Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

Sergei Skripal

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Sergei Skripal

Old 18th Jul 2018, 12:48
  #1721 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by A_Van View Post
Just came across a (UK) publication that seems to summarize main inconsistencies in the version so aggressively spread by "mainstream" media and some populist-type politicians.
Part 1:
http://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/craig-murray-illogical-inconsistent-and-shifting-government-narrative-over-events-in-salisbury-and-amesbury/

Part 2:
http://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/craig-murray-the-holes-in-the-official-skripal-story/

Just want to add that this substance (A-232 and -234 family) was in a possession of many countries since early 90's. The formula is well-known.E.g., the Germans got it, but preferred to experiment in Sweden.
Link to a German source:

https://www.dw.com/en/skripal-poisoning-germany-got-novichok-chemical-sample-from-russia-in-1990s/a-43818626

Czeck president himself confessed his experts also had the stuff:
https://www.dw.com/en/skripal-poisoning-germany-got-novichok-chemical-sample-from-russia-in-1990s/a-43818626

No need to say the US had it, too, and even got several patents (including methods to neutralize/alleviate it). The same for Porton Down: since they could identify it, this means they have samples and can produce it.

So, blaming Russia on attacking people in England just because this substance was found somewhere is the same as blaming Germany when anywhere in the world sarin is used (since they invented it).
Worth reading back through this thread to clarify what has already been pointed out, both about the unique signature of this batch of A234 and about some of the links posted.

I think the myths being spread by the ill-informed, but very vocal, conspiracy theorists have been well and truly debunked, and the identity of the agent and the fact that it was from a specific batch manufactured in Shikhany in the early 1980's have been proven by the independent OPCW accredited labs. As stated several times here already, those labs obtained their own samples and conducted their own tests and all of them concluded that the signature of the agent matched the UK findings.

There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind as to what the agent was or where and when it was manufactured. Like others I do have doubts as to who was behind the attack, again as already stated earlier in this thread.

In my view the main failing of Russia as a state was it's inability to ensure the security and safety of the hundred or more chemical agents developed under the novichok programme. When independent inspectors went to look at the former Soviet Union facilities in the mid 1990's they were pretty horrified by the lack of security and the generally run down and unsafe nature of the facilities they looked at. Have a read of this report from 1995, as it makes it clear that pretty much anyone in Russia could have had access to this agent, and others: https://web.archive.org/web/20150824...s/Report17.pdf
VP959 is online now  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 12:54
  #1722 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Москва/Ташкент
Age: 49
Posts: 783
I have no faith in the Government to tell the truth, or anything closely related to it. In this instance too many loose ends are evident, from the disappearance of the Skripals down a wormhole never to be seen again through this incredulous container story, the relentless government spin without a shred of evidence (but much to the contrary). Also the alleged connection to the Trump dossier, bizarre.

It does raise a question though - what if they were both genuine poisonings but the second was instigated by somebody unconnected with the first for whatever reasons?

The second instigator may be trying to stir the pot.
flash8 is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 13:03
  #1723 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234 View Post
It's going to be an interesting challenge to get forensic evidence off of that bottle.
One heck of a challenge, given that the whole bottle is almost certainly heavily contaminated by now.

Fingerprints were probably never going to be there anyway, as the attacker(s) had to have had the sense to wear gloves, just for their own protection, as it's almost certain that some agent made it's way onto the outside of the bottle when it was being used to coat the door handle at Sergei Skripal's house.

It'll be interesting to find out if the bottle was found inside a bag or other container. Thinking about the way I'd go about carrying out this attack, then I would definitely keep the bottle inside a sealed plastic bag right up until moments before deploying it. I'd be double gloved, as the agent may well be able to penetrate a single thickness of surgical glove, plus I'd need to doff the gloves without too much risk - double gloving allows the outer pair to be removed and turned inside out then the inner pair, with a relatively low risk of contamination. Very shortly before putting the agent on the door handle I'd cut open the outer bag and then quickly remove the stopper from the bottle and apply the agent to the handle.

