TRANSCRIPT

Programme(s) BBC News 24

Date 8 time Sunday 20th July 2003 1509
Subject/ interviewee Dr Kelly- Tom Mangold
Prepared by Irene Blake
Contact numbers 020 7276 1080- Pager 07659 137 572- 24hrs, every day

Philip Hayton: The former BBCjournahst Tom Mangold was a good friend of Dr
Kelly and he joins me now from West London Good afternoon
Tom Mangold (Friend of Dr Kelly) : Good afternoon
PH: So according to the BBC David Kelly was the principal source for that report.
David Kelly though didnY see it quite that simply did he?
TM : No he didn't he certainly didn't recognise several aspects of Andrew Gilligan's
report and when he told the Committee that he didn't think he was the, the main
source he was semantically correct He certainly gave Andrew Gilligan the hard
facts on what he felt was not quite right about the JIC intelligence assessment on
weapons of mass destruction and he wanted to put Andrew right on that . But he
took no responsibility for steering Gilligan in the direction of a wide conspiracy
involving possibly the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary and the Secretary of
State of Defence, the conspiracy to deceive the British public into supporting an
unjust war against Iraq .
PH: What about the BBC naming him today I mean some people are saying they
should have named him earlier, presumably as alournalrst you would not have
approved of that?
TM : Well I don't think you should ever name sources but it was Dave himself
because he was a very honourable man who decided to change the rules and he
outed himself, you must bear that in mind. From that moment onwards I think the
BBC should have worked with this important and major source and it should indeed
have helped him a little more than it did .
PH : So . . .
TM : I'm not, I'm not exactly bold over to learn two weeks later that, that the BBC
confirms that Dave Kelly was the source, we've known that for a long time.
PH: So do you go along with Robert Jackson, David Kelly's MP who said that in
some way the ambiguity could have contributed to his death?
TM : That's a tricky one . My own feeling about the tipping point for his death is that
Dave and I discussed at great length his desire, his very very strong desire to return
to Iraq as a weapons inspector, work with his previous colleagues . And he was
absolutely convinced he'd be able to find some of the evidence of the WMD
programme which had been hidden in the desert after Blix's visit in I think it was
November . He was really keen to go and I think the possibility that that trip, trip may
have been interrupted or might not have taken place, don't forget this was his last
year working for the British Government, this would have upset him very, very
deeply
PH: !s it right though that he should be named today after all he canY answer for
himself and we had Trevor Kavanagh the Political Editor of The Sun on earlier
saying that in effect the BBC is accusing him of lying2

C~-S) i l 0 4zo
TM : Well I'm not sure the BBC is doing, is accusing him of lying ..
PH: Well that, those were Trevor Kavanagh's words I mean in, in light of the fact
that the BBC statement today says that they stand by the accuracy of their report
and the interpretation . . .
TM : Well just (indistinct) lust examine, examine the words I mean semantics are
totally important in this issue. The BBC is still maintaining that it was right to
transmit that report . What the BBC is not saying, has not said and in my opinion is
never going to say is the one thing they ought to be saying which is do they believe
m the accuracy of the allegations? Those were very very serious Watergate like
allegations . They were made, they were transmitted on a very important programme
that sets the agenda for the day and the BBC has yet to produce substantive . .
PH : But . .
TM : . . . evidence supporting that
PH: . does, does it matter what the BBC thinks 1 mean the BBC was relaying . . .
TM : Well of course it matters what the . . .
PH: . . the information, relaying the allegation?
TM : You, you can't lust relay allegations, you know do you think that's how Ben
Bradley ran Watergate for the Washington Post? Do you think you just sit down and
say oh somebody's making an allegation, that sounds pretty credible 'cos they're all
a bunch of lunatics in Downing Street so I'll transmit that? Is it true, is it untrue, it
doesn't matter, at the time it was worth reporting the allegations? Our job as
investigative reporters, that's what we do and we do it well at the BBC, we find out
whether there's any truth to the allegations . If there is the BBC has yet to produce it
The BBC is not fully supporting Andrew Gilligan I haven't seen evidence that
supports the wider allegations Dave Kelly says he never made those allegations,
he told me he hadn't made them, he didn't tell the BBC Ten o'clock News that he'd
made them, he told the Committee he hadn't made them You know if it walks like a
duck and quacks like a duck it probably is a duck So the BBC has a way to go on
this yet but it cannot simply say we reported these allegations in all fairness . I
happen to think it was right to transmit that item They must now follow through and
say either the allegations are true or credible or untrue. And if they feel the
allegations are untrue they re going to have to take steps to apologise .
PH: Well they don Y mention Andrew Gilligan do they by name in their statement
today but the BBC does say quite categorically they believe quote we accurately
interpreted and reported the factual information obtained by . . .
TM: Well tell . .
PH : . .us during interviews with Dr Kelly
TM : Well tell me what that means, do you read that as meaning they support the
allegations and that it's true that there was a very high level conspiracy to deceive
the British people into supporting the war? Is that your interpretation of it because
you're in the office I'm not?
PH : l, l donY cast judgments on these things 1 just ask questions Tom.
TM: And the BBC just reports allegations
PH : Tom Mangold thank you.
End