Petty Officer John Black (Hansard, 27 June 1986)

§ Mr. Michael Latham (Rutland and Melton)

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for his presence today. I am raising the distressing case of Petty Officer John Black on behalf of his mother and stepfather, Mr. and Mrs. K. Crane of Melton Mowbray. Both Defence and Foreign Office Ministers have been in correspondence with me about the case and I have asked several private notice questions. I have also had two meetings with Foreign Office Ministers, one accompanied by the parents. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Enfield, North (Mr. Eggar) for his kind and helpful reception of my constituents and myself.

There are a few undisputed facts. Petty Officer Black, who was stationed at the time at HMS Dolphin at Gosport, was in Spain on leave with a friend, Miss Patricia Jeffs, on Christmas eve 1983. On or about Christmas day, he died in the apartment in Sabinillas which Miss Jeffs was renting. On either 26 or 27 December, Miss Jeffs reported to neighbours that Mr. Black was dead. The police came and Miss Jeffs was arrested and held in custody for a time before being released without charge.

Two Spanish pathologists carried out post mortems and an analysis of Mr. Black's blood. His body was brought back to Britain on 11 January 1984 and a post mortem was carried out by a British pathologist, Dr. Peter Puller, who is now dead.

A Spanish judge ruled at. Estepona on 10 May 1984 that death was caused by acute carbon monoxide poisoning, the source of it being unknown. Twelve months later on 22–23 May 1985, an inquest was held at Portsmouth. After hearing testimony, which included evidence from two Spanish pathologists and from Miss Jeffs, the jury reached a majority verdict of unlawful killing.

On 3 December 1985 the British embassy in Madrid presented a formal note to the Spanish Government on the case, and on 30 April 1986 the Spanish Government replied. The gist of their note was that the case had not been closed, but that there was insufficient evidence to accuse anyone of Mr. Black's death. That is how matters stand.

A British submariner, aged 25, a very fit young man, tall and physically strong and an excellent sportsman, has been unlawfully killed. No one has been charged with his murder and justice has not been done. My aim today is to urge the British Government that pressure should be kept on the Spanish in this matter, which has brought immense grief to Mr. and Mrs. Crane.

The case throughout has been the subject of much rumour and speculation. For example, the Daily Express of 24 November 1984 referred to reports that Spanish police had suggested that Mr. Black died because of some work that he had done in Britain involving gaseous substances entering his body.

Other press reports allege that British naval intelligence officers had cleaned the flat before allowing Miss Jeffs to report the death. Gibraltar was said to be full of rumours that she was a spy. The Daily Mirror of 23 May 1985 said that Mr. Black was a member of the crew of HMS Conqueror which sank the Belgrano.

674 On 25 May 1985, the Leicester Mercury, which has taken a close and sensitive interest in the case, spoke of the apparent lack of a determined investigation by the Spanish authorities. In letters to me, the Spanish embassy has been formal and courteous, but certainly not over-helpful. An unnamed Spanish detective was quoted by the Leicester Mercury on 30 May 1985 as saying that a major blunder has been made in the case by the Civil Guard.

All attempts by Mrs. Crane's solicitors to retain Spanish lawyers to assist have been unsuccessful. The Cranes felt that they did not get proper help from the Foreign Office when they flew to Spain after hearing of Mr. Black's death and they were unable to see his body. At the British inquest, Detective Chief Inspector Paul Blaker expressed public dissatisfaction with the cooperation that he had received from the Spanish authorities.

Let us deal with the rumours in the hope that we can dispel them. In a letter to me on 6 July 1984, my noble Friend the Minister of State for Defence Procurement, Lord Trefgarne, said: There is no truth in the assertion of a cover-up". He also said that there were no security implications in John's tragic death. Ministers have told me that Mr. Black was based at the shore base of HMS Rooke in Gibraltar throughout the Falklands conflict and that he was on leave from the submarine school HMS Dolphin when he died. It was said at the inquest that he had served on HMS Revenge and HMS Sovereign, two sea-going submarines.

In the interests of getting to the bottom of the rumours, I ask my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary these direct questions. First, was Mr. Black engaged at any time in any intelligence work in Spain or on such work in Gibraltar which took him into Spain?

Secondly, can my hon. Friend comment on the alleged Spanish rumours that Mr. Black had been affected by gaseous substances during his work for the Royal Navy? Miss Jeffs was quoted by the Spanish judge in Estepona during the May 1984 hearing. He reported that on one occasion John had told her in confidence that he had suffered from troubles connected with radioactivity on the submarine on which he was serving; but he never told her the whole truth, always maintaining it was secret. If there is any basis for that claim, it must appear in his naval medical records. What is the true position?

