THE LAST MINUTES
The following is based on known facts and evidence with reasonable assumptions:
1. It was dark and it was late, digging into his pocket the man drew out his packet of Army Club cigarettes and withdrew one of the 8 Kensitas brand cigarettes that he kept in that packet. EVIDENCE
2. He also took out his Bryant and May matches, (B& M made them in Melbourne under the REDHEAD logo from 1946) After hearing the evidence of both Constable Moss and Detective Sergeant Leane, Mr. Cleland, the Coroner, concluded that he did have a box of matches with him. EVIDENCE
3. He put the cigarette between his lips, struck a match and lit up. He shook the match out and tossed it aside, perhaps even pushing it into the sand to extinguish it. The match was never entered in evidence, therefore, the assumption is that it was not found. REASONABLE ASSUMPTION
4. He slowly drew a couple of times on the cigarette and contemplated the darkened beach before him, he felt suddenly drowsy even though he had just awoken. He drew again, a longer draw this time in an effort to shake himself from the drowsiness. REASONABLE ASSUMPTION
5. Just two minutes after lighting his cigarette and one more puff and his eyes slowly closed, he lost consciousness. REASONABLE ASSUMPTION
6. One minute later and the cigarette had self-extinguished, slowly every muscle in his body relaxed, his head drooped a little to one side and his lips loosened around the cigarette. It fell from his mouth landing between his cheek and the lapel of his coat. FACT AND LOGICAL CONCLUSION
7. The time of death was estimated between midnight and 2 am, shortly before that time of death was when he had his last cigarette. EVIDENCE AND LOGICAL CONCLUSION
And that's how Constable Moss found the Somerton Man the next morning, he was dead with his head against the sea wall, legs slightly spread and arms down. The cigarette was still there on his lapel. Constable Moss noted that the sand around the body was undisturbed. EVIDENCE
From that mental picture, we can reasonably assume that no one had gone near the man, nothing was added to his possessions and nothing was taken from him. LOGICAL CONCLUSION
The fast-acting toxin had done its work swiftly and surely. LOGICAL CONCLUSION
The partially smoked cigarette was not compared to the cigarettes in the packet. EVIDENCE
The partially smoked cigarette was not compared to the cigarettes in the packet. EVIDENCE
As far as the evidence goes, neither the partially smoked cigarette nor the cigarettes in the packet were tested for the presence of poisons. EVIDENT
Paul Lawson in his latest interview with Clive discussed how he had a number of calls from Cleland over the years and in Paul's view death was due to a massive Phenobarbitone injection, sufficient to kill him in minutes. HEARSAY EVIDENCE FROM PAUL LAWSON (Hearsay evidence is still evidence, of lesser value but still evidence)
No evidence or finding was put forward as to the presence of a syringe at the scene. EVIDENT
We know that Saxitoxin was in use at the time by both CIA and KGB operatives, sometimes as a suicide pill or sometimes as an assassination tool. In later years, Gary Powers, the U2 pilot shot down over Russia, had Saxitoxin with him but never took the poison. FACT
The effects of Saxitoxin are said to be calming and death whilst swift is not painful. FACT
Tags
CIA
Constable Moss
Detective Sergeant Leane
Kensitas
KGB
Paul Lawson
poison cigarettes
Saxitoxin
Somerton Man
I recall the transcript of the ABC story by Littlemore includes questions/answers the didnt make the final cut. I'm sure one says they found a syringe.
ReplyDeleteYes, I was aware that a syringe had been mentioned, it was supposedly found by Detective Sergeant Leane I understand. However, it waso included in any of the statements or in the evidence given to the Coroner. In the end whilst it is a possibility, without a sworn statement a finding by the Coroner that specifies the syringe being found then it is purely speculation.
DeleteHowever, the case has more than it's fair share of apparent issues, so it could be that a syringe was found which would underpin Paul Lawson's words, he stated in his most recent interview with Clive Turner, that he thought it was an injection of Phenobarbital that killed him. If it was an injection, then who delivered it? Bear in mind that the sand around the man was undisturbed, that would mean that the injection, if given by another may have happened close to where the syringe was found, near the seats I understand.
We are in a position where both scenarios have weight, one of them has sworn statements and the other doesn't.
I think that the exhumation may provide part are all of the answer.
Thanks for your comment..
Pete, Sudden death procedures form a very important part of officer training. There are different kinds of SD, some are medical as in within a hospital with known existing serious health issues involved or someone being treated at home for major issues to the finding of someone who simply collapses one day and passes away in a sudden and unexpected or unexplained death. The vast majority fall into those categories but the sudden unexpected death is always treated as suspicious.
ReplyDeleteThe finding of the man on the beach at Somerton on December 1st 1948 was a sudden one quickly became a suspicious death.
