BREAKING: Midazolam Barrister in Dimmock Inquest James Bogle KC Breaks Silence

This Radical Dispatch Newszine - below - is provided free for all subscribers.

At the top of this post, Resistance Radio presents our WARRIOR CREED video/audio podcast from Tuesday 15th July 2025, with a transcript provided - BREAKING: Midazolam Barrister in Dimmock Inquest James Bogle KC Breaks Silence.

This podcast can be set to either audiovisual, or just audio, and is for premium members of Radical Media only. To listen, basic members should upgrade to the premium service here:

Read on now for our free Radical Dispatch.

---

BREAKING: Midazolam Barrister in Dimmock Inquest James Bogle KC Breaks Silence

- A Radical Dispatch

1) Midazolam Barrister James Bogle KC Breaks Silence

The barrister for the family in the ongoing and potentially precedent-setting medical inquest into the death of Derek Dimmock at the Royal Trinity Hospice has broken his silence to hint that he personally believes the British state was hastening the deaths of the elderly, by prematurely placing them on end of life pathways involving the administration of death row drug Midazolam and an opioid, while using Covid as cover.

Click to play:

Dimmock family barrister James Bogle KC: “The favoured way of shortening a life, let’s put it that way, rather than putting it anymore controversially, is to use in combination morphine and Midazolam. Midazolam is a sedative and morphine is an opiate. Or morphine is used to eliminate pain and Midazolam is used to sedate you, ostensibly to calm you down. The combination of the two is a very effective way of shortening somebody’s life. And what happens is, the doses go up and up and up, the patient dies and nobody really knows ‘did he die from dehydration? Did he die from malnutrition? Did he die from his underlying condition? Or did he die from having an increased dose of morphine and Midazolam?’ …This is why I said earlier, if you want to kill somebody, get a doctor or a nurse to do it, because it's very, very difficult to pin the blame on them. And the use of morphine and Midazolam as a regular feature of treatment of the terminally ill, of the sick, of the chronically sick and elderly in the NHS is now very common. I myself, with my own mother, when I went down to visit her in hospital, I said to the doctor, can I have a look at the medical, sorry, the drug chart? And the consultant said, ‘well, why do you want to do it?’ ..’I just would like to see it, if you don't mind’. Sure enough, she was being given morphine and Midazolam. And I had earlier said to the doctor, ‘is she in pain?’ ‘No, she's not.’ Well, is she... ‘Is she thrashing about, or is she in any way requiring a sedative?’ ‘No.’ And then when I went to the drug chart, there was morphine and Midazolam.”

Host Peter McCormack: “Well, that sounds like malpractice.”

Dimmock family barrister James Bogle KC: “Oh, it does. But it's very easy to get around that. It's very easy for a doctor to say, ‘well, we wanted to make sure she was comfortable. We wanted to make sure that she wasn't agitated. So we gave her Midazolam’.”

James Bogle’s intervention comes in the context of the Midazolam scandal going global, with the US, Canada and Ireland joining the UK in witnessing eerily similar scandals.

Click to play:

Maajid Nawaz for WARRIOR CREED: “Well, James Bogle, the barrister in the potentially precedent-setting medical inquest, is hinting there at the fact that his own opinion now may well be - he's not just doing his job here as a professional barrister saying, ‘I'm going to make the case for the family’ - he's hinting there in his clip that because his own personal experience with his mother, that his own opinion is also this, that the hospitals under the instruction of the health secretary at the time, Matt Hancock, were prematurely placing all of the elderly on end of life care pathways, regardless of whether or not they were diagnosed or not with COVID, because they were always able to place that on the death certificate afterwards. If you remember the ‘died of COVID and died with COVID’ controversy, which again is now pretty much out in the open. But if you could regardless place COVID on their death certificate and the cause of death could have been anything, which is what the procedure was at the time, that if they died during that time, ‘put COVID on the death certificate’. That gave them the cover to prematurely place an entire bunch of elderly people onto the end of life care pathway, NG163, and to hasten their death using a combination of Midazolam and morphine. And the rest of this stream is going to be dedicated to why James Bogle is correct to be concerned about this on a personal level. And why he is now being vindicated because, not just as we've been covering from the early days on the Warrior Creed live stream, is the UK affected by this? But now new evidence has emerged, which we'll go into during the course of this live stream, that they have found exactly the same conclusions as Dr. Wilson's Sy’s Australia peer-reviewed research paper into the UK deaths. They found exactly the same conclusion in Canadian research. And it's being testified in Ireland that the same thing happened there too. And in addition, in the United States of America, which even made it to the Joe Rogan show. The Midazolam story has blown up. It's gone global. The US, Canada, Ireland and the UK, according to research from Australia, are all now talking about the use of Midazolam combined with morphine to prematurely hasten the deaths of the elderly, using COVID as cover. This story isn't going to go away. It's only going to get larger and larger, as this stream is now going to demonstrate.”

