W.W. SCOTT > EDITORS re: Sgt. HUGHES & HoL LIBRARY
William W. Scott,
**CUT by G.L-W.**
North Berwick,
East Lothian,
EH39 4PY.
Tel: 01620 **CUT by G.L-W.**
Fax: 01620 **CUT by G.L-W.**
17/08/09
Dear Editor,
10 years ago I heard and read in Hansard that Lord Burton had requested, on the floor of The House of Lords, that a copy of a report to the Cullen Inquiry into the Dunblane Tragedy by a Sergeant Hughes be placed in the House of Lords library. The request was refused as this crucial key report was subject to a 100 year closure order.
There are of course many questions that were unanswered:
01. Where did Hamilton get the finance to enable him to buy and afford the upkeep of a cabin cruiser on Loch Lomond?
02. What happened to the photographs that went missing from his house?
03. Where is the inventory of the many boxes of material removed from Thomas Hamilton's home by the plain clothes officials who ordered the local police out of the house?
04. Why was it accepted that he left Stirling on the road to Dunblane when that was not the case?
05. Why was there confusion over the phone calls made to the police from the school?
06. Who signed the letter of 'good character' that authorised the issue of a Fire Arms Certificate?
07. Where is that letter & why was it not presented as evidence?
08. Who signed his firearm certificate?
09. Why was a junior officer overruled when she recommended that Hamilton’s firearm certificate should not be renewed?
10. Why did the local authority allow him to run clubs when he did not have any of the legally required qualifications?
11. What was Thomas Hamilton's legal status regarding Queen Victoria Boys School (as it was then)?
12. On what grounds was Thomas Hamilton able to obtain overnight release on 'exeat' of boys from QVS?
13. When boys returning in a distressed state with money from exeats with Thomas Hamilton and various other establishment figures who investigated their well being?
14. On what authority did Thomas Hamilton use the grounds of QVS for his own purposes?
15. What was Thomas Hamilton's influence at QVS such that he could get people jobs at the school?
16. Who were the many visitors to his house?
17. What was Thomas Hamilton's relationship with his MP?
18. Had Thomas Hamilton's relationship with his MP anything to do with his MP being promoted OUT of British politics to become Secretary General of NATO despite his lack of relevant experience of any substance?
19. Why was a request to study a film showing a hole in a door which experts believed was caused by bullet fired from outside the gym refused?
20. Why was Hamilton neither charged, cautioned or investigated when two ladies lodged a formal complaint against him?
21. Why was Hamilton’s connection with Queen Victoria School not investigated?
22. Why were the allegations by the house master at Queen Victoria School not followed up?
23. Why did the Head Master of QVS collude with the police in breaking down the door of a house master who had lodged complaints?
24. What was found such that no charges were made but the house master was so intimidated that he surrendered his career and relocated first to The Isles and now Spain (I gather)?
25. Why did the head of the Scottish Ambulance Service stop a crew member who attended the scene speaking to me?
26. Why did the matter arrive on his desk?
27. Why was the peer who requested that the report be put in the House of Lords library warned to drop the matter?
28. Why indeed was The Peer roughly handled instead being given a simple refusal?
29. Why did Lord Cullen unlawfully hide evidence without having the integrity to show it was hidden unlawfully in his corrupted Inquiry?
30. Why was it only as a result of the questioning by myself, Tom Minogue, Greg Lance-Watkins, Billy Burns and others that the fact that 'The Inquiry' was corrupted come to light, as shown in outline by journalists such as Marcello Mega & Tamzin Lewis?
31. Why was there no autopsy of Thomas Hamilton presented either at the inquiry or to the public? Nor were the bullets or shell cases presented as evidence!
I thought that strange and so started a lengthy correspondence with officialdom. After all my efforts over such a long period I have to admit I am no nearer to finding the truth about that dreadful event other than the fact that 16 children and a teacher died with of course Thomas Hamilton.
As long as elected representatives will not make an effort to discover the truth it will no doubt remain hidden for a further 87 years. Of the many I approached the majority informed me they could not help as I was not a constituent. This they claimed was due to parliamentary protocol which of course is nonsense as it rightly refers to constituency affairs but not to national or international matters.
Those who acted on my behalf unfortunately accepted the letter they received from the Crown Office without question even although it was a standard letter sent to anybody enquiring about the Dunblane Tragedy. That there was a strong possibility a paedophile ring was in some way involved was not enough to motivate any of them. You would have thought they would have been anxious to make sure such practices were not continuing. A house master at Queen Victoria School alleged that there was abuse of pupils at the school and Thomas Hamilton was known to have connections there.
