PK/1978: FROM “SLALOM” TROUSERS TO SLALOM SHIRT

A reader recently posted a comment about the BABYGRO. SCOTT writes:

“It’s things like this that convinces me that some, if not all, of the suitcase evidence was planted. (…) The whole thing is a murky swamp and it stinks.”

Could Scott be right? Is it really “unthinkable” that “some, if not all, of the suitcase evidence was planted”? The Toshiba radio, its manual, the Babygro, the SLALOM shirts, the umbrella and so on…

Here is just a factual observation about PK/1978 whose importance was paramount to the case against Megrahi and Libya. (I remind you that some people even dispute the fact that the luggage was a Samsonite… See G. Thomson recent comment.)

Although this blog deals mainly with PT/35(b), it is nevertheless useful to keep in mind that it was discovered in the collar (PI/995) of a grey “Slalom” shirt because the story of this shirt is not free of anomalies.

Slalom_Shirt

Dr Hayes examined PK/339 and PK/1973 on May 22 1989. PK/1978 was examined on October 10 1989.

PK/1978 was found in/with an item tagged PK/1359

AZ61-PK1978

PK/1359

AZ61-PK1359

Now, please take a good look at the description of PK/1978. (as well as PK/1359)

PK1978BIG

It is no easy to confuse a shirt with a trouser… And, even though I am not a linguist, I would think that “MELTED” would better apply to a “SLALOM” trouser (the kind that people use for skiing in Europe at that time of the year) than to a shirt. What exactly is melted in PK/1978 anyway?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in PK/1978, SLALOM Shirt. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to PK/1978: FROM “SLALOM” TROUSERS TO SLALOM SHIRT

  1. Scott says:

    There is no way that even at a glance the item PK/1978 could be mistaken for a piece of Slalom trousers. It is so obvious it is part of a shirt! And why is PK/1359 destroyed at Linwood in June 1990?

    Like

  2. Craig says:

    Agree with the comments by Scott and concern with the destruction of PK/1359, June 1990.
    The log states these items are connected in some way, no idea why one item would be destroyed and for what purpose.

    Also using the secondary term ‘melted’ does not agree with the item, ‘melted’ does not ring true with the photo I’m looking at.
    The describer ‘grey Slalom trousers’, well what can you say, it is clearly a shirt with button area visible including of course the shirt pocket.

    Another point, if supposed recovered items as early as 07/01/1989 which are obviously being secondarily filtered and described in such detail – ‘slalom trousers’ etc.
    Why on earth would similar sized items including labels ‘Yorkie Clothing’ or ‘Made in Malta’ not be noted or remarked upon within their labelling.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s