Thirdly, at the British inquest, the Spanish pathologist, Dr. Gonzales, said that the police in Gibraltar refused to give any information to the Spanish police about the five visits that Mr. Black and Miss Jeffs made to Gibraltar between 16 and 24 December. He added: This is something that very much surprised the Spanish police and myself. There are many details that have puzzled the police. In a letter to me dated 16 September 1985, my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State wrote: There is no evidence to support the Spanish allegations. The Gibraltar police have made a careful check of their records and confirm that they received no approach from the Spanish authorities about this death, nor did they receive arty reports on the case. As there is no reason why Dr. Gonzales made up this allegation, he must be repeating what the Spanish police told him. What is the truth about this? Was there liaison between the two police forces about this, or not? There must be records about that as well.

Fourthly, did any British intelligence personnel tell Miss Jeffs to keep quiet about the cause of his death or 675 clean her flat before she reported his death? Were any British intelligence personnel involved at all? If so, in what capacity? Did any of them visit her flat during the crucial period 25 to 27 December?

Fifthly, in view of the persistent statement of lack of cooperation by the Spanish authorities, are the Government satisfied that the contents of the British diplomatic note have been adequately investigated? The British note contained 60 sheets of annexed paper, including a transcript of the inquest and a detailed commentary of the Cranes' solicitor. The reply that I have seen is fewer than two sides of paper and does not contain anything about the grave issues emerging from the inquest or the commentary. Have the Spanish really investigated this? Do they want to find the truth? Are they co-operating now with the British police?

At the British inquest, the coroner first tried to steer the jury away from an unlawful killing verdict, but it returned one after 25 minutes. I would have done the same on the evidence presented to the court. Chief Inspector Blaker described it as a "most suspicious death".

Without acting as judge and jury, I will now record open testimony given in public at the inquest which merits further investigation.

Miss Jeffs said that on Christmas eve 1983 she and John Black went out for the day and had little to eat and drink. John had had a beefburger and chips and she had had a few chips. However, she told the Spanish police that they went to several bars, had drinks at several of them, returned to her flat at 9 pm, ate some York ham and possibly had a drink or two more. Her friend, Fiona Burke, who bailed her out of jail on 4 January 1984, said that Pat Jeffs had told her that she had drunk a lot. Miss Jeffs denied this at the inquest.

Miss Jeffs' friend, Mr. Tony Taylor, quoted her as saying that they had returned to the flat at about midnight and that both she and Mr. Black felt ill. She had gone to bed and Mr. Black had decided to take a bath. Miss Burke also quoted Miss Jeffs as saying that she felt ill and went to bed. Miss Jeffs did not say that at the inquest. Instead, she said: It was my intention to lie down before going out in the evening … John did not complain about feeling unwell. The Spanish pathologist made several points about Mr. Black. His stomach contained some white beans. In the kitchen there was a small casserole where there were the same white beans. Next, he was in a "contented state" from alcohol but not really drunk. There were also some barbiturates in his body which could have increased the feeling of contentment. Mr. Black's body was found on 27 December in an empty bath with the plug not in place. A streak of blood was coming from his nose. His right arm was on his chest, his left behind his back. However, his hands and feet looked as if he had been in water for some time. The soles of his feet were marked and stained as if he had been walking without any shoes. There was a violent wound to his right shoulder, which could not have been caused by any fall. There were grazes on the front of his body as if done after death. How did those wounds happen?

Mr. Black's body contained an exceedingly high level of carbon monoxide—72 per cent. level in the blood. This carbon monoxide was not accidental. It was not a domestic accident. It could not have been caused by a 676 domestic water heater in the flat. He died too quickly for the heater to have been the cause, and the level of carbon monoxide was too high. He absorbed the fatal amount very quickly.

Other points from the inquest also caused concern. There is an unexplained 24 hours. Miss Burke said that she was telephoned in England on 26 or 27 December by a neighbour who told her that John Black was dead and that Pat Jeffs was in gaol. Miss Jeffs said that she went to the neighbour's on 26 December after she had tried to wake John whom she had discovered at about 2 am on Christmas day naked in the bath. She was suffering from diarrhoea and could not walk. She was feeling ill. She had not been unconscious for 48 hours. The police and pathologists went to the flat on 27 December. The pathologists found some air fresheners placed in each room. Who put them there? Did anyone enter the flat between Miss Jeffs going to bed at 9 pm on Christmas eve, waking at 2 am on Christmas day and allegedly discovering Mr. Black in the bath, and the arrival of the police on 27 December? Who was it and why? The pathologists said that there was diarrhoea in the flat when they arrived and that it had been scrubbed. By whom?

