No Inquest for Dawn Sturgess 340

The killing of poor Dawn Sturgess was much the most serious of the events in Salisbury and Amesbury that attracted international attention. Yet nobody has been charged, no arrest warrant issued and no inquest held.

The inquest for Dawn Sturgess has today been yet again postponed, for the fourth time, and for the first time no new prospective date has been given for it to open. Alarmingly, the coroner’s office are referring press enquiries to Scotland Yard’s Counter Terrorism Command – which ought to have no role in an inquest process supposed to be independent of the police.

Congratulations to Rob Slane and to John Helmer for their excellent work in following this.

It appears very probable that the independent coroner’s inquiry process is going to be cancelled and, as in the case of David Kelly, replaced by a politically controlled “public inquiry” with a trusty or malleable judge in charge, like Lord Hutton of Kincora. This is because the truth of Dawn Sturgess’ death in itself destroys key elements of the government’s narrative on what happened in Salisbury.

Simply put, the chemical that killed Dawn Sturgess could not have been the same that allegedly poisoned the Skripals. Charlie Rowley is adamant that he found it in a packaged and fully sealed perfume bottle, in a charity bin. Furthermore he states that it was a charity bin he combed through regularly and it had not been there earlier, in the three months between the alleged attack on the Skripals and his taking it from the bin.

The government narrative that “Boshirov and Petrov” used that perfume bottle to attack the Skripals, then somehow resealed the cellophane, and disposed of it in the bin, depends on the Russians having a tiny plastic resealing technology concealed on them (and why bother?), on their taking a long detour to dispose of the “perfume” in a charity bin – the one method that guaranteed it being found and reused – and the “perfume” then achieving a lengthy period of invisibility in the bin before appearing again three months later.

Those are only some of a number of inconvenient facts. Perfume does not come as a gel; it cannot both have been applied as a gel to the Skripals’ doorknob and sprayed on to Dawn Sturgess’ wrists. Gels do not spray. Neither Porton Down nor the OPCW was able to state it was from the same batch as the chemical allegedly used on the Skripals’ house.

Then there is the fascinating fact that it took eleven days of intensive searching for a vial of liquid in a small modern home, for the police to find the perfume bottle sitting on the kitchen counter.

Nobody has been charged with the manslaughter or murder of Dawn Sturgess. There is still an international arrest warrant out for Boshirov and Petrov for the attack on the Skripals. Very interestingly indeed, this warrant has never been changed into the names of Chepiga and Mishkin.

From the moment I heard of the attack on Dawn Sturgess I worried that she – a person down on her luck and living in a hostel – was exactly the kind of person the powerful and wealthy would view as a disposable human being if her death fitted their narrative. The denial of an inquest for her, and the complete lack of interest by the mainstream media in the obvious nonsense of the official story that ties her to the Skripal poisoning, tends to confirm these fears. What Dawn Sturgess’ death tells us, beyond doubt, is that the government narrative is fake and the Skripal and Sturgess cases are two separate incidents. Which makes a local origin of the chemical very much more likely. No wonder the government is determined to avoid the inquest.

I was struck today that the tame neo-con warmongering “Chemical weapons expert” Hamish De Bretton Gordon, former head of the British Army’s chemical weapons unit, appeared on Sky News. He was being interviewed on use of white phosphorous by Turkey in Syria and repeatedly tried to deflect the narrative on to alleged chemical weapons use by Syrian government forces, arguing that the present crisis was the moral responsibility of those who opposed western military action against Assad. But what particularly struck me was that he appeared by Skype – from Salisbury. When you look at the British government’s own chemical weapons expertise, you are continually led back to Salisbury, perhaps not surprisingly given the location of Porton Down.

I am aiming to make a full documentary film on the Salisbury events entitled “Truth and the Skripals”, based around the questions raised on this blog. I shall be looking to launch crowdfunding for the documentary shortly, probably within the week.


Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations



Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

340 thoughts on “No Inquest for Dawn Sturgess

1 2 3
  • Blissex

    Another thing that has never happened is a number of “The SUN” scoops/interviews with the Skripals, the hospital staff/doctors, and other people involved. Zero. Apparently “The SUN” is no longer at all interested in sensational scoops.

    • John Goss

      It’s much worse than that Blissex. Sergei Skripal is known to be untrustworthy by his history of selling secrets to the west. Not so his daughter Yulia. My assumption is she inherited her mother’s genes. Her mother knew nothing about Sergei’s secret life with our secret services.

      The last time Yulia spoke to her family in Russia she apologised for previous accusations regarding her cousin Viktoria (no doubt fed to her by UK spooks). She explained that she now had access to the internet and knew everything. As far as I can gather she has not been allowed to speak with her family since. Sergei has though but then he is so malleable in the hands of Pablo Miller’s cronies it is understandable. He stuck to the script.

  • Ort

    I applaud Craig’s intention to produce a “Truth and the Skripals” documentary, but reading the comments thread refreshes my divided mind, so to speak.

    To draw a parallel: I am one of those naturally curious and skeptical types easily derided as a “truther”, although not the militant, obsessed sub-type who give truth-seeking a bad name. So I am interested in JFK assassination research, and visit certain Internet sites on the topic to see if anything new and interesting is being bruited about.

    One researcher specializes in the murder of Dallas police officer J.D. Tippet, who was allegedly shot dead by Lee Harvey Oswald during his supposed flight from the Dealey Plaza assassination scene. This researcher has gone over chaotic and fragmentary evidence, including scrutinizing police-radio transcripts, to an impressive degree; he checks, cross-checks, compares, and contrast divergent and contradictory official and unofficial accounts in order to reveal the most likely, truthful explanation possible.

    But when I read his scrupulously-sourced posts, and discussions and debates with fellow researchers, I remind myself that they are picking over disputed events that occurred over half a century ago– 56 years, to be precise. This excellent researcher, like others in comparable circumstances, has definitively established that the official narrative is false– but he has not unearthed any hitherto-unknown key evidence to decisively establish what really happened.

    I bring this up to say that reading Skripal-related comments threads induces déjà vu. This is partly because they’re effectively continuations of the “meta” commentary that has been simmering along since the dodgy incidents that inspire them, but also because they are so similar to the JFK discussion.

    I’m not deriding or mocking anyone for this, but it seems as if good-faith “truthers”, i.e. curious skeptics, typically remain in a recursive loop. So, as we see here and in every other discussion thread on the topic, every element of the narrative is revisited over and over. The discrepancies and contradictions are teased out, the obvious mendacity and deception of official sources is reaffirmed, etc.

    But, as with JFK, these “people’s inquiries” always end by correctly repudiating the false official narrative, affirming that the truth of the matter remains unknown, and typically calling on authorities to acknowledge both the inadequacy of the existing official account, and the necessity of conducting a new transparent investigation to finally get to the truth.

    That’s my divided mind: appreciating Craig’s responsible “trutherism” on the topic, and welcoming his proposed documentary– while fearing that if Internet discussion forums are still a “thing” 56 years from now, they will feature familiar discussions and disputes over perfume-bottle wrapping, what that pair of Russian guys were really up to in Salisbury, etc.– ad infinitum.

    • J

      I think you’re missing the point. Key facts are available to be known, but right now cannot be encountered by the majority, since established media deny, obfuscate, distort and outright lie with alarming equanimity. Which is the whole point of making an independent documentary. Such key facts will surely help any audience toward a more realistic and informed understanding, however they choose to interpret them.

    • Blissex

      «But, as with JFK, these “people’s inquiries” always end by correctly repudiating the false official narrative, affirming that the truth of the matter remains unknown»

      And that’s very important: the english government has been creating a number of implausible conspiracy theories about the Skripal affair, and arguing against them has the good effect of helping an increasing (hopefully) share of the public to be skeptical about other implausible conspiracy theories, and in general propaganda by “the establishment”, so that there be less support for twisted policies and manipulating politicians. Maybe in 100-200 years historians will have access to the files of the agencies or the diaries of the participants that explain what actually happened.
      For now what is needed is even just rejection of obvious propaganda. It may be inevitable that “the establishment” do their dirty deeds above the heads of those they regard as “gullible simpletons”, and we should let them get away with them, but not with the propaganda that puts a ridiculous spin on those dirty deeds.

