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



340 thoughts on “No Inquest for Dawn Sturgess

1 2 3
  • Caratacus

    Good luck, Craig – and watch your back, for heaven’s sake. I will be contributing to the crowdfunding.

  • Mark Russell

    Good luck. And as other contributors will suggest, take care. Another layer, but we all know where it’s heading and what it might expose. On a cheerier note, my local library in Lancashire now stock your three books. Thank goodness for Andrew Carnegie.

  • Gary

    I can think of scenarios where the perfume bottle turns up later and had still been in possession of the Russians some time earlier, it is easy to imagine that they had TWO such bottles and needed to use only one. The Skripals took ill and then sat on a bench, therefore the attack was outdoors immediately prior to their sitting there. SOMEONE has two bottles and SOMEONE left it for anyone to take in a charity bin for exactly the purpose that it found ie killing an innocent.

    The government has now told so many lies it’s difficult to know whether ANYTHING they say is true. Were the Skripals even attacked?? I don’t actually doubt that Russian spies attack and kill people, so do our spies. Russians tend to do it more overtly, and for good reason. You can either believe Putin is responsible and wants to warn others not to betray Russia OR you can believe that a faction within the Russian state is in cahoots with foreign powers to bring down Putin, maybe BOTH – who knows!

    What’s definitely true is that Dawn Sturgess was murdered (perhaps randomly, perhaps not) to make a point. It wasn’t personal to her, her death was useful, and that is all…

    • Jack

      I think the most likely case that the 2 russians are responsible but not acted by any orders by the Russian state.
      If they did it, it was such a clumsy act by them, –
      failed to kill the goal,
      also ended up hurting Yulia,
      like them being caught in so many CCTV,
      how toxic chemical agent ended up killing Dawn,
      where they lived,
      how their apparently real names came out,
      the weird interview they did on RT.

      Or perhaps russian assassins are this clumsy.

      • Yeah, Right

        I think the most likely case is that the 2 Russians were sent to Salisbury to make contact with Sergei Skripal, this after Yulia had brought the initial message requesting such a meeting.

        Someone then poisoned Sergei and Yulia Skripal to prevent that meeting from taking place, leaving the two Russians to wander the streets of Salisbury wondering why Sergei hasn’t shown up at any of the pre-arranged spots.

        As for Dawn Sturgess, I don’t think for a second that her death has anything to do with any of this. But her death was too good an opportunity for the authorities to pass up, hence the obscene rush to conflate her death with the earlier poisoning.

        • Jack

          Seems far fetched to hatch a plan like that and nothing similar have been reported by the russians as a plausible idea for who attack Skripals’.

          • Borncynical

            “Seems far fetched to hatch a plan like that …”

            That depends on Sergei Skripal’s connections. Perhaps it was worth hatching a plan like that in order to stop him ultimately revealing US/UK security secrets. There was talk of him being directly involved with Christopher Steele of the infamous Steele Dossier. Revelations about the compilation of that could prove more than embarrassing for some.

          • Yeah, Right

            “Seems far fetched to hatch a plan like that and nothing similar have been reported by the russians as a plausible idea for who attack Skripals’.”

            Rather depends on what they wanted to talk to Sergei about, and what – exactly – Sergei had to offer them by way of proof.

            If it was super-explosive stuff and the Russians **did** get hold of it then there would still be no guarantee that they would “plausibly release it” as opposed to quietly make use of it (blackmail, whatever).

            But if it was super-explosive stuff and the Russians **didn’t** manage to get hold of it then I could pretty much guarantee that the Russians wouldn’t say “Boo!” about it, if for no other reason than that they would have the suspicion that the entire exercise was a CIA or an MI-6 set-up from start to finish.

  • Conall Boyle

    For God’s sake Craig, look out for the assassins who are out to ‘suicide’ you. We desperately need you for your truth-telling.

    • Tony

      And do not wear a coat that may mean that you get mistaken for a deer!!!!
      That is what happened to William C. Sullivan just before he was due to give evidence to the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1977.
      The former No 3 at the FBI was obviously a very prescient man. He actually predicted that he would die in an ‘accident’.

