Showing posts with label 9a. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 9a. Show all posts

Chapter 121: Remarkably Stupid


"There were two waves,"
said Mycroft.
Sherlock Holmes handed me the clippings one at a time, asking me to read them aloud. When I had finished, he spread the papers out on the table and turned to his brother.

"What do you see, Mycroft?" he asked. "What can you deduce?"

"There were two waves," began Mycroft. "The first was clearly driven by the official statement issued by the police. The second was apparently driven by unofficial statements, given to selected reporters by unnamed inside sources.

"The inside sources appear to have an agenda. They seem to be trying to distract the public, and possibly the police as well. But they've been clumsy about it. Some of their so-called 'logic' is quite the opposite. And they can't even keep their story straight."

"How so?" inquired the detective.

"The logic is inverted," answered his brother. "The second wave of reports seem to imply that the toxicology results confirmed the lurid hypothesis about a 'sex game gone wrong,' when that is certainly not true. Had it been discovered that the victim's body contained poison, for example, this would have disproved the 'sex game' story, or at least made it less likely. For who would poison him if he were cooperating? So the 'sex game' theory probably would not have survived a positive finding from the toxicologists.

"The lack of poison, or anything else indicating a cause of death, does not disprove the 'sex game' story. But that's all it does. It certainly doesn't prove that Gareth Williams died because of a 'sex game gone wrong'. Yet all the anonymous inside sources speak as though it did.

"And I say they cannot keep their story straight because of the conflicting explanations of what they think probably happened. Did Gareth take the key into the bag with him as a lifeline, but then die because he couldn't reach the lock? Or did his 'sex game' partner come back to flat, find him dead, and then put the key into the bag?

"Both versions were reported. In my view, neither seems at all likely."

"What do you think is happening?" asked the detective.

"Let's consider the possibilities," replied his brother. "Are we wrong about the sources? Could someone impersonate homicide detectives and fool journalists into thinking they were getting inside information from the investigation, when in fact they were getting something entirely different? How difficult is it for a journalist to confirm the identity of his source? Isn't that the first thing they do? Maybe once in a while somebody could fool one journalist. But to deceive them all, across the board, and on such a high-profile issue? I wouldn't think that's possible. So we can be very confident that the sources quoted in the second wave are actual insiders.

"So what's happening? Certain individuals within Scotland Yard are extremely concerned about this case, and determined that it be 'solved' as an accident -- a 'sex game' that went horribly wrong, rather than what it appears to be, namely a murder. These individuals got in touch with their favourite reporters -- there's one at every paper, is there not? -- shortly after the release of the official statement, and managed to get quite a bit of exposure for their version of the story, even though it doesn't really make very much sense. What does that tell us? Powerful forces are at work here, and they do not want this crime to be solved. That's what I think is happening."

"What do you think happened to Gareth Williams?" asked Sherlock.

"I can't tell from this mess," replied Mycroft. "I only know what I am reading here. You are far more familiar with the case than I am. But let's look as some possibilities. This is something the second wave of reporting fails to do; it only takes one possibility into account.

"I can't say I agree with
your conclusion," said Sherlock
"In other words, all the speculation masquerading as fact starts with the assumption that Gareth Williams died in his flat, and in the bag, into which he zipped himself voluntarily. From there, the only really interesting question is: Why did he do that? Not that it would matter to the police, because if his death were not the result of a crime, then there would be nothing for the police to do about it. They wouldn't have to care 'why' it happened.

"But it is also possible, is it not, that he could have died elsewhere, either before or after his body entered the bag, and that the bag was moved to the bath afterwards. The reports that say 'sex game' emphasize the fact that no sign of struggle was found in the flat, and conclude that therefore Gareth must have got into the bag of his own free will. But what if he died elsewhere? That would also explain why the police found no sign of a struggle, would it not?

"How difficult would it be to put the body into the bag, and to put the bag in the flat? If somebody killed Gareth Williams, could he not also obtain the key to Gareth's flat? Then he would only have to bring the body to the flat, use the key to get in without leaving any sign of forced entry, drop the body in the bath, and lock the door on the way out. That would leave no sign of a struggle, no indication of forced entry, and -- if elementary precautions were taken -- no forensic clues whatsoever.

