tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3634321588005420812.post7934890933379405199..comments2023-10-09T14:21:48.075+01:00Comments on Dr Kelly's Death - Time for the Truth: Dr Kelly's spectaclesbrian in the tamar valleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13475701925894027724noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3634321588005420812.post-5786857224943694762012-08-17T07:15:41.328+01:002012-08-17T07:15:41.328+01:00Felix, yes there is no doubt that Dr Kelly was in ...Felix, yes there is no doubt that Dr Kelly was in possession of bifocal spectacles and that Dr Hunt was correct in recording that fact in his report. The very fact that Dr Hunt was aware that they were bifocals should have caused him to ask "why remove them?" and similarly with the watch - "why didn't he take it off before he started cutting?" I can see no logic in Dr Hunt's assertion that this was evidence of intent of self harm. And then for Hutton to repeat this speculative nonsense in what should have been a purely factual opening statement is ridiculous. brian in the tamar valleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13475701925894027724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3634321588005420812.post-61572271982494891412012-08-17T06:54:56.848+01:002012-08-17T06:54:56.848+01:00Actually, this Bloomberg file photo. shows the bif...Actually, <a href="http://topics.bloomberg.com/david-kelly/_/slideshow/?category=%2Fnews%2Fhome%2Ftopic&selected_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bloomberg.com%2Fapps%2Fdata%3Fiid%3Di1qP0VwvnRk8%26pid%3Davimage&slideshow_id=260888" rel="nofollow">this Bloomberg file photo</a>. shows the bifocals excellently. felixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12363991252776819712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3634321588005420812.post-79089856981360290212012-08-17T02:22:19.157+01:002012-08-17T02:22:19.157+01:00Brian, the photo of Dr Kelly showing the right sid...Brian, the photo of Dr Kelly showing the right side of his face <a href="https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?4158-New-evidence-of-cover-up-in-Dr-David-Kelly-s-death.-Doctors-want-inquest." rel="nofollow">here in this forum page</a> (haven't looked for the original) <i>seems</i> to show bifocal spectacle lenses. Since he wears them at his daughter's wedding (photo on same page), one is at a loss why they would have been removed if Dr Kelly had wanted to cut his wrist in private. He doesn't seem to have been short sighted.felixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12363991252776819712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3634321588005420812.post-54770266025872185182012-05-24T11:25:18.347+01:002012-05-24T11:25:18.347+01:00One possible explanation that I have considered fo...One possible explanation that I have considered for some time to be a reason for the spectacles to be in a pocket of the jacket is this: if Dr Kelly's body had been carried into the wood at Harrowdown Hill then it's possible that the spectacles might have been stuffed into the Barbour jacket pocket to ensure that they didn't inadvertently drop from his face in transit.brian in the tamar valleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13475701925894027724noreply@blogger.com