Imperial War Museum:Goetz iron Lusitania medallion 1st issue; fact,fiction or conspiracy.

Dear Sir or Madam,
The “What do they know” website includes two previous information
requests to the DCMS . These concern an iron Goetz Lusitania
medallion 1st issue, number MED 937,IWM website photographs HU
74866/7.These requests contain all the background information on
this case. They were directed at the DCMS and are dated 6 August
2008---“RESPONSE--- and 20 August 2008---“THE TRANSFER . On 30
March 2007,the DCMS recommended that the Lusitania medallion
collection at the IWM be examined by a member of my family. In
August 2008 this advice was followed and the collection closely
inspected. A marked and defaced medallion, with a Goetz signature
and other writing on it was positively identified as the family
heirloom that was the property of Milton Wright, our father. This
fact was notified to the IWM and Number 10 by Mr Smyth our
solicitor and dated 11 August 2008.The object identified was
medallion number MED 937. The DCMS were delegated by Number 10 to
resolve the case; which involves the ownership issue. Evidence
supporting the Wright family case was summarised in a REPLY
document ( Jan 2008) by R.G.Wright and M.G.Wright (sons of the late
Milton Wright). Files and photographic plates in this REPLY
document (Jan 2008) strongly support the case presented by the
Wright family. Copies of the REPLY document (Jan 2008) were sent to
the IWM and Number 10 in February 2008.In early November 2008 a
further copy was sent by our solicitors to Ms E.Foxell at the DCMS.
The DCMS remain silent on the photographic evidence and the files
presented in the REPLY document (Jan 2008). A REVIEW document (Nov
2007) by two IWM Trustees ,Sir Miles Irving (MI) and Sir Francis
Richards (FR) was compiled of the case. The logistics were sorted
out partly by the DCMS’s Ms Foxell. For example the DCMS set up a
neutral post box. However, the final REVIEW document (Nov 2007) by
MI/FR contains serious errors and omissions. The REVIEW document
(Nov 2007) would be inadmissible as legal evidence, since
testimonials by members of my family and letters from the IWM DG
are excluded. The reasons for omitting such crucial evidence are
unexplained by MI/FR. Furthermore, evidence used by MI/FR to
support the IWM’s case are submitted by a Californian numismatic
scholar Mr G.Burns. In the REPLY document (Jan 2008) correspondence
from Mr Burns is presented that show his facts concerning the iron
Goetz first issue are unreliable and contradictory.
The actions of the IWM staff, it’s Secretary of Finance and the DG,
Sir Robert Crawford indicate that a conspiracy is in progress to
permanently acquire this family heirloom. The Trustees MI/FR have
made serious errors and through intransigence will not correct
them. The DCMS have always had responsibility for this case and
have at times interacted closely with the IWM. Three copies of the
REPLY document (Jan 2008) have been available for the DCMS’s
examination, since February 2008. Under the Act could the DCMS
specify if their role is to support the Museum services, who
operate on political correctness ? Alternatively, are they
instructed to assist members of the public, who are seeking moral
restitution and the absolute truth ?

Yours faithfully,

Robert G.Wright.