"How tricky would that be? How difficult? How likely? Can the police truly rule out such a scenario? They say they have eliminated 'almost' every other possibility, leaving the 'sex game' theory as the 'most likely.' But what is 'almost' supposed to mean? Are they saying that some other possibilities haven't been eliminated? And why not? Because they would require an actual investigation rather than a smear campaign? Who can say?"

"The Mediterranean couple!" replied Sherlock. "They could tell us! They could explain how the padlock was snapped shut on the bag -- in August! -- because luckily they were in the same building in June or July!"

"We'd better find them," said Mycroft, and we all laughed.

"But seriously," continued Sherlock's older brother, "The 'sex game' story is remarkably stupid, and the anonymous homicide detectives would have to be remarkably stupid to believe it. Maybe that's the case; maybe not. If not, then they are deliberately muddying the waters. Why would anyone do that? To smear the victim, or to prevent the crime from being solved, or both. I'm not a conspiracy theorist at heart, but what else could this mean? Does it not demonstrate complicity? As a propaganda tactic, it appears to have backfired. 

"In any case," continued Mycroft, "they are either remarkably stupid or deliberately trying to disrupt both the investigation and the public's perception of it. That is my conclusion."

"I can't say I agree with your conclusion," replied Sherlock, "and that is a shame, because you were doing very well."

"Where have I gone wrong?" asked Mycroft.

"It's not either/or," said Sherlock. "It's both. They are clearly trying to disrupt, and they have gone about it in a stupid way -- pushing a stupid theory that, even to a casual observer, makes them appear guilty."

"It's easy to see why they didn't want their names to appear in print," said Mycroft.

"I didn't say they were insane," said his brother.

Chapter 122: More Detail


The Guardian ran this graphic with
the article "Who was Gareth Williams?"
Three weeks elapsed before we obtained any additional information about Gareth Williams. Once again our source was a London paper, but this time it was The Guardian, which ran a long and apparently well-researched piece by Cathy Scott-Clark and Adrian Levy called "Who was Gareth Williams?" As usual, Holmes found it before I did. I knew this because I found the paper folded open to the page, with a circle around the headline.

The piece began by talking about the family, and said that Ceri had raised the alarm after not being able to reach Gareth by phone.
Now she contacted the police; the security services were already concerned, as Gareth had failed to show for work. On 23 August, at 6.30pm, a uniformed officer was sent to Williams's top-floor flat in a Georgian townhouse in Alderney Street, Pimlico. It was only a few hundred yards from the MI6 headquarters at Vauxhall, and was used by the Secret Intelligence Service as a safe house. A lettings agent who held a spare key showed the policeman in. He was asked to wait downstairs as the officer went up and entered the curtained rooms. The place was "spotless": two iPhones, some sim cards and an Apple notebook sat on a table. Then he entered the bathroom, and found a holdall in the bathtub. Red liquid seeped from it. Inside was a body, in such a contorted position that he thought its "legs and arms had been cut off". Radioing for assistance, the policeman noted that there were no signs a struggle. This was not a robbery or home invasion. It was a "neat job", a euphemism for a professional kill.

Given his clearances and access to classified material, Williams's death triggered alarm across Whitehall. MI5 agents swept through the Alderney Street flat, followed by detectives from the Homicide and Serious Crime Command, assisted by SO15, Scotland Yard's Counter Terrorism Command. Alderney Street was cordoned off as Home Office scientists began processing the scene. Once the spooks had departed, it was down to the murder squad to study the evidence. So far, they had a body in an "advanced state of decay". There was no weapon and no sign of forced entry or a struggle.

Concentrating on the holdall and its contents, detectives established that Williams had not been stabbed, shot or hacked to pieces. On August 25, Home Office pathologist Dr Ben Swift carried out a post-mortem that, together with the first batch of toxicological tests, came back "inconclusive". "If we don't know what to look for, and are not guided by what we see or smell on the body, we cannot find it," says a forensic scientist who worked on the Litvinenko case. "We do 50 obvious poisons. Fifty rare. We can do the isotopes. Litvinenko alerted us to that. But in the absence of a specific direction, the possibilities are as limitless as a killer's imagination… and we cannot test for that."
There was more detail here than we had seen in one place, ever. I wondered how much of it could be true. It was all well and good for "the security services" to claim that they "were already concerned," but why hadn't they done anything on their own? How long would Gareth have remained missing if he hadn't enjoyed such a close relationship with his sister?