      There was a claim by William Sullivan’s friend Robart Novak that William Sullivan specifically predicted that his own death by the following words “Someday you will read that I have been killed in an accident, but don’t believe it; I’ve been murdered.”

  • Michael Droy

    Or indeed like the LItvinenko “public Inquiry” which faltered on the insufficient evidence to prove a murder so went into a private phase where the Chairman took secret info from MI6. Which takes us back to Salibury, Pedro and Christopher Steele. The man that put together the MI6 secret presentation to convince the Chairman it was those sneaky Russians was none other than… Christopher Steele.

    • writeon

      Hello. Not ‘Pedro’. He’s called Pablo Miller. He lived close to Skripal and was the MI6 agent who ‘turned’ him years ago.

  • Republicofscotland

    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. ”

    Excellent article Craig as for the above you have it in a nutshell.

    • Tatyana

      I agree.
      When so many people showed their disbelief, mocked the narrative, I thought “now they will try to prove that Novichok can kill”. And they did it.
      The very fact of leaving the fial in a CHARITY BIN tells a lot, charity bin clearly outlines the range of potential victims.

      • Herbie

        “The very fact of leaving the phial in a CHARITY BIN tells a lot, charity bin clearly outlines the range of potential victims”

        Excellent observation.

        Very easy to portray that important aspect in the documentary. Scenes of the folk who rummage through charity bins in Salisbury.

        Makes the point about “disposable”, in so many many many ways.

        Good title, “Disposable”.

  • Mark Mcdougall

    So you begin a doco and they squash you with a d=notice? You’ll have to make it in Russia and bootleg dvds to the west!

    • Tom Welsh

      Ah, Craig Murray the celebrated samizdat author and distributor!

      “They seek him here, they seek him there…”

  • Calum Macmillan

    I am not an admirer of yours Craig, because of your pathological antipathy to the Gaelic language and culture.However I will contribute to your crowdfunding drive for a Skripal documentary.

    • craig Post author

      Calum I don’t have the slightest antipathy to the Gaelic language and culture, I am strongly supportive of it. Are you confusing me with someone else?

  • Ruth

    This is the most logical scenario. After his wife’s and son’s death Skripal became very lonely and isolated in the UK. He wanted to go home. His mother was elderly and not in good health. His daughter was in Russia. So he made contact with the Russian government but he had to offer something valuable for repatriation. Negotiations had to be done through his daughter. Most probably he offered information on the dodgy dossier which I believe he had helped compile and which had been commissioned by the UK government/Establishment to damage the chances of Trump in the election. Any evidence of this would have been dynamite for the Russian government.

    However, his daughter would have most definitely been under intense surveillance in the UK so taking physical documents or documents to get him out of the UK would’ve been impossible. So I suspect the role of the two guys in Salisbury was to check Skripal had the evidence he said he had and/or deliver the passport belonging to a third guy who had recently come to the UK so he could use his identity to travel out of the UK. MI6 got wind of the plan and to put them out of action they were poisoned with fentanyl.

    One thing which makes the detention of the Skripals deeply suspicious is that Skripal as far as I know hasn’t been in contact with his elderly mother. If he had been poisoned by Russia, then surely MI6 would allow him to make a call. So I believe Skripal and his daughter are imprisoned in the UK without trial that is if they haven’t been disposed of.

    MI5 concerned about focus on the Skripals introduced another scenario leading to the murder of a British citizen

    • Tatyana

      The most logical scenario is – Skripal wanted his daughter to live with him. He lost his wife and son, his mother is very old and Yulia is his only close relative.

      Yulia was going to get married and live her own life in Russia. I’m sure that Sergey wanted her to live in a beautiful democratic country, well financially secured with his spy’s pension. Instead of eking out a miserable impoverished existence in disgusting Russia with an indistinct husband.

      Skripal loves money and doesn’t love Russia.

      • Ruth

        If Skripal had contributed to the Steele dossier and he had proof and was willing to reveal all, then I’m absolutely sure he would have been very well rewarded.

        Anyhow, who do you think poisoned the Skripals?

