# 29 Still no answers from Foreign Secretary regarding the 'accidental destruction' of a passport that Ambassador Mark Kent knew to contain evidence that David Fletcher was not in Cambodia when the alleged rapes occurred.

Phillip Hammond

Foreign Secretary

Parliamentary House of Commons

London SW1A                                                                                   

7^th November 2014

Dear Mr Hammond

Further to my previous 13 letters regarding Mr Fletcher.

The refusal of yourself and FCO staff to answer any questions in relation to the accidental cancellation and destruction of Mr Fletcher’s passport borders on the absurd.

I find it hard to believe that the FCO could ‘accidentally’ destroy what consular staff knew to contain evidence relevant to Mr Fletcher’s defense against the charge that he had raped Yang Dany!

Surely, Mr Hammond you, as Foreign Secretary, can instruct your FCO staff to explain why and how Mr Fletcher’s valid British passport was returned by British Embassy staff to the UK for destruction without consulting Mr Fletcher first?

Unless there is some explanation that has escaped me, it seems that Mr Fletcher was quite deliberately kept in the dark about the impending fate of his passport for the simple reason that Ambassador Mark Kent (and/or some other senior FCO officials) knew full well that it contained evidence in support of Mr Fletcher’s claim that he was not in Cambodia at the time he allegedly raped Yang Dany – March 15^th and 22^nd 2009.

At the time of the apparent destruction of Mr Fletcher’s passport (2012) Ambassador Mark Kent and senior consular staff in both the Cambodian and Thai embassies knew that court documents revealed Yang Dany to be a virgin, her hymen intact, after the alleged rapes. They had known this since Sept 2010.

It is difficult to escape the conclusion that FCO consular officials deliberately destroyed (arranged to have destroyed) evidence that, once it saw the light of day, would be highly embarrassing to them – having been actively involved in the pursuit and arrest of Mr Fletcher in 2010 and having told Mr Fletcher that his passport would be retained by the British embassy in Bangkok until his court proceedings were completed.

It is in the nature of governments to cover up such errors of judgment and competence and this seems to be what is occurring here. And it often falls to journalists (the 4^th estate) to keep asking questions until logical answers have been obtained. This is not a role I chose but one that I have fallen into and that I will continue to pursue – despite what is becoming abundantly apparent to be deliberate obstruction by the FCO.

On 31^st Oct Mr Fletcher received the following from Sue Bennett regarding his Freedom of Information request.

Dear David,

Thank you for your email – I am currently working on your request.

The volume of data being assessed is significant – 6 large files and I estimate this assessment will take five working days. The legislative clearance will then apply ensuring that we only release what you are entitled to under the DPA.

I understand your frustration but I am obliged to follow due process; I will get the papers to you as soon as I can. Once they have been cleared for release we will send them to you via our Embassy in Phnom Penh – the safest method of dispatch to ensure the DPA is not breached. Colleagues there will then arrange for the parcel to be delivered to you.

Best wishes,

Sue

It is now 8 days since Sue Bennett sent this email and Mr Fletcher has asked me to request of the FCO when he might expect to receive these documents. Mr Fletcher has also requested that I ask you when he might receive the letter promised by the FCO regarding the ‘accidental destruction’ of his passport. He needs this letter, along with the other documents requested under FOI legislation for this forthcoming court case.

best wishes

James Ricketson