And as the Midazolam scandal goes global, the UK state under PM Keir Starmer has sought to protect itself by decriminalising state assisted death, or euthanasia.

We warned about euthanasia being used to sanitise the premature hastening of death in our previous Radical Dispatch.

Radical Media reports 28th May 2025:

But the state diid not stop there. During that same week, Starmer’s House of Commons also voted to decriminalise full term abortion.

This is the shocking global and domestic context in which James Bogle’s intervention comes. A great deal more now rests on Senior Coroner Dr Julian Morris’ conclusions when the medical inquest into Derek Dimmock’s death resumes on Monday 11th August 2025.

Radical Media reports 23rd April 2025:

2) Midazolam Scandal Goes Global

Recent developments have catapulted the Midazolam deaths scandal to a global audience.

Dr Mary Talley Bowden recently raised the issue on a podcast episode with Joe Rogan.

Click to play:

Watch the full episode here.

Dr Mary Talley Bowden: “There’s actually a law suite today, that's first jury trial in the country over these hospital protocols, where they had a young woman with down syndrome they basically euthanised her. They gave her a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) order even though she didn't have one, and the father has just been wonderful, it's the Shara family…”

Podcast host Joe Rogan: “…why did they do that. They euthanised her for what?”

Dr Bowden: “I've seen this. I have reviewed records from these hospital patients, and they'll euthanise them. They need the bed. They say, well, they're going to die anyway.”

Rogan: “What was this person in the hospital for?”

Dr Bowden: “Covid. COVID protocol.”

Rogan: “And they... wait, wait, wait. So they were in the hospital with COVID, and they gave them something to kill them?”

Dr Bowden: “Yeah. That happened all the... I'm sorry, but... I mean, that happened. People, they give them morphine and insulin...yeah, yeah.”

Rogan: “That's common?”

Dr Bowden: “Yeah, yeah. I've reviewed charts. In this situation, they gave her a DNR, which is do not resuscitate, meaning if they look like they're dying, you don't do anything, which that was not the case. So they're suing for battery, which is one way of getting around the PREP Act, because the PREP Act is very hard to penetrate. The PREP Act protects everybody, all the doctors, all the hospitals, from any wrongdoing during COVID. So it's been this big challenge trying to get around the PREP Act. And this case has hope of getting around the PREP Act, because they're charging for battery. And they're in trial. It started today. It's in Wisconsin. So that gives me hope.”

Meanwhile, new Canadian research has arrived at the same conclusions as last year’s peer reviewed statistical analysis by Dr Wilson Sy - exclusively interviewed by Radical Media here - by stating that the April 2020 death spike could not have occurred naturally.

This corroborates the view that the April 2020 death spike was “iatrogenic”, or caused by the medical intervention itself.

Slay news reports 1st July 2025:

Slay news reports 1st July 2025:

“The 400-page report, authored by researchers Joseph Hickey, Denis Rancourt, and Christian Linard, lays out a case that the deadly first wave from March to May 2020 was not a natural pandemic. It was a manmade medical disaster. ‘Where excess mortality occurred, it was of institutional and iatrogenic origin, caused by mistreatment of frail and vulnerable people in hospitals and nursing homes,’ the report states. In plain English, people died because of the way they were treated, not because of a contagious virus.”