        • Tatyana

          I think it was fake, a staged scene.
          1. Skripals are alive
          2. Chief military nurse is the first responder
          3. Skripals immediately isolated
          4. Russia accused with no evidence
          5. No evidence at all
          6. Pets are killed and burned
          7. Skripal’s house isolated and then partially destroyed
          8. No one russian is allowed to participate in the investigation
          9. Victoria Skripal refused a British visa
          10. From the beginning they said “we know Russia will deny…” How did they know it? I think they knew it exactly, that is why.

          • Herbie

            Well, you’ll be pleased to know that that was then and this is now.

            Whatever plots were entered into in order to stave off a change in the world order have clearly not worked to the UK’s interest. They’re even creeping back into the EU bit by bit, and allowed more grace than they deserve.

            It’s all Russia and China now, India, Africa, Turkey and Iran, the GCC, Qatar, and Israel.

            That’s where future wealth will grow.

            The UK is splitting at the seams. The US is in disarray. The EU is pulling apart.

            Shouldn’t matter to a Russian. They’re nothing now.

            You have no rivals. No outside bogeyman.

            Let them not pretend.

            Now is the time to look inwards.

            And what’s going in terms of investment in Russia itself.

    • Chris

      Ruth 18/10 at 21:09
      I think your scenario is entirely plausible, and is by far the most likely explanation we can speculate, on current evidence available to the public. This week’s blatant obstruction of a lawful inquest into the death of Dawn Sturgess strongly supports your thinking.
      But I do not think it likely that she was murdered to make the case: I think she was a very vulnerable person who happened to die at a time, and in circumstances that suited the UK government’s struggling narrative. Her death was then cack-handedly exploited to try to hold the absurd story together. While is was an outrageous violation of her humanity, I wonder her death actually saved the life of some other vulnerable person who might well have been murdered to support the government’s lies. They may unknowingly have given her back a touch of the dignity they stole from her, if that is so – not that they would care.
      I think Sergei and Julia Skripal are, most likely, both dead now, and if so they were certainly murdered by the UK government.
      I have a faint hope that Trump will somehow out this whole sordid story in his off-script egomaniac tweet-blurts, as he fights off attacks by people as rotten as he is himself.
      Meanwhile, the planet burns, and I grieve for the future generations we have condemned by doing what we do.

      • Blissex

        «I think Sergei and Julia Skripal are, most likely, both dead now»

        My alternate guess is that they are in an MI5 “prison”, and that the story is that they had some “black market” drugs trade going with some russian mafia (either as GRU agent or during his 7 years in prison Sergei must have had many contacts), with Julia as courier, and they handled the merchandise poorly and overdosed themselves. One detail that is sometimes reported is that Julia had too good a lifestyle for the job she was officially doing.

    • Tom Welsh

      I don’t buy your scenario, Ruth. Mainly because I am pretty sure that Moscow was well aware of who did what to whom, when and why. They wouldn’t need Skripal.

      Just as it appears that they have hard evidence of what happened on 9/11.

      We just keep seeing more and more reasons why the swamp creatures want to destroy Russia.

  • Dungroanin

    Not a single frame of cctv from the fully modernised system in the UK showing the Skripals.

    As for Hamish and his teletubby outfit rubber company – lets not forget his magic ship full of deadly chemicals and nerve agents in the run up to the Syrian escapade.

    They are daily forced into revealing their steel claws and fangs.

    • Deb O'Nair

      “Not a single frame of cctv from the fully modernised system in the UK showing the Skripals.”

      Apart from the carefully staged and scripted statement made by Yulia not a single anything has been heard from the Skripals since the incident. Compare this to the coverage given to Litvinenko after his poisoning.

      • Tom Welsh

        It would be a very useful part of Craig’s planned film to make an authoritative, fully documented list of the very few things we can be sure of about the Salisbury and Amesbury affairs.

        Aficionados of Poirot and Miss Marple will be acutely aware how often the police, civilians – and occasionally even the great sleuths themselves – believe some piece of “evidence” which eventually turns out to be untrue. Usually this is because they accepted someone as a witness, who was in fact a perpetrator.

        Now given that HMG are highly likely to be the perpetrators*, and that the MSM slavishly publish whatever HMG tells them to, how much of what we think we know is really reliable evidence that would stand up in, say, a murder trial?