It was claimed that the 100 year closure was necessary to protect the identity of children. This was found to be ridiculous when it was discovered that there were tens of thousands of pages covered by the closure. Lord James Douglas-Hamilton stated that there was no evidence of criminal behaviour on the part of Thomas Hamilton prior to the shootings. This was confirmed by Lord Cullen. Who then are the children who we are told must have their identity protected?
The Crown Office stated that it was the Keeper of the Records of Scotland who was responsible for the closure but this was not true and brought to light the fact that there was no statutory basis for the closure. Dr. Lynda Clark, Q.C. when Advocate General for Scotland wrote “under Scots law there is no legislation which provides for a hundred year closure”.
The Crown Office eventually admitted that was the case but declared that police records are routinely closed, the identity of witnesses must be protected, distress must not be caused and the terms of the Data Protection Act had to be taken into consideration.
They also stated that the Public Records Act 1958 applied to Scotland even although the legislation passed by Parliament only covers England and Wales. None of these conditions were mentioned before it became clear that there was no statutory basis for the closure. This is hardly the clear and concise language that should be expected from the highest legal office in Scotland.
The closure was actually agreed at a meeting on 13th January 1997. Those attending were Ms. Glynis McKeand, Clerk to the Inquiry, and representatives of the Police, the Scottish Records Office and of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service.
It is not known who proposed the closure but it is a strange coincidence that the officer who salvaged Hamilton’s cabin cruiser on Loch Lomond represented the Police at that meeting. Another strange thing is that although Lord Cullen agreed with the decision of that group he later wrote that they did not have the authority, individually or collectively, to impose a closure order.
Colin Boyd Q.C., Lord Advocate at the time, authorised the release of a number of the 106 closed productions which can be inspected at the National Archives of Scotland. He always insisted there was authority for the closure so who gave permission for their release? I have not viewed them but two colleagues did and were of the opinion that they might as well have remained closed as they had been so severely redacted that it was impossible to obtain any information from them.
One M.P. assured me that there had to be a good reason for the closure but it did not occur to him that the good reason could be to spare powerful individuals embarrassment or even from being arrested.
The Inquiry left many questions unanswered. At the time of the tragedy many felt that Central Scotland Police should have been in the dock instead of being responsible for the investigation. No attempt was made to delve into Thomas Hamilton’s background to see if friends and acquaintances had any influence on his actions.
There was doubt about who he spoke to outside his house before leaving for Dunblane. There was no explanation as to why he took 45 minutes to travel what is normally a 15 minute journey from his home to the school.
The Lord Advocate claimed that a student teacher saw Hamilton shoot himself. That teacher was not called to give evidence but his statement was read to the Inquiry and it did not state that he saw Hamilton shoot himself.
The off-duty police officer who was the first person into the gym apart from school staff wrote a statement that contradicted the evidence of the scene of crime officer. That statement was not transferred to the National Archives of Scotland and would have remained hidden if a request for a copy had not been made under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act. There are many discrepancies but the most glaring example is that the police officer stated that Hamilton had one holster.
The scene of crime officer said in his evidence that Hamilton had four holsters strapped around him. If the difference had been between three and four then it could be argued that the police officer made a mistake. But a man with four holsters strapped around him must have looked like a Mexican bandit and the police officer could not have been mistaken in what he saw. The police officer also wrote that he saw two pistols and yet the scene of crime officer in his evidence said there were two pistols and two revolvers beside the body.
If the police officer had been called as a witness or even had his statement been read to the Inquiry then the matter might have been cleared up but he was not called and it was intended that his statement remained hidden. There is also confusion over whether Thomas Hamilton’s body was temporarily removed from the gym.
A doctor who attended the scene informed journalists at a press conference on the day of the shootings that he did not see Hamilton’s body. When giving evidence to the Inquiry the same doctor stated that he saw many dead and injured children and one dead adult. When asked he confirmed that the dead adult was the body of a teacher.
There may be a simple answer but the questions will continue to be asked as long as there is no explanation as to why the police officer’s statement differs from the scene of crime officer’s evidence and why from the doctor’s evidence it would appear that at some stage Hamilton’s body had been removed from the gym and why was his clothing obviously altered.
There might have been more criticism of the Inquiry but the campaign to ban hand guns dominated the headlines. I accept that many sincerely believed in the campaign but who, I wonder, actually started it and for what purpose. Any sensible person knows that legally held guns are not used to commit crime and in fact gun crime has increased nearly every year since the ban was imposed.