The conclusion that these April 2020 deaths were “iatrogenic”, or caused by the medical intervention itself, is one that Dr Wilson Sy came to in his peer-reviewed statistical analysis over a year ago.

Radical Media reports 22nd February 2024:

Here is that new Canadian paper followed by a brief synopsis of its findings.

Correlation reports 13th June 2025:

“CORRELATION has published a new report entitled “Constraints from geotemporal evolution of all-cause mortality on the hypothesis of disease spread during Covid” authored by Joseph Hickey, Denis G. Rancourt, and Christian Linard. Using high-resolution geotemporal all-cause mortality data, the authors show that mortality patterns during March-May 2020 in Europe and the USA are incompatible with the dominant paradigm of having been caused by person-to-person spread of a novel infectious virus.”

In Ireland now too - exactly as Dr Wilson Sy’s statistical analysis concluded over a year ago - recent ‘protected disclosures’ have revealed that Midazolam administration in nursing homes perfectly correlates with death spikes in April 2020.

Click to play:

Guest: “In the nursing home, there were no protocols for the care of these people. In the hospitals they had been getting treatment, but when they arrived in the nursing homes there was no protocol for treatment, and this is one of the things that you may recall Dr Marcus de Brun spoke about when you interviewed him recently. In fact, he was so incensed by this policy that he actually resigned from the medical council because he saw that there were no treatment protocols. And the only thing that they were given was end-of-life care like ‘Do Not Resuscitate’ and they were, and they were given drugs like Midazolam. And I don't know if you know about Midazolam, and I don't know if the viewers…it's an end-of-life drug. It speeds up your death. It causes kidney failure. It's a horrific drug. Not only that but, it is a respiratory suppressant. So why would anybody give Midazolam to a patient that suppresses their respiratory system, when we are supposed to be in the midst of a respiratory crisis like COVID? It simply doesn't make sense. So this was a very, very bizarre policy. Now, it's not clear who directed the protocols for the care, or the end of life care. But what in effect happened was that in April of 2020, there was a spike in deaths in nursing homes in Ireland.”

Counterpoint host Eddie Hobbs: “Can I bring up my slide now?”

Guest: “Yes, please.”

Eddie Hobbs: “Okay, thank you.”

Guest: “Thank you.”

Eddie Hobbs: “I wanted to get to this slide as fast as possible.”

Guest: “Thank you very much. This is a slide. And by the way, this is a slide which is contained in this protected disclosures document. And that's why I'm using it. And so for the viewer can see that the dark, thick lines represent the deaths that took place. And as you can see, you know, fourth in from the bottom, April 2020, there is...Obviously, a very massive spike in death. I mean, it's very, very clear. And then coincidentally, the thinner line, which in reality follows it, it's red in reality. You can see it exactly. There's a huge spike then of that thinner line. That thinner line represents the administration of Midazolam.”

The Midazolam scandal has gone global. The story is now too big to contain.

3) What Caused the April 2020 Death Spike During “Covid”?

Only Midazolam injections correlate with the officially confirmed April 2020 UK excess death. Nothing else does.

Understandably, some still have questions.

Okay sure, we'll bite.

The undisputed April 2020 excess death spike was so large that it caused the nation to go into multiple lockdowns and mandates. This means something was killing people. What was it?

i) The April 2020 Death Spike could not have been caused by Covid

As per Dr Wilson Sy’s peer reviewed statistical analysis of the aggregated data, It was not Covid. New Covid cases from April 2020 do not match deaths.

Regardless, Covid has a Parliamentary Hansard recorded IFR of 0.096%, which is similar to the flu. This spike was abnormally far higher than 'similar to flu' deaths.

Further, it could not have been Covid causing the April 2020 excess death, not least because the official line from the UK government’s own Health Security Agency states, as of March 2020 “Covid-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease high consequence infectious disease.”

