It appears that the King's Cross and Russell Square scene evidence will finish without examining any forensic or pathology evidence for the presence of Jermaine Lindsay on the Piccadilly line train between King's Cross and Russell Square. This evidence was read for both Shehzad Tanweer and Mohammed Sidique Khan, not so for Lindsay. Instead, we are offered the following identifying documents as listed by DI Brunsden in his evidence on 17th December.
Let's work our way through this evidence by examining DI Brunsden's testimony during Hugo Keith's questioning:
As we can see from the zonal plan above, area Z is by the single door at the very rear of carriage 1, some way from the blast site which was by the second set of double doors further down the carriage.
So Lindsay's body was recovered some distance from the actual blast, although it may be fair to presume at this stage, despite the absence of a pathology report, that he hadn't suffered the almost complete disintegration, as described in evidence, of Shehzad Tanweer or Mohammed Sidique Khan.
Despite Brunsden's attempts to conflate a plastic bottle apparently 'destroyed in the blast' with peroxide-based explosives, even Brunsden would be aware that the plastic bottles in which peroxide is contained is, in and of itself, useless as an explosive material. Furthermore, whether hydrogen peroxide based explosives were something a policeman would be conscious of in July 2005 is highly unlikely, particularly given the opinions of explosives experts at the Ministry of Defence research centre at Fort Halstead:
Perhaps they should have asked DI Brunsden, who would appear to have been aware of hydrogen peroxide explosives just by dint of finding a plastic bottle!
We have been shown various types of containers in connection with the events of 7/7, none of which appear even to hint at the use of plastic bottles. Quite how a plastic bottle survived the initial explosion might also take some explaining.
No date is given for the body removal although the Intelligence and Security Committee report claimed that the pathology on Lindsay was carried out on 10 July, along with Hussain and Khan. The ISC report also claims that Lindsay became a suspect due to the viewing of the Luton CCTV on 12 July, although we now know that the viewing of Luton station CCTV took place some two days prior to that, on 10 July.
Jermaine Lindsay's home at 10 Northern Rd Aylesbury was searched on 13 July, after his wife, Samantha, reported him missing. No mention is made during the inquest hearings of finding identification documents on the Piccadilly line train prior to this raid on his home, which would have led to Lindsay being identified swiftly, as appears to have been the case with both Tanweer and Khan. On the contrary, we wouldn't expect much paper ID to survive the blast.
What about the circuit board 'attached' to Lindsay's body? In what way was it attached? What type of circuit board was it? What is it alleged that the circuit board was for?
As the precise nature of the explosives alleged to have been used on 7 July has never been revealed, the requirement for a circuit board of any sort is implicit, rather than explicit. Further, with mobile phones, laptops, iPods, etc. on each and every passenger-filled tube train, so too are there circuit boards a-plenty, even without the presence of an implied suicide bomber.
Perhaps the reference to the circuit board is an allusion to the notion of a suicide bomber with explosives primed and strapped to the body. If so, this is incredibly misleading. The official narrative holds that all the explosions on trains on 7 July 2005 occurred on the floors of the carriages, which is at variance with the modus operandi of 'suicide bombers'.
During the trial of the men accused of a similar attempt 'to bomb the tube' on 21 July, all of whom had the conspiracy to cause explosions charges against them quietly dropped (due to the evidence of expert witness, Professor Hans Michels who claimed that the mixture they used was incapable of exploding) it was claimed that these hydrogen peroxide explosives and their detonation method were similar to that used on 7 July. There was no mention of circuit boards, just tubes and wires, bulbs and 9-volt batteries. Remnants of a 'circuit board' and wires were apparently also found via x-ray embedded close to Mohammed Sidique Khan's lumbar spine.
To summarise, and to ask the questions that are not asked by Counsel to the Inquests, Lindsay's body with circuit board and plastic bottle was discovered in area Z, some distance from the blast, despite the explosives being apparently manually detonated and occurring on the floor of the carriage. Lindsay's body was subjected to a pathology test on 10 July. His home was raided on 13 July, a day after the raids in Leeds, and then on 17 & 18 July, some 10 and 11 days after the event, identification documents are found in precisely the same area that Lindsay was recovered from, despite this not being the location of the blast. Is DI Brunsden questioned on why it took so long to discover these documents? Or how they ended up in the same area as Lindsay despite being separated from him?
Nobody has explained either why Jermaine Lindsay, if he were indeed intent on committing an act of suicide-bombing on 7/7 would think to spend £30 on insurance for his mobile phone on 24 June 2005, just 13 days prior to 7 July. Note also that the address is 10 Meadow Way not 10 Northern Road - the address that Hugo Keith claimed the police drove past after the apparent robbery on 27 May 2005, when Lindsay's red Fiat Brava was said to have been involved and this address traced via registration details. [See Fiat Brava Foxtrot Tango].