I'd replace the stopper and put the bottle back in the bag, then walk away, holding the bag and bottle in a gloved hand, making sure it didn't contact my clothing. At the earliest safe opportunity I would discard the bag and bottle and then find somewhere to very carefully doff the gloves and dispose of them. As a precaution, I would almost certainly have a bottle of an appropriate acidic solution to wash my hands, plus a bottle of alkali solution to both neutralise the acid solution and wash way any residual broken down agent. I'd then rinse my hands well in water, maybe from the river close to where I suspect the bottle was found.

Somewhere there is bound to be one or two pairs of possibly contaminated gloves, probably not far from where the bottle was thrown. I've not heard of any gloves being found, but it seems inconceivable to me that any attacker(s) wouldn't wear gloves and dispose of them quickly afterwards.
VP959 is online now  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 13:12
  #1724 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by flash8 View Post
I have no faith in the Government to tell the truth, or anything closely related to it. In this instance too many loose ends are evident, from the disappearance of the Skripals down a wormhole never to be seen again through this incredulous container story, the relentless government spin without a shred of evidence (but much to the contrary). Also the alleged connection to the Trump dossier, bizarre.

It does raise a question though - what if they were both genuine poisonings but the second was instigated by somebody unconnected with the first for whatever reasons?

The second instigator may be trying to stir the pot.
I see nothing at all suspicious about the Skripals being kept in a secure and secret location. There's clear evidence that someone wants them dead - they've tried once and failed, so there has to be a pretty good suspicion that whoever was behind this attack may well try again, especially if their motivation is a feeling of betrayal.

The only spin I've seen from government has come from buffoons like Boris, who was talking out of his backside most of the time (nothing new there). I've not seen anything credible linking this to Trump at all - that seems to be pure media speculation.

The chances of exactly the same batch of an unusual, non-weaponised, former Soviet Union, chemical agent being used in two unconnected attacks seems just too incredible to stand up to scrutiny. The facts we know are that one of the second victims was a person that went around picking things up, with a view to selling them. What are the chances that a supposed second attacker happened to select him and choose to plant an extremely hazardous container in a place where only he would be likely to pick it up? There's little logic to that hypothesis, whereas one of the second victims picking up a container discarded months before by the original attacker does seem to fit the known facts pretty well, even down to the probable location of the container when he picked it up.
VP959 is online now  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 14:06
  #1725 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Location: Location!
Posts: 1,834
Originally Posted by flash8 View Post
It does raise a question though - what if they were both genuine poisonings but the second was instigated by somebody unconnected with the first for whatever reasons?

The second instigator may be trying to stir the pot.
Which curiously enough, however far-fetched, could lead to a charge of murder if any perpetrator were ever brought to trial, whereas I cannot envisage how the death of the unfortunate woman as a result of coming in contact with the agent used against the Skripals could legally be regarded as murder, as has been widely reported, rather than manslaughter.

Jack
Union Jack is online now  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 14:27
  #1726 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by Union Jack View Post
Which curiously enough, however far-fetched, could lead to a charge of murder if any perpetrator were ever brought to trial, whereas I cannot envisage how the death of the unfortunate woman as a result of coming in contact with the agent used against the Skripals could legally be regarded as murder, as has been widely reported, rather than manslaughter.

Jack
That was my thought when they announced that it was a murder enquiry, as I couldn't see how a charge of murder could be brought. I believe that the use of the term "murder" in this case just relates to the way the enquiry will be conducted, though, and hence resourced.

It seems clear that there was an intention to cause the possible death of the Skripals, in that they were specifically targeted, so in the extremely unlikely event of the perpetrator(s) being caught I can see them facing an attempted murder charge. There is a very strong link between the specific agent used against the Skripals and that which has killed Dawn Sturgess and poisoned Charlie Rowley, one that I'm certain will be forensically strong enough to prove that the agent was from the same batch, perhaps from the same container as they picked up. That would then mean (as I understand it, and I stand to be corrected if I'm mistaken) that a manslaughter charge could be brought regarding the death of Dawn Sturgess on the basis of gross negligence.

