Tuesday September 2 2003, 2.00 pm: PC Jonathan Martyn, Vanessa Hunt, David Bartlett, Barnabus Leith, Professor Hawton

POLICE CONSTABLE JONATHAN MARTYN SAWYER (recalled) Examined by MR KNOX (continued)

LORD HUTTON: Yes Mr Knox. MR KNOX: My Lord, I propose to recall Mr Sawyer to briefly deal with one point. LORD HUTTON: Yes, come back please. MR KNOX: Mr Sawyer, you will recall that this morning you said that amongst Dr Kelly's things that had been found on the search of the premises was a photograph which I think you said might have aroused some interest. I wonder if you could tell us something about the photograph that was found. A. Certainly. It was found in the study of Dr Kelly at 11.45 by one of my searchers, PC Slyfield. It was seized because, at the time, it showed Dr Kelly and another person standing outside the Parliament building in Moscow. It was after the coup in Moscow and the Parliament building showed a certain amount of damage. The photograph was in fact dated 11th of the 8th 1993. PC Slyfield showed it to DC Burton who was the Special Branch officer with him and they both agreed the second person in the photograph bore a very striking resemblance to Andrew Gilligan. The photograph was then seized and produced as an exhibit. That is what I was referring to in my statement. Q. What have subsequent inquiries revealed about that photograph? A. Subsequent inquiries, I have spoken to PC Slyfield on the phone, and I have also spoken to a DS McGuire at the Long Hanborough incident room. PC Slyfield states that, in his opinion, the person has a resemblance to Andrew Gilligan. DS McGuire is of the opposite opinion, that it does not look like Andrew Gilligan; and, as a consequence, the photograph is being brought up tomorrow by ACC Page for the Inquiry to actually look at. Q. Your current understanding of the position is that it is or is not Mr Gilligan? A. On the -- I saw the photograph but very, very briefly. I can form no opinion either way. LORD HUTTON: So it was really seized by the police because it was thought it bore a resemblance to Andrew Gilligan, that is as far as it goes? A. Yes, and the date on the photograph being 1993 which is some 11 years ago when it was. LORD HUTTON: Yes. Very well. Thank you very much. MR KNOX: Mr Sawyer can I ask you this: as far as you are aware, what is the current view of the police force about this photograph? A. The current view of the police force is it has been retained as an exhibit to be produced before this Inquiry. As to the identity of the second person in the photograph, that is a matter for the Inquiry to make its mind up. I must say that DS McGuire has also said he has been unable to actually speak to Mr Gilligan to verify the veracity of the photograph in question up to this point. LORD HUTTON: Yes. Thank you very much Mr Sawyer. A. Thank you my Lord. MR DINGEMANS: Ms Hunt, please. MS VANESSA ELIZABETH HUNT (called) Examined by MR DINGEMANS

Q. Can you tell his Lordship your full name? A. Vanessa Elizabeth Hunt. Q. What is your occupation? A. I am a paramedic. Q. Were you on duty on 18th July? A. Yes I was. Q. What time did you start work? A. 0700 hours. Q. And where were you based at the time? A. At Abingdon ambulance station. Q. Did you have any calls that morning? A. Yes, we did. Q. Did you have any call relating to Dr Kelly? A. Yes. Q. What time did you get that call? A. At 0940 hours to the ambulance station. Q. What were you asked to do? A. We were asked to mobilise towards Southmoor for a male patient but we were given no more details at that time. Q. So, did you set off? A. Yes, we did. Q. In an ambulance? A. In an ambulance with my colleague Dave Bartlett. Q. And you drove to Southmoor? A. Yes. Q. Did anyone meet you there? A. On the way we were given some more information on our data screens. Q. What did that say? A. It just said that we were attending the address -- Harrowdown Hill in Longworth for a male believed to be a kilo 1 which is actually deceased, and the Thames Valley Police were on the scene. Q. When you arrived on the scene was anyone there? A. Yes, there were a number of police officers. Q. Do you remember how many? A. Just lots and there was police vehicles there as well. Q. Did you drive off the public road? A. We parked up at the end of the public road, I do not know the name of the road. Q. And you proceeded on foot? A. Yes. Q. Who had met you? A. There was an officer in regulation clothing who directed us to two or three other officers in combat trousers and black polo shirts and we followed them along the track. Q. You followed them along the track? A. Yes. Q. And where did that lead to? A. To a wooded area that was on the left of the track. Q. And once you got to the wooded area did you stay on the outside of the wood? A. Initially there were three people on the track, what I now know to be detective constable, one was the search and rescue and there was another gentleman there. The police officers that we had followed stopped and spoke to them and then we followed the two chaps up into the wooded area. Q. And when you got into the wooded area, what did you see? A. There was a male on his back, feet towards us. Q. Yes. A. And no obvious signs of life. Q. Was there anything marking your route in to the body? A. As we walked into the wooded area the police officers were marking a route off with metal posts. We just walked behind them. Q. And can you describe what was being worn by the man? A. It was -- it looked like a wax type jacket, dark colour. Q. Yes. A. A shirt and I believe jeans, but I cannot be certain of the lower clothing. He also had a pair of boots or trainer cross type footwear on. Q. Could you see anything on the body itself? A. On his left arm, which was outstretched to the left of him, there was some dry blood. Q. Did you go towards the body? A. We stood behind the police officers while they took photographs. Then once they had taken the photographs I went to the right side of the body and my colleague went to the left side. Q. And what was done to check for signs of life? A. My colleague lifted the eyelids to check for pupil reaction, also felt the gentleman's neck for a carotid pulse and I initially placed the heart monitor paddles on to the chest over the top of his shirt. Q. Did you get any reading at all? A. There was some artefact reading I believed to be from myself as opposed to the body, so we said to the police officers would it be possible to place four sticky electrodes on to the chest, to verify that life was extinct. Q. What did the police say to you? A. Could they just take some more photographs before we undid the shirt, which they then did. My colleague unbuttoned the shirt and I placed the four electrodes on to the chest, two on the upper part of the chest and two underneath the rib cage area. Q. Did you connect those electrodes to anything? A. To the heart monitor. Q. What did that show? A. That showed asystole which is a flat line. Q. What does that mean? A. It means there is no cardiac output and life is extinct. Q. Did you declare life extinct? A. We pronounced we were unable to certify but we said, yes, that, you know ... Q. What did you do with the strips from the machine? A. Took three strips and handed them all to the police officer. Q. And what did the strips show? A. Just a flat line. Q. And having carried out those activities, what did you do then? A. I said would they like us to leave the electrodes in situ, they requested that we did, remove the leads from the chest and left the shirt unbuttoned. Q. Did you yourself move the body at all? A. The only part of the body we moved was Dr Kelly's right arm, which was over the chest, to facilitate us to place the fourth lead on to the chest. It was just lifted slightly from the body. Q. Right. And do you recall, now, what Dr Kelly was wearing? A. As I say, a dark coloured wax jacket, a shirt and I believe it to be jeans, but I am not certain. Q. Right. And anything on his feet? A. Trainers or cross trainer/boot type footwear. Q. Right. And did you see anything on the ground? A. There was a silver bladed knife, a wristwatch, which was off of the wrist. Q. Yes. A. And, oh, a water bottle, a small water bottle stood up to the left side of Dr Kelly's head. Q. And did you note whether or not he had a mobile phone? A. There was a mobile phone pouch clipped to his belt on his front but slightly to the right side, but you could not see if there was a phone within the pouch or not. Q. Right. And what were you wearing while you were carrying out this? A. My green squad suit and black boots. Q. And is there anything else that you know of about the circumstances of Dr Kelly's death that you can assist his Lordship with? A. Only that the amount of blood that was around the scene seemed relatively minimal and there was a small patch on his right knee, but no obvious arterial bleeding. There was no spraying of blood or huge blood loss or any obvious loss on the clothing. Q. On the clothing? A. Yes. Q. One of the police officers or someone this morning said there appeared to be some blood on the ground. Did you see that? A. I could see some on -- there were some stinging nettles to the left of the body. As to on the ground, I do not remember seeing a sort of huge puddle or anything like that. There was dried blood on the left wrist. His jacket was pulled to sort of mid forearm area and from that area down towards the hand there was dried blood, but no obvious sign of a wound or anything, it was just dried blood. Q. You did not see the wound? A. I did not see the wound, no. Q. You were not looking at the wound, then? A. The hand -- from what I remember, his arm -- left arm was outstretched to the left of the body. Q. Yes. A. Palm up or slightly on the side (indicates) and, as I say, there was dried blood from the edge of the jacket down towards the hand but no gaping wound or anything obvious that I could see from the position I was in. Q. Were you examining the wrist for -- A. No, I was not. No. Q. And were you examining the ground for blood or blood loss? A. No. MR DINGEMANS: Right. Thank you. LORD HUTTON: Thank you very much Ms Hunt. Thank you. MR KNOX: My Lord, the next witness is Mr Bartlett. LORD HUTTON: Yes. MR DAVID IAN BARTLETT (called) Examined by MR KNOX

