The Litvinenko Inquiry
2429870
2429870
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>The</strong> <strong>Litvinenko</strong> <strong>Inquiry</strong><br />
shortly, Dr Shadrin disputed Mr Kovtun’s account. He said that there had been no<br />
need for Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun to visit him in London at this time, since he had<br />
been a regular visitor to Moscow and they could have seen him there (as, indeed,<br />
they had done previously). Dr Shadrin also said in his further statement that he had,<br />
“no recollection of being provided with any reports pertaining to a US company called<br />
Harvest and Hicks or a person called Mr Byron”.<br />
6.127 <strong>The</strong> discrepancies between Mr Kovtun’s account and that given by Dr Shadrin are<br />
certainly matters that would have been explored with Mr Kovtun had he given oral<br />
evidence to the <strong>Inquiry</strong>. Since he did not do so, I am unable to reach any detailed<br />
conclusions on these matters. But what can be said is that I have no reason to doubt<br />
the truthfulness of what Dr Shadrin has told the <strong>Inquiry</strong>. That, in turn, gives rise to the<br />
distinct possibility that Mr Kovtun has exaggerated, or perhaps entirely fabricated, the<br />
business justification for his travel to London on this occasion. I will return to this point<br />
in due course.<br />
6.128 Before leaving this topic, I should add that secondary contamination was found at a<br />
number of places at CPL’s offices in Grosvenor Street. 114 As we shall see, Mr Lugovoy<br />
and Mr Kovtun paid a number of visits to these offices during the period in question,<br />
and it is not possible to state on which occasion or occasions this contamination might<br />
have occurred.<br />
Meeting at RISC<br />
6.129 <strong>The</strong> evidence was that Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun attended one further business<br />
meeting on the afternoon of 17 October, on this occasion in company with<br />
Mr <strong>Litvinenko</strong>. <strong>The</strong> meeting was with Mr Quirke of RISC. It took place at RISC’s offices<br />
at 1 Cavendish Place, in Mayfair. Mr Quirke had, of course, met Mr <strong>Litvinenko</strong> and<br />
Mr Lugovoy (although not Mr Kovtun) previously, and I have referred to the evidence<br />
about those meetings above at paragraphs 4.115 to 4.119.<br />
6.130 Mr Quirke gave oral evidence about the meeting. 115 He said that it had been arranged a<br />
fortnight or so in advance by Mr <strong>Litvinenko</strong>. 116 He was a little uncertain as to the precise<br />
timing of the meeting, but thought that it was already underway by shortly before<br />
6.00pm. 117 It would therefore appear that the meeting took place after Mr Lugovoy and<br />
Mr Kovtun’s meeting with Dr Shadrin.<br />
6.131 Mr <strong>Litvinenko</strong> had travelled down to central London by bus earlier in the afternoon.<br />
<strong>The</strong> bus on which he travelled was subsequently identified and tested; no radiation<br />
was detected. 118<br />
6.132 Mr Quirke’s evidence was that the meeting took less than an hour. Mr Lugovoy led<br />
the discussions. Mr Quirke said he had not met Mr Kovtun before and had not been<br />
expecting him to attend. 119 He said that Mr Kovtun took no part in the meeting other<br />
than operating a minidisc containing information. 120<br />
114<br />
Mascall 11/126<br />
115<br />
Quirke 11/86-103<br />
116<br />
Quirke 11/90-91<br />
117<br />
Quirke 11/98-99 (it is clear from the context that words ‘Shortly before 5.00’ in the transcript should read<br />
‘Shortly before 6.00’)<br />
118<br />
Mascall 11/125-126 see paragraphs 6.21-6.24 above for discussion regarding the value of such findings<br />
119<br />
Quirke 11/92<br />
120<br />
Quirke 11/94; 11/101<br />
136