    • Mark

      Ort – We have wondered off topic a little but what has kept the JFK assassination simmering is the fact that new information has over the years slowly and steadily come to light. The withheld Zapruder film being made public initiated the HSCA investigation. During this time the Church Committee looked into the rather unorthodox behaviour of the CIA. Then there was further revelations re the veracity of the autopsy. Then we had Oliver Stones film and the JFK Records act leading to the ARRB and the eventual release of a gigantic quantity of official files (enough to keep researchers going for decades). The Air Force One radio recordings also emerged having been locked away in a Pentagon desk with some very incriminating conversation. Now there is substantial evidence emerging that the Zapruder film itself has been altered and is not a camera original film. Where and how the death of JD Tippit fits into this is a whole new sub plot and mystery. This JFK stuff really is the conspiracy that keeps on giving, every time you think its dying out it suddenly re ignites. Over 56 years the Warren Commissions report has been completely shot to pieces and at the time they said it would be the Rock of Gibraltar standing the test of time. No chance of that in the internet age of information.

    • Allan Howard

      I don’t think it’s so much a case of WHAT happened Ort, so much as what DIDN’T happen, and also thinking about it all in terms of Cui Bono. There are many big holes and implausibles in the official narrative, but if I had to choose just ONE, it would be the inconceivability of two people – who came into contact with a nerve agent several hours earlier (and presumably at different times, unless they jointly closed the front door together) – becoming incapacitated in exactly the same moment, and so much so that one didn’t have the time to call an ambulance before THEY were incapacitated. The chances of THAT happening are absolute zero. They were acting!

      As for JFK, I take it you’ve seen the series The Men Who Killed Kennedy, and Part 9 in particular. I was already most of the way ‘there’, and THAT just confirmed it for me. Anyway, here’s a link to it for anyone who hasn’t seen it:–hA&index=9

    • Tom Welsh

      “It often happens that, if a lie be believed only for an hour, it has done its work, and there is no further occasion for it”.

      – Swift, The Examiner, 1715.

    • Tony

      What really happened is that LBJ ordered the assassination.
      He knew he was about to be dumped as vice president and that the scandal surrounding Billy Sol Estes and Bobby Baker could even send him to prison. That is a very powerful motive.

      It is not a coincidence that the shooting took place in Johnson’s home state of Texas. Johnson and his men planned the route of the motorcade. They chose a route that was about seven miles long when a different route to the Trade Mart was only about 4 miles long!

      According to Evelyn Lincoln, Kennedy’s secretary, Dallas was repeatedly deleted from the itinerary and repeatedly re-instated. This is highly suspicious. The mayor of Dallas was Earl Cabell, a Johnson man and brother of Charles Cabell who was sacked from the CIA by Kennedy following the ‘Bay of Pigs’.

      The head of the Secret Service was James Rowley, a close associate of LBJ. His men failed to carry out its own procedures to protect the president.

      Oswald was silenced by Jack Ruby who was introduced to Congressman Richard Nixon in 1947 as ‘one of Lyndon Johnson’s boys’.

      Ruby later implicated LBJ in the Kennedy assassination (a very dangerous thing to do):

      Oswald’s claim that he was a ‘patsy’ is true and that is why he was killed.

  • pete

    I suppose the fundamental point Craig is making in his excellent piece is that Dawn Sturgess is a pawn in an information war, an attempt to manipulate facts in order to give credence to a particular narrative spun by the government for its own ends. Gilbert Mercier clarifies this perception rather better than I can in his piece in the news junkie post back in March:
    As of writing I am more convinced by what Craig says than by any of the assertions regarding the matter in the main stream media, for this reason I will gladly contribute to the cost of any documentary he may make about the Skripal affair.

  • SIS

    The Skripal event was a total scam, Psyop, perception management operation. The Dawn Sturgess event, a “trigger follow up” event, used to trigger the perception of the public. Such follow up “trigger events” are used all the time by the state and media. A recent example was the “stabbing terrorist” event, again in Manchester last week or so, used as a trigger event to re-trigger the mass brainwashing over the fabricated terror attack at Manchester Arena. (Must watch: Rich Planet documentary on that).

    Skripal and daughter are lving under new identities.

    Dawn Sturgess if even a real person, and not made up, assuming a real person and dead, was likely a victim of a drug overdose, and nothing to do with any farcically concocted nerve agent.

    Critical thinking is the key to seeing through the lies in the media.

    • Ian

      Critical thinking may be one thing. Believing ridiculous websites like Rich Planet is another. A site that believes every terror attack is ‘fabricated’, despite the mass of evidence, believes in UFO’s and all the associated claptrap, and even pegs the Croydon Cat Killer as a ‘psyop’ operation. Lol. This is where internet conspiracy nonsense leads you. To spout gibberish, and believe every third-rate alien monster scare possible. Puts the Daily Star to shame.

      • Tom Welsh

        “A site that believes every terror attack is ‘fabricated’, despite the mass of evidence, believes in UFO’s and all the associated claptrap, and even pegs the Croydon Cat Killer as a ‘psyop’ operation”.

        That appears to be a very fallacious argument – although, of course, it isn’t an argument at all. Evidence? You calim that the Web site is unreliable, but you give no reasons for believing that (other than your opinion).

        As it happens, it seems to me that most “terror attacks” are invented. Just like the “security theatre” we can see around us every day, they are “terror theatre”. What’s more the two are symbiotic: without the terror theatre, security theatre would be much harder to justify.

        That excludes by far the greatest, bloodiest and most common terror attacks: those carried out by governments. Whether “terrorists” perpetrated 9/11 – killing about 3,000 people – pales into insignificance when we know perfectly well who perpetrated the attacks on Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria and Yemen – among others – which killed at least 1,000 times as many.

      • George McI

        I had a look at this Rich Planet thing and it seems to me to do what David Icke does i.e. to link all conspiracy theories to e.g. UFO visitation, reptiles from the fourth dimension, ancient cataclysms etc. And any source that tells you “You will be stunned!” sounds like sideshow entertainment stuff. The crop circle section on Rich Planet tells me “The evidence presented will leave you in no doubt…” which prompts me to think, “Well since you have figured out my response, you obviously don’t need me.” When you see all sorts of colourful theories getting banded about, it actually becomes dull. Yes, the moon is artificial, there are other intelligent species living under us, we are living inside a virtual reality generator à la those Matrix movies. (This last is one that Icke has been peddling. He doesn’t seem to realise that it negates the very concept of proof.) The net effect of this conspiracy saturation is to emphasises the mainstream media notion that all conspiracy theory is for nutters (while conveniently overlooking mainstream media conspiracy theories like Russian cyber interference, Skripal etc.)

        • Herbie

          If you do a little research on UFOs, you’ll see that most or all of the stories come from mainstream media, the USAF and film and so on.

          They weren’t created by alternative media.

          They’re fictions created by elite media and associates.

          “we are living inside a virtual reality generator à la those Matrix movies. (This last is one that Icke has been peddling. He doesn’t seem to realise that it negates the very concept of proof.)”

          Thing is, Plato said more or less the same thing. Shakespeare too.

          What they mean is that you’re living through a contrived drama, even playing a part in it, though it’s scripted by others.

          Brexit, and the Dems v Trump nonsense are wonderful examples. Think of the Groundhog Day nature of these three year long dramas. Then look at who’s funding the main players.

          You’ll see similar things going on if you look at who’s funding the rise of the Right and its online media, and their relationship to those funding Left online media.

          And again, you’ll see it in those behind the rise of Right wing politicians in Europe, and their relationship to those who were funding the Left.

          “The net effect of this conspiracy saturation is to emphasises the mainstream media notion that all conspiracy theory is for nutters (while conveniently overlooking mainstream media conspiracy theories like Russian cyber interference, Skripal etc.)”

          Aye. That’s the idea.

        • Hatuey

          Well, Ayer and various others have struggled with the problem of knowledge — can we ever really know anything? — and the bottom line is that it’s up to us as individuals to decide what we will prioritise and disregard, regard as truth and untruth, etc. It’s not something new; sceptics have been grappling with this stuff for hundreds of years.

          As for the idea that we live in some sort of construct invented by the media or whoever, again, you could have said that hundreds if not thousands of years ago. For example, do you think all of those people in medieval times — just as intelligent as any of us — swallowed the God construct? Back then if you didn’t buy the narrative you were likely to be done in.

