-kelly-blood-distribution.html ).
As a result of the care that I have taken to examine that evidence and to compose those communications I hope I do not have to persuade the Attorney General that the concerns that I express in the series of emails in the "The David Kelly Cover-up" series arise from a serious, detailed and, I hope, logical examination of the publicly available evidence relating to the death of Dr. David Kelly.
Equally, given the seriousness and potential criminality of the cover-up which I believe to have taken place I understand that the Attorney General will wish carefully to consider the totality of evidence before arriving at a view as to whether or not a cover-up has taken place (and is still taking place) and what action, if any, the Attorney General has a duty to take.
I do not attempt definitively in this email or related emails in the "The David Kelly Cover-up" series to differentiate the following possibilities (or examine whether some other possibility is true):
1. A cover-up was carried out to avoid the risk of public disclosure of the murder of Dr. David Kelly.
2. A cover-up was carried out to avoid the risk of an open verdict.
The political imperatives for each have broad similarities. Either an open verdict or an unlawful killing verdict at an inquest might have brought down Tony Blair in the Autumn of 2003 (the likely timescale of an inquest), given, for example, the mounting evidence that there were no WMD in Iraq.
It seems to me that actions which cover up what the evidence suggests to be the murder of Dr. David Kelly may constitute, at a minimum, "irregularity of proceedings" in the meaning of Section 13 of the Coroners Act 1988. And, in the sense that a cover-up suppresses examination of some evidence, then the cover-up also arguably resulted in "rejection of evidence" and "insufficiency of inquiry" in the meaning of Section 13.
Additionally, it seems to me that some of the acts of omission and/or commission in the cover up of the murder of Dr. David Kelly are such as to constitute the criminal offence of perversion of the course of justice, at least in the definition that the Crown Prosecution Service publicly indicates that they use.
Contrary to the assertion of the Attorney General that "There is not a shred of evidence to suggest that there has been a cover-up of the circumstances surrounding Dr. Kelly's death", there is, in fact, a significant body of evidence indicating that there has been such a cover up.
Provisionally, I anticipate sending to the Attorney General several documents by email covering topics including the following:
* The David Kelly Cover-up - Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell
* The David Kelly Cover-up - Lord Falconer
* The David Kelly Cover-up - Lord Hutton
* The David Kelly Cover-up - Nicholas Gardiner QC
* The David Kelly Cover-up - Thames Valley Police in 2003
* The David Kelly Cover-up - Thames Valley Police in 2010/2011
* The David Kelly Cover-up - Dr. Nicholas Hunt
* The David Kelly Cover-up - Professor Keith Hawton
* The David Kelly Cover-up - Dr. Malcolm Warner
In the emails in the preceding list I anticipate putting forward what I believe to be a significant body of evidence of a cover-up of the murder of Dr. David Kelly and indicate several possible instances of prima facie evidence of what seems to me to be perversion of the course of justice.
Following Prime Ministers Questions in the House of Commons on 18th May 2011 I do not exclude the possibility that a further name will require to be considered as having, wittingly or unwittingly, contributed to the continuing cover-up of the murder of Dr. David Kelly.
Similarly, I do not exclude the possibility that some individuals may have unwittingly carried out actions (or omitted to act as required by circumstances) with the effect of assisting the cover-up. Where I can provisionally differentiate between witting and unwitting actions or omissions I will endeavour to do so.
At the risk of stating the obvious my concerns are personal to me, however soundly founded they may seem to be on the evidence.
I ask the Attorney General to consider the evidence of a cover-up in the context of a possible application to the High Court.
In addition, I ask the Attorney General to use any investigatory powers that he may have diligently to inquire further into the evidence of cover-up.
The definitive assessment of the validity of my concerns regarding perversion of the course of justice should be established by a thorough, diligent and honest Police inquiry as a first step.
If the Attorney General does not have relevant investigatory powers, I ask him to request a Police force, other than Thames Valley Police, to carry out a thorough investigation into these matters and to produce a fully documented report to be placed in the public domain, consistent with any limitations temporarily required in relation to any potential prosecutions.
Without a publicly demonstrated thorough investigation into the death of Dr. David Kelly and the subsequent cover-up of that murder the concerns about Dr. Kelly's death and its cover-up will most certainly not go away.
I would be grateful if you would confirm receipt of this email and that the information contained in it will be drawn to the attention of the Attorney General. I would, of course, welcome being kept informed should the Attorney General ask for a Police investigation to be carried out into these matters.
(Dr) Andrew Watt