Let's work our way through this evidence by examining DI Brunsden's testimony during Hugo Keith's questioning:
Q. I want to ask you, please, about some exhibits that you found in area Z at the end of the first carriage. Could we have please on the screen [INQ10164-2]? Is this a plan that you made of the first carriage showing the zonal areas for the purposes of the searching?
A. Yes, that is correct, sir.
Q. On the far right of the plan towards the rear of the first carriage, can we see that you marked area Z?
A. Yes.
As we can see from the zonal plan above, area Z is by the single door at the very rear of carriage 1, some way from the blast site which was by the second set of double doors further down the carriage.
Q. In that area, area Z, you did you find a plastic bottle destroyed in the blast?
A. Yes, that's what it looked like to me.
Q. Why did that bottle seem to you to be out of place?
A. Obviously in the Anti-terrorist Branch we learn a reasonable amount about explosives, and we were very conscious of the fact that explosives can be made from peroxide-based materials, and peroxide can be contained in plastic bottles, and so I was concerned that this may have something to do with that.
Q. Was that bottle found in the near vicinity of a male body to whom you formally gave the exhibit JB3?
A. Yes, that is correct, sir.
Q. Was that person given a disaster victim identification number, for temporary purposes, 60022242?
A. I'm sorry, sir, I haven't got that record.
Q. Will you take it from me, then, on this occasion?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did that person, JB3, turn out subsequently to be the bomber --
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. -- Lindsay?
A. Jermaine Lindsay.
Despite Brunsden's attempts to conflate a plastic bottle apparently 'destroyed in the blast' with peroxide-based explosives, even Brunsden would be aware that the plastic bottles in which peroxide is contained is, in and of itself, useless as an explosive material. Furthermore, whether hydrogen peroxide based explosives were something a policeman would be conscious of in July 2005 is highly unlikely, particularly given the opinions of explosives experts at the Ministry of Defence research centre at Fort Halstead:
Until July 2005 the scientists at Fort Halstead in Kent had never seen a hydrogen peroxide bomb.
Despite 130 years' experience gathering information on home-made and military bombs from across the world they had yet to come across the type used in the attacks in London on July 7 and 21.
Perhaps they should have asked DI Brunsden, who would appear to have been aware of hydrogen peroxide explosives just by dint of finding a plastic bottle!
We have been shown various types of containers in connection with the events of 7/7, none of which appear even to hint at the use of plastic bottles. Quite how a plastic bottle survived the initial explosion might also take some explaining.
Q. When the body was moved, did you find a piece of circuit board attached to his body and also attached to his body another piece of plastic bottle which, again, had had a segment cut from it?
A. Yes, that is correct, sir.
Q. So in very close proximity to his body?
A. Yes.
Jermaine Lindsay's home at 10 Northern Rd Aylesbury was searched on 13 July, after his wife, Samantha, reported him missing. No mention is made during the inquest hearings of finding identification documents on the Piccadilly line train prior to this raid on his home, which would have led to Lindsay being identified swiftly, as appears to have been the case with both Tanweer and Khan. On the contrary, we wouldn't expect much paper ID to survive the blast.
What about the circuit board 'attached' to Lindsay's body? In what way was it attached? What type of circuit board was it? What is it alleged that the circuit board was for?
As the precise nature of the explosives alleged to have been used on 7 July has never been revealed, the requirement for a circuit board of any sort is implicit, rather than explicit. Further, with mobile phones, laptops, iPods, etc. on each and every passenger-filled tube train, so too are there circuit boards a-plenty, even without the presence of an implied suicide bomber.
Perhaps the reference to the circuit board is an allusion to the notion of a suicide bomber with explosives primed and strapped to the body. If so, this is incredibly misleading. The official narrative holds that all the explosions on trains on 7 July 2005 occurred on the floors of the carriages, which is at variance with the modus operandi of 'suicide bombers'.
During the trial of the men accused of a similar attempt 'to bomb the tube' on 21 July, all of whom had the conspiracy to cause explosions charges against them quietly dropped (due to the evidence of expert witness, Professor Hans Michels who claimed that the mixture they used was incapable of exploding) it was claimed that these hydrogen peroxide explosives and their detonation method were similar to that used on 7 July. There was no mention of circuit boards, just tubes and wires, bulbs and 9-volt batteries. Remnants of a 'circuit board' and wires were apparently also found via x-ray embedded close to Mohammed Sidique Khan's lumbar spine.
Q. Subsequently, on 17 July -- and you may find a reference to this on page 4 of your statement, if it's the same typed statement as us, at the bottom, Detective Inspector -- did you recover from the same area, area Z, an envelope addressed to Mr Lindsay which you produce as exhibit 1116?
A. That is correct.
Q. That is the envelope. You also found an exhibit JB117,our INQ8818, please, a driving licence -- no that's 117. Could we have 117 which is 8818, I think, please, unless I have my reference wrong. It may be it's not on Trial Director. I'm afraid I think the envelope is on Trial Director, but not the content. In any event, it was a counterpart driving licence in the name of Jermaine Lindsay, was it not?