And yet the description of the scene demanded attention.

What did it all mean? Scott-Clark and Levy continued:
Detectives set out their theories. One reading of the crime scene pointed to a forensically aware hit man. Slender 5ft 7in Gareth had been stuffed inside the near-airtight red North Face sports bag and placed in the bath, containing any spillage and minimising odours, too. The heating was on, increasing the rate of decomposition, which significantly lessened the chances of retrieving evidence from the corpse.

Or perhaps the body in the bag was evidence of a stage-managed "personal event", masterminded by a controlling individual. Was this a suicide (with Williams acting on his own)? Or a sadistic or masochistic sexual act gone wrong (with Williams engaging in some kind of auto-erotic asphyxiation?). "If you can imagine it, then we are investigating it," a detective said in late August. But what would shape police inquiries was the dawning realisation that Gareth Williams had not been alone.

Returning to the holdall, studying the zips and lock, police became certain that he could not have locked himself inside. And there was further proof that someone else must have been in the flat with him: his front door had been locked from the outside.
The piece went on to discuss Gareth's life, from childhood to the "character assassination" that followed his death.
"Murdered MI6 worker Gareth Williams was a secret transvestite who may have been killed by a gay lover, detectives said yesterday… Cops found women's clothing that would fit him at his Pimlico flat in central London." The Sun ran with this version of events, while other newspapers, quoting similar unnamed sources, reported that cocaine had been found, a cache of gay pornography, a small armoury of S&M paraphernalia. Williams was also said to have frequently paid for male escorts.

Senior detectives angrily rebutted the stories. Uncle William in Anglesey thought they read like a concerted smear, and wondered why anyone would want to destroy Gareth's reputation after he was dead.

Like most well-constructed character assassinations, however, this one was founded on a grain of fact that made it that much harder to quash. Detectives had been quietly investigating whether Gareth Williams was gay. They had canvassed witnesses in the Vauxhall Cross village of gay clubs and bars, a short walk from Alderney Street. They had also studied Williams's computers and reading matter, his journals, magazines and computer cache. Despite outright denials from his family, detectives were privately certain that Gareth was gay, although they had been unable to find trace of any sexual encounters. They had also come to believe that his sexual orientation was not central to the inquiry (although his sexual preferences might be). There was no evidence of Williams paying for escorts, buying S&M equipment, using porn or drugs of any kind. "This man didn't really even drink," one frustrated detective said.

The police felt they were being hurried along by other parties, keen for the scandal to go away. "Someone, somewhere, who has access to case material, is saying, 'He's queer and asked for it', rather than waiting for the outcome of the case," one veteran detective said.
Even at a distance, it was obvious that someone was trying to avoid "waiting for the outcome of the case." But once again I wondered how much of the other assertions could be true. It would be so much better to have a source inside the investigation.

Scott-Clark and Levy wrote that Gareth had worked for GCHQ, was with MI6 at the time of his death, and had also been working with the Americans at NSA. The article seemed to confirm our suspicion that Gareth had been involved with "foiling" the so-called "Liquid Bombers":
Williams's elevation within GCHQ came with the "Liquid Bomb" plot, where a group of British radicals of Asian origin were found to be planning to detonate home-made explosives on board seven flights to major north American cities. Intercepting emails and phone calls between these plotters and their contacts abroad, Williams flew between the UK and the US, working at Fort Meade (the NSA HQ, in Baltimore).
If, as it appeared, this were a case of murder, there would be no shortage of work-related suspects:
Williams was brought into close proximity to US intelligence, Islamic radicals and Middle Eastern agents. He would rub shoulders with the Russians, too, according to a foreign intelligence analyst based in the UK, who described how technology and software honed by GCHQ was deployed in tracking a Moscow-backed sleeper cell to which Britain had been alerted as early as 2003. The case blew up in June 2010 when 10 people were arrested in the US and accused of being part of an espionage ring. One of them, a glamorous 28-year-old called Anna Chapman, had lived for five years in the UK. According to the former GCHQ contractor, "Williams had been obsessed by the case, its methodology and characters."
and
Rogue individuals and nation states, Islamist terror groups and radical loners, extortionists and organised criminals – these were just some of those Williams had observed, investigated, disrupted and provoked. Any one of them was capable of reciprocating, lethally.
I wondered how many of these potential enemies were capable of both "reciprocating lethally" and arranging a massive "character assassination." It seemed to me that Scott-Clark and Levy had allowed this important question to slip through their fingers, and disappear without having been raised.