It's almost certainly hypothetical though, as I think the chance of finding out the identity of the attacker(s) and bringing him/them to justice, is vanishingly small.
VP959 is online now  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 14:42
  #1727 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: over the rainbow
Age: 70
Posts: 562
If I arm myself with a rifle intending to shoot and kill A and I miss him and kill B, a stranger standing near to him, I have committed the offence of murder.
roving is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 15:29
  #1728 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Москва/Ташкент
Age: 49
Posts: 783
If I arm myself with a rifle intending to shoot and kill A and I miss him and kill B, a stranger standing near to him, I have committed the offence of murder.
That is fascinating what you say... I would have assumed (as a layman) that two charges 1) Attempted Murder and 2) Manslaughter would be laid. You remind me that if ever I am to transgress (in a minor fashion like stealing sweets lest people view me in horror) I first better fully understand the consequences of any charges potentially brought against me.

My reasoning here is I had no intention of killing (or even harming) B and their death was therefore without any specific intent (mens rea?) on my part, negligence, yes, therefore a manslaughter charge.
flash8 is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 15:53
  #1729 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,665
Originally Posted by flash8 View Post
My reasoning here is I had no intention of killing (or even harming) B and their death was therefore without any specific intent (mens rea?) on my part, negligence, yes, therefore a manslaughter charge.
Your reasoning would be wrong.

Google Tanesha Melbourne or Joanne Rand, for example.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 16:15
  #1730 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 61
Posts: 514
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
Worth reading back through this thread to clarify what has already been pointed out, both about the unique signature of this batch of A234 and about some of the links posted.
I think the myths being spread by the ill-informed, but very vocal, conspiracy theorists have been well and truly debunked, and the identity of the agent and the fact that it was from a specific batch manufactured in Shikhany in the early 1980's have been proven by the independent OPCW accredited labs. As stated several times here already, those labs obtained their own samples and conducted their own tests and all of them concluded that the signature of the agent matched the UK findings.
You wrote that, but, sorry, this is not convincing.
I see the only official report (summary) published by this organization, here it is:
https://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/...12-2018_e_.pdf
There is nothing there similar to what you wrote above.
I assume though I was not able to find a more detailed report. Can you give a proof link to any official OPCW document stating what you wrote, please?

Anyway, even if such a document exists, since the Russian experts were not allowed to participate in the identification process, without them anybody could write whatever they like. Blaming with no evidence, just politics. We know who run OPCW and how they are generating reports in Syria without visiting the sites and even about the events that never happened.

Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind as to what the agent was or where and when it was manufactured. Like others I do have doubts as to who was behind the attack, again as already stated earlier in this thread.
OK, me too as far as your second sentence is concerned.

Initially I was tending to think that it was a provocation designed by some groups in UK who were interested to raise (once again) tension between Russia and West, but after the second case I have serious doubts. Those who manipulated with the substance seem to be complete idiots and laymen. Quite unlikely that "special services" either in East or West perform that bad.
A_Van is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 16:45
  #1731 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,665
Originally Posted by flash8 View Post
Well I do know this as stated by me in the same post earlier on if you bothered to read it fully.
Yes, that's why I said "your reasoning would be wrong" (having read your post), not "your reasoning was wrong".

Originally Posted by flash8 View Post
I would have assumed (as a layman) that two charges 1) Attempted Murder and 2) Manslaughter would be laid.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 16:55
  #1732 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 2,818
If I arm myself with a rifle intending to shoot and kill A and I miss him and kill B, a stranger standing near to him, I have committed the offence of murder
I'm with roving and DaveReid, you're guilty of murder. You're going to need a good lawyer flash.
Murder is an offence under the common law of England and Wales. It is considered the most serious form of homicide, in which one person kills another with the intention to unlawfully cause either death or serious injury. The element of intentionality was originally termed malice aforethought although it required neither malice nor premeditation.Because murder is generally defined in law as an intent to cause serious harm or injury (alone or with others), combined with a death arising from that intention, there are certain circumstances where a death will be treated as murder even if the defendant did not wish to kill the actual victim. This is called "transferred malice", and arises in two common cases:

The defendant intended serious harm to one or more persons, but an unintended other person dies as a result;

