Skip to content

26 When was the Rubaiyat lost?

Detective Brown is on record* as saying Detective Sergeant Leane’s filing system was responsible for losing track of the Rubaiyat. What wasn’t noted was the probability that Leane would have had an assistant to help him with this task as his files must have been substantial seeing he was an Administrator of Detectives and soon to be lead investigator in the Somerton Body Case.

On 23 July Leane had his hands on the Rubaiyat, the code and the telephone number.

On 26 July the newspapers knew of Canney’s visit to 90A Moseley Street.

On 29 July Leane sent a photograph of the code and a ‘similar’ copy of the book to Eric Nave. The feeling is a naval officer of Nave’s rank and reputation would have insisted on being given the original. A mere layman might deduce that a code found written on the back of a book might in some way be connected to what was written inside the book and that a man of Nave’s experience would have liked to test that possibility. As far as keeping the evidence secure, no doubt Eric Nave had his own means. And it would not have been the only time Leane allowed individuals other than the police to handle evidence, remembering Cowan and Cleland’s given task.

Was the Rubaiyat lost within six days of days of Leane receiving it?

How else could you have it?


Or is it yet another argument for it never to have existed?

5 Comments Post a comment
  1. the sly dog #

    Det Brown seems very clear in the transcript page that there were two phone numbers. One being for ‘someone’ who, around that time, living at 90A Moseley St and the other the un-named business with no apparent connections to the dead SM. The fact that any info into that aspect of the investigation (chasing up the second phone number) has never been revealed in any detail what so ever indicates that we are working with an incomplete picture of the investigation. Not even a mention of a gentleman’s agreement to not mention the business in connection to the case ala Freeman. There must have been stuff done that wasn’t collated in a nice and neat way like we might expect by detectives investigating a random dead body today.

    In the transcript Det Brown also alludes to photos being taken; photos taken that are probably not, or ever been, in the public domain. Photos that we haven’t seen… Even the famed code page photo comes from The Advertisers’ archives, doesn’t it, not from SAPOL’s. Book missing, photos missing, interview transcripts missing.

    If it were me, I certainly wouldn’t have posted the original book with code to Melbourne? for Nave to inspect. A picture (or a series of photos) is worth a thousand words!

    September 27, 2021
    • Sly dog .. Why wouldn’t you let Nave have the original?

      September 27, 2021
      • Siegfried Haussner #

        Did the PO lose it?

        Maybe it was just too embarrassing to record.

        September 27, 2021
        • Siegfried … would it have mattered? It wasn’t the original.

          September 28, 2021
  2. Earth to Siegfried … you need to respond to maintain your membership.

    September 29, 2021

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: