'I won't be seeing you again.'
Posts tagged ‘Detective Sergeant Leane’
Who had it and for how long.
“I am required to find, if I can, who the deceased was and how when and where he died. I will, I fear be unable to answer these questions unless further evidence is obtained.’ Coroner Cleland.
‘Unless further evidence is obtained.’
Evidence obtained subsequent to the adjournment …
(1) A Rubaiyat matching the Tamam Shud slip was obtained.
(2) The identity of the finder of the Rubaiyat was obtained.
(3) The circumstances surrounding the finding of the Rubaiyat were obtained.
(4) A code written on the back of the Rubaiyat was obtained.
(5) A phone number written on the back of the Rubaiyat was obtained.
(6) The identity of the phone’s subscriber was obtained.
(7) An interview with the phone subscriber was obtained.
(8) Evidence of a relationship between the Somerton Man and the subscriber was obtained.
It’s been put forward here in multiple posts that the actual existence of the coded Rubaiyat is questionable, given that there is no evidence that photographs of any part of the book are known to exist and Detective Brown, one of the leading Detectives in the case admitted that his superior at the time, Detective Sergeant Leane, lost the book in his filing system.
How and when Leane managed to lose the Rubiayat yet retain the much smaller Tamam Shud slip has never been satisfactorily explained. Neither has it been explained why Leane didn’t request that Cleland subpoena the individual who claimed to have found the Rubaiyat or why Leane didn’t submit the book itself as both were the further evidence Cleland was waiting for, seeing it was a requirement for him to do so and the inquest was adjourned specifically to await such further evidence.
Police cannot usurp a coroner’s function.
it’s back to the oft-repeated assertion, here at least, that the Rubaiyat cannot be proved to have ever existed and everything connected to both it and the Tamam Shud slip’s finding was a construction built to hide the identity of the Somerton Man and his relationship with Jessica Harkness.
All SAPOL had to do was wait Cleland out and for him to keep his judicial head down.
The Somerton Man inquest was closed for lack of new evidence despite the police having found more than enough.
Why was the coroner’s court denied the opportunity to subpoena new witnesses?
The suitcase held a cornucopia of identifiable items fingerprint-wise but DS Leane preferred to adopt a different approach in his efforts to identify who owned it and instead took a few bits and pieces back to the station to be photographed and distributed to the press, hoping their publication would do the job for him.
How does that make sense?
Sherlock Holmes he wasn’t.
Was the thread photographed because it was thought to have been used in conjunction with the tools or was it done to identify the Somerton Man as someone who used that particular thread to repair his clothing?
Fifteen investigative and one coronial failure cannot be the result of incompetence, surely.
We’ve already established through re-reading GF’s book that the commonly accepted and widely published images of both the Freeman Rubaiyat and the torn page were not of the original, meaning the press mocked them up after talking to the police.
We were told in another press report published only days after Freeman handed his Rubaiyat to DS Leane that it was torn from a Rubaiyat published in New Zealand by Whitcombe and Tombs spelt Toombs. The report also included the false image of the Freeman Rubaiyat..
One irresistible implication is that this information was also provided by the police. The other that it is also false – for reasons that have yet to become clear.
The press was in close contact with the investigating police prior to and post inquest as you would expect, particularly after DS Leane let them have a look at the Taman Shud slip and acknowledging his senior administrative background in the police force and the importance of the case, it’s hard to imagine him authorising any release of false information.
Yet he did. Twice.
One mistake is acceptable, two is not. Three makes them all deliberate.
Why did the police re-interview Harkness in 1982, and why isn't anybody talking about it?
From Byron Deveson.
It is interesting that Clive sees a resemblance to SM in the Scots-Irish actor Stephen Boyd (AKA Millar) because SM’s mtDNA haplogroup is present at significant levels in Ireland. See:
It appears that Scots-Irish were mercenaries in Finland in the 16th Century and that could explain the high incidence of the H4 haplogroup in Finland (and Iceland where it constitutes 9%?).
I am reminded that there was a large “tartan” scarf (shawl?) in SM’s suitcase. From memory the tartan looked like a military or an Irish tartan. Or even a Norwegian tartan. But the pattern is oblong and all genuine tartans appear to be square as a consequence of the weaving method.
Tweeds are often rectangular and SM’s “tartan” scarf appears to be a tweed, not a tartan. Unfortunately tweed patterns and colour were chosen for camouflage (hunting) and this is consistent with the appearance of the scarf/shawl in the black and white press photo.
Tweeds are often dun coloured to fit in with the Scottish landscape. A dark blue and green tweed such as the one from SM’s suitcase would be an exception from my vague memory of such things and this might be an overlooked clue. Dark green and blue suggests deep forest to me and, relying on dim memory, these are not abundant in Scotland or Ireland. I note that some estates had their own tweed pattern and some estates had private forests. The possible US belongings (comb, lighter and coat and chewing gum(?) from memory) bolster the case for SM being American and Scots-Irish DNA is concordant with US East Coast heritage.
I started building a family tree commencing with Robin Thomson’s likely forbears Tarleton Pleasants (1778-1836) and Tabitha nee Crew (1788-1819) but I found so much contradictory information that I gave up.
I started by assembling all the available material, regardless of the contradictions, with the intention of straightening it all out. But, I soon found that the descendants of this couple could not agree as to whom begat whom and when, so I didn’t stand a chance.
I pushed on in the hope that one of the descendant lines would show some connection to Australia, and some do. The Merryman family comes to mind. But, nothing crystallised and I decided that there was more than a thousand hours of research required and only a relatively small chance of success. So, there the Pleasants family tree rests.
"Although there was half a packet of cigarettes in one of his pockets, he didn’t have a match on him."
Comments by Byron Deveson and a word from Derek Abbott.