Q. Mr Bartlett, what is your full name? A. David Ian Bartlett. Q. And what is your occupation? A. Ambulance technician. Q. And who are you employed by? A. Oxford Ambulance. Q. And you are based at? A. Abingdon. Q. Abingdon ambulance station? A. Yes. Q. Were you on duty on the early morning of 18th July? A. Yes. Q. And what time did you get in? A. 0700 hours. Q. What is the number of the ambulance you were working in that day; can you remember? A. I cannot remember to be honest without going back to the computer readouts. We use so many different ones. Q. If I say number 934, does that sound right? A. Could be, yes. Q. Do you remember what happened about 20 to 10? A. Yes, we had a call to attend the Longworth area and on the way there -- excuse me, I have a bad cold -- LORD HUTTON: Yes, do you have a glass of water there? That might help. A. Yes. We got an update saying it was a male query kilo 1 which as my colleague explained is a person presumed dead. MR KNOX: You say you got an update, was that? A. On the computer readout in the ambulance. Q. That meant what? A. They had come across a body or a body had been reported and had not been certified but presumed dead. Q. Can you remember when you arrived at the place you were going to? A. The time? Q. Yes, the time. A. 9.55. Q. That was at Harrowdown Hill, is that right? A. Yes. Q. Off Tucks Lane? A. Yes. Q. What happened when you arrived? A. We parked at the end of the lane where there were some cars already parked, a lot of police officers there. We asked one police officer who directed us to the police that were in the combat uniforms and they asked us to bring some equipment and follow them down into the woods. Q. And you did that? A. Yes. We took a defib monitor with us and our own personal kit. Q. You walked down into the woods, is that right? A. Yes. Q. What did you eventually come across? A. We got to the end of the lane, there were some more police officers there. I think it was two or three, I cannot remember, I think it was two, took us up into the woods which was like right angles to the track. As we walked up they were in front of us putting the marker posts in and told us to stay between the two posts. Q. So you stayed between the two posts and carried on presumably? A. Yes. Q. What did you then come across? A. They led us up to where the body was laid, feet facing us, laid on its back, left arm out to one side (indicates) and the right arm across the chest. Q. What about the hands? Did you notice anything about the position of the hands? A. It was slightly wrist up, more wrist up than down. Q. What about the right arm? A. That was across the chest, palm down. Q. Did you notice any injuries? A. Just some dried blood across the wrist. Q. Which wrist would that be? A. The left wrist. Q. What about the face? Did you notice anything about the face? A. Yes, going from the corners of the mouth were two stains, one slightly longer than the other. Q. Where did the stains go to from the mouth? A. Towards the bottom of the ears. Q. Did you check for a pulse? A. Yes, checked the carotid pulse, also pupil reaction. Q. The pupils of the eyes that is? A. Yes, and then my colleague placed the two paddles across the chest and in between times the police were taking photographs. Q. Can I just check, did the police take photographs before or after -- A. Before. Every time we did something they took another photograph. Q. Your colleague was Ms Hunt who we have just heard? A. Yes. Q. Did you feel the skin of the body at all? A. Yes, it was pale and clammy. Q. You mentioned the injury to the wrist. You saw some blood, did you? A. There was dried blood across the top, yes. Q. Was that congealed or not? A. I did not touch it. It was dried, it started to crack like when it goes dry. Q. Did you see any items next to the body? A. Yes, to the left side above just where the arm was, there was a wristwatch, a silver knife with a curved blade and a bottle of water. Q. And the bottle of water, was that empty or full or -- A. I think it was empty. Q. Was it upright or can you remember? A. Yes, it was upright. Q. What type of a knife was it? A. I think it was one of those silver quite flat ones with like a curved blade, more like a pruning knife. Q. What clothes was the man wearing? A. It was a dark coloured jacket, sort of a wax type jacket, striped shirt, blue and white striped shirt, and I think it was jeans. Q. And was the top button done up on the shirt or undone? A. No, I think the top one was undone. Q. Did you notice any other items of clothing nearby? A. There was a cap ...(Pause). Yes, there was a flat cap on the left of the body, near the head end. Q. And were there any stains on the clothes? A. Not that I could see apart from on the deceased's right knee, there was a bloodstain about 25 mm across. Q. When you say on the right knee, you mean on the trousers? A. Yes, on the right knee of the trousers. Q. Did you yourself do anything to the body? A. I unbuttoned the shirt as my colleague was putting the electrodes on, and moved the right arm up so we could get the electrode down the bottom. Q. And once the electrodes had been put on was any activity noticed? A. No, no. It was just -- no output or anything. Q. And what about -- was there any heart activity or anything like that? A. No, nothing. Q. Did you have the ability to print out the results on the spot? A. Yes, I believe my colleague printed three strips out and gave those to the police. Q. And were any alterations made to the printouts? A. Yes, the time that is printed on the machine because they are the never the right time. We always write the time across the top of them. Q. What was the time that the printout showed before you made the alteration? A. I cannot remember because the colleague made the time. It is usually an hour out. Q. So you put it back or forward an hour to get the right time? A. Yes, one or the other. Q. You checked that against what? How did you know you were putting the right time on? A. Against our watches. Q. Can you remember at what time death was pronounced? A. (Pause). No, I did not actually make a note of the time. It would have been what was wrote on the strips. Q. It was noted on the strips? A. Yes. Q. How long were you at the scene altogether? A. 5 to 10 minutes. Q. Once the printouts had been done, what did you do with them? A. The police officer took some more pictures and then they told us to go back down through the marker posts to the main track. Q. Sorry, through the same track you had come up? A. Yes. Q. Then you go back there to the ambulance; is that right? A. Yes. Q. When you left were the electrodes still on the body or had they been taken off? A. No, we left the electrodes on, just removed the wires. Q. Was there any reason for that? A. We just -- we always just leave them on. Q. And then what did you do after that? You went to the ambulance, did you? A. We went back up to the ambulance and the police just asked us to check the young lady who had actually found the body but she was fine. They said she was a bit shaken but we had a chat with her and she was fine. Q. Is there anything else you would like to say about the circumstances leading to Dr Kelly's death? A. Just the same as my colleague actually, we was surprised there was not more blood on the body if it was an arterial bleed. MR KNOX: Thank you very much. LORD HUTTON: Thank you very much indeed Mr Bartlett. MR DINGEMANS: Mr Leith, please. MR JOHN BARNABUS LEITH (called) Examined by MR DINGEMANS