Miss Jeffs had some significant injuries. She had bruises on her left foot, left and right knees, round her genitals and buttocks, on both hips and elsewhere. The Spanish pathologists said that such wounds came from some sort of violent action. They did not correspond with any simple fall. Miss Jeffs said that she felt paralysed, kept stumbling about, dragging herself around and falling over. Fiona Burke quoted Miss Jeffs as saying that while she was ill she fell out of bed on to the floor, causing injuries to her right hip and leg which caused her to limp. It is not easy to reconcile those two sets of testimony by the medical experts and Miss Jeffs. One wonders if all the relevant details have come to light.

I have deliberately concentrated on matters in the public domain, stated in court, and available to anyone who had read a transcript or press reports of the inquest. It is entirely fair to say that Miss Jeffs attended the inquest, gave lengthy evidence and that the British police described her as "very co-operative". Other people whose testimony was read out in court did not attend because they were abroad. The coroner drew public attention to the fact that the agent involved in selling a flat in Spain to Mr. Black, Lieutenant Commander (retired) L. Ayling, who operates from Gibraltar, had declined to make a statement or to come to the inquest. Therefore, not all the possible testimony is available, nor has it been subjected to cross-examination.

Obviously there are major inconsistencies and grave features in this case. I have not dealt with all of them, only the more notable ones.

I wish to return to the crucial aspect. A capable, fit and promising young British submariner has been dead for two and a half years. He died in Spain, suddenly and suspiciously. A British jury has found that he was unlawfully killed—that is, either murdered or as a result of manslaughter. Medical experts say that he died suddenly of a massive dose of carbon monoxide poisoning. That alone should surely have galvanised the Ministry of Defence. Why has it not been constantly demanding action to discover the killer or killers of one of its service men and to bring the person or persons to justice? Should they not have been at the forefront of those demanding action? 677 Why has it been left to the Leicester Mercury, to me, to the Foreign Office and, above all, to Mr. Black's grieving mother to demand action and the truth?

None of us can accept that the Spanish authorities have done enough to bring the guilty to justice. Nor can we be happy that the British Government have acted sufficiently speedily or energetically. It is most distressing to hear statements from our police that the Spanish police have been unco-operative. It is disappointing that initially I had to approach the British Legion and other service charities to try to get money to pay for the transcript of the British inquest to be translated into Spanish, until the Ministry of Defence finally agreed to pay the £800 or so. It is also deeply regrettable that the Cranes have had to spend a lot of money, which they can ill afford, on legal help to find out how their son died.

British Ministers should tell the Spanish Government, now our NATO and EEC ally, that they have not done anything like enough. We cannot accept their brief diplomatic response. They should leave no stone unturned to bring the case to a proper conclusion. The Ministry of Defence and the Foreign Office should offer all facilities and information to help them in their task. My hon. Friend, as Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Armed Forces, must have a deep interest in the welfare of British service men and their families. I look to him to reply positively today.

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Armed Forces (Mr. Roger Freeman)

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Rutland and Melton (Mr. Latham) who has raised the subject of the tragic death of Petty Officer John Black, Royal Navy, in Spain in December 1983. My hon. Friend has been diligent and thorough in his examination of this sad case, and I am glad that he has brought this matter to the House for debate today on behalf of his constituents. I can assure him that, although I come new to this matter, it will have my close and continuing attention. May I also tell my hon. Friend that I appreciate the deep anguish felt by Petty Officer Black's mother, Mrs. Crane, over the death of her son. I join my ministerial colleagues and my predecessor in conveying our deep condolences to her.

I want to be as helpful as I can to my hon. Friend, and perhaps I should deal first with Petty Officer Black's naval duties and responsibilities, and then with the Spanish legal proceedings concerning the investigation of his death. My hon. Friend has raised many detailed points and I shall read the Official Report with great care. I shall write to my hon. Friend on the matters that I do not cover in my speech.

I should like, first, to deal with Petty Officer Black's naval responsibilities. He served in the Navy for some seven years, joining at the age of 18. He had a normal career and served for much of that time as a rating in the submarine service. On 26 April 1982 he had a routine posting to HMS Rooke at Gibraltar as a leading seaman. He left on 19 July 1983, after serving there for about 15 months, to go as a matter of normal career development to HMS Dolphin at Gosport to complete a course as a petty officer. Petty Officer Black returned to Spain on leave at Christmas 1983 while still serving with HMS Dolphin at Gosport.

