David Kelly, the biological weapons adviser at the centre of the Iraq dossier row, has been found dead. David Charter, Chief Political Correspondent, left, who witnessed Dr Kelly's evidence to MPs this week, recalls the hearing.

How did Dr Kelly come across when giving evidence on the Iraq dossier?

He was extremely softly spoken, clearly not a man used to making public speeches. While he seemed fairly composed at most times, the whole hearing felt incredibly tense. It was one of the hottest days of summer, the atmosphere was stifling, but the fans had to be switched off so people could hear him.

What was the main thrust of his evidence? Was it convincing?

Dr Kelly's main evidence was that he did not recognise or recall large chunks of what was reported by Andrew Gilligan, the BBC defence reporter, although he said he had met Mr Gilligan on May 22. He convinced the committee that he could not have been Mr Gilligan's main source.

What was the tone of the questioning?

Mostly the questioning was straightforward, trying to elicit facts and establish what Dr Kelly knew about Iraq's weapons and what he told Mr Gilligan. At times some of the MPs were quite hostile in their line of questioning and Dr Kelly seemed at a loss to know how to handle this.

What was the committee's view of his evidence?

The committee was firmly of the view that Dr Kelly was not Mr Gilligan's main source. Several members, both Labour and Conservative, were convinced that Dr Kelly had been made a "fall-guy" by the Government and offered up as the main source to rubbish Mr Gilligan's case.

What was the consensus among observers at the hearing?

Some of the journalists present felt that the committee was too ready to conclude that Dr Kelly could not have been Mr Gilligan's main source. There seemed to be some unique things which Dr Kelly said that he told Mr Gilligan, such as the 30 per cent likelihood that Iraq possessed chemical weapons, that Mr GIlligan attributed to his main source - the one which the BBC reporter said blamed Alastair Campbell for "sexing up" the September dossier on Iraq's weapons.

Dr Kelly denied accusing Mr Campbell of this, however. The implication of Dr Kelly being Mr Gilligan's main source is that Mr Gilligan either overplayed what he was told, or Dr Kelly underplayed it to the committee.

Was Dr Kelly voluntarily thrust into the limelight, or was he forced there?

The Ministry of Defence said that he volunteered to give evidence after coming forward because he realised that he might be construed as Mr Gilligan's source

Explore Specials

• Style Guide