I have been asked whether I could cover the issues surrounding the lack of an inquest in respect of the tragic death of Dr David Kelly, including the withholding of the post-mortem files.
For some background, see here.
On one hand, this is tempting. A source-based and skeptical approach seems appropriate, especially in view of the range of conspiracy stories this death has attracted. It could also be helpful for someone to explain the applicable law.
On the other hand, do I really want to engage with those passionately committed to their conspiracy theories?
Are there serious questions outstanding about the death of Dr Kelly? Questions which require a calm, skeptical, reasoned, source-based, and legally-informed approach?
Or am I just one blogpost away from Nuttersville?
Please do let me know any thoughts.
No purely anonymous comments will be published; always use a name for ease of reference by other commenters.