        Take the story so far and score out (or highlight in red, or whatever) everything for which the only evidence comes from HMG or the MSM. Would there really be much left? I believe that there are/were such persons as Sergei and Yulia Skripal; that Sergei lived in Salisbury for a while; that Yulia came to visit him… then it gets all blurry and vague. Do we really KNOW for certain that either or both of them were even taken ill at the place and time alleged? Do we really know where they were taken, by whom, how long they were there, what (if any) medical treatment they had… etc.? We certainly do NOT know whether either of them is still alive.

        • Tom Welsh

          * How very similar the Skripal scenario is to the MH17 scenario! In each case I firmly believe the perpetrator to have been the local government, which however then took/was given charge of the investigations, and provided information that tended to incriminate others.

  • Brianfujisan

    Great Post Craig.. The MSM need a good Kick up the Arse.. with they’re mindless Fawning and pushing UK Gov Propaganda

    Count me in on the crowd Sourcing.

  • Tatyana

    Mr.Murray, I’d like to contribute, but I’m afraid you’ll be accused of getting the money for the documentary from Russia 🙂

    • Ingwe

      Presumably, Mr Murray, you’ll let us know about how and when the crowd funding works? I’m in.

      • Phil Espin

        Tatyana, I was already going to contribute but will put some extra in on your behalf. I only hope the documentary gets more traction than George Galloway’s production on war criminal Tony Blair, which I also had the pleasure of supporting.

      • Tatyana

        seriously, I could have advertised the crowdfunding project with Russian audience, but donates from Russia hikely would be the reason to doubt the veracity of the film (for certain people)
        I’d rather buy one of his paper books, autographed by Mr. Murray with a personal message 🙂 It is my dream, really. I wish he offered such ‘personalised’ books.
        I once spent $100 on a tiny watercolor painting by an artist, who painted my favorite computer game. And reading Mr. Murray’s blog is much more informative and educative time spending.

    • Tom Welsh

      I wouldn’t worry too much, Tatyana. Most Western politicians are convinced (or pretend to be) that common sense or general knowledge is “a Russian talking point”.

      So much the worse for them.

  • Ian

    What a weirdly contorted attempt at crowbarring in some fantastical and entirely fictitious hobby horse of your own imagining.

  • Deb O'Nair

    This well published image (which was not made public by the police; it was a journalist who took the shot from the Salisbury fitness centre’s security monitor) is almost certainly of Strugess and Rowley. The police initially said that they were persons of interest and In a small city like Salisbury it would not have taken the police long to identify this couple by cross referencing other CCTV and using local intelligence. Then within 48 hours the police said they were no longer of interest. As well as being almost certainly Sturgess and Rowley there is also the red bag to consider, which was a detail picked up in many media reports regarding the scene where the Skripals were found.

    • Martin Hawes

      With modern image technology, wouldn’t it be possible to repair this image to the point where at least the man had recognisable features? Has anyone attempted this?

    • Deb O'Nair

      Coincidentally wondering around Salisbury at the tail end of the Army’s biggest ever chemical weapons exercise.

      • Tatyana

        Coincidentally Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley lived near Boscombe Down, coincidentally the RAF base, coincidentally managed by a private company, in which, coincidentally, Caroline Sturgess works.

        • Tom Welsh

          Craig’s film certainly should include a large, colourful and animated version of the simple triangular map he posted a year or so back – the one showing Salisbury, Amesbury and Porton Down with the lines joining them and the distances, and underneath a handwritten, “Well, this case has me stumped, Inspector – whatever can be the common factor?” (or similar words).

    • Tom Welsh

      Well, that is a very good question. I am a bear of very little brain, but if someone asked me the most foolproof way of bringing an important unique individual like the Army’s Chief Nurse together with a random superannuated spy living in retirement, I would say you would have to bring one of them to the other.

      Wouldn’t you?

  • Hatuey

    I remember in the 1990s installing a screen-saver that allowed SETI to harness the processing power of my computer when I wasn’t using it. It was a great idea but they didn’t find any evidence of aliens, as far as I know.

