There seems to be some confusion about which flights are under discussion, and with what purpose.
For example, the AWPA are looking for evidence that the London-Sydney was claimed to be solo (for which they presented an award), but turned out not to be. There is little relevance (for them) in saying that the African flight wasn't solo (although also claimed to be).
There appears to be ample evidence that the African flights were claimed to be solo (particularly by TCT herself) and mostly weren't.
Although clear that the London-Sydney flights were not solo, there is less direct evidence (particularly from TCT's own statements) about the Oz flights being claimed in advance or at the time to be solo, although as I have recently pointed out, copious "assumptions" have been made, and TCT never seemed to see the need to correct these at the time.
It is most peculiar that sponsors / partners such as Boeing and ExecuJet (who one would expect to be more intimately involved in the details of the expedition than mere reporters) should explicitly state in their press releases that the flights were solo, if they were never intended to be such - am I right in thinking that TCT has subsequently issued a statement to that effect about the London-Sydney? If someone can find it that would be helpful.
As for the US legs of the so-called "round the world" trip, well the less said about that ignoble chapter, the better!
FBW