"“We have lent a huge amount of money to the U.S. Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets. To be honest, I am definitely a little worried.” "


Chinese premier Wen Jiabao 12th March 2009


""We have a financial system that is run by private shareholders, managed by private institutions, and we'd like to do our best to preserve that system."


Timothy Geithner US Secretary of the Treasury, previously President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.1/3/2009

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

7/7 Forensic Explosives Report to be revealed as a result of FOI request

Leeds Crown Court heard today from a forensic toxicologist who producd a legthy, detailed and fascinating report, which revealed after examining hair and urine samples that Shannon Matthews had regularly been ingesting the drug Temazepam and travel sickness medication for up to 20 months before her disappearance earlier this year.

Regrettably the otherwise excellent Forensic services reports are not always availble in such detail or with such speed.

Remarkably the forensic report regarding the bombings on 7/7/05 is still unavailable (remember 56 people died that day and many many more were injured - such Danny Biddle who Home Secretary at the time, John Reid refused to meet and who has signed a petition asking for a Public Enquiry) and the public still do not know (amongst many other things) ;

1. What explosives / detonators were used in the bombs that exploded that day.
2. What triggers were used - remote or local.

Bridget Dunne has been a dogged pursuer of the truth and for the July 7th Forum sent the following ;

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 9:22 AM From "J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign"

julyseventh@fastmail.net

To public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

Subject Re: FOI request T16655/7

We requested a copy of the final forensics report into the events in London on 7th July 2005, and your response was:"This information will be put into the public domain following theupcoming trial of 3 defendants charged as a result of the continuingpolice investigation into 7/7 and it would therefore not be in the public interest to ask the Forensic Explosives Laboratory to disclose itbefore the conclusion of this."

As this trial has now concluded we request a copy of the final ForensicExplosives Laboratory report,

Regards
Bridget Dunne
on behalf of J7: The July 7th Truth Campaign

On November 11th 2008 she posted , "I have sent a reminder as we haven't had a reply. "

If Mr (?) J Fanshaw is still handling such matters, we look forward with interest to the reply. Of course if you want to gee things up you could send an e-mail based on the details above asking for a copy of the reply to her.

8 comments:

Bridget Dunne said...

During the Jean Charles de Menezes Inquest we learnt that the explosives in the car at Luton were destroyed at the scene.

This testimony is from army explosives expert codename 'Neil' who joined the Met in 2005:

A. I x-rayed the four devices to the right of the actual
screen itself, basically because with the other items
you could clearly see inside of them and that negated
any sort of threat inside of those. But with the other
four items, especially the ones with the cables going
inside, I wanted to see if there was any initiator
inside, and when we took the x-rays of the two with the
cable, they found flash bulbs which will be a typical
igniter for, as it was, TATP explosives.
SIR MICHAEL WRIGHT: That's the four jars or whatever they
were?
A. Yes, sir.
MR HILLIARD: Did you speak to a scientist at the forensic
explosives laboratory, and did you discuss whether it
was safe to try to fingerprint these items?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What was the view you were given?
A. That it was far too dangerous for anyone to actually
handle them. I then inquired would it be beneficial if
I could try and take a sample, and the advice was given
that, you know, it was my own decision whether it was --
whether I could take the risk to of the containers to actually get a sample; and having
looked at the items, the easiest ones were the four jars
at the top of the actual picture which only had
cellophane on, because I could easily cut one of those
open with a knife, pour some desensitising fluid inside
there and then take a sample from that.
Q. The flat packages?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you take a sample from one of those?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You did, all right. Ordinarily, would items like this
be taken away to the laboratory and be examined there?
A. No, not at all, sir, they were far too dangerous to
actually move any sort of distance and the forensics --
Q. I meant as it were ordinarily if you find items of
significance that --
A. Yes, sir.
Q. As far as these were concerned you were saying?
A. The nature of the explosives, because it is so
sensitive, is far too dangerous to move any distance at
all, and obviously the forensic scientist would have
refused to take it into the forensic laboratory, just
because of the nature of how dangerous it is so they
wanted --
Q. One of us is speaking too quickly. It could be me.
A. It's probably myself, sir.
Q. In case it's you, just -- yes?
A. So they would only take a sample that had been
desensitised, and then
subsequently with the other items they were destroyed by demolition a short distance from
where the vehicle was so we didn't cross-contaminate any
other evidence.
Q. So can you just explain to us, so they are photographed,
x-rayed and they are too dangerous to take to the
laboratory?
A. That's correct, sir.
Q. So they are detonated not quite there but --
A. It's about 150 metres down the car park was an area of
rough ground, grass, where I dug a small pit, got the
fire brigade to bring some sandbags, each item was
detonated using a single electrical detonator --
Q. Pause a moment. A detonator that was, as it were, there
ready or that you had to provide?
A. That I had to provide.

http://www.stockwellinquest.org.uk/hearing_transcripts/nov_07.pdf

He claims to have negated any threat from the ones he could see inside and yet claims they were too dangerous to send to the forensics lab. Nor were fingerprints taken. Too dangerous! Far too dangerous to move any distance at all, apart from 18 Alexandra Grove to Luton Station, apparently.

ziz said...

"Q. What was the view you were given?
A. That it was far too dangerous for anyone to actually
handle them."


Although curiously ( and very bravely) managing to take an X ray (famous nail bomb icon picturesw) which miraculously appeared on the abc News website
bearing their copyright.

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/LondonBlasts/story?id=979905

All very odd

But of course the official Forensic report will clear all this up.

Sinclair said...

The release of the 'ABC' pictures of the 'Luton unexploded devices' on 26th/27th July 2005 was timed nicely with the latest installment of the July 21st rolling story (the arrest of Yassin Omar in Birmingham)

The pictures of the 'unexploded Luton devices', as shown in the Jean Charles de Menezes Inquest were apparently 'mock-ups' !

ziz said...

It must be remembered that this ex military explosives expert was examining a zipped up black bag found in the footwell of a car in Luton railway Station on 12th July ...

There was a remarkable lack of curiosity about how this zipped up black bag found its way into the car ... nor even a philosophical examination why suicide bombers would leave them behind.

ziz said...

PS. Surely any photographs (ie ABC) taken by a forensic scientist which might be used as evidence would incorporate some device to provide a mthod of determing the dimensions of the item. Be numbered, dated etc.,

At the trial there was of course no discussion of the ABC pictures, who took them etc., how they got hold of them etc.,

Sinclair said...

The x-ray pic of the 'device' with the clout nails - that is a scary picture... however there does not seem to be a non x-ray pic of this device.

I haven't ever seen such an old-style milk bottle shaped bottle like that 33cm tall ...

Also why the delay in releasing these images to the public? Was it to keep the fear quotient up before the grand July 29th 2005 finale?

Sinclair said...

Pics of the 'mock-ups' of the alleged devices here

Bridget Dunne said...

Amazingly, the police hadn't received the final forensics report over a year later. This, from a response by John Reid to the Edgware Rd survivors who had questioned the location given in the official report:

"My officials have made enquiries of the Metropolitan Police. The police have confirmed that the wording of the Official Account accurately reflects their initial conclusions following statements they took from witnesses and their early examination of the scene. This shows that the bomb probably exploded near to the first set of doors. But where exactly the bomb exploded has yet to be established. The police are currently awaiting the final report from the Forensic Explosives Laboratory. This will be vital in determining the precise location of the bomb at the time of its detonation."

(C) Very Seriously Disorganised Criminals 2002/3/4/5/6/7/8/9 - copy anything you wish