    Was that a waste of time and effort? Yes, but we had the advantage of not knowing it at the time.

  • Ian

    I, too, would be happy to crowdfund such an endeavour. Always enjoy reading your blog and your books though seldom find the time to comment.

  • MBC

    Why would the Russians have disposed of it that way, supposing it was them? And why three months later? Yes, the charity bin makes me shudder. Whoever planted it aimed to maim a poor and vulnerable person whom society was less likely to lament. Skripal was a political target. There was a rationale there. But a humble down on their luck British citizen? What kind of target is that? Who would do that?

    • Tom Welsh

      Thirty or forty years ago when I earnestly read all Tom Clancy’s books, I would have said the charity bin business obviously pointed to the heartless criminals in the Kremlin.

      Having had more leisure since retirement, and being more aware of the characters of Mr Putin and the denizens of Washington and London, today I would unhesitatingly say that it has the trademark of “the West”.

  • Stuart Goddard

    Is there a way to make a one off donation instead of recurring?
    Love your work….spent from 2005 to 2014 based in Tashkent! Amazing city!
    I’ll be contributing to your upcoming project….should be fascinating! Ready to help if needed.
    I’m an Australian

  • bj

    For the record:

    wherein Dr Michelle Bentley, a Senior Lecturer in International Relations and Director of the Centre of International Public Policy at Royal Holloway, University of London suddenly makes her appearance, and it is a significant one.

    She is somewhat of a student of narrative management:
    Royal Holloway staff profile – Dr Michelle Bentley
    and this very interesting read by Dr. Bentley:

      • bj


        Somehow the dot-html tail-end of it didn’t carry over in the html of my post here. I suppose the brackets are problematic, although they are perfectly valid here. I suspect that is a bug in the posting software used here.

        Anyway — add it yourself in your browser link and it works just fine. I visited the link first last year I think (and just now). It is fine.

        [ Mod: Fixed. Thanks for pointing that out. ]

  • Kempe

    Let me get this right. You’re saying that Dawn Sturgess was deliberately murdered by the British state because it somehow “fitted their narrative” and that the way this was achieved was that some toxic substance was dumped in a bin on the off chance that some “disposable” bin-diver would recover it? How could they be sure it wouldn’t be recovered by some “non-disposable” person or that it would be found at all and not simply carted off to landfill? It’s a very uncertain way of making sure it gets into the hands of the intended target.

    We might never know how that bottle got to be in the bin but wild speculation isn’t going to help. What would help would be for “Boshirov and Petrov” or whoever they are to abandon the farcical account of their visits to Salisbury and start telling the truth.

    • David

      Help you get this right, we are saying that quite a while before the Skripal farce, which ended up so far killing at least one or exploiting at least one death – the Integrity Initiative documents suggested that such a ‘happening’ was required to drag Russian relations down.

      In Craig’s docu he can presumably cover the Integrity Initiative’s setting of the stage – so count me in for a bit of crowd-funding seed – it is always rewarding to examine dark corners and see the threadbare ends of the narrative therein

    • Deb O'Nair

      The whole bin-diver thing could be a fabrication. I personally suspect that Sturgess and Rowley, who I firmly believe (based on the remarkable physical similarity in height, build, hair and what little facial features can be gleaned from the fitness centre CCTV) were in Salisbury at the time of the poisoning and are somehow involved, either as witnesses to something or involved in some kind of operation – maybe duped into being set-up as potential back-up patsies (there is a strong suspicion that the 7/7 bombers were hoodwinked into playing the part of bombers by the security services during the exercises which were being conducted on London underground that day). Rowley could be under considerable duress to play his part if he understands that he will be knocked off if he doesn’t. What I do know is that you can not believe a single thing you read in the mainstream media about the Salisbury poisoning because any operation of this kind requires the full support and cooperation of the media and we know, from experience and leaked documents, that this is something that they are happy to do.

    • Guy THORNTON

      A good comment….but no less speculative than the assertion that Russian professional assassins carried out a hit by smearing a doorhandle with toxic

      In broad daylight…..not knowing whether they would be captured on some cctv….not knowing which Skripal, if any, would open or close the door using the handle…using gloves or not as it was cold…..