Here is the archived page from their own website:

The statement that there was “no high consequence infectious disease as officially declared in March 2020” means: there was no Covid pandemic in April 2020.

As a reminder, Covid cases simply do not correlate to the April 2020 excess death, as the above graph from Dr Wilson Sy’s peer reviewed statistical analysis has already shown.

ii) The April 2020 Death Spike could not have been caused by Vaccines

‘Covid Vaccines’ could not have caused the April 2020 excess death spike because, and though they did much harm later on, these ‘vaccines’ had not yet been rolled out in the UK by April 2020.

We are not saying that Covid ‘vaccines’ did not contribute to any excess death. They likely did, and this author was cancelled from his own LBC radio show for opposing these ‘vaccine’ mandates after publicly boycotting the booster jab live on air. After April 2020, and on the evidence, it is possible that both Midazolam and ‘vaccines’ acted concurrently.

However, we are specifically saying that the April 2020 UK excess death occurred prior to UK vaccine roll out and therefore could not be due to ‘vaccines’.

In other words, neither new covid cases nor ‘covid vaccines’ correlate to the undisputed huge excess death spike in April 2020.

iii) The April 2020 death spike must have been caused by something. So what’s left?

As Dr Wilson Sy’s peer reviewed statistical analysis demonstrates, the only intervention that correlates with the undisputed excess death from April 2020 - with over 90% co-efficiency - is the systemic administration of Midazolam injections plus an opioid by the state, using the NHS end of life protocols such as NHS protocol NG163.

Here is last year’s research paper in question, by Dr Wilson Sy.

And here is Dr Wilson Sy’s summary from the paper’s abstract:

“This paper shows that the UK spike in deaths, wrongly attributed to COVID-19 in April 2020, was not due to SARS-CoV-2 virus, which was largely absent, but was due to the widespread use of Midazolam injections which were statistically very highly correlated (coefficient over 90 percent) with excess deaths in all regions of England during 2020.”

As if that part wasn’t shocking enough, Dr Sy continues:

“Importantly, excess deaths remained elevated following mass vaccination in 2021, but were statistically uncorrelated to COVID injections, while remaining significantly correlated to Midazolam injections. The widespread and persistent use of Midazolam in UK suggests a possible policy of systemic euthanasia.“

We have presented a peer-reviewed thesis. It is now down to our detractors to use data, not emotion, to show otherwise. That is the scientific method. That is what ‘follow the science’ means.

Unless Dr Sy’s paper is scientifically refuted, the conclusion that the entire medical establishment was prematurely terminating people as a matter of protocol in care homes and hospices by inducing death via end of life protocol NG163 involving the use of Midazolam plus an Opioid while using Covid as cover on the death certificates, is an inescapable one.

As Dr Wilson Sy's peer reviewed statistical analysis shows - and rest assured, he understands the high school level distinction between correlation and causation - as it shows by labelling it "iatrogenic", the entire April 2020 death spike was self-induced by the state.

The saddest part of this all is that new research published on the British Medical Journal palliative care webpage suggests that patients whose deaths are ‘assisted’ in this way may die in pain, while being paralysed and therefore totally unable to express said pain.

4) ‘Died With Covid’ Was Code for Unlawful Killing

Those involved in this industrial level death orchestrated by the state sought to hide their crimes using deliberate obfuscation on death certificates by labelling those who died in this way as having ‘died with Covid’ rather than ‘died of Covid’.

Click to play:

Hancock: “Uh, al..when, a lot of, and a lot of...when people...how shall I put it? Working out whether a death was due to COVID-19 or not is not a trivial task clinically. Chris Whitty is more eloquent on this than I'm being. And therefore, working out what was non-COVID, what was COVID, and...and separating out also, you know, was, if there was a care home resident who went into hospital and died, making sure that that doesn't double count, that's a sort of tractable administrative challenge. But then there's genuine deep clinical challenges, which is when somebody who's very frail dies, what they died of is difficult question. And therefore, there were both tractable and intractable problems with the data. Does that make sense?”

