HUTTON INQUIRY: AT the Hutton Inquiry, Tony Blair proved himself a master tactician by admitting responsibility for the late Dr Kelly being forced to give evidence in the public domain, but being blameless in the manner in which it was done.

As a lawyer, he used courtroom procedure to perfection. A judge is responsible for announcing the verdict, but it is the jury that makes the decision based upon the evidence and the judge's advice.

Mr Blair, as judge, advised the jury, the Joint Intelligence Committee, to 'do it according to the book,' which meant either, as Lord Hutton remarked: "We do not divulge the names of civil servants," or "give the name of the person involved to the press."

Mr Blair, as judge, in advising the JIC failed to draw their attention to the statements of two witnesses. One was a secret agent in Iraq who had given the information that WMD could be ready in 45 minutes, while the other was doubtful about the same information, which resulted in his evidence being discredited. He was an expert on WMD but in this particular situation his statements had to be monitored before being put in the public domain.

The issue of WMD in 45 minutes should never have arisen because the Prime Minister had previously stated in Parliament the reason why Great Britain went to war with Iraq was to implement UN Resolution 1441, which ordered the Iraqi government to disclose all information concerning WMD so they could be destroyed.

The Hutton Inquiry is a tragic sideshow involving two journalists who, in the words of the children's game, wanted to be 'king of the castle and not the dirty rascal.'

Mr Blair is a man of integrity and does not play games with people's lives, which is why he continues to be a trustworthy person leading the country to a prosperous future. - Thomas Conlon, Spennymoor.

PERHAPS we will never know the full story from the Hutton Inquiry. But what concerns me is who suggested the meeting between Dr Kelly and Andrew Gilligan and exactly why was Dr Kelly meeting a journalist.

I don't think anyone from Government should even think of resigning. - F Atkinson, Shincliffe.

DAVID Kelly has been described as a quiet man who didn't like his name being in the public domain.

That was the reason his meetings with Andrew Gilligan had been in secret. In fact he went 'ballistic' when he realised his secret was out. Dr Kelly was an introvert who should never have been compared to Walter Mitty.

Walter was an extrovert, a hero, who could be relied upon to save the day in times of crisis. A 'very important person'.

Another difference was that Walter would have valiantly faced his detractors, our hero would never allow anyone to take the blame for his misdeeds.

Yet there was a slight comparison. We learned that Dr Kelly was highly annoyed when he was described as a middle ranking official. He was, in his opinion, a high ranking official, similar to Walter Mitty he was a 'very important person'.

It is so unfair to blame the MoD. Geoff Hoon wasn't the official who had clandestine meetings with BBC journalists. The only people to blame are those who held the meetings. - Jack Baker, Peterlee.

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

AFTER reading Hugh Pender's letters, I have come to the conclusion that he is anti-Royal, anti-American and anti-everything else.

Does he not realise that if it weren't for the Americans we would be under German rule and so would be most of the world by now.

He wouldn't be sitting in his cosy little home pulling everybody to bits if it weren't for the Americans.

So who does he thank for his freedom of speech? - J Cook, Newton Aycliffe.

DURHAM CITY

WHAT are the people in whom we place the custody of our beautiful city of Durham doing with it?

What moment of planning lunacy permitted the construction of an open air latrine in the middle of North Road, one of the major thoroughfares of the city?

The spectacle of drunken males standing feet apart while intoxicated, almost-dressed young females dance ring-a-ring-a-roses around them making raunchy comments, adds a new dimension to public toilet.

It is offensive to the residents of the city and seriously detracts from the image of our city presented to visitors.

That they have these latrines on the continent is no reason why we should have them and indeed lends weight to the argument that it should be demolished.

Perhaps a requirement should be that the people who instigated this monstrosity should be required to take their wives and families to view it in operation. - H Henson, Durham City.