      Since everyone, incl Russian govt, would know that the “Boshirov and Petrov” account would be met with derision, why would they have been sent/allowed to appear on TV?

    • Tom Welsh

      “UK to invest £48 million in new Chemical Weapons Defence Centre in wake of Skripal attack”.

      I love the idea that HMG is now going to spend £48 million of our money on a new “Chemical Weapons Defence Centre”! That seems to imply that they don’t already have a CW”Defence”C… so what on earth is Porton Down? Yes, that’s right – it’s a Chemical Weapons Offence Centre. An establishment purely dedicated to finding clever ways to kill or disable human beings.

      An establishment that lies within a morning’s walk of both crime scenes, where human beings were allegedly kill and disabled in clever ways.

    • Andyoldlabour


      How do you know that the location of the charity bin, was not being surveilled by the security services to allow them to harvest a victim who regularly bin dived. Ordinary people do not bin dive.

  • John A

    Far and away the most likely provenance of the sealed perfume bottle was that Charlie shoplifted it from the Boots where he got his methadone prescription. Drug addicts are always on the look out for ways to get easy money. Naturally, he then had to make up a story about finding it in a charity bin. Dawn most likely died from a drug overdose due to an impure fix.

    • Deb O'Nair

      My understanding is that the bottle was a fake, i.e. not a Nina Ricci perfume bottle, so it is unlikely that it would have been acquired from Boots.

      • John A

        Where did you get your understanding that the bottle was a fake? Not from the Mainstream Media by any chance?

        And even if it were, there are always dodgy traders on Oxford Street and elsewhere selling fake perfume. Charlie could have acquired it from somewhere else in the hope of making a bit of money.

        • Doghouse

          John A, it is indeed the most likely explanation.

          Everything after that relies entirely on the *analysis* and words of PD, as it does with the Skripals. Nuff.

        • Tom Welsh

          Yes, John A, that sounds like the right kind of thinking. As I posted shortly agao, how much of the information that has been published is actually rock-solid reliable?

        • Deb O'Nair

          The fake bottle can be adduced from looking at the images that were published of the bottle – obviously the vast majority of information has been gleaned from the media, but things can be inferred and deduced by looking at the anomalies, contradictions and inconsistencies in the reporting.

          The point I take with your post is that Rowley’s girlfriend died due to something he was supposed to have given her and yet you postulate that he stole it from Boots but made up the story of the charity bin, to avoid what? Being accused of shoplifting? Seems a bit of a stretch – if he stole it from Boots he would have no real reason not to admit it as lying to the police investigating a potential murder is far more serious than admitting to shoplifting.

          Without any evidence you then suggest that Rowely is an habitual petty villain, ducking and diving to make a few quid for his next fix, which is contradicted by the fact he was picking up a methadone prescription. You then state that Sturgess likely died of a drug overdose when it has been stated by her family and friends that she was battling alcohol dependency, while it may not be implausible that she also took drugs it is implausible that had she had an overdose it would not have been simply dealt with as one – people overdose all the time in the UK and I’m sure that Sturgess would not have been the first person to overdose in the Salisbury area since the Skripal poisoning.

  • Laguerre

    The KRG (Kurdish Regional Government in Iraq), to take a Kurdish example, is not a “fledgling democracy”. It’s run by a feudal oligarchy, the families of the Barzanis and the Talebanis. It’s a bit hard to say about Rojava, as they’ve been under the US thumb, dictating their actions, but the democratic bit is not very obvious when you’re at war. By the way, what women leaders in Rojava?

  • Robyn

    Does anyone have a plausible hypothesis about where the Skripals are? Zero contact with family and anyone else suggests they are dead or being kept totally incommunicado. I can’t imagine that they would voluntarily completely cut contact with everything from their pasts but, equally, I can’t imagine how the Deep State could whisk them away without a trace never to be heard from again.

    • Tom Welsh

      If the Deep State decided to get rid of them, they would have no scruples, no problem, and no hesitation. People are always eating and drinking things that disagree with them, and – in a government safe house – who’s to know? Who’s even to know if the deceased happened, by mischance, to walk into the edge of a swinging hand, or fall down stairs, or drown in the bath, or electrocute themselves… Some governments have been known to herd people into a helicopter, take them over the sea and push them out.

