The Litvinenko Inquiry

The Litvinenko Inquiry
8.124 Mr Cotlick said that he was aware that Mr Filinov had a personal relationship with
Mr Lugovoy. He said that he had “no doubt whatsoever” that Mr Lugovoy had himself
handed the T-shirt to Mr Filinov, in order for him to give it to Mr Berezovsky.
8.125 Taken on its own (and without, of course, the benefit of oral evidence from Mr Lugovoy),
it would be difficult to know what to make of this T-shirt. On any view, it demonstrates
that Mr Lugovoy approved of Mr Litvinenko’s murder. It was also, clearly, a threat
to Mr Berezovsky. Further than that, the T-shirt could be seen as an admission by
Mr Lugovoy that he had poisoned Mr Litvinenko, made at a time when he was confident
that he would never be extradited from Russia, and wished to taunt Mr Berezovsky
with that fact. Alternatively, it could, perhaps, be seen as an extraordinarily tasteless
joke.
8.126 However, the T-shirt does not stand alone. As I have indicated, I am satisfied on the
basis of other evidence (most importantly, the forensic evidence) that Mr Lugovoy did
indeed poison Mr Litvinenko. Set against that context, this T-shirt can only be seen as
Mr Lugovoy’s gleeful acknowledgement of his part in Mr Litvinenko’s death.
8.127 There is one last matter to address under this heading, and it relates to Mr Kovtun.
I have referred above to the fact that, after Mr Litvinenko’s death, Mr Kovtun had a
conversation with his ex-wife’s mother, Elenora Wall, about the radiation poisoning
that he was suffering from. When interviewed by the German authorities, Dr Wall gave
this account of the conversation:
“He told me that he had probably got some of the poison which killed Litvinenko.
He said word for word, ‘Those arseholes have probably poisoned us all’.” 12
8.128 It seems to me to be at least possible that this comment made by Mr Kovtun to his
mother-in-law, no doubt in an unguarded moment, was a revealing one.
8.129 The implication of his words is that a group of people, the unidentified “arseholes”
– had been responsible for poisoning both Mr Litvinenko and him – and possibly
Mr Lugovoy as well. This would not be consistent with the case pursued by the
Russian investigators, who accused Mr Litvinenko of having poisoned Mr Kovtun and
Mr Lugovoy. But it would be consistent with a scenario in which others had tasked
Mr Kovtun and Mr Lugovoy to kill Mr Litvinenko, and had given them a poison with
which to do it, but had not told them what the poison was or what its properties were,
with the consequence that the poisoners, through ignorance, ended up contaminating
themselves.
8.130 If that is what Mr Kovtun meant, then it was certainly an unwise comment for him
to have made. But, as we have seen, making unwise comments is something that
Mr Kovtun appears to have done from time to time.
Evidence apparently inconsistent with Lugovoy and Kovtun’s
involvement
8.131 I did hear some evidence that at least appeared to be inconsistent with Mr Lugovoy
and Mr Kovtun having been responsible for Mr Litvinenko’s death. I must, of course,
address that evidence.
12
Elenora Wall 32/81
202