Q. Can you tell his Lordship your full name? A. I am John Barnabus Leith. Q. What is your occupation? A. I am the Secretary of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United Kingdom. Q. The Baha'i faith is a religion, is that right? A. That is correct, yes. Q. When did it start? A. The Baha'i faith started in the middle of the 19th Century in the country now known as Iran and was founded by a figure we consider to be a prophet of God who had the title of Baha'u'llah or Glory of God. Q. What is the Baha'i attitude to other religions? A. The Baha'i faith is that all the great religions come from the same source, namely from God, so we are very happy to work with and welcoming towards people of other faiths. Q. Does that include every other religion, Christian, Jewish, Muslim? A. Yes, all the great religions, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist. We believe they all come from the same source. We believe there is a historical chain of religions and that Baha'u'llah is the latest of the messengers of God. Q. We have heard that Dr Kelly, after he converted to the Baha'i religion, started reading the Koran. Would that be something consistent with the Baha'i religion? A. It would. I did not know that until I read Mrs Kelly's evidence, but yes, it would be perfectly consistent. I know Baha'is are in fact encouraged to read the Koran. Q. And also other religious books, the Bible, the Koran? A. Yes indeed, I know that Baha'is read the scriptures of all the great religions in addition to our own Baha'i scriptures. Q. How many Baha'is are there in the world? A. Somewhere between 5 and 6 million. It is difficult to have an exact count because many of the Baha'is of the world live in very poor countries and statistics are not easily kept. Q. Is there a formal structure if you are a Baha'i? A. Yes, we have. The affairs of our faith are governed by elected councils at local level, at national and international level. We have no priests or ministers so we are not, as has been referred to in some of the press, a church. We do not consider ourselves to be a church. We do not have an ecclesiastical structure. Q. How do you get elected as a member of a local body? A. Well, each year on 21st April the Baha'is in each locality elect nine of their members to serve on what is called the local Spiritual Assembly, which is the local governing council for that locality, and their term of office is for one year. Those who serve on these bodies can be re-elected any number of times. But nobody stands for election and there is no canvassing, there is no nomination. It is a secret ballot. Q. So you just vote for someone else who is in the same community as you? A. Yes, each person in the locality has nine votes, and so they exercise those nine votes; and out of all -- the nine people who receive the most votes out of all the votes cast serve on the local assembly for that year. Q. And why 21st April? Is that a significant day? A. It is a significant day, yes, it marks a particular historic occasion in the history of the Baha'i faith. Q. Which is? A. Which is the Baha'u'llah who had been exiled to Baghdad in 1853 from his native Persia announced his mission in 1863, in other words 10 years after he had arrived in Baghdad, he announced his mission to a number of his very close followers and associates on that day in 1863. Q. What mission did he announce? A. That he had come to bring a message from God, that the message that God wished the world to have at this particular time is that all human beings of whatever ethnic group, whatever creed, whatever language, wherever they live in the world are all part of a single human family and that the work of this time is to make that a reality. Q. And if you had been elected on the local level, how would one then progress to a national and international level? A. You use the word "progress", it is not really a progression. Q. Sorry. A. Because there is no career structure, as it were. Again, the national body is elected by delegates who are, in turn, elected by Baha'is at local level. So it is a two stage election for the national governing council, so that the local Baha'is elect delegates, the delegates go to our national convention and there the delegates, of whom there are 95, each year vote for the national assembly on the same principle as the voting for the local Spiritual Assembly. Q. And what do you know of Dr Kelly's conversion to the Baha'i faith? A. Our records show that he became a Baha'i in September 1999 in the United States. At first we thought that he had become a Baha'i in New York but subsequently it became clear that he actually became a Baha'i in California; and I understand from what I read in The Times that there was a Baha'i in Monterey, California. Q. If you do not know from your own knowledge ... A. I do not know that. Q. He became a Baha'i in the United States? A. He certainly became a Baha'i in the United States, yes. Q. Did he then follow the religion back in Oxfordshire? A. Yes did, yes. Q. How did he do that? A. He attended meetings organised by the local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the Vale of White Horse. That local assembly, at that time, covered the whole administrative district of the Vale of White Horse. Q. Is that one of the 95 districts? A. No, this is the local government district of the Vale of White Horse. The local assembly covered that whole area and they organised the usual range of Baha'i meetings including regular prayer meetings and discussion meetings and other such meetings which he attended. Q. And did he have any -- was he elected on to the -- A. He was, yes. He was a member of the local Spiritual Assembly of the Vale of White Horse for a time, less than a year I think, I am not sure of the exact time. Q. That is one of the nine? A. He was one of the nine within that locality. Q. Did he have any role in -- A. He served for a time as the treasurer of that local Spiritual Assembly. Q. How long did he do that for? A. I could not tell you the exact length of time but I know it was fairly brief. Q. On the Baha'i faith website there is a little heading relating to suicide. Has that always been there or was that put up, as it were, after Dr Kelly's death? A. May I ask which website? Q. It is the baha'i.org.uk. It says this: "Baha'i leave questions of forgiveness and judgment to God." A. That was put up subsequent to Dr Kelly's death. Q. To explain the thing? A. Correct, yes. Q. If I can just read the extract and ask you to comment on it: "Suicide is always tragic because it cuts life short, but people who suffer hardship and distress deserve compassion." Can you just help his Lordship with the Baha'i attitude to suicide? A. Indeed. The act of suicide is condemned in the Baha'i writings because it is an undue curtailment of the life that should be lived to the full. However, Baha'is and the Baha'i institutions do not and never would take a condemnatory attitude to people who unfortunately commit suicide. Quite the opposite. There would be a great deal of sympathy, as indeed there has been in the case of Dr Kelly, and Baha'is would pray for the progress of the soul of that person as they have for the soul of Dr Kelly. Q. And do the Baha'is believe in an afterlife? A. Indeed, yes. We see it as a continuation of a single process that begins in this life of coming ever closer to God, through our normal religious practices of prayer and study of the Baha'i scriptures and meditation and reflection, and really attempting to live according to the Baha'i teachings to the best of our ability. Q. I think you wanted to comment on an article in a newspaper which claimed that Dr Kelly had spoken about his work. Did Dr Kelly speak about his work, as far as you knew? A. He did not, or at least he did not ever in my hearing and I understand from the Baha'is in Abingdon that he did not at Baha'i meetings talk about his work. He was extremely discreet. The particular press comment claimed that he had spoken at a Baha'i meeting critically about the September dossier. This was not in fact the case. I was at that meeting. It was not a meeting organised by the Baha'i local assembly, it was privately organised and he was invited to speak to an audience of Baha'is and non-Baha'is about his work as a weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 until 1998; and he did so with the aid of slides. He did not mention the dossier. Nobody asked him about the dossier. Q. Did you, yourself, know Dr Kelly? A. I had met him perhaps three maybe four times. I do not claim to have known him well. However, I certainly did know him and he came to -- I have a house in Abingdon and he came to that house and came to Baha'i meetings there, and so to that extent I knew Dr Kelly and engaged in conversation with him on those occasions. Q. And is there anything else surrounding Dr Kelly's death that you can assist his Lordship with? A. I would like to say that the Baha'i community extends the greatest sympathy to Mrs Kelly and to the Kelly family. We do not in any way believe that there is anything in the Baha'i teachings or in the life of the Baha'i community that would have induced Dr Kelly to commit suicide. There were allegations made that the Baha'i faith condones or accepts suicide; this is not the case, as I have explained, and so there is -- the Baha'i community itself and the Baha'i teachings are extremely positive in their ethos, very much to do with the affirmation of life and the development of qualities, and we do not believe that there is anything in the experience that Dr Kelly would have had of the community or his study of the Baha'i teachings that would have led him to suppose that committing suicide was a good act. However, of course, as I said, we do extend the greatest sympathy to his family and we are -- you know, we are praying for the progress of his soul. Q. And is there anything else you would like to say? A. No. That is all. Thank you. LORD HUTTON: Thank you very much indeed. A. Thank you, my Lord. MR DINGEMANS: Professor Hawton, please. PROFESSOR KEITH EDWARD HAWTON (sworn) Examined by MR DINGEMANS

