Shipwreck “Bugaled-Breizh”: Royal Navy rejects any responsibility

The families of the five sailors killed in the 2004 shipwreck think that the fishing trawler was poured by a submarine that would have taken his nets.

Le Monde

The families of the victims shout at the lie: the commander of a British submarine of the Royal Navy suspected of provoking the murderous sinking of the Breton Bugaled-Breizh trawler rejected, Tuesday, October 12, any liability in this drama which remains unexplained.

With the expected testimony of the former commander of the turbulent submarine in front of the London High Court, Andrew Coles, the families of the five sailors killed in the sinking hoped to approach the truth, and finally discover what s’ January 15, 2004, when their loved ones were swept away from the bottom.

From the beginning, they think that the trawler who fished off the Cornwall (southwestern England) was poured by a submarine that would have taken his nets. But questioned for about an hour, Andrew Coles, who is no longer in the Royal Navy, denied any involvement of his nuclear attack submarine.

“We were at pier”

“We were absolutely not involved. We were at quay” in Devonport (southwestern England) “on 15” January 2004, “he said. According to him, the turbulent had to take part in the exercises of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) planned in the area from 16 January, but could not do it because of a damage. The submarine, which was stationed for maintenance since the previous November, did not return to navigation only on January 19, 2004.

At the exit of the hearing, this testimony was seriously questioned by the families of the victims. “It does not stand up. There are still plenty of elements that are not cleared, regretted Thierry Lemetayer, the son of a victim, in front of the press. That’s where justice does not see that justice. not advance. “

“There was no moment of truth,” denounced his lawyer, Dominique Tricaud. “It’s not today that he has chosen to make peace with his conscience, he added about Mr. Coles, the fact that the” bugaled-breizh “was poured by a sub -Marin is a certainty acquired by all serious people. “

The lawyer recalled that it was Andrew Coles who was in the orders of another submarine, astute, when he had failed in Scotland in 2010, shortly after the entry into service of the nuclear submersible Who was the pride of the Navy. Andrew Coles also mentioned a meeting with Thierry Lemetayer several years ago during the projection of a documentary on the case in a city of Cornwall.

“I did my best with my very bad French to make sure I had nothing to do with it,” he remembered. “I was able to refer to the fact that if a submarine had hung him, it could have been a cause, but not that it was the case,” he added. At the end of the hearing, the former commander shook Mr. Lemetéyer’s hand, saying “sorry” and hoping he would find “answers”.

“We have two marines that lying “

Earlier Tuesday, two other gradés of the Royal Navy had ensured that the turbulent was at quay the day of the sinking. Official communications in support, one of them, Commander Daniel Simmonds, a manager of underwater operations of the Navy, repeated that only three submarines were at sea when the bugled-breizh sank, And none in the immediate vicinity. He also tried “unthinkable” that an allied military submarine could be in the area assigned to NATO exercises without reporting his presence.

When the trail of a US Navy submarine was mentioned in 2016, the United States had refuted. Just as “unthinkable”, according to the officer, would be to falsify the newspaper of a submarine or the documents relating to his movements: it would constitute a “serious breach” of a nature to “erode trust” between allied countries . British Navy exercises were also programmed on the day of the drama – without submarines, according to Daniel Simmonds.

In France, a long judicial procedure, closed in 2016, could not decide between the hypothesis of a submarine and that of a fishing accident. Asked Monday, the Dutch Navy had excluded any involvement of the Dolfijn submarine, ensuring that it sailed on the surface when the accident occurred. “We have two marine that lie, we have two governments that lie,” lamented Dominique Tricaud.

/Media reports.