It occurred to me that this could have been deliberate, and I wondered how many other questions had been allowed to slip away without having been asked, let alone answered.

I wondered what else Holmes had seen in the article. I was certain there must have been at least a dozen pertinent details that I had missed. So I re-filled my pipe, sat back in my seat, and began to read the piece again.

Chapter 123: Very Curious Circumstances

Previous: More Detail

Police guard the townhouse
in which the body was found
I tried to re-read the entire piece, but I kept returning to what seemed the key passage. This much, perhaps, I had learned from my friend. Holmes always seemed to focus on the essential details, or at least he always strove to do so. I highlighted the following text.
On 23 August, at 6.30pm, a uniformed officer was sent to Williams's top-floor flat ... The place was "spotless" ... he entered the bathroom, and found a holdall in the bathtub. Red liquid seeped from it. Inside was a body, in such a contorted position that he thought its "legs and arms had been cut off". ... the policeman noted that there were no signs a struggle. This was not a robbery or home invasion. It was a "neat job", a euphemism for a professional kill.

... MI5 agents swept through the Alderney Street flat, followed by detectives from the Homicide and Serious Crime Command, assisted by SO15, Scotland Yard's Counter Terrorism Command. ... Once the spooks had departed, it was down to the murder squad to study the evidence..
What, I wondered, was the meaning of this sentence:
Once the spooks had departed, it was down to the murder squad to study the evidence.
Questions swirled through my mind: How long were the "spooks" at the scene? Were the police there the entire time, or were they sent away to wait? What could the MI5 agents have been doing when they "swept through" the flat? And how had SO15 "assisted" the homicide detectives?

Holmes always wanted the scene of a crime to be as undisturbed as possible. I wondered how vigourously the MI5 agents and SO15 officers had "undisturbed" things in Gareth's flat. 

I was pondering these mysteries when the great detective returned. "I see you've found the Guardian, Watson," said he. "What do you think of the article?"

I showed him the sections I had highlighted, and he nodded. "There is fertile ground for speculation here," he said. "But some other very pertinent details are included as well. Have you noticed this paragraph?" He read from the paper:
Gareth had been stuffed inside the near-airtight red North Face sports bag and placed in the bath, containing any spillage and minimising odours, too. The heating was on, increasing the rate of decomposition, which significantly lessened the chances of retrieving evidence from the corpse.
"What do you remember about the month of August?" asked Holmes. "If I recall, we were comfortable in light jackets even in the evenings. There was no need for any additional heating. And Gareth lived in a top-floor flat. Surely he was warm enough."

"Why would anyone turn on the heating?" [source]
I nodded and Holmes continued. "It's all circumstantial, Watson, but what a circumstance! The heat by itself could not have hampered the investigation in the slightest. It needed both heat and time. If the body had been discovered shortly after the murder -- and surely this is a case of murder, regardless of the outrageous theories to the contrary" -- he held the paper in one hand and slapped it with the other -- "the temperature in the flat would have been irrelevant. If the killers turned on the heating to accelerate the decomposition, they had to have known that it wouldn't matter unless the body should lay undiscovered for a long time. In order for the heat to destroy the evidence, the killers also had to prevent Gareth's employers from looking for him when he failed to appear at work. Now who could do that?"

"And if that isn't the true explanation," I replied, "then why would anyone turn on the heating?"

"That's a good question, too," answered Holmes, "and there's another detail deep in the story that is new to me." He held the paper closer to his face and read another paragraph:
In the midst of lurid speculation, Ian and Ellen Williams reached London. In normal circumstances, they would be required to make a physical identification. However, given the degree of decomposition, police would rely on family photos. Was Gareth murdered, his distraught family asked. Despite launching a major investigation – Operation Finlayson – Scotland Yard were finding it a hard question to answer. One major problem facing investigators was the length of time that the body had lain undiscovered. Another was that they were being blocked by the security services from probing too deeply into Williams's life.
"We already knew the identification was done by comparison with photographs," said Holmes. "And we already knew the police were being blocked from probing too deeply, in several directions. But I don't believe the name of the investigation has been previously reported. Operation Finlayson: what does that mean?"

