This weekend saw yet another round of “experts” calling for more inquiries into the circumstances of the death of Dr David Kelly; with news reports in the Daily Mail, The Times and BBC News.

All the news reports mention that his body was found in 2003. Very few mention the detail of the search; for ALSAR and LSDogs teams a “typical” [hate the word in this sense but the only one that really works] despondent misper search, leading to the discovery of a body by search volunteers. In fact, in the detail that was to later come out at the Hutton Inquiry, the only people out searching at the time of the discovery were the two search volunteers who found the body.

However, my intention is not to go over the details of the search, and certainly not to speculate on the manner of his demise. I wanted to use this opportunity to congratulate the two search volunteers who found the body, and indeed the never mentioned search manager involved in the search, for maintaining their self-imposed silence on the whole matter. It is a reflection of the professionalism of these search volunteers that none have spoken publicly about the role [with the exception of the appearance at the Royal Courts, which I was fortunately present for!]

Compare this to the two paramedics, who very publicly pronounced their opinion!

I believe that it is this professionalism shown at all times by ALSAR and LSDogs members (not just at high-profile incidents) which sets it apart from other, more self-serving, so-called SAR teams!

2 Responses to The Search for Dr David Kelly

  1. Chris Squire says:

    Re: ‘another round of “experts”’; they are indeed expert: they are medical doctors who know about causes of death, diagnosis, etc. and who have good reason to doubt that DK could have died in the way he is said to have died.

    He was a distinguished public servant who died in suspicious circumstances: he deserves a public inquest; you do yourself no credit at all [I have no idea who you are] by sneering at those who wish to see his death properly investigated.

    If you wish to learn more about this case I recommend a search of the BMJ archive on “Dr David Kelly” where you will find a number of letters setting out the case for an inquest.

  2. A very well written post Rob.

    I agree with both you and “Chris Squire” [I have no idea who you are either]. But I couldn’t agree more that the Paramedics were uncategorically wrong for speaking out loud in the way that they did. As a SAR Volunteer and also a member of the front line ambulance service that now has the unfortunate links with that Ambulance Service would NEVER have done such a thing!

    With regard to the comments about the experts…. they may well be experienced in diagnostics etc, but so is a mechanic!

    Where is the Pathologist, the Coroner and other associated more applicable fields of expertise who maybe would be considered to be Relevant Experts?

    All of us lowly volunteers are also experts in our own field and most of us have seen countless bodies in the unusual settings that we find them in. As an Ambulance worker I am well skilled in assessing blood loss which looks very different on someones bathroom floor (or operating theatre floor for that matter) than on a porous surface that is covered by grass, leaves etc etc….

    …Don’t the family have a right to complete their grieving process rather than this being dragged out by our “Experts”?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>