By 2080, anyone with a direct interest in learning how Dr. David Kelly died, will themselves be dead.

That’s how an Oxford coroner reacted to a recent ruling ordering the details of the former United Nations weapons inspector’s death locked away for 70 years, according to a Mail Online report.

Kelly’s story, however, was gravely important in 2003, just before he was found dead in the woods behind his home in Oxfordshire, U.K. As the BBC revealed in the wake of his passing, he had been the key source behind a story claiming intelligence on Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction was “sexed up.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Hours before his death, he reportedly e-mailed New York Times reporter Judith Miller, warning her of “many dark actors playing games,” according to the BBC.

Lord Hutton, the British judge who led the state’s investigation into Kelly’s death, also ordered his written records pertaining to the case sealed for 30 years, according to UK’s Morning Star Online.

The report added that Hutton’s inquiry “concluded that Dr Kelly had killed himself by cutting an artery in his wrist. But the finding has been challenged by doctors who claim that the weapons inspector’s stated injuries were not serious enough to have killed him.”

A paramedic who responded to the scene was quoted by The Guardian, saying: “There just wasn’t a lot of blood… When somebody cuts an artery, whether accidentally or intentionally, the blood pumps everywhere. I just think it is incredibly unlikely that he died from the wrist wound we saw.”

The claims eventually led a group of six doctors to bring formal demands for an investigation into Kelly’s death. An initial inquiry was headed up by the British Ministry of Defense.

ADVERTISEMENT

“[Just] how far were the Blair/Bush administrations willing to go in order to fabricate a reason for the Iraq war?” asked RAW STORY’s Investigative News Editor Larisa Alexandrovna in a post to her blog, At Largely. “The Bush administration was at the very least willing to out a covert CIA officer, committing treason in the process. What was Tony Blair willing to do?”

Sadly, with the court’s inquiry ended, the questions seem doomed to persist.