Goetz Lusitania Medallion: Imperial War Museum :"REPLY" document evidence.

Dear Sir or Madam,

Previous postings on this website have described the actions of a
PA; The Imperial War Museum (IWM).Actions that resulted in the IWM
misusing the Act by supplying incorrect and misleading disclosures.
IWM Board Chairman Sir Peter Squire asked two IWM Trustees to
closely examine our case. As previously stated on this site, this
involved a marked and defaced Goetz Lusitania medallion; the
property of my late father Milton Wright. As a result of the
Chairman’s request a small splinter group of two “independent” IWM
Trustees looked at the files and medallions involved in the case.
Sir Miles Irving (MI) and Sir Francis Richards (FR) compiled a
REVIEW which was ratified by the IWM Board in November 2007. In
their REVIEW document MI/FR questioned our credentials and asked
for clear evidence to support our case. MI/FR were critical of any
“marks” on the medallion (REVIEW p 26).The two Trustees requested
our evidence regarding “ a medallion---worn and defaced---showing
signs of extensive handling” (REVIEW p 34).They placed the burden
of proof at our door. In February 2008 the proof requested by MI/FR
was forwarded to the Prime Minister’s Office and the IWM. There is
a saying: “a picture paints a thousand words” . Photographic plates
including enlargements provided the specific evidence requested by
MI/FR. The REPLY document (January 2008) by R.G.Wright and
M.G.Wright indicated how the original medallion, marks and all, had
been restored after being taken from my father. Images of this
medallion before and after restoration were used by the IWM to
confuse and delay the progress of the case. The IWM’ s collaborator
and scholar on Lusitania medallions, Mr G. Burns must have been
aware of certain facts due to his aberrant behaviour in
correspondence (enc). It was described in previous postings how a
family member (MGW) on the recommendation of the DCMS attended a
viewing of 4 medallions at the IWM. In correspondence to the Prime
Minister’s Office dated 11 August 2008,the authorities were
notified that MGW had positively identified his father’s medallion.
It was IWM medallion number MED 937. In June 1998,the historian who
took away my father’s medallion died. In August 1998 probate to his
next of kin was granted at Newcastle High Court. In October 1998
the IWM originated Collection Number (CN) 9810-03. CN 9810-03
concerned medallion MED 937 (that identified by MGW at the IWM
viewing). Correspondence from the DCMS of 30 March 2007,indicated
the existence of an “unknown” medallion. The IWM had acquired an
anonymously “donated” medallion in 1999.This 1999 medallion had
been concealed from us for 4 years. No data bases, registers or
disclosures mentioned it’s existence. It became clear why the IWM
Director General (DG) Sir Robert Crawford had intervened personally
in correspondence of 19 May,10 June and 20 August 2004.In these 3
letters, involving CN 9810-03 lay the origins of MED 937. The DG
misled us by supplying incorrect facts with regard to CN 9810-03.
At that time I notified my MP Charles Kennedy of the incorrect
details regarding CN 9810-03. There is a dark side to this case.
The IWM DG was granted executive privilege, which he used to become
judge, jury and principal witness. Trustees MI/FR were permitted to
remove prima facie evidence (REVIEW Nov 2007). No one seemed
concerned about civil rights. Autocratic leadership prevented any
objection and consideration of our family’s position. Constructive
counter evidence was considered vexatious and inadmissible (REPLY
Jan 2008) . Under the Act would the DCMS please answer our previous
requests. (enc attached)

Yours faithfully,

R.G.Wright.

ht.