SOMERTON MAN MYSTERY

The Evidence The Facts In Detail In Depth

THE SOMERTON MAN MYSTERY TAMAM SHUD: THE 1948 MI5 DIARIES... UPDATED FULL LIST OF DIARIES WITH DOWNLOADS

 ...CODE NAME: WALLFLOWER

THE GUY LIDDELL DIARIES...



Between late August 1939 and mid-May 1953, Guy Liddell wrote his diaries, which covered WW2 and what is referred to as the 'Early Cold War' years. In all an astonishing 22 volumes tell of the activities of British MI5.

An ex-Royal Artillery officer Guy Liddell made a humble start in intelligence in 1919 via the London, Metropolitan Police, Special Branch as a counter-intelligence officer.  Through the 1920s and 30s, he became very familiar with networks of German and Soviet spy networks in the UK.

'During the 1930s British intelligence produced increasing evidence of Russian and German spying in the British Isles. For Liddell, this came as no surprise. When British codebreakers broke Russian ciphers revealing Moscow-inspired espionage in Great Britain in the 1920s, Liddell was part of a team that raided the offices of ARCOS, the Soviet trading office in London, then at the heart of Bolshevik spying.' ......Dr. Ray Batvinis, historian.

MI5 In Australia

Our interest here is focused on the time of the Somerton Man, namely between the years 1947 to 1949. To that end, and whilst I do have copies of all 22 volumes of the Liddell Diaries, code-named WALLFLOWER, this post covers 1948  during that year, MI5 was particularly active in Australia from the time leading up to the Lapstone conference to the setting up of ASIO and onwards, senior MI5 officers were heavily engaged in Australian Intelligence operations. You will note many mentions of Roger Hollis and his role in the disclosure to Chifley of serious leaks within Doctor Evatt's, the Minister for External Affairs,  Department. There is also the matter of the Lapstone conference and the MI5 run surveillance exercise that appeared to have been deliberately derailed.

For those versed in Intelligence matters, and if you have not read it before, the 1948 Diaries may shock you, an intriguing read.

1948 Diaries, parts 1 and 2

Part 1.



Part 2:



You may be wondering why these documents are appearing here at this time. Simply put, it's because, in the not-too-distant future, there may well be a good reason to consider this Intelligence background of the Somerton Man case. The question of whether the exhumed remains are those of the Somerton Man has yet to be resolved.
I will add to this post in the coming days.

Update 1. Full List of Liddell Diaries with links:


The above list is courtesy of Dr. Ray Batvinis. You will find his website here:

Update 2. From Adelaide Advertiser. June 8th 1950:




Amongst the many cases investigated by Liddell was the infiltration of unions in the 1930s, not at all dissimilar to the events in Australia that were to follow in the 1940s.

6 Comments

Hi
Welcome to the Tamam Shud Blog, widely regarded as the leading and most trusted fact and evidence-based blog on the Somerton Man case. Please take a moment to review our comment guidelines here:

https://tamamshud.blogspot.com/p/tamam-shud-blog-rules.html

Visit our YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOamLze8PyNDafjjBGGngJQ

  1. In the 1948 diary marked part 1 and on page 31, there is a reference a SIGINT man named POLDEN. This man had knowledge of the security breach and had mentioned it to an Aus Government official ahead of the Hollis visit. It is believed that this man had a direct connection to MI5. A check of NAA files show 28 people of that name. Two of them look interesting and will be followed up, both were from South Australia.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousJuly 19, 2023

    Keep in mind that post WWII those who served were cobbers
    and they had fought for our democratic system
    Anyone who presented a threat
    to that system after they war,
    in other words communism
    would be up against the boys.
    RSL was strong post war years, clubs, meetings.
    Dwyer was AMF Lieutenant Colonel, one of the boys
    The dental chart has no reference mark
    and that may be for a reason or just a mix up
    Even if it did match the body in the grave it's not positive proof
    that the person in the grave was on Somerton beach.
    You need more than that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. On your last point, we have to disagree. What your saying is akin to saying that all of the statements made in courts by anybody ever are not valid evidence. I am sure you would agree that it would be ridiculous.
      Here's the thing, the dental chart taken by Dr Dwyer from the body identified to him as being that which was recovered from Somerton Beach and submitted in evidence to the coroner is as close as you can get to being at the autopsy watching the chart being written. The same applies to all of the links of the chain that started at Somerton Beach and ended on that mortuary slab under the scalpel and other instruments of Dr Dwyer.
      You mentioned that more than the chart would be needed, exactly what more did you expect? And to properly qualify your response, could you inform us all just what your credentials are as they would pertain to these issues?

      Delete
  3. Thanks for your comment. The RSL in those days had a different name from 1940 to 1965:
    Returned Sailors', Soldiers' and Airmen's Imperial League of Australia (RSSAILA),

    There was a movement known as The Association which you may care to read about, there are a few posts on this blog. They had a very close relationship with the RSSAILA and for the reasons that you allude to. In fact there was an interesting meeting at the Glenelg branch during November I believe, there's an article about it on Trove and pretty sure I posted it here.

    Regarding the dental chart it is quite specific evidence based on its inclusion as an exhibit in the inquest, however given Paul Lawson's comments regarding the skull of the body he worked on, that could be an issue as to whether the skull had been replaced but whose was the body? Lawson had also said that the body was smaller than he expected, an interesting comment I think you'll agree.

    If the teeth do not match then he is not the Somerton Man. If the teeth do match then the DNA from the teeth AND the skull need to be matched against DNA from other parts of the body, thigh bone I understand is a good location.

    At the moment there is considerable doubt as I see it, that the DNA results provided by Professor Abbott are valid and for reasons put forward on this blog.

    As Doctor Xanthe Mallet said early on in the piece, we may never know the real identity of the Somerton Man and that question is the only that has been referred to the Coroner at this stage.

    Thanks again for your comment.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It may have escaped your notice that this is a 1948 cold case and the witnesses are now long gone. We have the evidence and statements that was accepted at the time and that is what we work with, whatever that leads us to. The dental chart was submitted and accepted by the coroner as was Doctor Dwyers evidence and that is ample proof that it is a genuine article.

    Please don't submit any further comments here until you have researched the case thoroughly and gained an understanding of what is and what is not possible.

    ReplyDelete
  5. AnonymousJuly 21, 2023

    I think that somewhere in these documents is the original 'licence to kill' issued to British agents and they could do it anywhere.

    ReplyDelete
Previous Post Next Post
/body>