"The name of the investigation?" I asked. "What bearing could that possibly have on the case?"

"Sometimes the most relevant details are hidden in the strangest places," replied my friend. "Where do you think they get these names?"

"I have no idea," I admitted.

"But I do," he said. "Names of operations form a special kind of code, in which references are often made to places, events, or people, but always obliquely. Well, almost always. The U.S. plan for the 2003 attack on Iraq was called 'Operation Iraqi Liberation' until the geniuses in the White House realized the acronym -- OIL -- made their intentions a trifle too obvious. Code names of police and military operations are usually a good deal more subtle, but they almost always hint at something. What is Finlayson? Is it just a put-together sequence of short words: Fin, Lay, Son? No, no, it can't be! All my instincts are against it."

Holmes stepped toward the bookshelf. Perhaps his alphabetical index for the letter 'F' would tell us something. But before he could reach it, Mycroft appeared at the door.

"Hello, Mycroft," said the detective. "Your timing is good. Perhaps you can save us some time and effort. What, if anything, comes to mind when I say the word 'Finlayson'?"

"Why do you ask?" replied Mycroft. He had been with us for about about a month at that point, and was beginning to regain a semblance of his former, slightly disputatious, personality.

"It might be relevant to a case," replied Sherlock. "But surely that has no bearing on my question. Does the name 'Finlayson' mean anything to you?"

Mycroft made his way to the couch and settled into it. "According to an old Scottish tale," he said slowly, "a young woman named Mary Finlayson boasted one night at a dance that she could dance any man -- even the devil himself -- off his feet. According to the story, she spent the whole night with a tall dark stranger, dancing to a tune known as the Devil’s Music. And the next morning she was found stone cold, spread-eagled on the dance floor.

"The story," continued Mycroft, "is said to be an allegory warning of the dangers facing anyone who dares to challenge the established powers."

I looked from one brother to the other with wide eyes. "Is it possible?" I asked.

Sherlock motioned me not to speak, and turned to his brother. "What would you think if I told you 'Operation Finlayson' was the name of a murder investigation?"

"If the name of the investigation does refer to Mary Finlayson," replied Mycroft, "it could imply that the victim had threatened an entity so powerful that the murder must never be solved. And if this is the case, the name could only indicate that the investigation was thoroughly compromised from the beginning."

"Could the word 'Finlayson' be a reference to something else?" asked Sherlock.

"Of course it could," said Mycroft.

"Does anything else come to mind?" asked the detective.

"Not at the moment," replied his brother.

"But would anyone dare," I interjected, "to use a name that virtually announces the investigation is not what it purports to be?"

"It wouldn't be the first time," said Sherlock Holmes.

"This is all circumstantial," I observed.

"Indeed," replied the detective. "But these are very curious circumstances."

Chapter 124: Mycroft's List


"You have me at a disadvantage."
"You have me at a disadvantage," protested Mycroft Holmes. "Which investigation are we discussing?"

"Forgive me," replied Sherlock. "I wanted your initial reaction context-free, but there's no reason you shouldn't know. According to today's Guardian, 'Operation Finlayson' is the code name of Scotland Yard's investigation into the death of Gareth Williams."

"Seriously?" asked Mycroft.

"Seriously," replied his brother. He handed Mycroft the paper.

"If you have nothing important to do," continued Sherlock, "please subject this to your usual analysis. I would certainly value your opinion. I am especially interested in -- one: any claims that seem improbable, or dare I say impossible; two: any hints that the investigation is being hampered; and three: any other details that strike you as particularly remarkable or noteworthy."

"It's quite lengthy," remarked Mycroft, looking it over.

"There's no hurry," answered Sherlock. "Make yourself comfortable, take your time, and make good notes. We can talk later." He handed his brother a notebook and a pen, then turned to me.

"Watson, I need to be away for a while again. I can't remember ever having so many cases on the go at the same time. Maybe it was easier when I was younger. In any event, I will be out for most of the day. So please do your usual fine job of making sure Mycroft is looked after -- he's never more productive than when he's well-fed -- and I will rejoin you as soon as I can."

I rang Mrs. Hudson, who brought us a pot of tea and a tray of food. Then, not wanting to disturb Mycroft while he worked, I curled up with a book.