Cross-examiner at Covid inquiry: “Yeah, I understand that. And I think the answer to my question was, yes, you would have rather had it earlier on. Yeah, of course. But there are various practical reasons why it may not be possible to ascertain in the level of detail what is a death from COVID or a death of COVID. I understand.”

Hancock: “Death with COVID. But the answer to your question would it have been better to have data earlier on: ‘yes’. The real question now, for the country now is, will we be in a position to have this sort of data right from the start next time?”

Aside from Hancock’s brazen conclusion at the end there, which hints at his wanting to create a unified government database of all things (a panopticon, or Palantir) to ‘prevent this from happening next time’ a key takeaway from the above is that the state obfuscated around death causes - by liberally placing ‘died with Covid’ on death certificates - at a time when Midazolam has been shown to have been the only factor to have correlated with the huge April 2020 death spike, not new Covid cases.

Such obfuscation was not restricted to the UK.

KFRY TV reports 2nd September 2020:

Ongoing covid inquiries from England, Scotland and Wales only serve to further corroborate this bleak picture.

Click to play:

Helen Louise Hough: “Do you recall the first death of a COVID-19 positive patient of yours?”

Carehome manager: “I do.”

Helen Louise Hough: “Can I just ask you some details about that, if I may? On that occasion, I understand that he was an elderly gentleman...”

Carehome manager: “No, a lady.”

Helen Louise Hough: “A lady. Oh, my apologies. A lady who'd become unwell.”

Carehome manager: “Yeah.”

Helen Louise Hough: “And that you requested a test, again, from Public Health Wales, as we've already been through. That test subsequently came too late.”

Carehome manager: “Yeah.”

Helen Louise Hough: “…in the day. But I want to concentrate, if I may, upon your requests for medical assistance and oxygen in particular. Her oxygen levels were low..”

Carehome manager: “Yes”

Helen Louise Hough: “..and you sought a prescription, is that right?”

Carehome manager: “That's right.”

Helen Louise Hough: “And what response did you get?”

Carehome manager: “This lady became quite poorly very quickly. She was a very fit lady, and I noticed she became quite poorly. Her temperature was rising, and she did start with a bit of a cough. So we rang the GP (a doctor who is a General Practitioner). Of course... with with the wi-fi, you don't, we couldn't get an accurate picture because the wi-fi would break up, so she couldn't see her. So I said to the to the GP, she was a Locum GP, she wasn't a local GP, and...I said ‘I need some oxygen for this lady and some antibiotics’ so she prescribed the antibiotics and she did say to me ‘how do I do the oxygen?’ So I said, ‘well you write me a prescription, we come and pick it up, then we take it to the chemist, and then we get some oxygen, or whichever body where we take the prescription to, and we get the oxygen’. So she said, ‘well, the prescriptions will be here tonight’. So we picked up the prescription from the GP's practice. By this time, it was 6 o'clock, so everywhere was closed. So I couldn't get any oxygen. So the very next day, I rang her own GP, who was then back on duty, and I said the same thing to them. ‘This lady's deteriorating overnight. She's very poorly. I need some oxygen. We've picked up the antibiotics. I need the oxygen. I need it ASAP, because our oxygen levels are dropping down’. And she prescribed end-of-life drugs. And we never, ever got the oxygen, ever.”

Matters were facilitated in this regard because, as a matter of protocol, patients were placed on DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) orders so that no attempt could be made to revive them if their condition began to deteriorate.

Click to play:

Pete Weatherby KC: “I ask questions on behalf of the Covid Bereaved Families for Justice UK, and I have just one topic and a few questions. It's an important topic. It's DNA CPRs. which, as you'll appreciate, is a very traumatic topic for quite a number of the families I represent. So 26th of March, and you're sending this, as I say, to Rosamund Rawton. And you say that, ‘Ros, we've been contacted by a care home provider in relation to a flurry of emails and letters from their local GPs. Essentially, requesting that all residents in the home are put onto a DNAR (Do Not Attempt Resuscitation) . In one of the emails, which I know is not the scanned copy, there is even a suggestion that the GP is following government guidance stating that all over 70s in homes should be issued with a DNAR. This is a very urgent situation that could escalate very quickly and unhelpfully causing lots of fear and concern amongst residents and their families made worse by the fact that people are being asked to make decisions about their family members who they may not even be able to see for the last couple of weeks, nor do they have any prospect of seeing. I'd like clarification ASAP if this is in any way endorsed government policy’. And then it goes on, I won't read it all. And then finally, ‘I'd be grateful if you could also let me know the response. I think these things are probably happening all over the country’.

