Was britische Ärzte und Anwälte von dem Hütten- äh, Hutton-Käse halten...

verfasst von RK, 31.01.2004, 10:11

-->http://www.rense.com/general48/birt.htm

British Doctors Doubt Dr Kelly's 'Suicide'
The Guardian - UK
1-29-4


As specialist medical professionals, we do not consider the evidence given at the Hutton inquiry has demonstrated that Dr David Kelly committed suicide.

Dr Nicholas Hunt, the forensic pathologist at the Hutton inquiry, concluded that Dr Kelly bled to death from a self-inflicted wound to his left wrist. We view this as highly improbable. Arteries in the wrist are of matchstick thickness and severing them does not lead to life-threatening blood loss. Dr Hunt stated that the only artery that had been cut - the ulnar artery - had been completely transected. Complete transection causes the artery to quickly retract and close down, and this promotes clotting of the blood.

The ambulance team reported that the quantity of blood at the scene was minimal and surprisingly small. It is extremely difficult to lose significant amounts of blood at a pressure below 50-60 systolic in a subject who is compensating by vasoconstricting. To have died from haemorrhage, Dr Kelly would have had to lose about five pints of blood - it is unlikely that he would have lost more than a pint.

Alexander Allan, the forensic toxicologist at the inquiry, considered the amount ingested of Co-Proxamol insufficient to have caused death. Allan could not show that Dr Kelly had ingested the 29 tablets said to be missing from the packets found. Only a fifth of one tablet was found in his stomach. Although levels of Co-Proxamol in the blood were higher than therapeutic levels, Allan conceded that the blood level of each of the drug's two components was less than a third of what would normally be found in a fatal overdose.

We dispute that Dr Kelly could have died from haemorrhage or from Co-Proxamol ingestion or from both. The coroner, Nicholas Gardiner, has spoken recently of resuming the inquest into his death. If it re-opens, as in our opinion it should, a clear need exists to scrutinise more closely Dr Hunt's conclusions as to the cause of death.

David Halpin
Specialist in trauma and orthopaedic surgery

C Stephen Frost
Specialist in diagnostic radiology

Searle Sennett
Specialist in anaesthesiology

http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,3604,1131833,00.html



+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.rense.com/general48/LAE.HTM

Hutton Findings Not Supported By Evidence - Lawyers
By Robert Verkaik
Legal Affairs Correspondent
The Independent - UK
1-30-4


Lord Hutton's final conclusions into the circumstances surrounding the death of Dr David Kelly were one-sided and were not supported by all the evidence given to his inquiry, lawyers said yesterday.

There was also disquiet among the legal profession that a senior and respected judge had been used as a political tool to settle what had begun as a dispute between the BBC and the Government. Some of the most serious criticism was made by Alan Levy QC, who chaired the influential 1991"Pindown" inquiry into the abuse of children in local authority homes.

He said:"I was surprised by his conclusions because I do think it was rather one-sided. I expected it to be critical of Whitehall and the Government because of the evidence submitted. I think whitewash might be too strong but I'm uneasy that criticism was not attached to other parties. It seems the BBC has every reason to cry foul."

Louise Christian, a solicitor representing some of the British Guantanamo detainees, said she was astonished how Lord Hutton had"explained away" the 15 changes Alastair Campbell had asked to be made to the dossier."This was much more than a subconscious influence being exercised."

Ms Christian, who has appeared at several inquiries chaired by judges, described Hutton's report as"very badly written, reproducing large chunks of evidence that did not marry up to the evidence".

Mr Levy, whose inquiry was set up by the Department of Health and heard 75 days of evidence from 100 witnesses, added:"I would have liked the terms of reference to have been widened to take account of whether we rightly went to war. Was the intelligence there for people's lives to be put at risk?"

Matthias Kelly QC, a former chairman of the Bar, said the time had come to end the custom of making sitting judges chairmen of politically sensitive public inquiries."I am far from convinced it's a very good idea for serving judges to conduct such inquiries because they are highly politicised. It would be far better if the Government used retired judges on such occasions." But he said the conclusions drawn by Lord Hutton were a matter for him and were ones on which he did not wish to comment.