While I read, Mycroft made the following list:
1. Claims that seem improbable or impossible
[The] townhouse in Alderney Street ... was used by the Secret Intelligence Service as a safe house. A lettings agent who held a spare key showed the policeman in.
Yes, of course, because lettings agents always have spare keys to SIS safe houses.
One [criminal psychologist], who spoke anonymously, thought his death might have been a masochistic ritual that had gone wrong: "For a retentive individual with an ever-green mind like Gareth Williams, always on duty and in control, the bag could have been a furtive release."
I would speak anonymously as well, if I were contributing such nonsense to the discussion.
"If you can imagine it, then we are investigating it," a detective said in late August.
Yes, of course.

2. Hints that the investigation is being hampered
MI5 agents swept through the Alderney Street flat, followed by detectives from the Homicide and Serious Crime Command, assisted by SO15, Scotland Yard's Counter Terrorism Command. ... Once the spooks had departed, it was down to the murder squad to study the evidence. ...
"MI5 agents ... followed by detectives..." In other words, the scene found by the detectives was set by the MI5 agents. And the
investigators ... were being blocked by the security services from probing too deeply into Williams's life.
so:
Detectives had no idea what Gareth Williams really did or who he was, and had been unable as yet to find anyone close to him.
but:
"If you can imagine it, then we are investigating it"
Yes, of course.
The Sun [published an anonymously sourced, lurid] version of events, while other newspapers, quoting similar unnamed sources, reported [equally lurid details]. Senior detectives angrily rebutted the stories.
Where did these stories come from? How did they find their way into print without confirmation from "senior detectives"? The police would seem to have good reason for feeling that
they were being hurried along by other parties, keen for the scandal to go away. "Someone, somewhere, who has access to case material, is saying, 'He's queer and asked for it', rather than waiting for the outcome of the case," one veteran detective said.
Aside from which, even if he were "queer," what of it? Plenty of people are "queer," but they don't usually end up padlocked in airtight bags. So this is not only a vicious smear but also a red herring. Even if Gareth Williams were "queer," does being "queer" provably increase one's probability of being locked in a bag? any more than being Welsh? or a cyclist? or a mathematician? But the "he was queer" doesn't go away. And all this, even though
the investigation ... failed to turn up the smallest vice
and the
detectives ... had been unable to find trace of any sexual encounters.
In other words, the detectives have been unable to find out anything about Gareth whatsoever.

So: "If you can imagine it, then we are investigating it," really means, "If you can imagine it, then we are investigating it, except if it pertains to the victim, his job, or his private life, about which we still know practically nothing."

If not for all the lurid claims that senior detectives "angrily rebutted," the investigation might have come to a few conclusions that seem more or less obvious. In the first instance, it took them quite some time to figure out that he could not have done this to, or by, himself. And that's why the piece mentions
the dawning realisation that Gareth Williams had not been alone.
The conclusion "that Gareth Williams had not been alone" is based on what little they seem to have gathered in the way of evidence. But by
studying the zips and lock, police became certain that he could not have locked himself inside. And there was further proof that someone else must have been in the flat with him: his front door had been locked from the outside.
If the investigation were not being hampered, the police would surely have reached this conclusion much more quickly and easily than they apparently did.

And were it not for all the nonsense from contributors such as our anonymous "furtive release" theorist, it should not have been difficult for the police to reach another seemingly obvious conclusion, namely that they were looking at, if not actually investigating, a murder. After all,
the policeman [who found the body] noted that there were no signs a struggle. This was not a robbery or home invasion. It was a "neat job", a euphemism for a professional kill.
3. Other details that seem particularly remarkable or noteworthy

The young man's intellect.

His rate of progress through his education.

The torment inflicted on his family.

Chapter 125: A Very Odd Statement

Previous: Mycroft's List

The Mediterranean couple
November faded into December, and the change in the weather -- colder and darker -- mirrored the state of our investigation into the death of Gareth Williams. Nothing concerning the case appeared in the press. The source Sherlock Holmes had cultivated in the coroner's office was saying, "Wait," and not much else. Holmes said he had been probing, gently, but none of his contacts among the police knew anything, other than what they had seen in the papers. Or else they were unwilling to talk. And the great detective's mood grew as gloomy as the wind that beat upon our windows.

