One last hope to unravel the mystery of the
Bugaled Breizh
?
Five years after the final dismissal in France, the British justice must render Friday, November 5 its conclusions on the sinking of the French trawler, which had five dead in 2004.
Read also Shipwreck of the Bugaled Breizh in 2004: was the Breton trawler sunk by a submarine?
Over the course of three weeks of hearings before the High Court in London in October, witnesses have succeeded in this proceeding which attempts to shed light on the circumstances in which the vessel suddenly sank off the coast of Cornwall (south-west of England) on January 15, 2004.
"I capsize, come quickly!"
, had launched the boss of
Bugaled Breizh
(
Children of Brittany,
in Breton) Yves Gloaguen, in a distress call to one of his colleagues at midday that day. On board the trawler, which fished in rather good conditions, were five experienced sailors,
"riding on safety"
, according to their relatives.
Of the five victims, only the bodies of Patrick Gloaguen, Yves Gloaguen and Pascal Le Floch were found - the first in the wreckage during its refloating, the other two in British waters.
It is on the deaths of the latter two that the proceedings underway in London are focused.
Georges Lemétayer and Eric Guillamet have meanwhile been reported missing at sea. Initially expected on October 22, Judge Nigel Lickley's conclusions were postponed until Friday because of the magnitude of
“the evidence to be examined”
.
Read alsoBugaled Breizh: the hypotheses of the sinking
If the British procedure cannot lead to the pronouncement of sentences, the families of the victims hoped that it could raise new elements likely to nourish a request for reopening of the investigation in France. The dismissal pronounced by the French justice became final in 2016 after the rejection of their last appeal. But over the hearings before the High Court in London, the hypothesis of the collision with a military submarine, favored by the families of the victims, moved away in favor of that of a fishing accident that would be due to a ship's equipment which would have gripped the bottom, defended by an expert at the hearing.
The presence of three submarines (the Dutch
Dolfijn
, the German
U22
and the British
Torbay
) was certified in the area, while military exercises were to take place there or were being prepared. But the suspicions of the families are on another submarine, the British
Turbulent
. Before the High Court, the Dutch Navy and the Royal Navy ruled out any involvement, the first claiming that the
Dolfijn was
sailing on the surface when the accident occurred, the second that the
Turbulent
was not at sea on the day of the sinking.
“We weren't involved at all. We were docked ”
in Devonport (South West England)
"January 15,"
said then-British submarine commander Andrew Coles in a much-anticipated testimony.
Read alsoBugaled Breizh: the Royal Navy rejects all responsibility, families cry lies
As for the hypothesis of the presence of an unidentified Allied submarine in the exercise area, it was deemed
"unthinkable"
by Commander Daniel Simmonds, an underwater operations manager for the Royal Navy.
When the track of a US Navy submarine was mentioned in 2016, the United States had refuted it.
French justice, after long years of investigations, could not decide between the hypothesis of a submarine and that of a fishing accident.