One retired law lord said some of these issues would be taken up during a House of Lords debate this month."I think a number of retired judges will want to raise concerns about the way the inquiry came about," he said.

Peter Carter QC, chairman of the Bar's human rights committee, said he was"rather horrified" when he heard the judge's conclusions. But he said for the first time the public were able to hear the evidence about how the"information was manipulated and how governments operate". He added:"Lord Hutton's final conclusions are persuasive but not definitive."

He also said he thought the inquiry's terms were too narrowly drawn."The issue lawyers wanted addressed was the legitimacy of going to war." But he said he made no criticism of Lord Hutton's conduct of the inquiry, which he said was fair and open.

Stephen Irwin QC, the chairman of the Bar, said Lord Hutton was"professionally and judicially very highly regarded" and reached his conclusions after hearing all the evidence, some of which was given in private. He asked:"What do think the media would be staying about his standing if he had delivered a judgment against the Government?"

© 2004 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=486354


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


http://www.rense.com/general48/whw.htm

The Disgraceful Hutton Whitewash -
A Set-Up From Day One
From Andrew Rowland
1-30-4


I put this little piece together earlier this year as soon as I heard that establishment freemason poodle Brian Hutton was chosen to get the Blair government off the hook.

I hope you can post this. It gives details on exactly the nature of Htton and exactly why he was picked to do a"job" on our freedom of speech, whilst also defelecting the spotlight from the real reasons that we went to war in the first place.

Thabks

Andy

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=34477

From Andy: read all and form your own conclusions!

I posted this to my friends and the BBC (radio 5 live in UK - they didn't comment on it all afternoon...)

begin snip

"This will be a whitewash.

Brian Hutton is an establishment freemason, he ran the same military tribunal hanging courts in Northern Ireland that are identical to camp X-ray! The Diplock courts, and he was chosen by blair and his advisors as the most expedient way out...

This is what the poodle, representing the Ministry of Defence, said in 1973!!!

talk about conflict of interest!!!

1973: 'Bloody Sunday' inquest accuses Army The coroner presiding over the"Bloody Sunday" inquest has accused the British army of"sheer unadulterated murder". The accusation came from the Londonderry City coroner, Major Hubert O'Neill, after the inquest jury returned an open verdict on the deaths.

Thirteen people died on 30 January last year when members of the Parachute Battalion opened fire on people attending a civil rights march in Derry.

Another man died later in hospital and 14 others were also shot and injured.

Major O'Neill said there had been no justification for the soldiers to open fire.

He said:"These people may have been taking part in a parade that was banned but I do not think that justifies the firing of live rounds indiscriminately."

But Mr Brian Hutton, QC, representing for the Ministry of Defence told Major O'Neill the inquest had heard only part of the evidence.

"It is not for you or the jury to express such wide-ranging views, particularly when a most eminent judge has spent 20 days hearing evidence and come to a very different conclusion," Mr Hutton said.

Andy: he was an establishment kow-tower in 1973, and still is, and that is EXACTLY why Blair picked him to preside over this upcoming whitewash...

Catholic priests who were at the rally gave evidence to the inquest.

They said many of the dead men were unarmed and running away when they were shot.

They also claimed the troops failure to stop firing prevented them from helping the sick and dying.

The MP for Antrim North, Reverend Ian Paisley, has said he will ask the Northern Ireland Secretary for Major O'Neill's removal.

"Mr O'Neill is not fit to be coroner for he has let his religious and political feelings dictate his decision," Mr Paisley said.

=========================================

Lord Hutton was the former Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland where Britain has been condemned internationally for human rights abuses;

snip

Shayler did not act in public interest, court rules

Staff and agencies Thursday March 21, 2002

The country's highest court, the Law Lords, today ruled that the former MI5 agent turned whistle-blower, David Shayler, did not act in the public interest when he disclosed state secrets alleging illegal activities and incompetence in the security services.

Andy: LOL LOL LOL, Shayler acted *precisely* in the public interest!

The House of Lords unanimously rejected a human rights challenge tabled by Mr Shayler and said he could not use"public interest" defence in his forthcoming Old Bailey trial.

Mr Shayler is accused of disclosing state secrets in 1997 in a series of newspaper articles about alleged illegal activities and incompetence in the security services.