      One thing is for sure. People who meet with their end in a government safe house do not require inconvenient inquests.

    • bevin

      It’s really very simple: anyone who knows where they are or runs across them, is forced to keep quiet by a state whose power can be gauged by its ability to force anyone who knows where they are, how they got there and what happened to them, to keep quiet.
      The logical presumption in this case is that Dawn Sturgess knew something damaging to the state and was not going to keep quiet.

    • Keith McClary

      Robyn: “I can’t imagine that they would voluntarily completely cut contact with everything from their pasts …”

      Even if they did, they could still make a lucrative book deal (with a ghostwriter assistant, if desired).

  • King of Welsh Noir

    ‘The government narrative…depends on the Russians having a tiny plastic resealing technology concealed on them…’

    Presumably, too, they would have needed to be wearing Hazmat suits, items which I understand take half an hour to put on and take off safely. (I think you also need a decontamination tent.)

    • Andyoldlabour

      King of Welsh Noir

      They would have needed to be wearing them all the time, including the hotel in London where they allegedly left lots of traces of the deadliest nerve agent known to man.
      Remember, no children, no ducks and no first responders were hurt by the deadliest nerve agent known to man.

      • Deb O'Nair

        “where they allegedly left lots of traces of the deadliest nerve agent known to man.”

        For the record there was one tiny quantity claimed to have been found – so tiny that when checked again none could be found.

  • David

    Craig’s docu “Highly-Likely” would presumably cover stuff, some of it likely to be accurate, some of it not, still being vomited from weaponised news outlets like Belling?cat

    they are still churning away, now being reprinted in limited places like the NL based “Moscow Times” and the odd Ukrainian agency.

    Craig’s docu would need to cover the ten minutes with May call.
    In a summer 2018 call with Prime Minister Theresa May, Trump harangued the British leader about her country’s contribution to NATO. He then disputed her intelligence community’s conclusion that Putin’s government had orchestrated the attempted murder and poisoning of a former Russian spy on British soil.
    “Trump was totally bought into the idea there was credible doubt about the poisoning,” said one person briefed on the call. “A solid 10 minutes of the conversation is spent with May saying it’s highly likely and him saying he’s not sure.”

    on this story at least, taking ownership of our own consciences, we are with Trump.

    • Tom Welsh

      “A solid 10 minutes of the conversation is spent with May saying it’s highly likely and him saying he’s not sure.”

      Highly likely she did it, that is. Or some underling. Maybe even a “who will rid me of this turbulent priest?” scenario.

      • Tom Welsh

        Before anyone asks, I have exactly as much evidence that Mrs May gave the orders as she has that someone in Russia did.

  • LeeJ

    Why has no one considered that Dawn died of something connected to her drug taking and it is just a coincidence?

    • FredUp


      Dawn’s Family & Friends say she didn’t use “recreational drugs”, she had dabbled in them when she was younger but not at the time of her death, she was an alcoholic.

      The toxicology from the postmortem report says there were no non-prescription drugs in her system, she was dependent on antidepressants.

      The police say they substance found in the counterfeit perfume bottle discovered (eventually) in Charlie Rowley’s flat was a Military Grade Nerve Agent called Novichok, Porton Down say it may have been a “related compound”

      But ask yourself this; why did the Russians put the Nerve Agent in a counterfeit bottle of perfume (only available in Russia) when a genuine branded bottle would have been of far better quality (less leaky) and less likely to be detected at customs as a fake?

      • Tatyana

        I wonder is it possible that a manufacturer said ” I produce counterfeit Nina Ricci perfume and I sell only to Russia”? Even in this unbelievable situation, it’s hard to imagine that Putin ordered to find a bottle of perfume ‘only available in Russia’ to use it for the lethal chemical in Britain.