          If things have changed, then, they have changed for the better. It’s relatively easy to determine what is most likely junk and what is worth looking at too. If they talk about it on mainstream news or the discovery channel, it’s probably not worth looking at. The stuff about aliens is a good example; it’s wall to wall on some of my channels.

          Video is a terribly corruptive way of communicating ideas and I’d suggest it has a big part to play in the apparent increase in crazy stuff going around. Five million people watch a YouTube video about 911 and four million of them convince themselves they are structural engineers for a week or two, using phrases like “controlled demolition”, etc. It’s dire.

          Of course, one of the big reasons video is so potent is because most people are too lazy to read books and devote time to learning. But video is a really inefficient way of delivering information. As s guess, I’d say it takes about 30 minutes of video to communicate about 100 words of text.

          If your only or primary source of information is video or TV, you basically aren’t worth talking to in my opinion. And you’re probably insane.

      • Andyoldlabour


        I agree Ian, you cannot just go around spouting nonsense about terror attacks not really happening, because it is an insult to the victims and their friends and family.
        I was working in London for a large company when the 7/7 attacks happened, and one of our colleagues was badly injured in the tube incident.

      • Deb O'Nair

        Rich Hall does have a scatter gun approach but he is nonetheless diligent, tenacious and persistent. My view is that when you are dealing with mass deception and government lies you are dealing with a construct that has multiple layers of perception. The psyop narratives are crafted so that ill-informed casual observers will be convinced at the slightest hint of the official narrative from the media and then you have something more complex going on for the more informed, questioning types. Some of these narratives are very well thought out and diversions, red-herrings and linguistic traps abound, the point is to convince enough sceptics in order to create confusion and disagreement in which those that may perceive the actualities can be side-lined as one group of conspiracy theorists amongst many. The Rich Hall investigation into the Madeleine McCann affair is a good example of the diligent and comprehensive investigation into a highly suspicious event which has been controlled and managed by the UK government from the get-go, whereas other films I’ve seen leave me wondering why he even bothers – as the saying goes ‘don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater’.

        • Ian

          What is very funny about these kind of UFO/giant lizards sites is that their followers, as here, stoutly proclaim how they can see through all of the mainstream media, and are critical thinkers, and then proceed to swallow the most egregious, laughable nonsense on an internet site, because it isn’t the ‘fake’ mainstream media. No cognitive dissonance there at all, oh no.

  • John Manning

    Dawn Sturgess may not be the only casualty from the Skripal poisoning. Where are Yulia and Segei. They have moved from British custody to “never to be heard from again”. In Yulia’s only media interview she stated that she wished to return to Russia. So why has she now disappeared without trace in British custody.

      • Trowbridge H. Ford

        How can anyone say that when Gudrun Loftus,, a German language expert Williams worked with. fell down the stairs backwards when she went to an early morning meeting at St John’s College, Oxford after she said she would continue Williams ‘ work, and Steve Rawlings was Killed by Dervinter Sivia, who apparently found her body, after he raised the matter after a high dinner at the college?

        Britain’s covert state is Murder, Inc,. when it becomes necessary!

    • Shatnersrug

      That must have taken a lot of work. It does have quite a few terms in it that point to the author being a romantic American

      No welshman would every go into a candy store, sweet shops are what they’re known as in these isles. Holmes would never say “smart-assed” he would never use ass lest to refer to a small horse, the term ARSE would never be used by a man of Holmes background. You’d be hard pushed to find tide washing powder in the UK Persil of Ariel being more likely

      Besides that though it’s quite a work. And extremely entertaining.

      And Cass worthy of Holmes and Watson

  • N_

    Gotta start with Toxic Dagger before talking about small bottles of anything. If there’s a funny side to this it’s got to be the video footage from inside the international coin dealer’s shop.

  • Curious

    Why no interest in the face in Zizzi’s mirror?

    There are two widely-published photos of Sergei and Yulia “at Zizzi’s” taken in different years. The photo which appears to be the more recent, indicates that Sergei knew the photographer, who shared their table along with a fourth person, whose glass is also visible. The photographer inadvertently took his own picture because of the mirror just behind the Skripals.

    Since the photographer (and friend) appear to have been the last people who saw them before their collapse, the UK government should have identified him as a major person of interest to interview. Its lack of interest speaks for itself.

    • Allan Howard

      They were having their picture taken for the media, to be passed on to them after doing their act of becoming incapacitated etc AND at the point where they are supposedly identified, first off Sergei (and a ‘female companion’), and then the next day Yulia, his daughter. The ‘authors’ of the script wanted to milk as much ‘news’ out of the saga as they possibly could, and it wouldn’t have been the same if they had identified them both at the same time. And THAT’s why they left it until the afternoon of the NEXT day before ‘identifying’ DS Nick Bailey. And let’s face it, the story wouldn’t have had anywhere NEAR the impact that it DID have if it had only been Sergei Skripal who had been ‘poisoned’, but throw in a young, completely innocent woman, and a brave heroic cop who went to their rescue and then ended up getting ‘poisoned’ himself, and voilà, you have the making of a movie.

      And it WAS a movie! A fairy-tale!

    • Tom Welsh

      “The photographer inadvertently took his own picture because of the mirror just behind the Skripals”.

      Ah, such world-class tradecraft. To my mind, such grotesque incompetence points directly to the British “intelligence services”.

    • Mighty Drunken

      There is probably no interest because the photographer in the mirror is Alexander Skripal, Sergei’s son. The images were probably taken from Yulia’s social media sites so will be from awhile ago and taken by people where she had easy access to their photos.

    • Robyn

      Their ‘reflection’ is nothing but self serving comments from this bunch of MSM hypocrites now that it affects them. Not a word about Julian Assange’s appalling treatment (torture). As for the Leader of the Opposition putting in his twopence worth, he’s the lickspittle who has not responded to a single email (of four) I have recently sent him about Julian Assange. They all take their marching orders from the US. Beyond disgusting.

  • Allan Howard

    My apologies (for so many posts), but I just thought of something that I’ve wondered about a few times since the Salisbury saga….. I’m not really a football fan (I’m more into cricket and tennis and snooker and darts), but I think I would be right in saying that any country that is hosting the World Cup Football Tournament does a ‘countdown’, and when it gets to 100 days to go, they have a batch of pre-prepared promo videos which are distributed to TV networks all around the world. Now in the case of Russia, THAT was on the Tuesday, a couple of days after the ‘poisonings’, but in actual fact, the very next day after the story broke. I used to watch RT News quite a lot at the time, and I seem to recall there being three promos that were being shown on RT on the day – ie the Tuesday – one with a sequence of famous ‘old’ footballers doing the thing where they are heading a ball etc, just for fifteen/twenty seconds each, and then one with some dolphins in a seaworld-type place balancing a football on their nose(s) and other tricks AND then diving (as happens in football on occasion!), and the OTHER one I can’t quite recall, except that I think there was lots of people dressed up in colourfull costumes and music and dancing.

    And the reason I mention it is because ordinarily the promos would have been shown on news bulletins (towards the end) in the UK (and numerous countries around the world), and I’ve wondered on a few occasions if they WEREN’T shown here at all because of what (supposedly) happened on the Sunday in Salisbury. I mean I don’t recall exactly when Putin and the Ruskies were initially being blamed for the ‘poisonings’ (or suspected of being responsible), but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was the Monday evening, and of course at THAT stage, the Novichok was an ‘unknown substance’. But if the promos WEREN’T aired – and it seems unlikely that they WOULD have been under the circumstances – then the ‘poisonings’ couldn’t have been better planned time-wise, if you get my drift – ie as close to the start of the tournament itself as possible, but BEFORE the 100 day ‘celebrations’.

    PS And my apologies again for it taking so long to make my point! AND to anyone who may have pointed it out before!

    • David

      I seem to recall uncertain news on that Sunday night, with a major newspaper leading on the Monday in their print run that a man had been killed by an attack. I wonder if that was the pre-briefing narrative, but everything fell apart.

      back to today, BBC R4 mentioned in a brief sentence at 05:35 that a political prisoner is expected to appear in court soon for extradition proceedings to the USA based on trumped-up charges of hacking….

      I might have imagined the italic bits…. “the right to know” NOT!

      • Tom Welsh

        “I seem to recall uncertain news on that Sunday night, with a major newspaper leading on the Monday in their print run that a man had been killed by an attack. I wonder if that was the pre-briefing narrative, but everything fell apart”.