Q. Can you tell his Lordship your full name? A. Keith Edward Hawton. Q. What is your occupation? A. I am a consultant psychiatrist in Oxfordshire Mental Health Care Trust in Oxford. Q. Do you hold any other posts? A. I have the title of Professor of Psychiatry which is a personal chair from Oxford University. Q. And are you a director of any other post? A. Yes, I am Director of the Centre for Suicide Research in the University Department of Psychiatry in Oxford. Q. And your professional qualifications? A. My professional qualifications are Fellow of the Royal College of Psychiatrists and Diploma of Psychological Medicine. My degrees are Doctor of Science, Doctor of Medicine, MA, Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery. Q. How long have you been Director of the Centre for Suicide Research at Oxford University? A. The centre itself has only been in place for about four years but I have been conducting research in this field for far longer. Q. How long have you been conducting research into suicide? A. I first began in 1973. Q. So that is? A. 30 years. Q. 30 years. Have you received any recognition? A. I have had three international awards. Q. What were they? A. One in 1995 which is the research award of the International Association for Suicide Prevention; one in 2001 from the American Association of Suicidology, which is an American term, and one in 2002 from the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, again for research activities. Q. And I think you were appointed by the solicitors to the Hutton Inquiry to assist in relation to this? A. Yes. Q. Can you, first of all, give us any general information about the reasons for suicide? A. Well, I think one important thing to bear in mind is the fact that suicide does not usually result from just one factor as it is often portrayed. Research into suicide has shown it is often the end point of a series of factors some people refer to as the suicidal process, and these factors may include life stresses and problems obviously, psychiatric disorder, substance misuse, that is misuse of alcohol or drugs, certain personality characteristics, psychological processes that may precede the act, a physical illness can be a factor, exposure to suicidal behaviour in other people can be important, availability of methods for suicide and also, of course, knowledge of these methods can be relevant and also certain family background factors, factors to do with upbringing and so on. Q. Are there any aspects which offer protection against suicide? A. Yes, we know less about these, but there is certainly evidence that having children, particularly young children, can offer relative protection. Strong religious beliefs can be another factor; and having a close confiding relationship, in other words one in which a person can share their problems with other individuals. Q. And in terms of gender differences, are there any gender differences in the number of people who commit suicide? A. Suicide in this country and most countries in the world is far more common in males than females at roughly the ratio of 3 to 1. Q. Does the risk increase as you get older? A. To a small degree. It used to be that suicide was much more common in older people than younger people but because of changes in suicide rates in both older people which have decreased, and younger people which have increased -- I am referring here to males -- there is little difference these days in risk in different ages. Obviously I am talking in adulthood after puberty. Q. You mentioned a relevant factor may be psychiatric disorders. Can you explain a bit more about that? A. Well, a number of studies have been conducted of suicides in general; and the findings of these are very similar in this respect in that something like 9 out of 10 people obviously with retrospective examination appear to have had evidence of psychiatric disorder. Q. And what is the most common psychiatric disorder you might expect to come across? A. That is depression. Q. You have also mentioned personality types. What sort of personality types are likely to be most at risk? A. Well, in younger people it is people who tend to be aggressive and to act impulsively, that is without much forethought. In older people we are now getting evidence that individuals who are rather perfectionistic and somewhat rigid may be more at risk. Q. You have mentioned psychological processes. What do you mean by a psychological process? What does that mean? A. Well, it means styles of thinking or thinking processes -- you know people think about things in different ways and it refers to particular styles of thinking in an individual. Q. Right. And what styles of thinking are most associated with suicide? A. Well, the one for which there is most evidence is the tendency to feel hopeless when faced with a difficult circumstance. Q. Are there any other relevant feelings? A. Yes, certainly a sense of feeling trapped, being unable to escape from an unbearable situation. Isolation may be another factor, either actual isolation in the sense of not having people around or relative isolation where a person is unable to communicate with those around them because of their particular personality style. Q. Are there any other additional factors that one might consider here? A. Well, another important factor is where a person has suffered a severe blow to their self esteem, that is their sense of self worth. Shame can be another factor. Sometimes people appear to engage in a suicidal act, and I am here including attempting suicide to show other people how bad they are feeling, and occasionally there seems to be a desire for revenge, that revenge is a part of the motivation. Q. You have also mentioned physical illness. How does that affect it? A. Well the association here is particularly with incapacitating disorders, in other words where somebody's freedom of movement and so on is severely limited; where there is life threatening illness or illness which produces chronic pain. Q. And are there any other factors which are relevant at this stage? A. Well, we know that exposure to suicidal behaviour in other people may have an influence. This might be through the family, through other people around the individual or possibly through the media. Q. Does knowing about how you can commit suicide have any effect? A. It seems to be particularly important knowing how to do it, and of course having the availability of methods; and as I mentioned in my report, certain occupational groups that seem to be at higher risks of suicide all seem to have ready access to methods for suicide and to know about them. Q. What are those groups? A. Those include farmers, doctors, medical doctors that is, dentists, pharmacists and veterinary surgeons. Q. I think you have mentioned some of the protective factors. Is suicide always planned in advance? A. No, it can be impulsive, that is carried out without much thinking beforehand; but this tends to be particularly in younger people. Q. It is more impulsive in younger people? A. Yes. Q. And for older people, what is the sort of evidence of planning that you can see? A. Well, evidence of planning would be, for example, saving up medication to carry out an act, deliberately going and obtaining a specific method for the act, obviously seeking out a place to carry out the act, where one is least likely to be disturbed, and things such as a person putting their affairs in order, changing their will and so on. Q. And do you always have to communicate your intention to commit suicide? Is there always a note left? A. Not at all, no. In recent studies from the United Kingdom, somewhere between 40 and 50 per cent of people who die leave a suicide note or a suicide message, it is not always a note. Q. So the majority do not leave a note? A. That is correct. Q. People who commit suicide, do they always intend to carry out the act? A. No, certainly some deaths by suicide appear to be unintended, that is the person -- as far as one can gather the intention was not to commit suicide. We have evidence of this, for example, from people who die from overdoses where they do not die immediately and one can actually talk to them about their intentions. Certainly in some cases they clearly indicate that was not their intention, to die. Q. What, just a cry for help, or ...? A. Yes, to show desperation, to show other people how bad they were feeling and so on, yes. Q. Is there always a history of previous attempts of self harm or previous attempts at suicide? A. No, this is found in about half of all cases of suicide. Q. I understand that there are a number of different methods of suicide but for fairly obvious reasons you probably do not want to go into those. A. That is correct. Q. Did you form any assessment of whether Dr Kelly's death was consistent with suicide? A. I think all the information we have about his death and the circumstances of his death strongly point to his death having been by suicide. Q. And what would you say drives you to that conclusion? A. Well, the first thing is the site in which the death occurred. We have heard that it occurred in an isolated spot on Harrowdown Hill. In fact it was, as I think you have been told, in woodland about 40 or 50 yards off the track taken by ramblers. The site is well protected from the view of other people. Q. Have you been to the site? A. I have visited the site, yes. Q. And what did you notice there then? A. Well, I noticed, first of all -- what struck me was it is a very peaceful spot, a rather beautiful spot and we know that it was a favourite -- it was in the area of a favourite walk of Dr Kelly with his family. Q. What other factors have you considered relevant? A. The nature of his injuries is very consistent with an