Several people share an intent to do serious harm, and the victim dies because of the action of any of those involved (for example, if another person goes "further than expected" or performs an unexpectedly lethal action).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_in_English_law
megan is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 17:01
  #1733 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Currently within the EU
Posts: 317
Originally Posted by flash8 View Post
My reasoning here is I had no intention of killing (or even harming) B and their death was therefore without any specific intent (mens rea?) on my part, negligence, yes, therefore a manslaughter charge.
The intention is to kill. If you succeed in killing, a victim is dead and you are a murderer. I don't see what the victim's identity has to do with it.
Sallyann1234 is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 17:03
  #1734 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 369
Thanks for that, megan, I was unaware of that aspect of the law but the concept of "transferred malice" makes a lot of sense. It certainly seems to apply in this case, as there seems little doubt at all that there was an intention to murder Sergei and/or Yulia Skripal, and by carelessly disposing of a very lethal weapon in such a way that it killed and injured others, it seems to meet the criteria. I stand corrected on what I thought might apply in my post above.
VP959 is online now  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 17:33
  #1735 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Москва/Ташкент
Age: 49
Posts: 783
Yes, that's why I said "your reasoning would be wrong" (having read your post), not "your reasoning was wrong".
Sorry Dave wrong end of the stick, deleted the post. I will say however that I was completely unaware of the law as it is... mind you I am not in the UK and here I err on the side of caution with everything just in case...

The intention is to kill. If you succeed in killing, a victim is dead and you are a murderer. I don't see what the victim's identity has to do with it.
​​​​​​​Fair point.
flash8 is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 17:55
  #1736 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 67
Posts: 19
Originally Posted by flash8 View Post
It does raise a question though - what if they were both genuine poisonings but the second was instigated by somebody unconnected with the first for whatever reasons?

The second instigator may be trying to stir the pot.
Now you're just being silly.
Shandy52 is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2018, 18:04
  #1737 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Москва/Ташкент
Age: 49
Posts: 783
Now you're just being silly.
Well, perhaps, however it can't be ruled out, best keep an open mind on such things, however unlikely.

Stirring the pot might not be the best way of putting it, but instigating it with a desired outcome of some sort.
flash8 is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2018, 07:15
  #1738 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: sydney
Posts: 135
Being reported in various newspapers:

Officers think several Russians were involved in the attempted murder of the former double agent and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury and are looking for more than one suspect, the British-based news agency Press Association claims.

A source with knowledge of the investigation told PA: “Investigators believe they have identified the suspected perpetrators of the novichok attack through CCTV and have cross-checked this with records of people who entered the country around that time. They (the investigators) are sure they (the suspects) are Russian.”
Groaner is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2018, 07:32
  #1739 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by Groaner View Post
Being reported in various newspapers:

Officers think several Russians were involved in the attempted murder of the former double agent and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury and are looking for more than one suspect, the British-based news agency Press Association claims.

A source with knowledge of the investigation told PA: “Investigators believe they have identified the suspected perpetrators of the novichok attack through CCTV and have cross-checked this with records of people who entered the country around that time. They (the investigators) are sure they (the suspects) are Russian.”
If it turns out that the perpetrators are Russian, I think the media would be well-advised to not assume that Russian = Russian government.

I can't see what Vladimir Putin would have to gain right now by authorising such an attack, but I can see that there could be some powerful Russians who would have a very strong personal motive for wanting revenge against Sergei Skripal. I get the feeling that Putin cannot always maintain control of some of the powerful people in Russia, and that a large part of his "tough man" approach is aimed at bringing loads of powerful mavericks under control, probably including some his former colleagues in the security services. I'm not 100% convinced he has all of them under control even now, perhaps one of our members resident in Russia might like to comment on this.
VP959 is online now  
Old 19th Jul 2018, 09:38
  #1740 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 369
It seems the BBC have more on this story, but are stressing that they haven't verified it yet: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44883803

One bit of new information is that the independent OPCW labs have been to Salisbury to independently collect samples of the agent used against Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley and are now taking those samples for analysis in their own labs to see if the agent is from the same batch as that used in the attack on the Skripals. My understanding is that Porton Down may have already confirmed that it is from the same batch, but if the independent OPCW accredited labs reach the same conclusion then that removes pretty much any doubt that the latest poisoning was unrelated to the Skripal attack.

Last edited by VP959; 19th Jul 2018 at 10:07. Reason: typo
VP959 is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.