Five law lords said there was no incompatibility between the 1989 Official Secrets Act, under which Shayler faces prosecution, and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights guaranteeing"freedom of expression". Lord Bingham of Cornhill said:"Despite the high importance attached to it, the right to free expression was never regarded in domestic law as absolute." The European Convention recognised that it was not absolute and could be restricted if a state could show that restriction was necessary in a democratic society. The 1989 act imposed a ban on disclosure of information or documents relating to security or intelligence by a former member of the service"without lawful authority". Lord Bingham said:"The crux of this case is whether the safeguards built into the Official Secrets Act are sufficient to ensure that unlawfulness and irregularity can be reported to those with the power and duty to take effective action, and the power to withhold authorisation to publish is not abused and that proper disclosures are not stifled."

He added:"If a person who has given a binding undertaking of confidentiality seeks to be relieved, even in part, from that undertaking he must seek authorisation and, if so advised, challenge any refusal of authorisation. If that refusal is upheld in the courts it must, however reluctantly, be accepted." Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Hutton, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough and Lord Scott of Foscote unanimously agreed and dismissed Mr Shayler's challenge. He is due to face a criminal trial later this year after making claims in the Mail on Sunday in 1997 that agents in the 1970s tapped the telephone of Peter Mandelson, later to serve as Northern Ireland secretary, and kept a file on Jack Straw, now foreign secretary.

======================================

Profile of"Lord" Hutton

'A classic establishment figure'

If Lord Hutton's name has previously penetrated the public consciousness, it would have been for his role in the extradition case against General Augusto Pinochet, writes Matthew Tempest

Monday July 21, 2003

Lord Hutton: charged with investigating the death of David Kelly. Photo: PA.

Beyond the fact that he was born and spent much of his career in Northern Ireland, Lord Hutton is a classic establishment figure: a lawyer, law lord and Balliol man to boot. Educated at an all-boys boarding school in Shrewsbury, the Ulster-born James Hutton then took a first in jurisprudence at Oxford, continued his studies at Queen's College, Belfast, before being called to the Nothern Ireland bar in 1954.

A long and distinguished career across the Irish sea followed. The then Mr Hutton became junior counsel to the attorney general in Belfast in 1969, a QC (Northern Ireland) in 1970, and a senior crown counsel in Ulster from 1973-79.

Since this period was the height of the Troubles, where Northern Ireland appeared on the brink of civil war, Lord Hutton will have crucial experience not only of the judiciary, but also of Whitehall and even the security services.

He was also a member of the joint law enforcement commission of 1974, and a judge of the high court of justice before finally, in 1988, becoming the lord chief justice of Northern Ireland.

In 1997 he became a law lord.

If Lord Hutton's name has previously penetrated the public consciousness, it would have been as one of the law lords ruling on the extradition case against General Augusto Pinochet. Lord Hutton ruled that the Chilean former dictator was liable to be extadited for crimes of torture committed after 1988.

Andy: and then he was let go!

The 72-year old Baron Hutton of Bresagh in the County of Down is married, with two daughters, and sits as a crossbencher in the Lords.

He lists no hobbies or clubs in his Who's Who entry, although he is a past president of the Northern Ireland Association for Mental Health, and is currently a vistor at the University of Ulster.

=====================================

Belfast Telegraph > News Publication Date: 21 July 2003

Ulster Judge with life and death experience London Editor Brian Walker profiles LORD HUTTON, the law lord from Northern Ireland who faces the greatest challenge of his career, to head up the inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the suicide of the MoD weapons inspector, Dr David Kelly

By Brian Walker email: brian.walker@belfasttelegraph.co.uk

WITH the Prime Minister's future ultimately at stake, the eyes of the world will also be on Northern Ireland's Brian Hutton, when Tony Blair enters the box to give evidence in what will surely be the most sensational appearance of his life.

This is one forum the Prime Minister will not be able to dominate easily.

Now 72, Lord Hutton, unlike most law lords, has presided over life and death issues for many years.

He will surely keep Mr Blair on a tight rein and squash any attempts at grand-standing by any of the considerable egos likely to appear before him.

He is known as a very reserved and private man.