act of self cutting. The doctor -- I have read Dr Hunt's report, who is the Home Office forensic pathologist. I have also seen the photographs of the injuries to Dr Kelly's body; and the nature of the injuries to his wrist are very consistent with suicide. Q. Why do you say that? We have heard from some of the ambulance personnel who did not themselves see very much blood. We have heard from others who did see more blood. What is relevant here? A. Well I am referring here particularly to the nature of the cutting which perhaps I would prefer not to describe in detail. Q. Right. A. But it -- Q. Perhaps you can just explain why you do not want to describe these matters in detail. A. Well, one of the concerns I have is that there is now good evidence that reporting and portrayal of detailed methods of suicide in the media can actually sometimes facilitate suicide in other people. Q. So it is perfectly obvious there are lots of members of the press here. If you had to say anything to them about the reporting of your evidence today, what would it be? A. I think with regard to the specific method of suicide, I would prefer that that was kept as general as possible. Q. For those reasons? A. Yes. Q. You have talked about the cutting. What else do you consider to have been consistent with suicide? A. Well, the situation or the circumstances in which Dr Kelly's body was found are consistent, in that he had apparently removed -- his glasses were found by his body in a way -- in a manner suggesting that they had been taken off by him, as was his cap; his watch had been taken off, was removed from the body. Q. What does that indicate? A. It suggests that he removed the watch to give him better access to be able to carry out the cutting. Q. And was there anything else that you saw from the pathologist's report that assisted you in your conclusion? A. Well, the instrument that was used, which I have seen a photograph of, and the family, as you know, I think, have been shown a copy of a similar instrument, a large penknife -- I will call it a penknife, but it is a rather primitive style of penknife -- is very similar to one that he had in his drawer in his study, and it was one I think you heard yesterday he had had since his childhood. Q. Yes. A. When considering something like this, one obviously has to think about whether there could have been some other person or persons involved in the act, and the circumstances suggest that was not the case. Q. What, whether some third parties were involved in Dr Kelly's death? A. Yes. Q. And what circumstances do you consider show that there were not? A. Well, there were no signs of violence on his body other than the obvious injury to his wrist that would be in keeping with his having been involved in some sort of struggle or a violent act. There was no sign I understand of trampling down of vegetation and undergrowth in the area around his body. So that makes it highly unlikely that others could have been or were involved. Q. We are going to hear from a toxicologist. Have you had a chance to read that report? A. I have. Q. Does that assist you in your determinations? A. Well, we know that evidence was found in Dr Kelly's body and also on his person of him having consumed some particular medication. Q. Right. And what medication was that? A. That is Coproxamol. Q. And why does that assist in your determination? A. Well, it in itself is quite a dangerous medication taken in overdose because it can have particular effects on both breathing and also on the heart rhythm. LORD HUTTON: Just going back to the knife, Professor Hawton, you said it was very similar to one in his drawer. Now, we have been told, for very understandable reasons, that Mrs Kelly was not shown the knife. But when you say "very similar", are you drawing the inference that in fact it was probably a knife that had been in his drawer, is that what why you say "very similar"? A. Yes, I am my Lord. LORD HUTTON: Yes, quite. Thank you very much. Yes. MR DINGEMANS: We were dealing with the toxicologist's report. What do you understand the position to be in relation to that Coproxamol? A. Well, I understand that the evidence found from blood levels and from the contents of Dr Kelly's -- in Dr Kelly's stomach suggests that he had absorbed -- he had taken approximately 30 tablets -- I am sorry, the number of tablets is based on the number that were missing from the sheets he had with him. Q. Right. A. But that he had consumed well in access of a therapeutic dose of Coproxamol and given the blood levels and the relatively small amounts in his stomach, although he had vomited, I believe you have heard evidence he has vomited, but this would suggest he had consumed Coproxamol some time before death. Q. Does that assist you in determining whether or not any third party was involved? A. Well, for a third party to have been involved in the taking of the Coproxamol would, I imagine, have involved a struggle. I mean if somebody was forced to take a substantial number of tablets, it is difficult to believe there would not have been signs of a struggle. Q. That is a factor you have borne in mind? A. Yes. Q. Did you come, then, to any overall conclusion about whether or not Dr Kelly had committed suicide? A. I think that taking all the evidence together, it is well nigh certain that he committed suicide. Q. Before I turn to Dr Kelly's psychological state, can I just check what information you had available to you in producing this report? A. Yes. I have had a lot of information available. Shall I read -- Q. Can I just run through that? A. Yes. Q. First of all you have spoken to the coroner, is that right? A. Yes. Q. Who was the coroner? A. Mr Nicholas Gardiner, the Oxfordshire coroner. Q. I think you have seen a number of statements the family made to the police, is that correct? A. That is correct. Q. I think you have also seen various witness statements from Ms Absalom and some of the ambulance personnel? A. Yes. Q. The report by the forensic toxicologist, we are going to hear from him tomorrow? A. Yes. Q. Have you seen any other reports? A. As I said, I have seen the report of the Home Office forensic pathologist. Q. That is Dr Hunt? A. Yes. Q. And have you seen anything from Dr Kelly's GP? A. Yes, I have read his statement and also seen a copy of his GP records. Q. We have heard about e-mails that have been sent by Dr Kelly. Did you see those? A. E-mails sent -- I saw e-mails sent in some days before his death and I have seen e-mails that were sent by him on the day of his death or presumed day of his death. Q. Then I think you have also seen some other police statements from other personnel? A. Yes, I have. Q. Did you see the notes of his interview? We have seen them, on 4th July and 7th July and -- A. I have seen those, yes. Q. -- and 14th July? A. That is correct. Q. And we have also heard about him giving evidence before the Foreign Affairs Committee. Have you seen anything relating to that? A. I have viewed the video, the full videotape of that. Q. I understand you have also conducted some family interviews, is that right? A. I have interviewed Mrs Kelly and two of the daughters, Rachel and Ellen, and also his sister or half sister Sarah Pape, yes. Q. Have you spoken to anyone from the Baha'i? A. I spoke to Wendy Moman(?) who I believe is treasurer of the Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the UK. Q. Have you discussed this with the police at all? A. I have had discussions with Thames Valley Police, yes, that is correct. Q. And have you seen any materials that they have shown you? A. I have. Q. And I think you have also seen Dr Kelly's personnel record? A. I have. Q. Sorry, going back to Dr Kelly's psychological state. Can you put this in context, as it were, in relation to his work? A. Well, my understanding is that he had become increasingly busy over the two years or so -- this is an approximation -- preceding his death in that work appeared to occupy more and more of his time. When he was not -- when he was working and in the evenings he was frequently telephoned by people from this country and from abroad, presumably discussing his work, seeking information and so on. So I gained the impression that he had become more and more involved in his work and had taken virtually no time off from his working activities. Q. And was anything reported to you to be an effect on Dr Kelly as a result of that? A. Well, I think the first indication that was given to me was by Dr Kelly's wife, who, in the beginning of 2003 -- the beginning of this year, began to notice signs of tiredness and strain and she commented that she noticed he had begun to look a little older and to have less time for his outside interests. Q. Were there any other factors to set against that? A. Yes, I mean there was a particular factor of his daughter Ellen's wedding, in February, when I understand from all the family members I spoke to that he was in tremendous form and full of good humour and gave an excellent speech and was witty and so on. So he was obviously in reasonable condition then. Q. Coming to the end of May, we have obviously heard from Mrs Kelly yesterday. A. Hmm. Q. What was your understanding of his position? A. Well, that he was showing increasing signs of tiredness. In fact tiredness is a sort of theme running through the account from the family, increasing tiredness. I do not know if Mrs Kelly spoke about