IMPERIAL WAR MUSEUM:ARBITRATION:THE RIGHTS OF PUBLIC ACCESS TO TRUSTEES

Department for Culture, Media and Sport did not have the information requested.

Dear Sir or Madam
Details of the case which involve the IWM / DCMS are recorded in previous posts on the WDTK website. Between March 2005 and August 2007 numerous requests for disclosure were answered improperly by the IWM. Disclosures given by the IWM on 22 April 2005 and 18 November 2005 are relevant to the current post. The issue concerns property belonging to my late father, Milton Wright. The object an iron Goetz Lusitania medallion was taken by deception around autumn 1968. Evidence indicates that after being taken from my father this medallion went on extended loan to the IWM.A paper entitled “The Lusitania Medallion” by IWM commemorative medallion specialist the late Diana Condell was written as Departmental Reference Material in 1974. Dutton in a 1986 IWM Review paper supplied photographs of the medallion (MED 937). A medallion that had been restored contrary to disclosure given by the IWM on 22 April 2005. My younger brother ( MGW ) identified this medallion (MED 937) at the IWM in late July 2008. Marks and chips seen below the renovated surface confirmed this to be Milton Wright’s medallion. Importantly there was also the K Goetz signature observable on the bow of the ship. Further elements of the case concern the passing of the main perpetrator of the crime (GDW) in June 1998.The establishing by the IWM of Collection Number 9810-03 in October 1998 ( MED 937 ). Finally the acquisition of a Lusitania medallion by the IWM in 1999. On 10 June 2004, IWM DG Sir Robert Crawford when requested failed to identify any 1999 object. It should also have been revealed by the IWM in disclosure on 18 November 2005. The extent of concealment regarding this undisclosed 1999 medallion (running to almost 4 years) is fully covered in the REPLY document of January 2008. The situation had changed in 1998 but altered further in 2002 and 2003 with the passing of my parents. As the eldest son I have recently written a letter dated 28 August 2009 to IWM Board Chairman Sir Peter Squire. I have requested a constitutional re-examination of the evidence in this case. Evidence which has never been brought to the attention of most IWM Trustees. This process, a Trustees Appeal was denied to us by the action of IWM executive officers in Jan/Feb 2004. An Appeal terminated by ambiguous evidence from flawed documentation. Executive officers at the IWM, intimately involved in the case should be unable to veto constitutional action requested by a member of the British public. A member of the public who should be assured legal representation at such an Appeal. Since my father and mother had little, they left no estate. Therefore the future of this medallion is open to all eventualities. It’s future by any legal process should be determined by 5 siblings. This is the only legal avenue of administering any personal effects left by my parents. Under the Act I would ask the DCMS to indicate the right of access of the public to IWM Trustees? Regarding such a serious issue as this medallion and IWM executive officers; how can genuine unbiased arbitration be achieved without the intervention of a full IWM Board ? Is this not the reason that they are appointed by the Prime Minister ?

Yours faithfully,

Robert G.Wright.

FOXELL LIZ,

Reply to request - [1][email address]

Dear Dr Wright

I write in response to your request under the Freedom of Information Act -
Imperial War Museum: Arbitration: the rights of public access to Trustees.

The Freedom of Information Act gives requests the right to information
held on record. As your request is asking for an explanation/justification
of the Imperial War Museum's investigation processes rather than to see
any specific information held on record at the Department for Culture,
Media and Sport, we are responding to your email as general correspondence
outside of the terms of the Freedom of Information Act. However, this is a
technical point and does not make any substantial difference to the
response.

The Museum does not have evidence that the medallion which belonged to
your late father was placed on deposit there. With regard to the
provenance of the medallions mentioned in your letter, the first, MED937,
was donated to the Imperial War Museum by Stephen Gaselee in 1931. The
donation was recorded in the Museum's `Receipt for Objects Received'
ledger, with the donor's signature, and entered in the Museum's Accession
Register. The second, acquired in 1999, was donated to the Museum by a
donor who wishes to remain anonymous, however, it has been confirmed that
there is no connection with your family.

The Department is content that the review of 2007 was carried out on
behalf of the full Board of Trustees, following your representations. The
Chairman requested two of the Trustees to undertake an independent review
and report its findings, which were later considered and endorsed by the
whole Board.

Yours sincerely

E Foxell
Museums, Culture Team
Department for Culture, Media & Sport
2-4 Cockspur Street
London SW1Y 5DH

From: Robert G.Wright. [[FOI #18390 email]]
Sent: 22 September 2009 09:05
To: FOI
Subject: Freedom of Information request - IMPERIAL WAR
MUSEUM:ARBITRATION:THE RIGHTS OF PUBLIC ACCESS TO TRUSTEES

Dear Sir or Madam Details of the case which involve the IWM / DCMS
are recorded in previous posts on the WDTK website. Between March
2005 and August 2007 numerous requests for disclosure were answered
improperly by the IWM. Disclosures given by the IWM on 22 April
2005 and 18 November 2005 are relevant to the current post. The
issue concerns property belonging to my late father, Milton Wright.
The object an iron Goetz Lusitania medallion was taken by deception
around autumn 1968. Evidence indicates that after being taken from
my father this medallion went on extended loan to the IWM.A paper
entitled "The Lusitania Medallion" by IWM commemorative medallion
specialist the late Diana Condell was written as Departmental
Reference Material in 1974. Dutton in a 1986 IWM Review paper
supplied photographs of the medallion (MED 937). A medallion that
had been restored contrary to disclosure given by the IWM on 22
April 2005. My younger brother ( MGW ) identified this medallion
(MED 937) at the IWM in late July 2008. Marks and chips seen below
the renovated surface confirmed this to be Milton Wright's
medallion. Importantly there was also the K Goetz signature
observable on the bow of the ship. Further elements of the case
concern the passing of the main perpetrator of the crime (GDW) in
June 1998.The establishing by the IWM of Collection Number 9810-03
in October 1998 ( MED 937 ). Finally the acquisition of a Lusitania
medallion by the IWM in 1999. On 10 June 2004, IWM DG Sir Robert
Crawford when requested failed to identify any 1999 object. It
should also have been revealed by the IWM in disclosure on 18
November 2005. The extent of concealment regarding this undisclosed
1999 medallion (running to almost 4 years) is fully covered in the
REPLY document of January 2008. The situation had changed in 1998
but altered further in 2002 and 2003 with the passing of my
parents. As the eldest son I have recently written a letter dated
28 August 2009 to IWM Board Chairman Sir Peter Squire. I have
requested a constitutional re-examination of the evidence in this
case. Evidence which has never been brought to the attention of
most IWM Trustees. This process, a Trustees Appeal was denied to us
by the action of IWM executive officers in Jan/Feb 2004. An Appeal
terminated by ambiguous evidence from flawed documentation.
Executive officers at the IWM, intimately involved in the case
should be unable to veto constitutional action requested by a
member of the British public. A member of the public who should be
assured legal representation at such an Appeal. Since my father and
mother had little, they left no estate. Therefore the future of
this medallion is open to all eventualities. It's future by any
legal process should be determined by 5 siblings. This is the only
legal avenue of administering any personal effects left by my
parents. Under the Act I would ask the DCMS to indicate the right
of access of the public to IWM Trustees? Regarding such a serious
issue as this medallion and IWM executive officers; how can genuine
unbiased arbitration be achieved without the intervention of a full
IWM Board ? Is this not the reason that they are appointed by the
Prime Minister ?

Yours faithfully,

Robert G.Wright.

show quoted sections