Western Morning News (Saturday)
Judge’s pledge on trawler tragedy
Claim submarine sank fishing boat could be tested at new inquest
AN inquest is set to examine claims that a Royal Navy submarine may have played a part in the sinking of a French fishing boat off the coast of the Westcountry with the loss of five lives.
The Royal Navy has always denied that one of its nuclear submarines could have caused the sinking of the Brittany-based Bugaled Briezh off the Lizard in January 2004. Yesterday a judge at the Old Bailey said the inquest into the sinking would be reopened over the deaths of the only two men whose bodies were recovered, Yves Marie Gloaguen and Pascal Lucien Le Floch.
Judge Nigel Lickley QC, acting as coroner, held a pre-inquest hearing and promised a “full, vigorous and fair investigation.” An inquest will be held at the Old Bailey in October.
Jonathan Hough QC, counsel for the coroner, said there were “significant difficulties” with the submarine theory.
But Oliver Hyams, counsel for the families, argued that there is “credible expert evidence” consistent with the submarine theory. “The submarine theory is not fanciful but is possible,” he said. Edward Pleeth, for the Ministry of Defence said there must be “limits” on the extent of inquiries into the idea a submarine could have sunk the fishing boat when “there is no evidence to support that suspicion.”
THE mystery of how the crew of a French trawler died when the vessel sank off the Westcountry coast is to be reopened 17 years after the tragedy.
All five men on board perished when the Bugaled Breizh capsized and sank 14 miles off Lizard Peninsula in Cornwall on January 15, 2004.
The bodies of French nationals Yves Marie Gloaguen, 45, and Pascal Lucien Le Floch, 49, were recovered and brought to Cornwall.
In 2016, France’s top judicial court confirmed the closure of its investigation after finding no evidence to support the claim that a submarine was involved, nor that it was a fishing accident.
Britain’s Royal Navy has previously denied claims that one of its nuclear submarines caused the sinking. And further investigations have ruled out any allied or non-allied submarines being nearby at the time.
Yesterday Judge Nigel Lickley QC, acting as coroner, held a pre-inquest hearing at the Old Bailey, attended by relatives of the crew by video link from northern France.
Mr Lickley said: “This is a preinquest hearing into the tragic deaths of Yves Marie Gloaguen and Pascal Lucien Le Floch, two French nationals who were on the fishing trawler Bugaled Breizh.
“They lost their lives when that vessel capsized on 15 January, 2004, some 17 years ago. Although the vessel sank in international waters, the bodies were recovered to Cornwall.”
He expressed his condolences to relatives of the victims, saying: “My objective is to carry out a full, rigorous and fair investigation.”
He said it was hoped that full inquests into the deaths of the two crew members whose bodies were found would take place at the Old Bailey in October.
Jonathan Hough QC, counsel for the coroner, went on to outline the history of the investigation and the proposed scope of the inquests.
He said there were “significant difficulties” with the submarine theory that led the French court to end its investigation.
He suggested it was “unlikely a submarine would fail to assist” if it was involved and “equally unlikely no crew member would come forward” in the 17 years since.
While there is “no evidential basis” for submarine involvement, the possibility that new evidence could emerge should not be ruled out, he added.
But he said it would not be proportionate to re-do the technical investigation “from scratch”.
Despite the families’ wish for jury inquests, Mr Hough said that was “not desirable” as the coroner alone would be able to give fuller reasons for his findings.
Oliver Hyams, counsel for the families, argued that there was “credible expert evidence” consistent with the submarine theory.
He said: “In looking at the expert evidence, there is a clear and consistent picture that emerges from credible and respected experts. The submarine theory is not fanciful, but is possible.”
He said the issue should “remain live” for the inquests to consider.
Edward Pleeth, for the Ministry of Defence, said his intention was not to “shut down or close out” proper investigation into the facts.
But he said: “The evidence as it stands demonstrates there is no arguable evidence that a submarine made any contribution to the sinking of the vessel.
“There must be limits on the extent of inquiries and the disclosure made pursuant to those inquiries that are pursued to dispel public suspicion when there is no evidence to support that suspicion.”
Judge Lickley said he would decide on the legal submissions later.
‘There is no evidence that a submarine made any contribution to the sinking’
MINISTRY OF DEFENCE