      • OnlyHalfALooney

        And the bottle apparently just broke in Charlie Rowley’s hands. Yeah right. I’m going to take this deadly nerve agent all the way to the UK in a bottle that might shatter at any moment. And I’m going to wander around Salisbury as if I’m lost with my face clearly visible. All the time carrying this bottle that might shatter and kill me. And then I’m going to spray it on Skripal’s door handle because this is a sure way to kill him.

        And I’m going to enter and leave the UK in the most visible way possible – via a major airport directly from Russia. On a Russian passport which requires a visa, because I’m completely stupid. And then I’m going to walk around with a smartphone because I don’t believe all that Snowden rubbish about the NSA being able to track anyone in the world.

        Contrast this attack with the assassination of Kim Jong-Nam. They splashed VX nerve agent directly on him. He was dead in minutes.

      • LeeJ

        My bad. She was an alcoholic. My understanding is that has health issues as well as drugs. So it’s plausible she died from her life style.

  • John Stone


    It has to be said that none of it makes sense. If Dawn Sturgess was deliberately killed to what purpose was it? Tying it in with Skripals, as you point out, only makes the whole thing even more difficult to explain. That said, it isn’t your fault that it doesn’t make sense.

    • FredUp

      Why they needed a death – any death:

      The Skripal NoviHoax had run out of steam, it had failed. Putin was more popular than ever.

      A huge amount of resources had been thrown at NoviHoax, it was in the planning stages for years, the Institute of Statecraft (IoS) and Integrity Initiative (II) had drawn up the blue prints for a response to such an incident 3 years earlier and immediately advised HMG to implement those proposals when the Salisbury Incident occurred.

      How could the most deadly Nerve Agent in the World not kill?

      A death was needed, Salisbury had failed, Putin had won the March election (boosted by the hysterical international response to Salisbury) and England were doing extremely well in the fantastically successful Russian World Cup, they were through to the final 16 by the 30th June

      Dawn was poisoned on 30th June, England went through to the semi’s on the 7th June, Dawn’s life support was turned off and she died on the 8th June.

      Why Dawn was kept on life support until the 8th June is not clear, perhaps the Inquest would clear that up.

      Russia was and remains resurgent, Nordstream 2 is forging ahead (a principal aim of IoS / II policy 2015 document was to scupper the Nordstream 2 project, when the Salisbury Incident occurred they immediately pushed again for sanctions against it to be fortified)

      The Russia World Cup could not have gone better for Putin, Russia had won in Syria (the US humiliatingly defeated). The Syrian False Flag Gas Attacks shown up for what they were and the cringe worthy Trump Dirty Dossier exposed.

      Theresa May had been caught out getting Mi6 to sabotage Trump’s Presidency, Steele and his dossier linked Mi6, Pablo Miller (Skripal’s Mi6 handler) to Skripal and dirty tricks aimed by the UK at Trump and Putin.

      A high stakes game had been played and lost by May’s secret army, a bunch of crackpot MoD disinformation & propaganda producing neocon fanatics placed in every British Embassy throughout Europe whose remit was to promote Clintonesque policies and harm Russia wherever possible.

      By any means; False Flags, False Reporting, False Research (Bellingcat), False Police Responses.

      Amesbury was a misconceived wicked plot, to rejuvenate the Salisbury project and get the Insane Scheme back on track.

      It was failed from the outset for several reasons, not least because the objectives were as mad as the people planning them, executing them and covering up the doomed machinations of lunacy.

      It didn’t have to be Dawn but her and Charlie but were ideal targets, they were well known (habits and movements) to the local police (and higher) their lives meant nothing to those involved, as now the feelings of Charlie and Dawn’s family and friends are completely immaterial, they are begging for answers and all they get fed are more questions.

      The people who do this job are public servants (paid for by us) they are selected through psychometric filtering to do inhumane deeds in support of their psychopathic masters, the same people that payroll the major political parties and own the main stream media along with 99% of the world’s wealth. But they always need more.

      And guess what at the next election (which is now imminent) the majority of the people who turn out to vote will vote for more of the same.

  • different frank

    Didn’t Charlie Rowley’s brother say that he wished his brother had not gotten involved with “those people”?
    I could not find the video to post a link to it.
    Who might people think “those people” are.
    These people have been used as pawns in a nasty political game.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.