this yesterday but she told me she had become concerned about how he was going to cope with his retirement, because work had become such a major focus of his life. He was also frustrated about not getting back to Iraq, because obviously he had spent a tremendous amount of time there. And, you know, he was concerned about the people in Iraq and the suffering they were experiencing. Q. And did you understand the tiredness to improve? A. No, I think it -- I was informed that in fact it got worse and certainly by mid June all of the family were aware of this fact. Q. And how does that manifest itself? A. Well, I think it was particularly in his appearance, in that he looked exhausted. On the other hand, he would still drive himself to do things like, when he had the opportunity, I think you heard yesterday, to cut the large lawn at his home, and so on. But I think he got particularly tired after that. However, I was also told he was still able to walk very vigorously on his walks with his daughters. Q. We heard from Rachel yesterday about a conversation she had had with her father about his health. A. Yes. Q. Do you consider that significant at all? A. I do consider it significant. Dr Kelly was a person who did not encourage people to -- including his family -- probe into how he was feeling and thinking; and I think the fact that his daughter, Rachel, felt the need to say to him that she was concerned about him is evidence that things were not well with him. Q. We have also heard some of Dr Kelly's reaction reported by Mrs Kelly yesterday. Was there anything in that that is relevant? A. This is his reaction to -- Q. The fact that his name is coming out. A. It seemed to be extremely painful for him. Being a very private person, I think the idea that he would not only be questioned but this would be in public and televised -- this would be on television, was extremely difficult for him. Q. And the circumstances of his appearance itself before the Foreign Affairs Committee, you have seen the video. Is there anything that you can, from an expert perspective, help us with? A. Well, I watched part of it before I got involved at all in the Inquiry; and I remember thinking at the time that I was surprised that -- not about the questions he was asked but about the style of some of the questions, the questioning of someone who was obviously such a senior and important person in his field; and having watched the full video, I would confirm my -- you know, I would agree, if you like, with the impression that I had beforehand. There were clearly times during the interview when he became uncomfortable and almost seemed a little bit confused, I do not mean in a pathological sense, but he seemed quite uncertain. Q. What were the indications that you, from an expert point of view, would look at for that? A. Well, in terms of his -- the way he looked, when he looked down and moved in a slightly uncomfortable way and he looked, at times, rather sort of hot and flustered, but there were also, I understand, environmental circumstances which did not help. Q. Yes, we have heard it was a hot day; and we have heard that the fans were turned off. A. Hmm. Q. We have also heard Rachel's description of her father as he returned from that. Was there anything in that description which has assisted you? A. Yes. I think, again, I am relying, obviously, on the information -- the information you heard was very similar to the information I was given. There were no major discrepancies. He seemed to have been very disturbed -- distressed, rather, by that hearing. He gave the impression of having felt belittled by some of the questioning; and I gather he expressed, unusually for him, a certain degree of anger about a particular style of particular questioning that he received. She told me that when he came home to her house in Oxford where he was staying, he, using her words, appeared to be "shocked, broken and humiliated". This was obviously a very, very, very stressful experience for him. Q. We have also heard about his experience in front of the ISC on 16th July and Rachel's description of the supper they all had that night after Mrs Kelly had come up from Oxford, going home to his house on the evening of 16th July. Is there anything in any of those descriptions that particularly add to the picture you were developing? A. Well, as I understand it, he reported being less disconcerted by the ISC hearing. I think the striking point for me was the moment he left Rachel's house when she talked about a particularly haunted look in his eye, which was somewhat in contrast to how he had been during the meal. So it was the point at which he was leaving her. Also important, I think, is the fact that he arranged to meet her the following evening, the 17th. Q. What significance does that have? A. Well it suggests to me that it was probably unlikely he was thinking of suicide at that point in time. Q. Because? A. I think having become more aware about the nature of the relationship with his daughter, I doubt very much whether he would have arranged to meet her to go for a walk knowing that he was likely not to have been alive when it came to the point. Q. We have heard from Mrs Kelly about what happened on the Thursday morning. Is there anything that you take from those descriptions? A. Well, I gained the impression that during that morning there was an escalation in his distress, which became particularly marked, as I understand it, around late morning when he emerged from his study, which apparently was unusual for him. He would usually work through, after a coffee break, to lunch. I think Mrs Kelly described, yesterday, how he went into the sitting room and slumped in a chair. That was a particularly unusual thing for him to do. So one gains the impression of escalating distress during that morning. Q. And you have had a chance to look at his e-mails on that day? A. I have. Q. And you have been given phone records from the police or told of the phone calls that have been traced? A. Yes. Q. Was there anything, to you, that assists you in determining what escalated the stress? A. Well, I understand that around 11.18 he sent a series of e-mails to friends and colleagues who had sent him messages during the days beforehand. He obviously had not seen these because he had not been at home and he had only gone to his computer that morning. I got the impression he had written a series of e-mails offline and then sent them off all at the same time. Q. At 11.18. A. Yes. And these were to colleagues, ex colleagues and professional acquaintances; and the striking thing in those messages is that he talked, briefly -- he mentioned, briefly, the difficulties that he was facing, but he also talked about how he hoped to get back to Iraq and continue his work there. So there was also a sense of optimism at the same time. Q. Can I take you to an illustration of that, at COM/1/10? If you look towards the bottom of the screen you can see: "Dear David, "Sorry about your latest run in with the media. I hope you are not getting too much flack. As we both know only too well dealing with the media is always a balancing act and its always impossible to predict which way it will go. When you get it right everybody is in favour but when you get it wrong you don't see their feet for dust." We can see the response: "Many thanks for your thoughts. It has been difficult. Hopefully it will all blow over by the end of the week and I can travel to Baghdad and get on with the real work." Is that the type of e-mail you are referring to? A. Absolutely. Q. What does that illustrate for you? A. Well, it would suggest -- one cannot be definite about this -- that at that stage he still had optimism for the future and that it was probably unlikely that he had ideas or certainly definite ideas of suicide at that point in time. Obviously it is conceivable that he was presenting a different light in those e-mails but I think a logical conclusion would be that he was not thinking of suicide at that time. LORD HUTTON: I think this may be a convenient time to give the stenographers a short break. 