- 2000 MAY 08 -


00-05-08          0700    Morning routine.  …..

            Forwarded a memo to Andy LATHEM (Vic GORMAN later advised that he received it from LATHEM – see below why) that is actually a memo to Vic GERDEN asking for a meeting – as follows:

Mr. V. GERDEN    Transportation Safety Board    Hangar ‘A’ CFB Shearwater     Halifax, N.S. B0J 3A0


OIC RCMP     RCMP Swissair Task Force     Hangar ‘A’ CFB Shearwater     Halifax, N.S. B0J 3A0            00 MAY 08

Re:       Exhibit Wire Beads     Post Auger Analysis     Swissair Flight 111 Investigation                  

            On 00 JUN 16, it is expected that the final AES phase of the wire bead analysis process will be completed.  It will then be time to consider what type of further analysis should be undertaken.  Several avenues have been considered by both the TSB and the RCMP, in co-operation with the partner companies involved in this matter.  They include Sky Scan, FIB and TEM, and the normal TSB examination by SEM.

            It is requested that a meeting of members from the partner groups including Boeing, Swissair, Hollingsead, the TSB, and the RCMP be held to discuss the future analysis of the wire beads.  There is a need to openly discuss this matter to eliminate the potential for a discord, as one must remember that one of the avenues is a totally destructive process that will preclude the chance of any further analysis.  It would be convenient for the meeting to be held in Ottawa during the week of the AES examination, perhaps on Friday, 00 JUN 16 at CANMET.  Dr. BROWN should be asked to provide his ideas in the matter as we have relied on his expertise to date for the AES.  It is requested that Gus SIDLA of the TSB also be present as his expertise in the matter is necessary.  As well, the other partners may have ideas that we have not yet heard.

            At this time, it is unknown if representatives from Swissair or Hollingsead plan to attend the AES seawater wire testing during the week of 00 JUN 12/16.  Larry FOGG of Boeing, Jim FOOT, and I do plan to be present.  If the arrangements can soon be made regarding the meeting, then Swissair and Hollingsead team members can be advised of the matter to ensure their attendance.  Should they be unable to attend in person, further arrangements can be made for a teleconference from CANMET. 

            Your prompt consideration of this matter is requested. 

(T.C. Juby), Sgt.     Forensic Identification Section

(A. Lathem), Insp.           RCMP Swissair Task Force                               Swissair Flight 111 Task Force

            Vic GORMAN later advised that he had received it and will forward it as being acceptable.  After all, we had discussed it last Friday and he suggested the wording.  Had a conversation with John GARSTANG about it, and he suggested – but didn’t know for sure – that SIDLA won’t be doing the grinding of the beads, as he won’t have time.  It might also seem that if they let the idea die, they can ask for the beads in September for shipment to Ottawa, and then as time permits, SIDLA can do the work without anyone knowing until it is too late.  This gets it out in the open.  I bet that in light of what is written below, Vic GORMAN also attends the meeting.


Received a memo this afternoon from the OIC, Swissair Investigation, Insp. LATHEM.  It is in reference to my memo of 00-04-27, Auger Testing of AES Seawater Wire Standards.  In it he refers to my two points (b) and (f).  Instead of my comments, he tells me that he wants only the ‘facts’.  He finds that statement (b) indicates the RCMP’s position as perceived by others, and (f) has conclusions that speak for another agency, and he considers them inflammatory and unwarranted.  My two statements are as follows:

b)        We have undertaken the seawater test preparations virtually on our own after lengthy discussions of the matter with the TSB.  If we fail to attend at this stage, it will be seen as a message to the TSB and the partner companies that we were insincere in our desire to complete the testing.

f)         If we fail to attend at this stage, the TSB will imply from it that we have lost interest in the matter.  When the AES report from Dr. BROWN is finally completed, they will have reason to ignore us and withhold it as they have done with countless other reports in the past.  Our continued attendance will provide a strong foundation argument in our favour.