And then, suddenly, just a few days before Christmas, Scotland Yard broke the silence with a very odd statement, which I reproduce in its entirety below.
Bulletin 0000002137
December 22, 2010

OFFICERS from the Homicide and Serious Crime Command investigating the circumstances into the death of Gareth Williams (date of birth 26.09.78) in August continue to appeal for information.

The Mediterranean man
Police have issued two e-fits of a man and a woman they wish to speak with in connection with the enquiry.

They are described as of Mediterranean appearance, aged between 20-30 years-old.

They called at 36 Alderney Street, Pimlico, SW1 late one evening in June or July, 2010.

Having gained access to the communal area of the building, they intimated that they had a key to Gareth's flat, number 4, and were last seen walking towards it. It is believed they said they had been given the key by a 'Pier Paulo', or something similar.

At this stage, officers are making a further appeal and are urging this man and woman to come forward and assist, so that they can be eliminated from our enquiries.

There are also a number of other points on which officers are asking the public for their help.

Gareth was attending Central St Martins College, Clerkenwell, on a fashion course for beginners - police are urging anyone who knew or met him through the course to come forward if they have any information.

The Mediterranean woman
In addition, Gareth's wardrobe contained a collection of female attire, such as dresses and shoes, which were new, and seemingly unused, worth in the region of £15,000, as well as a collection of wigs. If anyone knows where, or when he might have bought such clothing, officers would very much like to speak to them.

Police would also like to hear from anyone who met Gareth on a visit he made to a drag cabaret - 'Bistroteque' in Mile End on 13 August 2010. Gareth had bought tickets for two other shows at the same venue. They also want to speak to anyone who saw Gareth in May 2010, at the 'Barcode' gay bar in Vauxhall, south London, when there was an unconfirmed sighting of him.

Routine forensic examination of Gareth's phones has revealed a limited number of occasions when access was made from them to websites relating to bondage and escape from bondage. Officers would like to talk to anyone who had contact with Gareth via one or more of those sites, who may be able to assist in understanding the circumstances of his death.

Police strongly believe Gareth was not alone in his flat at or before the time of his death and are strongly urging any person, or persons who were there, or knows anything in relation to this, to come forward.

DCI Jacqueline Sebire,
the investigating officer
DCI Jacqueline Sebire, the investigating officer, said today: "Gareth was a very private individual, and we know he would not have given his keys to anyone other than close family. I am asking this man or woman, or anyone who recognizes them, to encourage them to come forward and assist us with this enquiry.

"Gareth's death remains suspicious and unexplained, and enquiries into the circumstances continue."

Anyone with information should call the Incident Room in Hendon on 020 8358 0200 or, if they wish to remain anonymous, Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

The Williams family said today: "Gareth's family are still struggling to come to terms with the loss of their son and brother, they urge anybody to come forward with any information that can assist the police investigation."

The Inquest into Gareth's death will be heard before Westminster Coroner's Court on 15 February 2011.

Gareth Williams returned to the UK from a planned holiday in the US, on Wednesday, 11 August 2010. CCTV enquiries established that on a number of occasions on his return, he was shopping in the West End and Knightsbridge areas.

CCTV images issued by officers (6 September 2010) showed Gareth on Saturday 14 August 2010 at approx 15:00hrs, entering Holland Park underground station.

On Sunday 15 August 2010 Gareth was shopping in Brompton Road, SW7. He went to a cash machine, and then into Harrods. At approx 14:30hrs, CCTV images show him in Hans Crescent, SW1 heading towards Sloane Street, near to the Dolce and Gabbana store.

He was wearing a red t-shirt, beige trousers, and white trainers. Gareth was approx 5ft 7inches tall, with short hair and of a muscular build.

On 23 August 2010, Gareth was found in his flat at Flat 4, 36 Alderney Street, Pimlico, SW1 by uniformed officers. There was no sign of any forced entry to the property, and no signs of disturbance inside.

Gareth was found unclothed, in a zipped and padlocked red 'North Face' holdall which was in an empty bath in the en suite bathroom. Officers do not believe any property was missing from the flat and there was no suggestion the items within the flat were specifically posed. No drugs, or indications of drug usage, were recovered.

The first post mortem on 25 August 2010 established no cause of death. Further examinations of the body were held and results from comprehensive further toxicology tests carried out came back negative, showing no trace of any drugs, alcohol, poisons or any other substances that would indicate cause of death.
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)