Senior Tory joins in demands for inquest on death of Kelly

His call came after a group of prominent experts described the official explanation for the scientist's death seven years ago as "extremely unlikely".

Ministers are already said to be considering new evidence submitted to them and could order a new inquest.

Dr Kelly's body was found in woods near his Oxfordshire home in July 2003 after he was identified as the source of a BBC story claiming the Government "sexed up" its now notorious dossier on Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction including the suggestion Iraq was capable of firing biological or chemical weapons within 45 minutes.

In the outcry that followed, then Prime Minister Tony Blair appointed Lord Hutton to head a public inquiry into his death. Unusually, the then lord chancellor, Lord Falconer, suspended an inquest and later ruled the inquiry should take over the role of ruling on the cause of death.

Lord Howard – who is now a Tory peer – said the latest intervention by experts to have queried the official version of events confirmed his belief there should now be a proper inquest.

"In view of the growing number of relevant questions that have arisen and cast doubt on on the conclusions reached by Lord Hutton, I believe it would now be appropriate for a full inquest to be held," he said. "Recent evidence by the first police officer on the scene, together with new statements by doctors raise serious questions which should be considered.

"This has been on my mind for quite a while and recent events have crystallised my view."

Lord Hutton concluded Dr Kelly took his own life and that the principal cause of death was "bleeding from incised wounds to his left wrist which Dr Kelly had inflicted on himself with the knife found beside his body".

He also found that the scientist took an overdose of co-proxamol tablets – a painkiller commonly used for arthritis – and that he was suffering from an undiagnosed heart condition. In a letter to The Times, however, eight experts insisted the conclusion was unsafe. They argued that a severed ulnar artery, the wound found to Dr Kelly's wrist, was unlikely to be life-threatening unless an individual had a blood clotting deficiency.

"Insufficient blood would have been lost to threaten life," they wrote.

"Absent a quantitative assessment of the blood lost and of the blood remaining in the great vessels, the conclusion that death occurred as a consequence of haemorrhage is unsafe." The signatories included a former coroner, Michael Powers, a former deputy coroner, Margaret Bloom, and Julian Bion, a professor of intensive care medicine.

Dr Powers has been leading calls for a new inquest, claiming Lord Hutton, who was not a coroner, should not have been left to find out how Dr Kelly died. He believes there is not enough evidence to conclude "beyond reasonable doubt" the expert took his own life.

Other questions to have been raised since the Hutton Inquiry concluded in 2004 include the minimal amount of blood found at the scene and the apparent difference between the numbers of co-proxamol tablets police said were missing from his home and the amount found in Dr Kelly's system.

Lord Howard's intervention comes as Attorney General Dominic Grieve and Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke are said to be exploring how best to allay concern over shortcomings in the official version of Dr Kelly's death.

Mr Grieve could ask the High Court to order a full inquest if he believes there is enough evidence to cast doubt on Lord Hutton's verdict.

Concerns have also been raised after it emerged Lord Hutton also ruled evidence relating to the death of Dr Kelly should be kept secret for 70 years.

Medical records including the post-mortem report will remain classified until after all those with a direct interest in the case are dead.

[email protected]

Comment: Page 10.