Educated in England, but retaining traces of an Ulster accent, he has always kept his political distance and a low public profile, but has shown a strong personality in court.

"He is not afraid," said one senior Belfast solicitor who knows him well,"and he is completely independent."

His experience as a trained prosecutor, also rare for a law lord, will stand him in good stead in the essentially straightforward task of the inquiry, that of establishing truth beyond reasonable doubt.

One of his early cases was to prosecute the then Bernadette Devlin MP after the Bogside riots in August 1969, looking very uncomfortable as she mocked the charges and the mandatory six month sentence.

As the last Lord Chief Justice of the province to experience life as a so-called"legitimate target" of the Provisional IRA, he achieved a reputation for fair and meticulous judgment.

Few of his verdicts were challenged, despite the unpopularity of the non-jury Diplock courts.

Rising rapidly to the top in Belfast and then elevated with a great sense of relief to the final Court of Appeal in the Lords, he has managed to keep his slate clean of political controversy, building up his reputation as a lawyer's lawyer who relies heavily on legal precedent.

While reckoned to be a small"c" conservative, he has not invariably sided with the Establishment.

Two major decisions, one each from a criminal and a rights lawyer, appear to confirm his independent streak.

In the early 90s, he ruled that the 11-plus marking system discriminated against girls; and in a decision later overturned, he ruled that"subsequent ill-treatment" while in custody could render a prisoner's original arrest illegal - a decision which, if upheld, could have had momentous consequences.

As a law lord, he upheld the detention in England of the former Chilean dictator General Pinochet over attempts to extradite him for crimes against humanity.

In one hotly political case last year, he agreed with Peter Robinson's case against John Reid's extension of the six week time limit on the Assembly to elect a First and Deputy First Minister in 2002, but was overruled.

=================================

from SAOIRSE Irish Freedom February 1997

Six Counties Chief Justice a Freemason Within days of taking up his position of Britain,s new Lord Chief Justice in Occupied Ireland Robert Carswell faced scrutiny from the former British Labour Party spokesperson on the Six Counties, Kevin McNamara, to ascertain if the senior member of the judiciary has ever been a member of the Freemasons or the Orange Order. Carswell was appointed in November 1996 as a successor to Lord Chief Justice Brian Hutton. The Dublin administration was not consulted about his appointment, despite precedent being set in the London-Dublin agreement of 1985.

Robert Carswell, an infamous anti-Republican, presided over many high profile trials in recent years including the Casement Park show-trials into the deaths of two British soldiers. Now Kevin McNamara has tabled a series of House of Commons questions into the background and appointment of the new court,s chief.

He is being aided by fellow Labour MP, Chris Mullin, who is a member of a Home Affairs Select Committee at Westminster which is investigating the extent of Freemason,s influence among politicians, the police and the judiciary.

McNamara received written and evasive replies from the Lord Chancellor,s department,"The Lord Chancellor does not require candidates for, or holders of, judicial office to declare membership of any lawful organisation. McNamara referred to the description of the Orange Order as a"lawful organisation as"an unhappy reply given what happened at Drumcree when the rule of law was challenged by the Orange Order.

Asked why he was pursuing the issue, McNamara replied"I was never happy with him [Robert Carswell] and his judgements on various things. I thought it would be helpful if he was aware that people were keeping an eye on him.

Meanwhile in Britain the Association of Women Barristers has compiled a dossier on members of the judiciary with links to the Freemasons and is recommending to the Commons Home Affairs Committee that anyone appointed a judge be required to resign membership of the Freemasons or at least disclose it publicly.

Josephine Hayes, chairperson of the association, said there were probably more judges who were Freemasons than those identified. The Masonic yearbook for 1996/97 lists over 30 judges as high-ranking or"Grand Officers of the Masonic Order.




++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


http://www.rense.com/general48/huttue.htm

What Hutton Is Really Saying
By Michael James
Frankfurt, Germany
1-30-4


There can now be little doubt in the minds of independent and free-thinking men and women that the British ruling elite has all but abandoned any pretence of observing the democratic niceties of the post-Cold War era and is now steeling itself for the next phase of conquest and repression. The ongoing coup d'état, which started with the assassination of the antiwar Princess Diana and which continues in the militarization of British domestic and foreign policy under the calculating auspices of the proven war criminal Tony Blair, saw its most recent manifestation in a brilliant diversionary sideshow, the Hutton Inquiry.