        Rather like the BBC telling us about the collapse of Building 7 while it was standing untouched on the screen behind.

  • Duncan

    The Duck Feed

    The duck feed where the two Skripals shared bread with three young boys, is the most significant detail that the authorities cannot change.
    The parents were shown CCTV, their boys were with the Skripals, and this happened at approximately 1-40pm.
    This is immediately after the door dosing, and one or both Skripals would have Novichok on their hands.

    As others have pointed out, there were a few UK papers leading with articles documenting the duck feed with the three boys and the Skripals.
    The Mirror seems to be the paper breaking the story on the 24th of March. The Sun followed up with an article and pictures, which were the result of an interview with Aiden Cooper’s mother on March 27th, and a resulting publication on March 28th.

    Turning to Trump and the expulsions, this happened on March 26th, so as other writers have mentioned. Ms Haspel needed to only show the POTUS the media headlines, rather than actual pictures.
    It seems incredible on many fronts.
    1) The duck feed in now erased from the official narrative. Mainly because it makes the door handle dosing impossible.
    2) POTUS and his government expelled the Russians based on children not being exposed to nerve agent, and subsequently not being ill.
    3) Haspel based on her own “crank it up – anti Russian” agenda, would have known by March 25th, that no children were ill, no ducks were killed in the making of this movie.
    Notice the key line on the Mirror article of March 24th.
    “The incident involving the boys, who are believed to have been given the all-clear, was confirmed by Public Health England and described by British officials to US authorities.”
    The incident (the duck feed = jeopardy, Russian recklessness) was described by British officials to US authorities.
    HOWEVER, it seems that the “all clear” part of the message may have been omitted.

    • Doghouse

      Yup, they were supposedly contaminated by a military grade lethal agent applied to their door handle as jelly from an aerosol and immediately going on a jolly and feeding some park ducks but just prior to uncontrollable spasms, vomiting and falling comatose they handed contaminated bread to uncontaminated boys with their contaminated hands some of which was even eaten by one of the boys. After having their lives miraculously saved by a guardian angel guised as military nurse superior and the valiant NHS, the Skripals on gaining consciousness were sucked into another dimension and disappeared forever. Bummer.

      On the other hand, the ducks went on to have ducklings and the boy who ate the bread still has a roof on his house. Some people and things have all the luck.

      • Doghouse

        And as if that wasn’t enough bad luck for the Skripals, directly according to the terror plod narrative the aerosol jelly as well as being adhesive and water resistant, was also magic jelly managing to contaminate them without them being anywhere near it. Plod has their named and only suspects arriving in Salisbury and wandering up to their house after they left home, and they never returned unless invisibly by some form of teleportation. Sheesh, when it goes wrong eh?

    • Dunno

      The duck feeding incident was curious in many ways, the Skripals went armed with the bread I say this because it has been reported that they parked the car at 1:40pm and at 1:45pm were caught on CCTV with the 3 children.

      One of the children is reported to have eaten the piece of the bread given to him by Skripal just 15 minutes after Skripal had touched his front door handle to close and lock the door. Later in the day the Skripals ate at Zizzis where the furniture that the Skripals had sat at was later destroyed because it was so badly contaminated with Novichok.

      The police were not too worried about the children being poisoned by Novichok (the deadliest Military Grade Nerve Agent known to man) and so took a leisurely 2 weeks to trace and contact their parents.

      “Coincidently”? the suspects were in the very same area of the duck park whilst the duck feeding was taking place, they were caught by CCTV on Fisherton Street at 1:05, 1:08 and 1:48 (Dauwalder’s Vintage Coins Shop).

      All three sites are approximately 150m from the car park where Skripal parked his car and the duck feeding event, it is at these locations that the Russian suspects are known to have been in close proximity with the Skripals much much closer than they were to the Skripal home when they were caught by the Shell garage CCTV on Wilton Rd.

      A waste bin close to where the duck feeding took place was forensically examined for a considerable period, the only bin that appears to have received this treatment.

      If the Skripals did meet with the Suspects it is most likely they met briefly around this area and it is highly likely they were caught on CCTV, there are a couple of dozen CCTV cameras in that specific vicinity.

      The CCTV cameras are not hard to see they are highly visible, most of them are Council Digital HD cameras (10 in Sainsburys car park alone) the leader of Salisbury Council confirmed they were all working that day.

      • Duncan

        An excellent summary.
        I emailed Nick Pisa of the Sun.
        With a photographer he made the trip to Wiltshire to interview the Coopers.
        Ironically, he let me know that he was not following up as he had been dispatched to Russia for World Cup 2018.
        If an intrepid reporter followed up with the Coopers and the other parents then the door handle hoax would be exposed.
        However, there has been no second story.
        Maybe Craig Murray’s expose will reveal the story.

    • Ivan Sharkov

      I just watched that Mirror video again. I have somehow missed that there is a second man in the frame, very close to the supposed victims. I wonder if he played any role in the events to follow!

  • OnlyHalfALooney

    t looks like a whole theatrical production was put on in Salisbury.

    Just think of this: the poison was supposedly sprayed/smeared onto the Skripal’s outside door handle. Let’s assume Skripal and his daughter are leaving the house to go for wander. How likely is it that BOTH would touch the outside door handle within a few seconds of each other? Of course, one would pull the door closed after them. But unless the other opened the door again to go inside again (e.g. forgotten something), only one of them would have pulled the door closed. The first one to touch the handle would presumably remove most of the poison leaving the other with a much reduced dose. Yet they allegedly became equally ill simultaneously.

    Another odd thing: it would be very odd indeed if Skripal wasn’t under MI5 surveillance. Intelligence services put much less “interesting” people under surveillance, like green activists, etc. Not only would MI5 be interested in seeing what Skripal was up to (how trustworthy is double-agent ever?), MI5 would also want to protect him. Isn’t it likely that MI5 would have a secret surveillance camera monitoring Skripal’s home?

    As to the Russian “suspects”. They were carrying smartphones, this would enable the police) to track their movements (passively using triangulation of transmitter towers) within 50 meters or less. Yet all the police can say is that the Russian “suspects” were sighted in the vicinity of Skripal’s home. We are told a story about them “turning their GPS off for a few hours”, but GPS is not necessary to track smartphones (albeit with much lower accuracy).

    The more one thinks about the official narrative the more holes one sees.

    • MJ

      “Isn’t it likely that MI5 would have a secret surveillance camera monitoring Skripal’s home?”

      There was a CCTV camera mounted on the house opposite. No images have been released.

      “the Russian “suspects” were sighted in the vicinity of Skripal’s home”

      Sighted walking down a road towards the station a few 100M from the house. Not exactly in the vicinity. I wonder how many others were seen walking down that road – are they also suspects?

      • OnlyHalfALooney

        “There was a CCTV camera mounted on the house opposite. No images have been released.”

        Perhaps it mysteriously malfunctioned like the two cameras in the corridor in front of Epstein’s cell. But most likely nobody went to Skripal’s door.

        • Doghouse

          It’s irrelevant who closed the door according to the official timeline. as stated above, the suspects who are alleged to have applied the muck, did not ride into town until AFTER the Skripals left home. They say they didn’t do it, the official timeline says they couldn’t have!
          They released CC footage of them in the vicinity of the house. If the camera across the road showed them even nearer or walking up the drive they would have shown that instead/as well, ergo it does not – or anyone else for that matter.
          There is no evidence whatsoever they ever returned home after leaving, if there was terror plod would have said so to fill the gaping hole.
          They absolutely could not have been contaminated with lethal weapons grade nerve agent when they handed that bread to the boys, one of whom ate it, as evidenced by the boys and ducks carrying on life as usual. If they allege it was no longer on their hands then Zizzis and the pub should never have been closed down for an eternity.

          Only explanation – magic aerosol adhesive water resistant self applying flying jelly, stuck itself to the handle, when they didn’t come out or come back it flew off in search, found them after they handed the boys mauled and torn bread, applied itself to them sufficiently liberally as to cause near bankruptcy of Salisbury, then returned to the door handle readying itself to create a hero – but only one mind.

          In an interview the novichok stated it would have preferred to return home to it’s bottle but someone had resealed and shrink wrapped it and it wasn’t quite that magic.

          Theresa May was unavailable for comment…..

