IWM:Goetz Lusitania Medallion:Confirmation letter to the Prime Minister 11 Aug 2008

Dear Sir or Madam,

Details with regard to this case have been posted previously.
Between March 2005 and August 2007 a PA, the Imperial War Museum
contravened the Freedom of information Act. The IWM supplied
incorrect details in their disclosures. Trustees (MI/FR) who
carried out a review of the case were prejudicial. Prima facie
evidence that incriminated the IWM in wrongdoing was removed from
their REVIEW (November 2007). The responsible government
department, the DCMS were provided with a copy of this detailed
evidence. Evidence catalogued in a REPLY document by R G Wright and
M G Wright ( January 2008 ). Photographs and files included in the
REPLY document provided powerful evidence of IWM complicity. The
IWM and DCMS have ignored the existence of this REPLY document and
the evidence it contained. Their silence suggests the two PA’s are
intent on concealing the source of the artefact, an iron Lusitania
medallion number MED 937. The provenance for this medallion ( MED
937 ) was provided by the IWM on 19/11/2003. The Art Dept’s
Documentation Manager stated that the central computer had no donor
or date of acquisition for the medallion. It consequently had NO
RECORDED PROVENANCE. This provenance was later updated and
summarised in DCMS correspondence dated 30/3/2007(Annotation 1).
The letter from the DCMS ( paragraphs 2&3 ) stated that a concrete
provenance existed for medallion MED 937. A clear photograph in the
sale catalogue alongside an invoice / accession file established
beyond doubt the provenance and the ownership of medallion MED 937.
The medallion belonged to the IWM. It was derived from SCHULMAN of
AMSTERDAM, on the 22/10/1917. However in a recent DCMS letter
posted on this website ( 23/10/2009 ) it was apparent that the IWM
had once again amended the provenance. The IWM had revised the
provenance of medallion MED 937 to GASELEE 1931( Annotation 2).
There is however a problem for the IWM/DCMS regarding the Gaselee
medallion. It was listed in IWM data bases as a bronze propaganda
copy. This provenance, the alchemists dream is unsustainable. Iron
and bronze are different metals with contrasting magnetic
properties. Not only do the IWM treat the Act disrespectfully but
they expect the public to engage in fantasy. The 1917 provenance
was altered because medallion MED 937 was marked, damaged and had
been written on. A new medallion purchased by the IWM from Schulman
in 1917 needed to be pristine. MED 937 did not fit this 1917
acquisition criteria. Subsequently at a later date, on the
announcement of the importance of this medallion, the IWM would
have had serious problems explaining the surface anomalies. The
1917 provenance was abandoned because high resolution photographs
were supplied to myself by IWM Director General Sir Robert
Crawford. These Photographic Archive images, coded HU 74 866 and 74
867 supplied in August 2004 were a serious error. These two
photographs included in the REPLY document revealed a damaged and
defaced medallion. With respect to the DCMS’ s confusion over the
provenance of MED 937.I would remind the DCMS that they recommended
my family inspect the IWM collection. In London in late July 2008,
Milton Wright’s youngest son ( MGW ) after examining the IWM
medallions held dad’s prize possession, still marked and damaged,
for the first time in 40 years. This was identified as medallion
number MED 937. For confirmation MGW’ s solicitor wrote to the
Prime Ministers Office and the IWM stating that MGW had positively
identified his fathers medallion. This letter was dated 11 August
2008 (Annotation 3). Therefore could the DCMS under the F o I Act
supply the real / correct name of the person (s) authorising the
IWM to retain this medallion, number MED 937.

Yours faithfully,

Robert G.Wright.