Procedures have without doubt changed greatly over the years even in my time, we didn't have the facilities that are required now. No rubber gloves except for the messy jobs and contamination of a death scene was par for the course in many cases. We would of course take great care and would abide by the rules of concealing a body from the public gaze and ensuring great and due respect was shown.
Proceduraly, on arrival at a scene such as the one at Somerton, you would quickly check if the person had a pulse, was there any sign of life? Whilst not qualified to ascertain that in those days you were Johnny on the spot and you would realistically know whether or not there was any hope. Next you would pend a few minutes to take in what you see. A visual search of the immediate area surrounding the man, I would suggest a radius of a few metres would have been the case. Constable Moss noted that there was no sign of any disturbance of the sand or ground around him. Next a very quick examination of the body, he would have been looking for any obvious signs of violence or unusual marks. To do that he would have moved the body around perhaps loosened his shirt to examine the neck and behind the ears, quickly look through the hair for signs of blood on the scalp, a close look at the wrists and hands and ankles if visible. Next a quick search of the pockets, I doubt that it would have been a thorough search and examination on the beach. Any items would have been noted and probably put back in the pockets unless Moss had a couple of envelopes handy. Maybe a pat down but probably not, the man together with his clothes and belongings wasn't going anywhere but first to the hospital for a quick confirmation that life was extinct and then to the morgue. Moss would have made a call from the scene or near to it to inform the office of the death and to arrange transport which would have been basic, a metal stretcher and a blanket in the back of a van. During the time Moss was examining the scene etc transport would have been on its way. Constable Moss may have accompanied the body to the morgue following the pronouncement, at some stage in the process, he would have called in to the office and organised for CIB or SOCO to visit the morgue and view the body and then carry out a more thorough investigation including the search and photography. In my day we had a Coroners Officer who took charge of the body from the moment it was pronounced dead, the officer that brought the body would identify it to the Coroners officer to provide continuity, an audit trail of identification. In some cases we would strip the body ahead of the autopsy, no mention was made of that in the notes I have read. That was more likely the Coroners Officer's job.
In my view, given that Constable Moss wasn't specific about where and when he actually searched the body thoroughly, there was every chance that the matches had been missed at the beach but were picked up at the morgue by either Jimmy Durham or Detective Sergeant Leane.
A final note for you Pete. The rules for this blog are simple. We listen to each other, we acknowledge each others right to hold their views, we discuss and question in order to learn and we treat each other with respect. I do not allow abusive or demeaning comments about others. The comments you made to me and others on the Big Footy blog were unacceptable, in my view you were extremely rude and aggressive. I found that disappointing and even more so because you never even offered an apology. None of us have any idea about what is going on in each others lives and when you choose to attack people in a forum the effects of your rude and hurtful words can be magnified; you never gave it a moments thought. I hope you learn and I hope you change.
ReplyDeleteGiven the scenario of the poison being delivered by a cigarette, then the most revealing comment by Constable Moss was:
ReplyDelete'There were cigarettes on the body, which were in a packet. I did not compare the with the one that was partly smoked.'
Put simply we do not know whether the partially smoked cigarette was a Kensitas brand. The way a cigarette is smoked is normally with the brand closes to the lips. That brand name you would think would have been visible. Neither Jimmy Durham, Det. Sgt. Leane nor Cleland commented on the cigarette brand. In fact no one did except Moss who volunteered that he didn't compare them.
That is crucial information and this is why. If you had your favourite cigarettes in a packet but knew that one of them had something special about it, then it would make sense to perhaps have a different branded one so you could choose the right one if the need ever arose.
By not comparing the cigarettes, Constable Moss showed that he was capable of missing important details. To his credit, he volunteered the information.
What, if he didn't smoke?
ReplyDeleteIs there any evidence that he was a smoker at the a autopsy?
Who's cigarettes would they be in his pocket?
The cigarettes were in an Army Club brand packet, a cheaper smoke. The cigarettes within it were Kensitas, a dearer smoke. The partially smoked cigarette on the mans lapel was not checked against the brand of cigarettes in the packet.
DeleteThe only evidence given was the finding of nicotine stains on his fingers, I think there may have been a couple of mentions in the documents. That plus the cigarettes and matches found with the body and then the lighter in the suitcase added up to the strong likelihood that he was a smoker.
ReplyDeleteHere's a link to the extended (122 pages including some blanks) Inquest documents:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YsklEGt0NYkMCaP-OXc9tnU92U7sprOb/view?usp=sharing
A lot of discussion about Constable Moss and the matches that he didn't find and that Moss was very certain about that in his newspaper interview. But when you read through the evidence and the Unknown Man book in particular, you will find that the matches weren't the only thing he didn't find. Very honestly the comments that are made on some blogs are more akin to mysticism than qualified assumptions or information based on evidence. Round and round it goes, where it stops, I wonder who knows...
ReplyDeleteIn ever decreasing circles with the inevitable result...
ReplyDelete