          • OnlyHalfALooney

            Of course. My point is that the official story is obviously a load of nonsense. Even if one ignores the facts it is obviously bullshit. Not even good bullshit.

          • Kempe

            ” There is no evidence whatsoever they ever returned home after leaving ”

            Apart from Sergei’s car being spotted in Salisbury city centre sometime after 0900 and then seen heading back into town from the direction of their home at 1315.

          • Doghouse

            Kempe – of course their car was spotted heading back into town – that’s where they were after all. Spotted heading into town not heading home, there’s CCTV like confetti in Salisbury and it wasn’t seen heading home. They would have said if it was no?

          • Kempe

            It had to have got back home somehow so assuming it didn’t slip through a wormhole in the space-time continuum it must’ve been driven. I’ve no idea how thorough CCTV coverage in Salisbury is but somehow it was missed or seen and not positively identified.

      • Kempe

        Sergei’s house, No.47, is at the end of a cul-de-sac. There isn’t a house opposite. If any neighbours did have CCTV it’s usual to comply with DPA guidelines and position them so they don’t record anything outside the owners property.

        • mark golding

          Rubbish Kempe. Recording events outside the property boundaries requires you keep records to respect the data protection rights of the people whose images you might capture so that you can respond to objections, if any, respond to access requests and auto-delete after 30 days recording.

          • Kempe

            If you position your cameras to only record your own property you don’t have to comply with the DPA. That was my point.

        • Ken Kenn

          So the Skripals ( both of them? ) drove back home in the car at a certain point in time?

          Then the car was driven away from the direction of their home around 1.15 pm.

          Does this imply that the Skripals went back home and entered the by now now contaminated outside door handle?

          If the door handle was contaminated by then and they entered the house would there not be contamination on the inner ( outer door ) handle and the outer inner door handle/ knob or whatever and when closing the inside door shut the inside of the inner door handle?

          If so ( we don’t know whether it’s true or not) what was the obsession from all quarters with just the outside door handle re: contamination.

          Either way any contamination from Mr Skripal should have been found on his steering wheel – would it not?

          I’ve not heard a Dicky Bird about the car that was being driven by a now contaminated Mr Skripal.

          Curious is that.

          • Duncan

            Ken Kenn,

            The car was taken from the Sainsbury car park to the commercial company which was used by the police as pound.
            Later the car was taken to be stored away for the next 150,000 years.

    • Jeremn

      The sense of theatre is supported by the honours and awards showered on Salisbury after the events. Alistair Cunningham of the council got an OBE, Robin Townsend and Simon Rowe get MBEs, Tim Atkins, Mark Fulop Dr Sarah Stubbs of Porton Down get OBEs. Cara Charles-Barks of the hospital gets an MBE. Then there are more in the police, and the army. Hmmm.

    • Piotr Berman

      The application of Novichok on the door handle was remarkably sloppy:

      Skripal Novichok poisoning attack house roof replaced – BBC … › news › uk-england-wiltshire-46792956
      Jan 8, 2019 – The roof of the home of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal is to be dismantled by military teams in the wake of the Novichok attack. Detectives …

      I can imagine people in the neighborhood ignoring strangers approaching the door, but splashing stuff on the roof would be a tad unusual even to reticent English, wouldn’t it? Somewhat consistent with the case of ducks and boys, roofs are frequented by birds, squirrels, cat, and no news items about dead critters.

      • nobody

        Maybe they had to tear apart the house, including the roof, looking for any draft copies of the Steele report. SS was two separations from Steele. SS -> PM (his recruiter and handler) -> CS$ <- $Fusion <- $Lawyer <- $Democratic Party.
        Analysis of format of details of the Steele report indicated it was written by someone familiar with Russian Intelligence, but the terminology was obsolete by a few years. Candidate?

        • Katpus

          Skripal was in it up to his bushy eyebrows, and the sh*t hit the fan when Yulia arrived with a wedding invitation and a permit from the Russian Government to allow Skripal to travel unmolested to Russia to be at his daughter’s wedding….
          He was worth more to the Russians alive.. with all his information about MI5 and the Steele dossier… but the UK could not allow that, so he and Yulia were eliminated..
          The girl with the bobbed hair and tracheotomy was not Yulia.. but a look alike. Yulia had long auburn, straggly, thinning hair and higher cheekbones., which she then highlighted yellow, and lighter eyebrows.

          I paint portraits and can tell you now. they are completely different people.

  • Monster

    So convenient that the Army’s head nurse marched past the incapacitated Skripals at the correct time, and that her daughter, later to be honoured, was able to help them without experiencing the ill effects from the deadly nerve agent, which the unfortunate Nick the cop had suffered. We do not know if this tragic sergeant (now Chief Superintendent) keeled over in front of them as a result, or whether his habit of touching door knobs had caused this. Did Salisbury Hospital suddenly have a major triage of cops, spies, boys, ducks (sorry no ducks) and a series, one even published in The Times, of confusing contradictory narratives as to whether there was a deadly nerve agent, or a lesser poison.

    The only casualty in British Intelligence, apart from their reputation, is Major Pablo Miller, who has been posted to a desk less important than his earlier one.

    • Jay

      There was a lot of extraordinary good fortune in Salisbury, thank goodness. Also at the City Stay Hotel in Bow, where the presence of military grade nerve agent was fortunately not deemed a serious enough risk to guests to close it for even for one day. Very, very lucky.

  • Paul Lockwood

    After reading your article, I did a quick web search on ‘Dawn Sturgess’ and I discover (why am I not surprised?) that none of the mainstream media have even mentioned the fact of the postponement of the coroner’s inquest on her death. Nothing to see here, folks…

    • Duncan

      Paul, I have made a formal complaint to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office regarding the conduct of David Ridley’s office in NOT providing notice of the cancellation and deferring to the Met for press release content.
      Ridley is a judicial appointment and knowing how and where Dawn Sturgess died should not require further delay.

  • Doghouse

    There is a lot of speculation and confusion regarding the Skripal incident, so to help clear things up I will present one solitary fact –

    In my 60 years I have never witnessed such a flagrantly outrageous crock of incompetent bull shit, as this insanity, never seen such a transparent blend of dishonesty coupled with fabrication and lies – not even at the Village Idiot Finals of 71. Shameful. Just the last few above posts prove it for what it was.

    It therefore follows that all of the theatre, the conscienceless shutting down of Salisbury and massive public spending, the awards are all very expensive statements, open displays to say “look see, look at all this, it must have happened just like wot we said it did.” Which then casts a very dark light on the Dawn Sturgess incident.

    Just my opinion you understand, but supported by a warehouse of contradiction and evidence or lack thereof. I like being British, I like being part of these islands, used to feel a pride and warmth with that, but honestly, the depths of this charade left an empty sadness at my core, one that grew larger by the day. Some serious answering to the big fellah on this one when their time comes, and just like us, he won’t be fooled either.

  • Doghouse

    If these two Russian bozos did it, if there was any evidence to support that other than simply being the wrong nationality and in the wrong place at the right time, then the police, CPS, judiciary are absolutely duty bound issue an arrest warrant on the Skripal incident alone, attempted murders. I stand to be corrected but this has never happened and the diplomatic channels appear not to give a monkey’s beyond primate lip service. Attempted murder and then the subsequent murder of Dawn Sturgess – not even manslaughter – you don’t put nerve agent into a perfume spray and not expect someone to spray it on themselves, even if it is a jelly. So not manslaughter, murder of a British citizen even at its weakest legal interpretation, with or without a coroner.

    Perhaps they are not seeking such cooperative or legal extradition of these two alleged terrorists because they have wafer thin diplomatic status, at least here we should find some consistency however extraordinary the lack of rendition.

    • Kempe

      Domestic and International arrest warrants were issued for the two Russians on 5th September 2018. Russia doesn’t extradite it’s citizens no matter what so no point in applying for extradition.

      • Tatyana

        Why would Russia extradite its citizens due to London’s warrants, while London never extradites those wanted by Russia? I mean corrupt officials, olygarchs, traitors, etc

          • Tatyana

            Ahmed Zakaev chechen terrorist, Yuliy Dubov Berezovski’s partner, Berezovsky himself, Shuppe Berezovsky’s son-in-law, ЮКОС managers, William Browder
            And I can name more.
            Strange you are not aware, Kempe.

          • Kempe

            Zakhaev’s extradition was refused for lack of evidence, political motivation and fear he would be tortured. Dubov and Berezovsky were rightly or wrongly granted political asylum. No request was made to extradite Browder from anywhere. Russia did try and get Interpol to issue an arrest warrant but this was ultimately rejected for being politically motivated.

            It’s all irrelevant anyway, just because country A does something bad doesn’t justify country B doing the same thing.

          • Tatyana

            Thank you Kempe for providing the reasons.
            I think that the UK arrest warrant for Bashirov and Petrov is refused for lack of evidence, political motivation and looking at Mr. Assange, I can suppose you torture your prisoners, so you can add ‘fear they will be tortured’, too.

      • Ken Kenn

        So why did they bother naming them ?

        For show from the government – nothing more nothing less for the consumption of the schmucks.

        If you know it I’m sure May and her highly paid sidekicks knew it too.

  • M.J.

    The packet with the spray that killed Ms Sturgess could have been a spare supply thrown away by Russian assassins as part of their getaway, and done after the attack on the Skripals.

    If your film intends to accuse Porton Down of having done it (or supplied the means), I hope you have good evidence. I don’t see Porton Down scientists disposing of very dangerous substances in this way.

    • Deb O'Nair

      “I hope you have good evidence”

      Showing that the claims of HMG and media stenographers are self-evidently not true does not require one to state what is true, one can only guess at what the truth of the matter is, but proving that HMG and the media are fabricating a narrative should alarm any sensible person and cause them to closely question these events and, more importantly, question what kind of people are actually running this country.

    • Tatyana

      If the 2 russian assassins brought the novichoked perfume with them, so why disposing of it? Why not taking it back to Russia?

      • TJH

        From the RT on camera interview.

        Simonyan: Did you have that bottle of Nina Ricci perfume?

        Man calling himself “Boshirov”: Don’t you think that it’s kind of stupid for two straight men to be carrying perfume for ladies? When you go through customs, they check all your belongings. So, if we had anything
        suspicious, they would definitely have questions. Why would a man have perfume for women in his bag?

        Man calling himself “Petrov”: Even an ordinary person would have questions. Why would a man need perfume for women?

        Simonyan: Why would a man have perfume for women in his bag?

        Man calling himself “Petrov”: Even an ordinary person would have questions. Why would a man need perfume for women?

        Simonyan: How would it be possible for someone to find any perfume bottle on you?

        Man calling himself “Boshirov”: I mean, when you go through customs…

        Simonyan: Long story short, did you have that Nina Ricci bottle or not?

        Man calling himself “Boshirov”: No

        Man calling himself “Petrov”: No, of course not.

        That was from 7:05 in the video.

        • OnlyHalfALooney

          Assuming all the rest is true (which it obviously isn’t).

          Why not use a bottle of after-shave? Or better still some kind of medicine applicator?

          Why use a Nina Ricci perfume bottle that is more likely to attract attention?

        • Portonchok

          The official narrative is of course poppycock, but this extract of the two Russians does not help them at all.
          Customs check very few people. If they did check them, a bottle of perfume is a permissible item to bring into the UK.
          As for the other, related point, of course a man would normally be carrying perfume as a present for a woman.
          I’m not saying they brought in anything at all, but their answers are strange. Any thoughts anyone?

      • M.J.

        Because they wouldn’t want to carry such deadly stuff on their person more than they had to. I wouldn’t blame therm!

    • Piotr Berman

      A similar story, disgruntled employee of a bioweapon lab spreading the toxins, was the OFFICIAL version of the Anthrax attacks in USA. Hard as it is to conceive, one cannot assure that only angels work on military poisons.

  • Steve Malloy

    Similar to the death of WMD expert Dr David Kelly where the politically controlled “public inquiry” was also used to good effect to suppress information about his death.

  • Crispa

    By chance Luke Harding reviewed Mark Urban’s Skripal book in last Saturday’s “Guardian” Review and unsurprisingly had a more positive view of it than I did when I read it some time ago. I just read the review as I did the book quickly as the book was rubbish. But he did make one intriguing comment at the end to the effect that there will be more to emerge about Skripal. I suspect he was implying that there will be more made up stuff on the Russian role rather than the facts around the parts played by the British authorities. I have thrown the magazine out with the recycling today so I can’t check what he actually might have meant by it.
    In addition to the mystery surrounding the Skripals’ disappearance, I am also wondering what might be happening to Charlie Rowley, for example, where is he living? is he a free person or does he too have a minder that will deter him from speaking out on other than to a script? is he still being questioned? what might he have said at Dawn’s inquest had it been held? is he actually as confused as he appears? He just might offer some clues if he is free to give them – which I doubt.

  • Olaf S

    I will support the project

    Apart from pointing to the inconsistencies of the official version,
    I believe it also would be of interest to try to present some plausible alternatives. One may build on the suggestion that Sergey wanted to return to Russia, and had to be stopped. The couple was sprayed with a non-lethal substance at the bench, and the Novichok part was added to boost the Russia-Scare.

    I will suggest another possibility: The whole thing was mainly about Yulia. The discussions about why Putin should need to kill Skripal, the old spy, may have been be a complete waste space and time.
    First of all the background: Several Western Agencies must have been eagerly on outlook for a good scare story to counter the goodwill Russia would earn from the WCh football event. (A true horror to them if ordinary people started seeing Russia as a normal, friendly country: The end of Nato/US presence in Europe, at least in the long run, and worst for the UK ”poodle”, needless to say.)
    Now, assuming that the information is correct that Yulia worked at the U.S. embassy in Moscow, this must have been seen as a provocation to some Russians: ”The traitor’s daughter working for the enemy!” She may very well have received serious threats. At the embassy the CIA would soon have learned about such threats and naturally informed the British SS. They probably also convinced Yulia that she had to get away.
    Now the natural question came up: Could this be used for some clever plot/psy-op. The big propaganda success of the earlier Litvinenko/polonium story, with people in protection suites on the streets etc, must have been at the back of the mind of many of these people. A murder attempt with an invincible, extremely dangerous substance, what could be better! Specialists were consulted and one decided on Novichok as the substance (and the main propaganda component of the plot). Yulia was probably asked to visit her father in England only after they had found some patsies and tricked them into travelling to Salisbury. Anyway, my main point is that the Skrips may have played voluntarily along, all the time.
    One may assume that the couple were promised a few millions to participate + security for a long period afterwards.
    The two obediently went to the bench after the restaurant meal, Sergey was seen uneasy/irritable, they say (unusual for him). They knew they were early, so they brought some bread to feed the ducks. Better than sitting passively waiting for the attack. Medical army personal was ready nearby, we learn. What more to add? Yulia surely must have asked the spooks to take care of the pets, but that was somehow ignored/forgotten.

    Before you reject this version, please consider again: 1. Something really happened at the bench, and it was non-lethal. 2. If anybody was after Sergey, there was no need to involve Yulia. A poisoning of Sergey could have been done with considerable more ease, by any potential part/suspect and at almost any time. (And it would be either lethal, or there would be no attack at all, why else take the trouble?).

    The ”good” thing with the second perfume bottle is it not being needed for compiling a plausible chain of events, it probably just was added long afterwards by any part which wanted to boost the Novichok/propaganda component of the narrative. (as several have pointed out).

    And the millon-reward to the Skripals? I doubt there can have been budget posts for such amounts. I would not be surprised if the money came from a certain billionaire who always had done his best to discredit/destroy Russia. A member of the American, influential and extremely anti-Russian CFR, he may well have been got in touch with some of the organizers of the operation. That he personally knew ”mr Novichok” – having given him a helping hand after his escape from Russia – need not be more than a curious detail, of course. (this connection was mentioned in the biography of Mirzayanov printed in the Guardian).
    Also interesting that Mirz himself seems to have participated in the scare, although perhaps only wanting to state some facts, nothing else, (who knows):
    ” Novichok inventor says hundreds could be at risk for years”.

    But one can not look completely away from the possibility that the Novichok idea had its origin in these quarters, IMHO.

    (At least to some degree, Mirzayanov shared the views of his benefactor:
    Wikipedia: ”In March 2010, Mirzayanov signed the “Putin Must Go” campaign”).

    • Allan Howard

      Olaf. Regards what you said about several western agencies looking for a good scare story to counter the goodwill Russia would earn from the WC football event, as ordinary people started seeing Russia as a normal, friendly country, it’s interesting to note that:

      The World Cup Football Tournament ran from June 14th until July 15th, and it does seem rather extraordinary that Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley should just happen to get poisoned (allegedly) whilst the tournament was taking place, but not only THAT, but EXACTLY in the middle of it, to the day, on June 30th.

      I mean WHAT are the chances of THAT happening by coincidence! And if the wikipedia entry for the ‘Amesbury poisonings’ is correct, and Dawn and Charlie didn’t open the perfume bottle until some nine days after he found it (which in itself seems extraordinary), then THAT means that he just happened to find it about six or seven days after the tournament kicked off.

      • Allan Howard

        Actually, it’s even MORE extraordinary than I thought regarding the timing! In the wikipedia entry for the ‘Amesbury poisonings’ it quotes a press report released by the Metropolitan Police in which it says that: ‘at 10:15 on Saturday 30 June 2018, the South Western Ambulance Service was called to a residential address in Amesbury after Dawn Sturgess had collapsed’, and down the bottom of the page (under the heading: Interview with Rowley), it says: ‘His partner became sick “within 15 minutes” after spraying the “oily substance” onto her wrists…’. In other words, Dawn must have sprayed the ‘Novichok perfume’ on her wrists (and Charlie accidently spill a bit on his hand) at around 10.00am which, given the two hour time difference, is mid-day in Moscow. So it wasn’t just the exact middle day of the football tournament, but the exact middle HOUR of the middle day of the tournament, and down to the minute! I mean THAT’s really Cosmic man!!!

    • Olaf S

      Sorry I was a little fast. They were not “sprayed at the bench” if my version is right (voluntary participation). Rather they must have swallowed a pill or smth like that. (Carefully designed to suit the age, body type, weight, health condition of each of them). No need for any insecure, unprecise “spraying”-

  • Alan Heffez

    Mr. Murray, I expect your documentary on the events in Salisbury will be as informative and considered as your excellent narrative on Alexander Burnes.

    I hope you will include in the documentary a separate section concerning the the March 14th, 2018, announcement by the MoD of an additional £48 million in budget appropriations for new chemical weapons defense and the vaccination of thousands of British soldiers against anthrax, which seems to have slipped under the radar.

    I keep wondering when such a huge budget was pulled together by the MoD, presented as it was merely a few days after the revelation of the “nerve agent attack,” and what were the line items of this budget? Was the budget approved and transferred to the MoD, and, if so,where did the additional funds come from in this time of austerity? Also, of interest, where were all those thousands of vaccinated British soldiers gathering to go?

    A fine blog. Thanks for following up on this story.


    • Ken Kenn

      I’m looking forward to it too.

      No Crimewatch program was set up for witnesses to call in with evidence ( trivial or not) and all the CCTV evidence is under wraps and it makes you wonder who was around at the time of the alleged incident?

      Never mind the Russkies – what about the English spies doing a bit of Sunday shopping?

      As usual the media never ask any pertinent questions.

      Such as – How has Julian Assange got in such a bad state under the care of his Belmarsh carers?

      And – what exactly did Dawn Sturgess die of ,if what killed her was not Novichok?

      Don’t hold your breath for answers.

      • Kempe

        Last ever Crimewatch was broadcast in March 2017, a year before the poisonings. It would’ve been a bit of a giveaway I think…

        • Ken Kenn

          You could always do ‘ A Special ‘ for this very serious matter.

          Say a Matt Albright enquiry.

          Loads of CCTV evidence to go off.

          The ublic were asked to help the police with their enquiries and all we hear is hearsay from deranged journalists.

          All emotion and no fact.

          In fact none of us know the ‘ facts ‘ and that for the PTB is the main thing.

          I’ve said this before to yoy that we will all be dead when and if the truth comes out.

  • Allan Howard

    At some point, when initially reading through some of the comments, I came across a ‘dispute’ going on about whether the ‘Novichok’ was in liquid form, or in a gel form, and there was ONE commenter who was insisting that it was in liquid form. Now if that person was a shill – and I’m not saying that they WERE – then the reason they were perhaps being so insistent is because it wouldn’t make sense for the would-be assassins to bring the ‘Novichok’ in different forms. I mean what we’re supposed to think and believe is that the would-be assassins brought the ‘Novichok’ with them disguised as perfume, and must have brought TWO bottles with them AND discarded the second one (in the charity bin OR the park) as they didn’t need to use it as it transpired.

    So in other words, when planning the operation and working out how they would go about it, the Assassination Department hit on the idea of poisoning and killing Mr Skripal with some ‘Novichok’ AND coating it on the handle of his front door, and as we learned some months after the event, Russian scientists had in fact been experimenting with how to apply ‘Novichok’, INCLUDING putting it on door handles. So that was sorted then, and the would-be assassins then provided with two bottles of ‘Novichok perfume’ prior to setting off on the operation, the second bottle as a back up just in case they inadvertently dropped the first one and broke it.

    Now jesting aside, not only is it ludicrous beyond words that they would think to carry out an assassination in such a manner, but to do it with a LIQUID form of ‘Novichok’, in Britain, at the beginning of March, is just totally off this planet! It would be interesting to add some dye to a spoonful of some cheap perfume and coat your front door handle with it (when it’s forecast to rain) and see how long it takes to get washed off when it starts raining. I would imagine that it would take just a few minutes in a medium downpour, and probably LESS than a minute in a heavy downpour. I mean it didn’t happen of course, but if they HAD thought to carry out an assassination in such a manner, ludicrous as that is, the agent would have been in some form where it couldn’t be washed off if it rained. So no, it wouldn’t have been in liquid form inside a perfume bottle, and so they COULDN’T have discarded one in the park, never mind a charity bin that was obviously emptied regularly!

  • Andyoldlabour

    The Skripals, were not poisoned at their home, it is simply impossible.
    They were poisoned at some short period of time, between feeding the ducks and sitting on the bench.
    Why do I say this?
    Because, how is it that two people of different ages, weight and sex, drive around, go for a meal, all this taking hours, and then collapse at exactly the same time?
    I think that they were poisoned when sitting on the bench.

      • Andyoldlabour

        Allan Howard

        I think they were poisoned, just not with the most powerful nerve agent known to man. The thing is though, poor Dawn Sturgess was bumped off by someone.

    • Doo

      Say what Tom?
      What reasons do you have for saying the blogmire is a ‘alt-right crackpot’?
      He’s a font of knowledge and hasn’t leaned in any political direction with his dissection of the whole fake Salisbury/ Amesbury nerve agent affair.

  • FedUp

    Reasons to believe it was not Novichok

    (Or as Belligcat might say: Conclusive Open Sourced Evidence Proving 100% that this was not a Nerve Agent)

    1) It didn’t kill it’s targets in Salisbury, we are told it is 8 to 10 times more toxic than VX (which is extremely potent and can kill in seconds), we are told 1 teaspoon full of Novichok could kill thousands of people but it didn’t kill Sergei or Yulia, it didn’t kill Bailey nor Charlie Rowley who had several doses of it. Charlie spilt it on himself, he sniffed at it to see what it smelt like (it had no odour) and he breathed it in again when Dawn sprayed it.

    The kill rate was 20% which coincidentally was precisely the kill rate of the Opiate Based Incapacitant (Not Nerve Agent) used in the Moscow Theatre Siege:

    The available evidence suggests that the people found poisoned at the bench were not the Skripals but had been harmed by an Opiate Based Incapacitant.

    The available evidence also suggests that Dawn died from anaphylaxis, an extreme allergic reaction to the substance she came into contact with. Charlie had an immense tolerance to Opioids earned from many years of extensive drug abuse, his onset of symptoms might be explained by a dose of the methadone that he had picked up from the chemist after Dawn had been taken to hospital, the combined doses from the substance in the perfume bottle and his prescribed methadone may have been enough to send him into OD.

    2) DSTL (MoD) Porton Down provided evidence to the High Court that said that they were not sure it was a Nerve Agent, it could have been a “Related Compound” or a “closely related agent”

    The Judge’s summary of the DSTL evidence


    I consider the following to be the relevant parts of the evidence. I shall identify the witnesses only by their role and shall summarise the essential elements of their evidence.

    i)CC: Porton Down Chemical and Biological Analyst

    Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound. The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent.”

    3) Public Health England (PHE) Porton Down concurred with DSTL when they described the functional properties of the substance discovered in Salisbury and Amesbury, its effects on human beings were not those of a Military Grade Nerve Agent, in fact the substance described by PHE was completely useless as a Military Grade Nerve Agent, PHE said it was designed by function to only take effect after a minimum of 3 hours (when in contact with a large dose) and up to 12 hours maximum (from a significant dose)

    This information was communicated to a Public meeting in Amesbury by a Director of PHE and later confirmed in a Freedom of Information Request

    “If you become ill with this stuff (Novichok) from actually coming into contact with a significant amount of it then its within 6-12 hours, maximum (that symptoms would occur) – 3 hours is the minimum but you have to be in touch with a large dose.”

    Public Health England Medical Director Paul Cosford

    4) The OPCW and UK Parliament advice on the time for symptoms to appear when contact is made with a Nerve Agent is 20 – 30 minutes

    “Poisoning takes longer when the nerve agent enters the body through the skin. Nerve agents are more or less fat-soluble and can penetrate the outer layers of the skin. However, it takes some time before the poison reaches the deeper blood vessels. Consequently, the first symptoms do not occur until 20-30 minutes after the initial exposure but subsequently the poisoning process may be rapid if the total dose of nerve agent is high. The toxic effect of nerve agents depends on them becoming bound to an enzyme, acetylcholinesterase, and thereby inhibit this vital enzyme’s normal biological activity in the cholinergic nervous system.”

    UK Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology

    “Nerve agents include tabun, sarin, soman and the more potent VX. These agents interfere with normal nerve function and are lethal at low concentrations. They can be absorbed both as a liquid through the skin, which can be lethal within 20-30 minutes, or as a vapour through the lungs, where death may occur more quickly. Preventative medicine is available and, as it is most effective 2 hours after treatment, is most useful where there is warning of an attack. Antidotes are also available but these must be administered immediately following exposure.”

    PHE’s advice for the time it takes Novichok to present symptoms is based, they say, on observations of the injuries caused to the victims in Salisbury and Amesbury
    The time it took for symptoms to present in the Wiltshire Incidents
    The Skripals: 2.5 hours (simultaneously)
    DS Bailey: 3 days
    Dawn Sturgess: 15 minutes
    Charlie Rowley: 8+ hours
    Only Charlie Rowley’s clinical reaction time conforms with PHE’s advice and PHE say they based their advice on observations of the Salisbury and Amesbury Incidents.

    They don’t know what it is yet they call it Novichok but it does not behave like a Nerve Agent.
    They say it can only have come from Russia yet provide no proof.
    And a Coroner may now not get to examine this evidence because the process may be taken over by a politically motivated Public Inquiry a la Hutton Cover Up
    We get what we vote for.
    God Bless Dawn

  • Petri Krohn

    The only part of the Skripal story that makes sense is that it was Sergei who dumped the Nina Ricci bottle in the charity bin. Charlie found it the same week and saved it for Dawn’s birthday.

    It is elementary tradecraft not to open bottles of unconfirmed origin. But why did Sergei put it in charity bin for others to use if he suspected it was poison? No, he did not suspect it was poison, it was simply elementary tradecraft. Besides, because it is elementary tradecraft no one would seriously consider poisoning a GRU officer with a bottle.

    It is possible that Yulia bought the bottle with her from Moscow. This would explain why the Police knew about the bottle and were searching for it on the first day. Yulia’s luggage would have been inspected at the airport and note of its contents would have been made by MI5/MI6. It might also have arrived at Sergei’s house by mail from someone in Britain. Who knows.

    Actually it may be Yulia who dumped the bottle on Sergei’s orders. She might have had some sentimental attachment to the bottle, motivating her to walk all the way to the bin.

  • Duncan


    Local media SpireFM are reporting that shooting will begin soon in Weston-super-mare of the two part Skripal docudrama.
    I don’t know who is playing the part of Aiden Cooper who is of course one of the central characters in the saga.
    ( Anyone betting that the duck feed is in the drama?).

    Anyway, in true art imitating life, SpireFM report the filming but NOT the cancelled/postponed/rescheduled to an unspecified future date, inquest of poor Dawn Sturgess.
    Truly pathetic.

    • Ken Kenn

      Look forward to the ‘ Re – imagining ‘ of this saga.

      To be fair to Kempe I saw a Crimewatch on the BBC to which I was a witness.

      More holes in it than Swiss Cheese.

      In actuality had the robbers van been parked where they showed it myself and my brother would have had to climb over it to get to the bookies.

      As Max Boyce used to say ” I know – because I was there! “

  • Duncan

    To Vicky, of the Weston-Super-Mare Mercury

    Hello Vicky,

    I read your piece on the online version of the Mercury

    Hopefully you can get to interview the crew and the actors involved in their production.

    I would imagine that one of the most important scenes is what is known as “The Duck Feed” incident.

    You may not be fully up to speed, so bear with me, and I will explain.

    At approximately 1:40 pm on Sunday March 4th, the Skripals feed ducks in Salisbury. During this event, three young boys were also in the area.
    It became a joint exercise and one of the boys actually ate some of the bread that Sergei and Yulia Skripal had brought along.

    This feeding of the ducks was only minutes after the two Skripals had “interacted” with the door handle at home.
    Their BMW was parked at the local Sainsbury’s, and then after the duck feed they ( the Skripals) went onto Zizzi’s restuarant, where subsequently a table was so heavily contaminated with Novichok, that it was required to be incinerated.
    The Skripals later went to the Mill Pub, and this small timeline detail may also feature in the documentary. The Mill Pub followed Zizzi’s.

    How do we know this?

    Well, the parents of young Aiden Cooper, (one of the three boys) was interviewed by the police, so 8 days later, and CRUCIALLY the parents were shown CCTV of the duck feed at the water.

    Unbelievably, this CCTV footage is the only footage of the Skripals which has ever been shown of their events that Sunday.
    Very useful to the team at Dancing Ledge, as it would also show what clothes the Skripals were wearing that day, and that red bag, may or may not be visible.

    One would well imagine that the writers Adam Paterson and Declan Lawn, and chief executive Laurence Bowen, would have this dramatic incident as the focal point of their production.
    It does after all show again the tremendous fortitude and bravery of the Salisbury citizenry.
    The 8 day delay between the incident and the police finally getting round to inform the parents may have to be an accelerated timeline as we movie buffs say.

    I have copied Camille Curry, whom I believe is the agent for Adam and Declan, as they may wish to do additional follow up with Luke Cooper who is Aiden’s father.
    Aiden may want to play the part of himself, and I have it on good authority that the ducks also survived the ordeal but were not available for comment.



      • michael norton

        It was claimed that Charlie Rowlie was holding the bottle of Novichok when it broke, yet several days later the police found it on the window sill, unbroken.

        • Duncan

          His house, which no doubt the UK taxpayers paid for must have been larger than we thought.
          In the Tardis it took more than a week to find the perfume bottle, deviously hidden on a counter top.
          Police followed a similar protocol in Salisbury
          Go through the front door and start dismantling the roof.
          One beam at a time.
          Heroes every one of them.
          Yes, the beams I mean.

      • Andyoldlabour


        Can’t they find a part for Mark Urban to play, to make it a bit more realistic?

        • Duncan


          Undoubtedly he is on the payroll as an adviser/consultant.
          Next up is weapons expert is Hamish deNoClue.

        • Ken Kenn

          Apparently Charlie was an habitual ‘ Bin Dipper ‘ and that’s how he found this alleged perfume wrapped in plastic similar to how bacon is wrapped.

          If he was habitual ( regular places etc ) how come he only found it three months later, way after the supposed assassins had gone back home?

          Surely if it had been thrown away on the day it would be at the bottom of the bin not near the top.

          He also said it didn’t smell like perfume,

          So why give it Dawn to spray on herself?

          Why not ask her to sniff it – to see what she thought of it?

          The Coroners initial report said there was damage to her hands and face.

          Was there any damage to Charlie’s hands or face?

          • Andyoldlabour

            Ken Kenn

            The fact that the bin hadn’t been emptied in three months is nothing short of farcical.

  • alexanderscottish

    This is my first visit to this site. It is well worth reading even though I disagree here and there. I shall subscribe because real information is declining and the future of independent journalism is bleak. Regards.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.