In response to some of the major points raised by my hon. Friend about Petty Officer Black's naval career and 678 responsibilities, I should like to state first, in relation to his medical fitness, that I confirm that he served in Her Majesty's submarines in the normal course of his duties. When he went to Gibraltar in April 1982, he was perfectly fit and well.

Secondly, Petty Officer Black was in Gibraltar, as I have said, from April 1982 to July 1983 and he was not involved in the Falklands campaign. His period of service in Gibraltar, as the House will appreciate, covered the period of the Falklands campaign.

Thirdly, in relation to his work in Gibraltar, I can tell the House that he was involved in the collation of classified information at HMS Rooke, but no more than any other rating of his rank or branch would be expected to do. During his posting to Gibraltar he qualified as a petty officer and performed all his duties well. I wish to emphasise, as my predecessor the then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Armed Forces stated in a letter to my hon. Friend the Member for Rutland and Melton on 6 July 1984, that there was nothing out of the ordinary about Petty Officer Black's work. The one sentence in that letter which may be relevant states: I assure you and the parents that there is no truth in the assertion of a 'cover-up' and that there are no security implications in John's tragic death. I re-emphasise and underline that point.

My fourth point concerns Lieutenant Commander Ayling, a retired naval officer. Lieutenant Commander Ayling is an estate agent in Spain and was involved with Petty Officer Black simply because Petty Officer Black wanted to buy a flat. Miss Jeffs, with whom he was staying on Christmas leave, was already renting a flat in the same locality and the police used Lieutenant Commander Ayling and his Spanish wife, who were well known local residents, in their interviews with Miss Jeffs.

The Navy did not know about the death of Petty Officer Black until 27 December, that is to say, until after the police began investigating the death. I can tell my hon. Friend that no Navy or Foreign and Commonwealth Office officials have ever been in the apartment in which Petty Officer Black was found dead.

Secondly, let me deal with the other aspect of my hon. Friend's speech and the points that he raised about the proceedings in Spain and the inquest procedure in Spain and in Portsmouth. My hon. Friend said that, following the initial investigation by the police, Spanish pathologists gave as their opinion to the judge involved in the case that the cause of death was carbon monoxide poisoning from a source or sources unknown. The judge in charge of the case, who is an obviously independent judicial authority, decided that there was no one to be accused in this case and therefore no proceedings were commenced against any party or parties concerning the sad death of Petty Officer Black.

At the British inquest held in Portsmouth, we know that the jury returned a verdict of unlawful killing, as my hon. Friend said, and that the Spanish pathologists—the same pathologists—gave further evidence. The Ministry of Defence paid for the translation of the inquest verdict and proceedings, and that was sent to the Spanish judge. He concluded that no new evidence had been presented concerning the case. Therefore, the position as far as the Spanish authorities are concerned is that the case is still open and will be looked at again if new evidence is presented by the Spanish police authorities or, indeed, by private proceedings initiated by the family of Petty Officer 679 Black, with new evidence to produce. It is only on the basis of new evidence being presented that further proceedings can be pursued.

Let me deal, in response to my hon. Friend's speech this afternoon, with what the Ministry of Defence can do to assist my hon. Friend's constituents. First, the Ministry of Defence will answer in detail, and as comprehensively as we can, any questions that my hon. Friend cares to put to us. As I have said already, I and my officials will study the Official Report of this afternoon's proceedings with great care, and I also know that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office will ensure that any new evidence available to us will be presented to the appropriate Spanish authorities.

In specific response to my hon. Friend's submission this afternoon, I have today instructed officials at my Ministry to review all the documents again afresh to see whether there is any new evidence that could be brought to the attention of the Spanish authorities. That review, coupled 680 with any new evidence that can be brought by my hon. Friend on behalf of the family, or submitted directly by the family or their legal representatives, will enable us to decide whether there is fresh evidence that can and should be presented to the Spanish authorities. I can assure my hon. Friend that, if that is the case, that evidence will be presented promptly and properly.

However, I must tell my hon. Friend that this matter is one for the Spanish authorities to decide whether it is to be pursued further and charges brought. I am sure that he will accept that. The Spanish judiciary is an independent authority, and it is for it to decide, on the basis of fresh evidence produced, whether to take the matter further.

This is a sad case, and I repeat what I said at the outset. I regret the tragic death of Petty Officer Black and ask my hon. Friend to convey to Mrs. Crane, Petty Officer Black's mother, our sorrow and understanding in this matter.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at seventeen minutes past Three o'clock.