3.15 pm: Short Break 3.20 pm: MR DINGEMANS: We were looking at the e-mails that Dr Kelly had received that morning. We know he received some Parliamentary Questions following up those that Mr Mackinlay had asked him about in the proceedings. Do you know whether any other Parliamentary Questions were received that morning? A. My understanding is that he received four further Parliamentary Questions. Q. Can I take you to a document COM/1/1? It appears this was received at 9.28. It says: "David, more PQs! but plenty of time for reply. I expect that Bryan will deal tomorrow. "James." We know there is a James who shares the office which is James Harrison. This has been taken from his computer. Can I take you to COM/1/2? It appears to be a Parliamentary Question needing to be answered by 8th September 2003, which I understand is when Parliament will sit again, and: "To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether his department has complied with Dr David Kelly's terms and conditions of employment in handling the matter of his discussions with Andrew Gilligan." Then there is another one at COM/1/4: "To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, on how many occasions Dr David Kelly spoke to BBC Radio 4 defence correspondent Andrew Gilligan; and whether his line managers were aware of this." Again it is from Mr Jenkin. Then COM/1/6: "To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what (a) Civil Service and (b) MoD rules and regulations may have been infringed by Dr David Kelly in talking to BBC radio defence correspondent Andrew Gilligan." Then the fourth one is at COM/1/8: "To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what disciplinary measures his department will take against Dr David Kelly." Those were questions which have now been extracted from his computer; and Mr Page, the Assistant Chief Constable, will give formal evidence about that tomorrow. LORD HUTTON: From Dr Kelly's computer? MR DINGEMANS: My Lord, yes. They appeared to have been annexed to the e-mail he received at 9.28. We have also heard about the other Parliamentary Questions he was answering, about his lists of contacts with journalists. Do you think any of those might have been relevant? A. Well, I think it is likely that he would have begun to perceive that the problem was escalating, the difficulties for him were escalating and that the prospects for an early resolution of his difficulties were diminishing. Q. We have heard from Mrs Kelly about how he seemed, going to sit down, and then at lunchtime being almost unable to speak. What do you derive from that? A. Well, that he was extremely preoccupied. I think, obviously I am deducing here, but that his inability or difficulty with communicating with her was that he was probably focused on the issues in his mind at that time rather than the interaction with his wife. Q. And we have also heard how she was unwell, went up to bed, thought he had left and he had not left at that stage, and then the phone rings again and he had left for his walk at that time. LORD HUTTON: I beg your pardon, can I just ask you Professor Hawton, I mean I think you have referred to this already, but could you just explain perhaps in a little more detail as to whether or not Dr Kelly was a communicative sort of man or whether he seemed to keep things to himself and bottled up his worries? A. I have used the term in my report of an "intensely private man". I think that does describe him. He clearly did not like talking about feelings that he had and difficulties that he was experiencing; and he was a very private man who kept things to himself in that respect. LORD HUTTON: And even to his family of whom he was obviously very fond. A. This was a consistent theme reported by all the family members that I spoke to. LORD HUTTON: Yes. MR DINGEMANS: We have also heard from Ruth Absalom, this morning, who said that he seemed perfectly normal to her when she met him about a mile away from their house. How is that consistent with the picture that you are portraying? A. Well, I think it is consistent with the notion that he had made a decision before that to end his life or try to end his life and certainly it is not an unusual experience in people who have died by suicide, for people who knew them or came into contact with them shortly beforehand to say that they seemed actually better than they had been shortly before suicide. And I think it is this -- it is having, in a sense, decided on how to deal with the problem that leads to a sort of sense of peace and calm. Q. So when do you believe that Dr Kelly is likely to have formed the intention? A. Well, it is my opinion that it is likely that he formed the opinion either during the morning, probably later in the morning or during the early part of the afternoon, before he went on that walk. Q. We have heard evidence from a Mr Broucher, who relayed a comment about Dr Kelly being found "dead in the woods" and he had at the time thought it a throwaway remark. He had attributed it, if he attributed it at all, to Iraqi agents. Then after hearing of Dr Kelly's suicide he thought perhaps it was something else. Can you assist with that at all? A. Well, I gained the impression talking to family members about that particular alleged statement that it was not a typical -- not that he would say that particularly -- communicate that, but it was the sort of throwaway comment he might make. I have also gathered that it is quite possible that it was not made at the time that was initially alleged but possibly a year beforehand. Q. We have seen now diaries. Mr Broucher thought it was February 2003. He did say it was a deep memory pocket. We have seen diaries which suggest that he has met Mr Broucher in February 2002 and Mr Broucher has said they only met once. So that may mean it is February 2002. Does that assist? A. I think it is pure coincidence. I do not think it is relevant to understanding Dr Kelly's death. LORD HUTTON: May I just go back a little, Professor? Rachel said that when she saw her father on the Tuesday that she thought he was having a nervous breakdown. Now lay people use the word nervous breakdown of course in a very general sense. But would you like to comment on that observation by Rachel? A. Yes. I asked her to try to, you know, be a bit clearer about that; and I gained the impression that what she was referring to was his clear state of anguish that she perceived. I think that was the signs of anguish that she perceived. I think that was the principal reason for that. LORD HUTTON: Yes, I see. Thank you. MR DINGEMANS: Do you consider Dr Kelly had developed any sort of psychiatric disorder before his death? A. I have thought very carefully about this; and my conclusion is that he was not suffering from a severe psychiatric disorder. Q. We have heard of his weight loss; and we have also heard about some of the sparkle going out of his eyes. Are those features relevant? A. Those are certainly relevant; but other features which suggest that he did not have a psychiatric disorder, and I am particularly thinking here of depression, is that his mood was predominantly reported as being quite upbeat in spite of all his difficulties, except at certain times. There was not a sense of a persistent depressive mood. His sleep, as far as we can gather from the family accounts, was not disturbed and his appetite was good. Q. And those are contra-indicators, are they? A. They are. Q. Can we turn to Dr Kelly's personality now? What was your view of his personality? A. Well, the first comment is that he was clearly a highly intelligent man, extremely meticulous, a person that dealt in facts rather than speculation, who clearly believed intensely in what he was doing. I think a comment was made by a family member that he really thought he was making a difference and a significant difference in what he was doing. I gained the impression that his identity, his self identity, how he perceived himself was increasingly tied up to his work. Everyone I have spoken to has said that he had a particular sense of loyalty and that trust and loyalty were particularly important to him. He was also a very courteous man and one not to seek the limelight. As I have said earlier, he was intensely private with regard to expressions and feelings and this was conveyed to other people, so that they did not intrude into how he was thinking or feeling. He virtually never seemed to be angry or to express anger. Q. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? A. Of course it can be a good thing in certain circumstances; but also if one bottles things up this can also have a very negative effect on a person. Q. We have heard a lot about him dealing in facts. Is that a relevant feature? A. I think it is relevant in the sense that some reports that have been made about what might or might not have been said need to be considered against that. I am thinking here particularly to people in the media they have to be considered against that characteristic. He seemed to be an extremely careful sort of person. But I think also it did mean that his reliance on facts meant that feelings tended to be kept very deep inside him. Q. We have heard that he was a weapons inspector, it must have put him in all sorts of difficult situations. Was that similar to the situation that he found himself in towards the end of his life? A. No, I think there was an important difference. One has heard about the situations he faced, for example, in Iraq, while cross-examining people, which sounded to me quite terrifying situations. I gather he could cope with those extremely well. I think the importance about the problems he was facing shortly before his death was that these really challenged his identity of himself, his self esteem, his self worth, his image of himself as a valued and loyal employee and as a significant scientist. Q. And in that respect some of the comments reported of him being middle level, et cetera, how are they likely to have affected him? A. Well, I can only really go on particularly his wife's account that these were really very upsetting for him. Q. Was there any other character trait that you considered relevant? A. He appears to have been somewhat of a perfectionist. Q. And what does that actually mean? A. I think he liked things to be just so and wanted to be sure that, you know, things were correct; but it also extended to being a little uncomfortable with change; and I am thinking particularly of change within the household and so on. His wife talked about how, you know, he did not like the house -- she found it quite difficult to arrange for changes in the nature of the household, the layout of the household; that he liked things to