I realise Hamilton was entitled to own guns but that was not a failing in the law but sheer incompetence or favouritism on the part of Central Scotland Police. Hamilton’s action should not have been used to destroy a sport and many livelihoods.
There are of course many questions that remain unanswered, though it does not in any way imply an end to the search for the truth:
01. Where did Hamilton get the finance to enable him to buy and afford the upkeep of a cabin cruiser on Loch Lomond?
02. What happened to the photographs that went missing from his house?
03. Where is the inventory of the many boxes of material removed from Thomas Hamilton's home by the plain clothes officials who ordered the local police out of the house?
04. Why was it accepted that he left Stirling on the road to Dunblane when that was not the case?
05. Why was there confusion over the phone calls made to the police from the school?
06. Who signed the letter of 'good character' that authorised the issue of a Fire Arms Certificate?
07. Where is that letter & why was it not presented as evidence?
08. Who signed his firearm certificate?
09. Why was a junior officer overruled when she recommended that Hamilton’s firearm certificate should not be renewed?
10. Why did the local authority allow him to run clubs when he did not have any of the legally required qualifications?
11. What was Thomas Hamilton's legal status regarding Queen Victoria Boys School (as it was then)?
12. On what grounds was Thomas Hamilton able to obtain overnight release on 'exeat' of boys from QVS?
13. When boys returning in a distressed state with money from exeats with Thomas Hamilton and various other establishment figures who investigated their well being?
14. On what authority did Thomas Hamilton use the grounds of QVS for his own purposes?
15. What was Thomas Hamilton's influence at QVS such that he could get people jobs at the school?
16. Who were the many visitors to his house?
17. What was Thomas Hamilton's relationship with his MP?
18. Had Thomas Hamilton's relationship with his MP anything to do with his MP being promoted OUT of British politics to become Secretary General of NATO despite his lack of relevant experience of any substance?
19. Why was a request to study a film showing a hole in a door which experts believed was caused by bullet fired from outside the gym refused?
20. Why was Hamilton neither charged, cautioned or investigated when two ladies lodged a formal complaint against him?
21. Why was Hamilton’s connection with Queen Victoria School not investigated?
22. Why were the allegations by the house master at Queen Victoria School not followed up?
23. Why did the Head Master of QVS collude with the police in breaking down the door of a house master who had lodged complaints?
24. What was found such that no charges were made but the house master was so intimidated that he surrendered his career and relocated first to The Isles and now Spain (I gather)?
25. Why did the head of the Scottish Ambulance Service stop a crew member who attended the scene speaking to me?
26. Why did the matter arrive on his desk?
27. Why was the peer who requested that the report be put in the House of Lords library warned to drop the matter?
28. Why indeed was The Peer roughly handled instead being given a simple refusal?
29. Why did Lord Cullen unlawfully hide evidence without having the integrity to show it was hidden unlawfully in his corrupted Inquiry?
30. Why was it only as a result of the questioning by myself, Tom Minogue, Greg Lance-Watkins, Billy Burns and others that the fact that 'The Inquiry' was corrupted come to light, as shown in outline by journalists such as Marcello Mega & Tamzin Lewis?
31. Why was there no autopsy of Thomas Hamilton presented either at the inquiry or to the public? Nor were the bullets or shell cases presented as evidence!
To date we have failed to expose the truth but we hope others with more clout and further contacts will take up the cudgels and that the truth will out.
It is interesting to note that Lord Cullen having been implicated in the corruption of 'The Public Inquiry Into The Shootings At Dunblane Primary School 13-Mar-1996' for the full text CLICK HERE.
Lord Cullen was also implicated in the Inquiry into The Catastrophic Failure of Pan-Am 103 over Lockerbie - a case which would seem to have provided no acceptable answers, many unanswered questions and the unsound conviction of a man for whom there would seem to be absolutely no evidence of connection with the matter beyond what seems to be a disgraceful, unjust and corrupt summing up by Lord Cullen.
It also is worthy of note in the case of Thomas Hamilton, Dunblane & QVS that there seems to be a mallign connection with 'The Magic Circle', institutionalised pederasty indulged in by members of the Scottish 'establishment' and a seemingly mallign involvement of the clandestine and secretive Speculative Society of Edinburgh.
It is to be hoped that further investigation of the facts by others will help to bring out the truth in these matters which are so clearly obfuscated, seemingly deliberately, from the top down!
Yours sincerely,
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment