/ Gareth Williams Inquest

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
mypyrex - on 27 Apr 2012
The BIG question has to be if he got into the bag himself how the hell did he padlock it?

http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16217290

He would have done Houdini proud.
birdie num num - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:
It's a case for Jonathan Creek.
mypyrex - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to birdie num num: Could Mrs. num num get into one of those bags?
gethin_allen on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:
I bet north face think this is an excellent advert for their duffel bags.
mkean - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:
I think it would be possible to padlock it from inside but very difficult, it would probably be impossible to do without leaving evidence though. I also doubt it is something you'd manage without a lot of practice. I cetainly wouldn't put any money on someone managing it unaided.
mypyrex - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to mkean:
> (In reply to mypyrex)
> I cetainly wouldn't put any money on someone managing it unaided.
Nor me. Seems a lot of effort to top yourself.

mypyrex - on 27 Apr 2012
> (In reply to mkean)
> [...]
> Nor me. Seems a lot of effort to top yourself.

Also, didn't the bath have water in it?

loopyone on 27 Apr 2012 - 10.7.86.161 [v2035.eth0.proxy03.pf1.sxgfl.ifl.net]
In reply to mypyrex: This has got to be one of the weirdest cases of the last decade
mkean - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:
Well if you'd practiced a lot then you could possibly turn the tap on slowly, climb into the bag and seal it up before the water reached the overflow? I doubt it though.
Rob Exile Ward on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to tatty112: Weird all round. I can think of vaguely comparable cases a few years back - a Tory MP springs to mind - but I think it's a bit tough on the family to have this speculation circulating on the internet, so I won't.
Skyfall - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:

Having just bought yet another TNF duffel (though to be fair they're incredibly hard wearing) I got to wondering which size he was found in.... L or XL?

Sorry....
jonny taylor on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:
Either I have led a very sheltered life or the story we are being told is pretty far-fetched. I accept there are some people out there with seriously "niche" interests. However if we are to accept this story as true, I thought that this was *exactly* what developed vetting was supposed to identify, and somebody cocked that up pretty dramatically.

If nobody owns up to that, it strikes me the only other option is that this whole story is total bollocks, and it amazes me that the media seem to be taking it at relative face value. Or maybe it's only being reported for the prurient aspect, and nobody is actually interested in whether it's true or not.
Skyfall - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to jonny taylor:

What story do you think we're being told and by whom?

The police seem to think a 3rd party was involved but have no idea who or whether they deliberately killed him and have no evidence to suggest it was job related (though accept it could be). The family clearly think it was job-related. No one seriously seems to thnk he did it on his own, though it's not totally discounted. Given lack of physical evidence, there is of course speculation about both hs job and possible sexual interests (which his friends and family dispute). There is hard evidnce to support possible sexual interests a bit off piste (corroborated by landlady and shop who sold him women's clothes). Given the authorities are pretty clearly not fabricating that element, I fail to see who is trying to sell us a far fetched story. It seems genuinely puzzling and perhaps just very embarrassing for the spooks.

What do you make of it, genuinely?
Ava Adore - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to jonny taylor:
> (In reply to mypyrex)
> this was *exactly* what developed vetting was supposed to identify, and somebody cocked that up pretty dramatically.
>

How would vetting identify any kind of deviant behaviour if the deviant in question kept it private?
jonny taylor on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to JonC:
OK maybe I have got the wrong end of the stick, haven't followed it in detail. I got the impression from news headlines that the inquest seemed to be working towards "he did it all himself", and the media seemed generally to be going with that - e.g. today's line seemed to be "expert concedes: it might be possible to lock yourself in there", not "expert says: come on you have got to be joking"
mkean - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to JonC:
Having just bought yet another TNF duffel (though to be fair they're incredibly hard wearing) I got to wondering which size he was found in.... L or XL?

We managed to squeeze someone into a 100L Mountain Equipment one a few years ago but she was tiny, I'd be amazed if an adult male could fit into the 90L large!
jonny taylor on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to Ava Adore:

Well his landlady had obviously had run-ins with him. I kind of assume they are pretty good at this vetting business, and I'd have thought *something* (even internet history, if that doesn't mark me out as paranoid...) would have attracted note.

... though they failed to act on him vanishing for a week, which they have conceded was a cockup, so maybe they don't take things as seriously as I had assumed they might.
Ava Adore - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to jonny taylor:
> (In reply to Ava Adore)
>
> Well his landlady had obviously had run-ins with him. I kind of assume they are pretty good at this vetting business, and I'd have thought *something* (even internet history, if that doesn't mark me out as paranoid...) would have attracted note.
>
> ... though they failed to act on him vanishing for a week, which they have conceded was a cockup, so maybe they don't take things as seriously as I had assumed they might.


I'd heard that landlady and her husband had to rescue him once when he was tied up to the bed. Not THAT uncommon a practice I would have thought. Internet history - assuming he surfed for deviant practices - but again, would normal vetting really pick that up??
Steve John B - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:

Never mind locking himself in the bag, I want to know how he managed to bum himself first
mypyrex - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to jonny taylor: > (In reply to Ava Adore)
>
>they are pretty good at this vetting business,

They are - generally speaking. They very often seem to know more about the person being vetted than they do themselves.
ads.ukclimbing.com
mypyrex - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to Ava Adore:
> (In reply to jonny taylor)
> [...]
would normal vetting really pick that up??


Probably
mypyrex - on 27 Apr 2012
"They" are following this ;0)
Skyfall - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:

I know, cool isn't it?!
Skyfall - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to mkean:

> We managed to squeeze someone into a 100L Mountain Equipment one a few years ago but she was tiny, I'd be amazed if an adult male could fit into the 90L large!

Well he was a small guy I think and my large sized TNF does seem a bit tardis like. Mind you, you could hide an aircraft carrier in my new XL i

Ava Adore - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:
> (In reply to Ava Adore)
> [...]
> would normal vetting really pick that up??
>
>
> Probably

But seriously, how?? Let's say he was into dodgy sexual practices. Assuming he didn't deliberately publish it on the internet nor did he discuss it in emails or look for websites of that nature, how? The partners with whom you conduct such things are hardly likely to come forward and say, "ah yes, we used to get up xyz twice nightly". If you keep these things inside your head and in the privacy of your own home, I fail to see how they can be discovered except by means of surveillance which I assume would be OTT for a "normal" vetting procedure.
Wingnut - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:
When I first read about this there was one photo that sprang to mind:
http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.html?id=3663

. . . except that the gentleman in question goes for tapirs rather than women's clothing. ::o)

dunc56 - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:
> The BIG question has to be if he got into the bag himself how the hell did he padlock it?
>
> http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16217290
>
> He would have done Houdini proud.

1 word - Houdini !
mypyrex - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to Ava Adore:
> (In reply to mypyrex)
> [...]
>
> But seriously, how??

I don't know but believe me they do.
Ava Adore - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:

No they don't
Timmd on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to Wingnut:

I'm bidding for a ladie's skirt on ebay, but that's for a friend who's always skint, and seems in need of some more clothes. Will say my sis-in-law was having a clearout incase she'd feel awkward.

Gareth Williams could have thought simiilarly about his friends is my thinking, in buying womans' clothing.
Sir Chasm - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to Timmd: You're buying a friend 15,000 of clothes? I suppose it's one way of getting into a woman's knickers.
Timmd on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to Sir Chasm:Nah.(:-)) She's a platonic friend anyway.

birdman - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to Ava Adore:

YeS IT CERTAINLY WOULD!
MG - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to birdman:
> (In reply to Ava Adore)
>
> YeS IT CERTAINLY WOULD!

Err how?

Niall - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to Ava Adore:
> (In reply to mypyrex)
> [...]
>
> ... "ah yes, we used to get up xyz twice nightly".

I'm going to assume you meant "..get up TO xyz..."

..but maybe you didn't :-D
winhill - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to Ava Adore:
> (In reply to mypyrex)
> [...]
>
> But seriously, how?? Let's say he was into dodgy sexual practices. Assuming he didn't deliberately publish it on the internet nor did he discuss it in emails or look for websites of that nature, how? The partners with whom you conduct such things are hardly likely to come forward and say, "ah yes, we used to get up xyz twice nightly". If you keep these things inside your head and in the privacy of your own home, I fail to see how they can be discovered except by means of surveillance which I assume would be OTT for a "normal" vetting procedure.

They asked me if I still tossed off onto Digestive biscuits, I said No, that's student thing, I haven't done that since I left college. Then they terminated the interview and offered me tea and biscuits.
kathrync - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to jonny taylor:
> (In reply to mypyrex)
> I accept there are some people out there with seriously "niche" interests. However if we are to accept this story as true, I thought that this was *exactly* what developed vetting was supposed to identify, and somebody cocked that up pretty dramatically.
>

From one of the MI6 witnesses (via BBC news):

"There's no set template as to what [an employee's] lifestyle should be. Individuals have lifestyles and sexual choices which are perfectly legitimate."

It's entirely possible that MI6 did identify him as having alternative interests before employing him but decided it had no bearing on his job or his ability to do it. Afterall, if you can't discriminate against someone for being gay, why should you be able to discriminate against them because they like being tied to the bed? I would be more concerned about vetting for, say, links to MI6-like agencies in other countries....



Timmd on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to kathrync:Good post, emphatically seconded, I completely agree.
jonny taylor on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to kathrync:
My understanding from various second-hand tales I have heard is that they do not care about what you do with your life, but they care very strongly if you are doing things that you are keeping secret from family and friends, because that opens you up to blackmail.
kathrync - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to jonny taylor:
> (In reply to kathrync)
> My understanding from various second-hand tales I have heard is that they do not care about what you do with your life, but they care very strongly if you are doing things that you are keeping secret from family and friends, because that opens you up to blackmail.

Ah, that's fair and in that case it would count as being something that would have a legitimate bearing on your ability to do your job.
ads.ukclimbing.com
Eric9Points - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to kathrync:
> (In reply to jonny taylor)
> [...]
>

> It's entirely possible that MI6 did identify him as having alternative interests before employing him but decided it had no bearing on his job or his ability to do it. Afterall, if you can't discriminate against someone for being gay, why should you be able to discriminate against them because they like being tied to the bed?

Depending upon their attitude to their own sexual preferences they could leave themselves vulnerable to blackmail.

I do wonder whether this guy had a "master" who left him tied up for long periods of time. A kind of S&M relationship with bells on.
subalpine - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to Eric9Points: can MI6 be investigated or are they above the law?
Sredni Vashtar - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to subalpine:
a committee of MPs does that
subalpine - on 27 Apr 2012
In reply to Sredni Vashtar: oh dear..
Rigid Raider - on 28 Apr 2012
It was an onanistic act, which went horribly wrong. Somebody did lock him into the bag intending to come back later and release him but got killed in a car crash or died of a heart attack.

Except that's not onanism, it's a joint enterprise.
Dave Garnett - on 28 Apr 2012
In reply to Rigid Raider:

Sounds reasonable, except the experts who did the tests said that it got pretty hot very quickly in the bag and that it doesn't seem likely he would have survived for very long, even assuming he was OK when he went in. And they also seemed to think he was probably unconscious before being put in the bag (not quite sure what the evidence for that was, other than that they couldn't imagine he'd done it voluntarily)
Dauphin - on 28 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:

It seems behaviour highly correlated with his desire to create and break into improbably complex mathematical codes.

He wasn't a spy. He was a technician at GCHQ seconded to SIS.

D
Timmd on 28 Apr 2012
In reply to Dave Garnett:
> (In reply to Rigid Raider)
>
> And they also seemed to think he was probably unconscious before being put in the bag (not quite sure what the evidence for that was, other than that they couldn't imagine he'd done it voluntarily)

Maybe if he lost conciousness in the bag he'd have tried to escape, and his face wouldn't have been left with a calm expression, and there might be signs on his body and/or the bag that he'd tried to escape, perhaps red marks on his skin from rubbing against the inside of the bag?
Trangia - on 28 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:

I am very suprised that decomposition of the body was so rapid. I understand it was so advanced that a post mortem was unable to establish the cause of death. I've always understood the decomposition was a comparatively slow process lasting over months rather than days?
dek - on 28 Apr 2012
In reply to birdie num num:
> (In reply to mypyrex)
> It's a case for Jonathan Creek.
Open and Shut Case Shirley?! Nothing to see here,move along now.


Dauphin - on 28 Apr 2012
In reply to Trangia:

Not sat in plastic bag within a house with central heating switched on.

D
Andrew Wilson - on 28 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex:

His friends answer to the question about wether the extensive collection of designer womens clothing could mean he was a cross dresser amuses me. Just because she says "he would definitely have told me if he was" it seems that is the matter closed.
The photos of him that i have seen could not look more like a tranny without the wig and make up if he'd tried. It could of course be a deniable op deep undercover. . .
subalpine - on 28 Apr 2012
In reply to oscarsdad: moving on from his character assassination, his reset iphone could lead to something?
Eric9Points - on 28 Apr 2012
In reply to subalpine:

You have something against cross dressers?

Why?
DR - on 28 Apr 2012
In reply to JonC:
It was an XL size TNF duffle - 155 litres.

'Inspired' by my friends following of the inquest on Twitter, we tried to fit her into my old Blacks 90 litre expedition bag today - no chance. So we went down to Nevisport and checked out the XL TNF - she would have fitted in there easy and she has bigger hips and arse than Mr Williams did. I thought she was going to get in it at one stage!

Aye,
Davie

subalpine - on 28 Apr 2012
In reply to Eric9Points:
> (In reply to subalpine)
>
> You have something against cross dressers?
>
no, but maybe his family and others would prefer not to have all the speculations released and discussed on public forums.. is it just because he's dead?
IainRUK - on 29 Apr 2012
In reply to subalpine: Thank god someone said that.. I got the rath of UKC for mentioning soccer on a rape thread.. but humour and random speculation in a murder case is all OK.. pretty sick imo..

And yes, I knew Gareth. But if I didn't its not great behaviour tbf..
Timmd on 29 Apr 2012
In reply to IainRUK:My condolences, apologies if I was insensitive.
JoshOvki on 29 Apr 2012
In reply to Sir Chasm:
> (In reply to Timmd) You're buying a friend 15,000 of clothes? I suppose it's one way of getting into a woman's knickers.

Nah, he is buying a female version of one of these instead.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=503720
John Rushby - on 29 Apr 2012
In reply to DR:

You can fit all sorts of rubbish into a TNF duffel.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.html?id=3663

I ended up zipped inside and left at the bus stop at Les Chosalets.
ads.ukclimbing.com
Rob Naylor - on 30 Apr 2012
In reply to Ava Adore:
> (In reply to jonny taylor)
> [...]
>
> How would vetting identify any kind of deviant behaviour if the deviant in question kept it private?

Things may have changed now, but when I graduated I applied for a job at GCHQ. They absolutely took my life apart. If there'd been anything like that in my background, I'm sure they'd have sussed it.

As it turned out, I failed the vetting. My girlfriend was of half Estonian extraction and she still had relatives living there. We'd been together a year and although we weren't engaged or giving any signs that we might be, that connection was enough to fail me as a potential blackmail target. And they knew the names and addresses of most of my GF's extended family living there....which they *didn't* get from her parents or her.

It was scary how much they knew about me.

Rob Naylor - on 30 Apr 2012
In reply to Ava Adore:
> (In reply to jonny taylor)
> [...]
>
>
> I'd heard that landlady and her husband had to rescue him once when he was tied up to the bed. Not THAT uncommon a practice I would have thought. Internet history - assuming he surfed for deviant practices - but again, would normal vetting really pick that up??

Pretty sure it would. They interviewed *all* my previous landlords/ landladies when they vetted me, as well as all my previous housemates, and asked quite searching questions. But that was in 1977, and I guess resources are a bit more thin these days.
mypyrex - on 30 Apr 2012
In reply to Rob Naylor:
> (In reply to Ava Adore)
> [...]
>
> Pretty sure it would. They interviewed *all* my previous landlords/ landladies when they vetted me, as well as all my previous housemates, and asked quite searching questions. But that was in 1977, and I guess resources are a bit more thin these days.

Indeed Rob, as I said earlier, they know more about you than YOU do. I was "done" in the early seventies and during the interview questions were asked and I found myself thinking "how the hell did they now about that?". Friends, relatives, bank managers, health records etc. They'll find it.

Sarah G on 30 Apr 2012
In reply to mypyrex: I think this whole case hinges on just one question.....

What size were the SHOES?

Sx
mgco3 - on 01 May 2012
In reply to mypyrex: Someone who worked with 2 organisations that are BOTH involved in UK security. He worked in code breaking and potentially had access to data of the highest level of security. He is found dead in what can only be described as VERY suspicious circumstances and the authorities say they dont know how he died!!!!

I think it would be a good idea for them to get their fingers out and find out bloody quickly.
KTT on 01 May 2012 - client-81-108-134-141.mcr-bng-012.adsl.virginmedia.net
In reply to mgco3: Err don't you think they've tried?
mgco3 - on 01 May 2012
In reply to KTT: If they have then they haven't tried hard enuf matey.. These faceless Herberts have unlimited budgets at their disposal to keep us all safe and they cant even keep tabs on one of their own??? Aparrently he was missing for a few days and no alarm bells rang!!

It smells like rank incompetance (or an inside job)..
Mooncat - on 01 May 2012
In reply to mgco3:
These faceless Herberts have unlimited budgets at their disposal

I don't really think that's true.


mgco3 - on 01 May 2012
In reply to Mooncat:

All 3 of the intelligence agencies receive their budget through the Single Intelligence Account which is in the region of 2bn per year. However this has recently been reduced due to the budget cuts and as such has forced a number of changes to how the services work.

There was also an additional 650 million to combat cyber terorrism..

THese are the "disclosed" figures. You can bet your ass that there are additional funds that aren't disclosed. So, yes, whilst unlimited is an ambiguous word I feel justified in using it..
Mooncat - on 01 May 2012
In reply to mgco3:

Unlimited is not an ambiguous word. Their budget is more fluid than most government departments but like every other department extra funds are very hard to come by and needs a strong case to be justified as the money ends up coming from another department.
mgco3 - on 01 May 2012
In reply to Mooncat: Finances aside, I would expect the "Faceless Herberts" to treat getting to the bottom of this as a priority.
When the russian dissident Alexander Litvinenko was murdered by Polonium poisoning the investigation uncovered everything down to the seat on the plane on which the poisoner came into the country.

When Georgi Markov was poisoned with a microscopic ricin filled pellet fired from an umberella "air gun" they even knew who the assasin was.

These 2 unfortunates weren't even one of "ours".

You cannot , surely, think that there is not something suspicious about the fact that the security organisations don't seem to know what went on??

I would have expected at least a plausible "cover up " story
ClimberEd - on 02 May 2012
In reply to mypyrex:

Am sure that he was left 'undiscovered' so that the evidence would be too degraded for a 3rd party (i.e. the police) to be able to work out what happened.

Cover story is sexual fetish game goes wrong.

Both have backfired slightly, but not enough for the truth to out.
mypyrex - on 02 May 2012

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.