remain as they had been. Q. And were there any other traits that you consider relevant? A. Well, he was also -- having said that, you know, he was really -- showed flexibility. He had to cope with changes to his work schedule, often at the last moment, and frustrations with changes in scheduling and so on. So while I said he did not like change in his personal life, in his work life he seemed to be very adaptable and able to cope in that way. Other aspects are -- we have talked a lot about his work life. He did have outside interests. Q. What do you understand those to have been? A. He was -- well, obviously his family. He had a very considerable interest in his family. He was devoted to them. But in terms of hobbies and interests, he was keen on sports, particularly rugby and athletics. He was interested in local history, gardening, horticulture events and cribbage, particularly at the local pub, although I think a lot of these interests had diminished in the sense of him actively pursuing them during the last few years because of the demands of work. Q. Is that a good or bad thing? A. Well, I think combined with the fact that he hardly ever took holidays it must have meant that he really did not have much relief from the stresses of his work situation. Q. Can I turn to Dr Kelly's background? What do you understand to have been his relevant background? A. Well, he was brought up in Wales in Pontypridd. I understand that his father went away to war about six months after the marriage to Dr Kelly's mother and that when he returned, and I believe this was a couple of years or so later, the marital relationship did not continue. They did not continue together again after that. So that Dr Kelly was brought up in a household with his grandparents and because his mother was working much of the time, the rearing of Dr Kelly fell to -- the responsibility fell to his grandparents, particularly his grandmother. Q. Did you have any view of those relationships? A. Well, I got an impression that he was very close to his grandmother and that he spoke fondly of her. I did not gain -- was unable to form an impression of his relationship with his grandfather. Q. And do you know whether Dr Kelly talked very much about his mother at all? A. I think he spoke about her very little to the family. Q. And did you know anything about her background? A. I did not know much about her -- I knew little at all about her background. Q. And was there anything that you have been sent or been told about the mother that is relevant? A. Well I understand that she died relatively young, that she had had a stroke in her 40s and died a year or two after that, so I think it was at the age of 47, shortly before Dr Kelly's 20th birthday. Q. And did that have any effect on Dr Kelly? A. I think from what I can gather, and of course he did not speak about this too much to people, but one gets the impression that it caused him quite a lot of difficulty. He was about to go to university and I think there were comments that he had some difficulties, you know, coping with his academic work in the first year; and I understand -- I cannot say this for sure -- that he had to deal with his mother's estate. Q. Right. What about Dr Kelly's medical history? A. It was unremarkable in the sense that he appeared to be a fit and healthy person. He had had very little contact with his general practitioner and in particular there was no history of psychiatric problems. Q. And we have heard reports that he was becoming tired towards the end of his life; is there anything physically that might help in that respect? A. Yes. The forensic pathologist's report indicates that he had quite marked, for his age, narrowing of the arteries to his heart, suggestive of him developing coronary heart disease, and it is possible that that could have contributed to his tiredness. Q. What might be another contributory factor? A. Clearly the stresses and strains that he was facing. Q. Were there any other potential problem areas? A. He worried a little about money. I think it was a general trait, you know, that he was concerned that, you know, if there are extra expenditures -- I think you have been told that he was concerned about his pension, the size of his pension, because he started pension payments somewhat later than usual because of his academic -- his working academia. But there is no indication that he had major financial problems at the time of his death. There are obviously concerns that he would have had about his wife's physical problems which I think you talked about yesterday. Other than that, I do not think there were particular problems or issues. Q. And alcohol consumption; was that a problem in his history? A. Certainly not. He had stopped drinking as I understand it at the time of his conversion to the Baha'i faith. Q. Previous consumption? A. I would describe it from what I have been told as a normal social level of consumption. Q. What factors would protect Dr Kelly against suicide? A. One would obviously be or might have been his family and the importance of his family to him. And another might have been his faith, his conversion to the Baha'i faith. Q. And anything else that would have assisted in protecting him against -- A. Well, if he could have shared his problems with other people, I think maybe that could have been a factor that might have mitigated a suicide. Q. Have you considered, now, with the benefit of hindsight that we all have, what factors did contribute to Dr Kelly's death? A. I think that as far as one can deduce, the major factor was the severe loss of self esteem, resulting from his feeling that people had lost trust in him and from his dismay at being exposed to the media. Q. And why have you singled that out as a major factor? A. Well, he talked a lot about it; and I think being such a private man, I think this was anathema to him to be exposed, you know, publicly in this way. In a sense, I think he would have seen it as being publicly disgraced. Q. What other factors do you think were relevant? A. Well, I think that carrying on that theme, I think that he must have begun -- he is likely to have begun to think that, first of all, the prospects for continuing in his previous work role were diminishing very markedly and, indeed, my conjecture that he had begun to fear he would lose his job altogether. Q. What effect is that likely to have had on him? A. Well, I think that would have filled him with a profound sense of hopelessness; and that, in a sense, his life's work had been not wasted but that had been totally undermined. LORD HUTTON: Could you just elaborate a little on that, Professor, again? As sometimes is the case in this Inquiry, witnesses give answers and further explanation is obvious, but nonetheless I think it is helpful just to have matters fully spelt out. What do you think would have caused Dr Kelly to think that the prospects of continuing in his work were becoming uncertain? A. Well, I think, my Lord, that first of all, there had been the letter from Mr Hatfield which had laid out the difficulties that Dr Kelly, you know, is alleged to have got into. LORD HUTTON: Yes. A. And in that letter there was also talk that should further matters come to light then disciplinary proceedings would need to be instigated. LORD HUTTON: Yes. A. And then of course there were the Parliamentary Questions which we have heard about, which suggested that questions were going to be asked about discipline in Parliament. LORD HUTTON: Yes. Thank you. MR DINGEMANS: Were there any other relevant factors? A. I think the fact that he could not share his problems and feelings with other people, and the fact that he, according to the accounts I have been given, actually increasingly withdrew into himself. So in a sense he was getting further and further from being able to share the problems with other people, that is extremely important. Q. Were there any other factors which you considered relevant? A. Those are the main factors that I consider relevant. Q. And is there anything else relating to Dr Kelly's death that is relevant that you want to say to his Lordship? A. No. No, my Lord. LORD HUTTON: Yes. MR DINGEMANS: And is there anything further that you would like to say? A. Yes. I would just like to thank all the people who have helped me do my investigation into this case, this sad case. I would particularly like to thank Dr Kelly's family who have all been willing to speak to me and have spoken to me extremely openly; and I would like to say that I only hope that the healing process following this dreadful event can soon begin for them and that they can be allowed to get on with that. Q. One question, sorry, that I forgot to ask was this: you have had the benefit of judging everything with hindsight. You have had the benefit of exploring Dr Kelly's psychology and his make up in a way that no-one could have done at the time. A. Hmm. Q. If I was a lay person before Dr Kelly's death, would I have had any chance of knowing the possible outcomes? A. I think for a lay person then certainly not. I think it would not have been an outcome one would have predicted. LORD HUTTON: Yes. Thank you very much indeed Professor Hawton. Does that bring us to the end of the evidence for today? MR DINGEMANS: Yes, my Lord. LORD HUTTON: Thank you very much. We will sit again at 10.30 tomorrow. 3.50 pm: Hearing adjourned until 10.30 am the following day