A. I certainly found some correspondence in that name.
Q. Could we try 8818 one more time? No, don't worry, that's the envelope rather than the contents. In any event, it was a driving licence counterpart in his name. The following day, on 18 July, did you recover from the floor area, area Z, another piece of plastic that appeared to have been cut from a bottle?
A. Yes, correct, sir.
Q. In the same place, did you also find an exhibit JB123, a passport, a United Kingdom passport, in the name of Jermaine Lindsay?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. Could we have INQ8816 [INQ8816-2], please? We can see at the bottom there the remains of that passport, JB123.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. The exhibit had a number of different items in it. Split from it, did you also produce a certificate of mobile phone insurance, again in the name of Mr Lindsay?
A. Yes, that is correct, sir.
Q. Our INQ8815 [INQ8815-2], please. A certificate of mobile phone insurance, there we are. If we could just enlarge the number on the top left-hand corner --
A. Yes, that's correct, sir.
Q. -- we should see the name and address, and also split from that exhibit JB123, did you find a handwritten document, a Department of Work and Pensions letter, dated 9 May 2005?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Our INQ8814 [INQ8814-2], please. Could you just enlarge the top right-hand segment of that document, please? The significance of that a document addressed to him, but it contained handwriting on it, did it not?
A. Yes, it did, sir.
Q. On that front page, there was a reference there, wasn't there, to "one minute per train"?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. On the reverse side -- which should be the next page in the exhibit [], if you could enlarge the top half first, please -- there were a number of days in the week set
out, as well as journey times, making references to "Holborn", "West", possibly Westminster, "Paddington", "Oxford Circus"?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. In the bottom half of the page, if you would rotate it, please, days of the week with more detailed explanations of distances and times from certain London Underground
stations?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Could we perhaps return one more time -- I feel my luck might be better this time -- and try INQ8817 [INQ8817-2], please, for the DVLA letter, if it could be rotated -- I'm very grateful to Mr Suter -- there is the counterpart driving licence with the name Mr Lindsay.
A. Yes, I do recall it.
MR KEITH: Thank you very much, Officer, those are all the questions I have for you.
Nobody has explained either why Jermaine Lindsay, if he were indeed intent on committing an act of suicide-bombing on 7/7 would think to spend £30 on insurance for his mobile phone on 24 June 2005, just 13 days prior to 7 July. Note also that the address is 10 Meadow Way not 10 Northern Road - the address that Hugo Keith claimed the police drove past after the apparent robbery on 27 May 2005, when Lindsay's red Fiat Brava was said to have been involved and this address traced via registration details. [See Fiat Brava Foxtrot Tango].LADY JUSTICE HALLETT: Any questions? Mr Patterson?
Questions by MR PATTERSON
MR PATTERSON: Just one or two additional exhibits, please, Officer. I think there were other similar peroxide bottles that were found on the train that appeared to have the neck cut off them, rather like the one that you've already mentioned.
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. I think there was one JB228, which was at area Y, so at that rear part of the carriage but --
A. On the other side.
Q. -- on the other side, exactly. There was a Nokia mobile phone, JB41, that was found in that first carriage near seat D --
A. Yes, sir.
Q. -- which was later examined and found to be a phone that had text messages consistent with having been used by the bomber, Jermaine Lindsay?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. In addition, another document rather like the one that we've just looked at, which showed handwritten notes about Underground stations, there was another one, JB265, which was a Tube map which had ringed Underground stations including King's Cross, Bond Street, Oxford Circus and so forth?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. So a similar document to the one we've looked at?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Finally, this: I think there were also assorted pieces of rucksack that were found in different areas, also in that carriage, which were later considered by the scientist Mr Clifford Todd?
A. We did find a number of items of that description, yes.
MR PATTERSON: Thank you very much. That's all I ask.
LADY JUSTICE HALLETT: Ms Gallagher?
Questions by MS GALLAGHER
MS GALLAGHER: Just one very brief matter. We've looked at on screen JB125, so the Department of Work and Pensions letter which has the times written on it. Can we go -- I'm not sure if it's on Trial Director -- it's [INQ9644-3]. Yes, it is. At the very top box there, it just confirms that the handwriting is definitely Jermaine Lindsay. Just for completeness, my Lady, I thought it appropriate to raise that at this stage.
More debris, again from another area at the rear of the carriage. opposite to where Lindsay's body is claimed to have been recovered, rather than under the train or around the blast site.
The damage to the Piccadilly line train and the area where the explosion occurred (note the lifting up of the carriage floor around the bottom left corner in this image). Area Z would be somewhere around the yellow and blue poles at the rear of the carriage near the middle left of this image and area Y on the opposite side.The 7/7 Inquests have some explaining to do as the official story continues to fall apart.