You then sent later, the same day in fact, going up to page one of that thread, please, the bottom half, to the same...well, to a CQC (Care Quality Commission) person, but also copied to Rosamund Rawton…sorry, you sent another email in the afternoon, bottom of page one. ‘Further letters come through on this issue’, a headed sample of GP letters. The penultimate paragraph says this, quote, ‘we will also be signing forms to say that if your heart or breathing stops, the carers will not resuscitate you. There will not be ambulances available to continue any resuscitation or take you to hospital, so that will not work. You would be unconscious quickly and not be aware that this is happening to you and not be in any pain’, unquote. The homes are being asked to give this letter out to all residents in the care home. Apart from this being an extraordinarily upsetting letter for people to deliver to already vulnerable and anxious residents and families, it is essentially telling people that they will be left to die. Where was the decision to ration resources in this way made?’ and then you continue in terms of community health and the CQC. Just two points arising from that. Your emails suggest that there were multiple GP practices involved. Are you able to help us in how widespread you understand this issue was at the time?”

Professor Vic Rayner OBE: “So on that day that we had received note that there was a flurry of emails. So that was the description. I couldn't quantify that anymore. But I was aware from talking with other colleagues in other organisations like my own that they were also aware that other groups of people had received emails.”

Pete Weatherby KC: “Yeah, so not an outlier, but a flurry.”

Professor Rayner: “I think it was an early, a bit like I was describing earlier, an early indication of something that we wanted to stop before it got more. But it was definitely not the suggestion it was one letter alone.”

Pete Weatherby KC: “No, indeed. And you say, as I've just read out, I think these things are probably happening all over the country. And is that because the accounts you're receiving were coming from different areas?”

Professor Rayner: “So the provider I was talking about was a national provider, so they were reporting it was from different parts of the country?”

Pete Weatherby KC: “Yes, thank you. To your knowledge, who was instructing, if anybody, who was instructing GP practices to put DNACPR (Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation), notices such as this in place?”

Professor Rayner: “I never had any answer to whether there was any instruction around that.”

While placed on these DNR orders, nurses were instructed to simply routinely terminate patients using Midazolam.

Click to play:

Registered nurse Zandra Lewis: “…and they put all of them apart from two patients on what I call TLC, Tender Loving Care, which basically means Liverpool care Pathway to them, but it didn’t to us because TLC means you still give somebody fluids and food until they really can't take it anymore. Even if somebody's dying, you still, you don't deprive them because, you know, thirst and that feeling of being nil by mouth, that's horrible. So they basically went around and did that, put everybody on TLC. They wrote a lot of people up for Midazolam and for diamorphine, and started giving it to some of the patients. Now, rather than trying to give fluids and, you know, food, because that's what most people need to sustain life, they didn't. They didn't bother. They basically, the ones that put TLC were written up for morphine and Midazolam, and then they overdosed them”

Cross-examiner: “…I’m just re-asking because the information is so shocking essentially. What you are saying is that when..the health and social..came in, people were put on what you would call ‘end of life pathways’ whatever the current term is, which means they’re denied food and water and they’re put on drugs like morphine and Midazolam which are respiratory suppressant drugs and are used at end of life. So irrespective of Covid or no Covid at that point, whether they had a virus or not, they were going to die from the ‘end of life pathways’ and therefore it’s accurate to say the Department of Health and Social Care, the arm of our government, killed a number of people..up to 20 people’”

Zandra Lewis: “Yes. And when our lawyers sent a thing to the police to investigate it. We were told there was nothing to answer to.”