I had no intention of this memo being inflammatory, and indeed, I do not feel that the comments are.  I am merely stating what I know to be the facts when it comes to trying to get things done around the hangar, to attend these tests and get test reports.  FOOT has even cautioned me during the first AES that we would receive no copies of BROWN’s report.  It appears that these comments have hit on a very sore spot.  In view of our general meeting last week, and the manner in which Insp. LATHEM degraded my discussion points on AES and then Karl’s comments on the fire load, there might appear to be a relation between the two.  Then he goes on to advise me that the official reporting structure is through S/Sgt. GORMAN.  This presents a problem as Vic is only around the hangar at best half a day per week, and then he is working on non-Swissair paperwork most of the time.  As for this memo, it did go through Vic, having sat on his desk for over a week.  His last line reads, “I trust there will be no further clarification required.” 

            I feel that this memo is excessively strong for the circumstances.  I thought that in our meeting of 00-02-17, I was assured that I was part of the team and had open access to LATHEM.  It seems that everyone else reports to LATHEM except me.  Some team!  The unclassified memo dated 2000-05-08 is as follows:

Your Memorandum of April 27, 2000 Concerning AES Seawater Wire Standards/AUGER Testing

When you submit a memorandum to provide rationale for travel or fiscal commitment I want the “facts” that pertain to the issue not statements such as paragraph b) that indicate the RCMP’s position as perceived by others.  Your paragraph f) has conclusions that speak for another agency and I consider them inflammatory and unwarranted.

Your expertise and commitment to this investigation is recognized, and this type of correspondence only serves to diminish those qualities.  I categorize it as less than professional and unacceptable.

The reporting structure for you is through S/Sgt. Vic GORMAN and then to me.

I trust there will be no further clarification required.

A.S. LATHEM, Insp.     OIC, Swissair Investigation     ASL/hcm     cc: S/Sgt. Vic GORMAN

            Later, I spoke with Vic GORMAN about the memo.  He said that he had only seen it just shortly before I received it.  I somehow doubt that, as I think there was a considerable discussion over how to deal with me.  At the bottom of my original memo is Vic’s handwriting saying:

1 April 2000 (obviously the month should be May)

Insp. LATHEM and I have discussed this.  Approval for Sgt. T. JUBY to attend has been given by Insp. LATHEM.

Vic Gorman    S/Sgt.

I doubt that they discussed my travel without LATHEM having made his feelings known to GORMAN.  While he may have only just seen the memo, he certainly knew that it was coming and what it was all about.  GORMAN feels that I am not a team player and that I go off on my own - example, the e-mail to BROWN about pressure from TSB.  However, on checking my notes, I found that I had discussed it with Insp. LATHEM prior to sending it and that he had agreed with the idea. 

“00-02-11                    Checked with LATHEM and he is in agreement.  I will liaise with Dr. BROWN via e-mail over the AES testing and reports.  This will keep a record of exactly what I say to him.  Insp. LATHEM agrees that I will ask him to advise me if he is pressured to limit what he puts in his reports.  Will do that up next week, and will also discuss the Focused Ion Beam system for cutting the beads.”

Also, Vic says that I spend too much money.  I told him that they want the product and therefore it will cost.  One cannot produce in this environment without it costing money, especially when we are undertaking new methods and techniques.  He said that even in ‘B’ Hangar I was spending too much money.  We had a discussion over this, and I suggested that he read my report from ‘B’ Hangar that covers all of this.

            The truth is that Karl and I don’t follow the accepted line.  Because of it, we are being castigated for our concerns over what might be the actual cause of this crash.  Because we are not willing to conclude tasks without an investigation, not willing to accept things in the face of scientific evidence that questions the chosen path, we are deemed not to be team players.  It seems that one cannot have a different opinion than the party line, and the number of times that I have been told to keep my mouth shut and my opinions to myself certainly proves that.  Vic says that I am too independent.  Others might consider it to be persistence in the face of indifference.  This memo from Insp. LATHEM goes a long way to place a barrier between the ‘team’ and this ‘player’.  I would even suggest that it is not very ‘professional’ on his part at all.  It forms part of my hard notes for this date.  It makes me wonder why I am still putting in over 60 hr per week on this file, and getting paid for only 40 hrs.







*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *



------------ TIME LINE ------------