The inquiry itself, headed by an intellectually decrepit"Lord" whose hands had already been bloodied in the handing down of imperial British"justice" to Irish Patriots in the 1970s, exposed a manipulative and deceitful Blair administration intent on crafting lies to sell an unpopular war. Yet the final report, shocking in its gratuitous homage to the naked power of the state, absolved the"Prime Minister" of any blame in the circumstances leading to the suicide - some are saying murder - of arms expert David Kelly.

The dispute is notable for four main reasons. Firstly, it provided Blair with a political theatre, refocusing public attention away from the illegality of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Secondly, it provided him with the means by which he could finally bring to heel those factions of the establishment too"liberal" in their critique of government policy. Thirdly, it gave the Murdoch media empire a green light on the government's continued fealty and its desire to dismantle the BBC in favour of Murdoch's indefatigable predatory ambitions. Fourthly, it allowed him to send an unmistakable message to opponents of the phoney"war on terror": Think very carefully about what you say and write, for I have the will and the power to crush you, to humiliate you and to destroy your careers and livelihoods.

The governing British Parliamentary Labour Party, itself an emerging corporate front-end for the arms industry, is now breathing more easily in its other newly found collective persona - a special elite of executive murderers and child killers. Its traditionally pacifist old guard and younger idealists uncomfortable with the new (albeit politically-correct) National Socialism, will continue to raise unsettling questions before they are sidelined and eventually retired or deselected. Like the antiwar and pro-Palestinian George Galloway, they will be deemed irrelevant or marked out as dangerous fringe lunatics out of step with the new order of corporate-military realities.

American readers should be reminded that all this is happening in a country where subject-citizens have no constitutional right to bear arms, indeed have no written constitution at all. Life in the British state has always been a trade-off of personal liberties against fancy welfare benefits and the spurious promise of protection under the common law of the land. In survey after survey the vast majority of the British people, already by means of CCTV the most closely watched in the western world, have indicated that they are only too happy to carry biometric identity cards and surrender most of their residual freedoms in return for greater"security" and progress in the ever-widening and perpetually insurmountable"war on crime". That their own ruling elite, which history has shown to be ruthless in the brutal suppression of dissent in former colonies and in Ireland, might one day square them through the barrel of a gun and slaughter them as surplus to requirement is an urge!
nt consideration naively absent in their minds.

In stark contrast to America and Ireland, there is no culture of resistance abroad in the British state. Even those in a position to fight and make a stand - such as BBC General Director Greg Dyke - capitulate like frightened puppy dogs at the crack of the master's whip. Such genuflection before one's perceived social"superiors" or complete surrender of self-worth and personal dignity in the face of state authority is deeply ingrained in the psyche of every Briton, particularly in the English. Yet the speed with which draconian"anti-terror" laws have been slammed through parliament and the brazen Huttonian clampdown on free speech and dissent, even within the outer circle of the establishment itself, suggests that this is not enough to gird the ruling elite against the fearful consequences of the coming social emergency.

It is therefore hardly surprising to learn that President Bush and John Ashcroft, mindful that their own munchkins are tugging at the Wizard's obscuring curtain of lies, are now studying the brilliant coup d'état that spawned the Hutton Report. American citizens, however, may reassure themselves that when the Big Hit comes, and the goon squad begins its killing spree, they at least have the firepower to defend themselves.

In Britain, it will all be over in a day.

_____

Michael James is a British freelance journalist and translator, exiled in Germany for almost 12 years.

Thread gesperrt

 

gesamter Thread:

• Endlich kritisiert mal jermand das B.liar-Fanclub-Urteil! - RK, 31.01.2004, 09:06
  • Nur eine Entwicklung unter vielen. - eesti, 31.01.2004, 09:33
  • Was britische Ärzte und Anwälte von dem Hütten- äh, Hutton-Käse halten... - RK, 31.01.2004, 10:11
  • jW:"Schon immer war auf ihn Verlaß - Seine Lordschaft Brian Hutton" - RK, 31.01.2004, 12:33