5) Who is Responsible for the Deaths?

i) Covid-era Health Secretary Matt Hacock

The ongoing covid inquiry has at least revealed that the former Health Secretary Matt Hancock has accepted responsibility for the decisions made that led to this unmitigated disaster. Many victim-families will be inclined to interpret this as criminal responsibility.

Click to play:

Cross-examiner: “Can I turn, please, to ask you about the hospital discharge policy, Mr Hancock? And at the outset, can we be clear, was it one person's decision?”

Covid-era Health Secretary Matt Hancock: “No.”

Cross-examiner: “Who or which department's decision was it?”

Matt Hancock: “Well, it was formally a government decision. It was signed off by the Prime Minister. It was really driven by Simon Stevens, the chief executive of the NHS. But it was widely discussed, both in the department, with the NHS and with the centre.”

Cross-examiner: “You said in your statement, in fact, that...NHS England insisted on the policy.”

Matt Hancock: “Yes.”

Cross-examiner: “And you later in your statement said, ‘although I did not take the decision, I take responsibility for it’.”

Matt Hancock: “Yes, for two reasons. The first is it was a decision of the government and I was the... Secretary of State. And I take responsibility for all of the decisions in the area that I was responsible for. The second is that whilst this is obviously an incredibly contentious issue, as I also said in my statement, nobody has yet provided me with an alternative that was available at the time that would have saved more lives. There are things that we can do now and indeed should have been doing for the last three years since this inquiry was set up, to make sure we're better prepared. And we went through some of those right at the start. But obviously having... wracked my brains about this and thought about it incredibly hard and in preparation for this inquiry having gone through all of the paperwork, I still can't see a decision that would have been less bad. None of the options were good.”

Cross-examiner: “Do I take it that it was, from your perspective, the least bad decision, the least worst decision?”

Matt Hancock: “That's exactly my view, is that it's the least worst decision that could have been taken at the time.”

Cross-examiner: “But it was a decision nonetheless that you agreed with at the time?”

Matt Hancock: “I accepted it. I wasn't the driving force, but it was the decision of the government, yes.”

Cross-examiner: “…question I asked you, was it a decision you agreed with at the time?”

Matt Hancock: “Yes, yes. I defended it at the time. And whilst I wish that there had been a better option, I still can't find one.”

ii) Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty

Likewise, Hancock’s covid-era Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty has also now accepted responsibility, while previously having denied it.

Telegraph reports 30th June 2025:

iii) Tory MP Dr Luke Evans

Another who should be held to account is Dr Luke Evans MP, the Tory parliamentarian who encouraged Hancock as Health Secretary to pre-order sufficient supplies of Midazolam prior to the “Covid” outbreak.

Click to play:

Dr Luke Evans MP, April 2020: “…a ‘good death’ needs three things. It needs equipment, it needs medication and it meeds the staff to administer it. So in terms of equipment, a few quick questions. Do you have enough syringe drivers in the NHS to deliver medications to keep people comfortable when they're passing away?”

Matt Hancock MP: “Yes, we do. There was a challenge raised about this about eight days ago, and we resolved that actually it wasn't as big a challenge as as was made public, and we've resolved that. So yes, right now we do”.

Dr Luke Evans MP: “And the second one is with that, that's the syringe drivers deliver medication, particularly things like Midazolam and morphine. Do you have any precautions put in place to make sure we have enough of those medications to be delivered?”

Matt Hancock MP: “Yes, we've got a big project to make sure that those sorts of medications, as well as the ITU medications that I spoke about earlier, that the supply chains, the global supply chains for all those medicines are clear. They are, in fact, those medicines are made in a relatively small number of factories around the world. So it is a delicate supply chain and we are in contact with the whole supply chain.”

Dr Luke Evans MP: “And in line with that, morphine is currently prescribed per patient. The reason to do that is to stop it being abused. So I have to prescribe it for Mr. Hancock. However, in this situation, if you're going into a healthcare home, you may not want to waste precious things like morphine. Have you considered relaxing the laws around morphine prescribing for doctors and healthcare professionals so that there isn't waste?”

Matt Hancock MP: “That’s something that we keep under review. I’ve looked at that particular point to reduce wastage of key medicines, and it’s something that he supply chain, the supply team sorry, in the department and the clinical team talk about all the time. I don't know if that's JVT's (Jonathan Van-Tam) part of the clinical team and he may want to say more.”

Likewise, Chief Science Officer Jonathan Van-Tam should not be so easily forgotten.

To access the Parliamentary source transcript for above video dated April 2020 click here:

Curiously, and as Radical Media has previously highlighted, this is the same Dr Luke Evans who was out campaigning for then Tory councillor Amanda Wright-klugar, who is now the barrister representing the Royal Trinity Hospice at the Derek Dimmock inquest.

iv) CEO of NICE Sir Andrew Dillon

Another who must accept responsibility is Sir Andrew Dillon, who was Chief Executive at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), the body that devised the NG163 Midazolam protocol.

Interestingly, Sir Andrew quit as the CEO of NICE in March 2020, one month before the huge April 2020 excess death spike.

HSJ reports 22nd August 2019:

Sir Andrew Dillon then went on to become a Director at the Royal Trinity Hospice, which is where Derek Dimmock died after being administered Midazolam.

Rather suspiciously, again, Sir Andrew quit from the Royal Trinity Hospice only one day after the medical inquest into Derek Dimmock’s death began.

Derek Dimmock’s medical inquest began on 17th March 2025. Here is the Companies House entry stating the date of Sir Andrew Dillon’s resignation, on 18th March.

It looks like Sir Andrew is on the run. What does he have to hide?

6) Derek Dimmock’s Precedent-Setting Inquest Resumes August

The first half of this medical inquest was held between 17th March 2025 until 21st March 2025. It attracted significant media attention and was eventually covered nationally by GB News.

Click to play:

GB News’ Beverly Turner: “Thank you. It is important that we keep talking about it. There's a fascinating coroner's case going on at the moment in Southwark in London, which nobody's talking about, which was the death of a gentleman called Derek Dimmock, who died in a care home, and his son, Paul, has asked for a coroner's report into the fact that he believes he was killed by Midazolam, which is an end-of-life pathway that many old people in that first spike of deaths were put on in care homes and hospices and in not hospice but in hospitals and and the findings of that will be extremely significant but if it is found that this guy died because he was over liberally given an end-of-life care drug that he didn't need then it opens the floodgates to lots of people say hang on what happened to my mum what happened to my dad because people were panicking in care homes and I'm not saying that they were deliberately bumping off the elderly but in the environment of panic.”

GB News’ Andrew Price: “And don't forget, the Secretary of State for Health, Matt Hancock, said he was putting a protective arm around our care homes and it was a disaster.”

GB News’ Beverly Turner: “And here he is on the front page of the Mirror, Matt Hancock, having been at the COVID inquiry yesterday. Now he said, I'd do it all again over my dead body.”

The wider allegation being made by victim-families is that during Covid the British state implemented a deliberate and systemic policy of involuntary mass euthanasia of the elderly in hospitals and care homes by administering the end of life protocol drug Midazolam plus an opioid, while using Covid deaths as cover for this mass killing.

If ruled by the senior coroner as ‘unlawful killing’ in this precedent setting case, the United Kingdom will be rocked by the worst mass killing scandal in its history.

Radical Media attended Committee Room 5 in the UK House of Commons in June 2023 to hear from 50 victim-families who believe that their loved ones had been similarly involuntarily euthanised.

No official recordings from this parliamentary hearing have ever been made available.

Even though the parliamentary sign from the day of the hearing stated “broadcasting.”

But Radical Media has provided our own free raw audio file of these 50 family member testimonies in Parliament from June 2023 below….

To continue reading, gain access to the WARRIOR CREED podcast and other exclusive paywalled content, become a premium member of Radical Media here…