The Litvinenko Inquiry

The Litvinenko Inquiry
6.80 DI Mascall explained that, despite extensive enquiries, the police had been unable to
establish the means by which Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun travelled from Gatwick to
central London on 16 October. 53 It seems reasonable to assume, however, that the
journey would have taken approximately an hour.
6.81 I heard evidence from Mr Krgo, who in 2006 was the House Manager of the Best
Western Hotel in Shaftesbury Avenue. He said that he remembered “quite vividly”
meeting Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun on their arrival at the hotel on 16 October. 54
6.82 Mr Krgo’s evidence was that the two men arrived at the hotel at between 9.00 and
9.30 in the morning. He thought that these timings had come from timed images
from the hotel’s CCTV that he had viewed with the police. 55 I think that Mr Krgo was
mistaken on both counts. There is clear evidence, as set out above, that Mr Lugovoy
and Mr Kovtun’s flight was still in the air at 9.30am, and that they were still at Gatwick
at 11.30am. Moreover, DI Mascall confirmed that, although the police did review the
hotel CCTV system with Mr Krgo during their enquiries, the review established that
the images for 16 October had already been automatically deleted by that time, so no
footage of that day was ever seized. 56
6.83 Mr Krgo also gave evidence that, following their arrival at the hotel, Mr Lugovoy and
Mr Kovtun completed registration slips and a credit card was pre-authorised to cover
any incidental costs. The credit card slip showed that that process had taken place
at 12.51pm. 57 Although Mr Krgo thought that the credit card had been pre-authorised
some time after their first arrival at the hotel, in light of the known timings set out
above, I think it most likely that this process was in fact undertaken on their arrival, and
therefore that Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun arrived at the hotel shortly before 12.51pm.
6.84 Leaving timings to one side, Mr Krgo was confident as to the sequence of events
following the arrival of the two men. When they first arrived, neither of their rooms was
ready. They left their luggage in the storage room and left the hotel for an hour or so,
apparently to go to a nearby café that Mr Krgo had recommended. When they returned
one of their rooms was ready. That was number 107, which was Mr Lugovoy’s room.
The two men then took their luggage up to that room, and got changed. They came
down again about half an hour later and left the hotel. Mr Krgo did not see them again
that day and it therefore seems likely that at this point they went to the meeting with
Mr Litvinenko and Mr Reilly. 58
6.85 Before turning to that meeting, it is necessary to address a submission that
Mr Emmerson QC made in the course of his closing submissions. The general
submission related to Russian State responsibility for Mr Litvinenko’s death and the
source of the polonium apparently used to poison him. Those are matters to which I
shall turn in due course. However, in developing this submission Mr Emmerson made
a factual point that is relevant to this stage of the narrative. Put shortly, he contended
that, on the assumption that Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun had attempted to poison
Mr Litvinenko with polonium during the 16 October meeting with Mr Reilly, they must
have brought the polonium with them from Russia, since they had no opportunity to
acquire it from any other source between the time that they arrived on that day at
53
Mascall 9/127-128
54
Krgo 9/49
55
Krgo 9/53
56
Mascall 9/96-97
57
Krgo 9/57
58
Krgo 9/54-60
124