They were called Yves Gloaguen, Georges Lemétayer, Pascal Le Floch, Patrick Gloaguen and Eric Guillamet. Since the sinking of their ship on January 15, 2004, the five men have been at the heart of a vast mystery. What happened to the Bugaled Breizh (Children of Brittany in French), this trawler from Loctudy (Finistère) which carried them to the bottom of the water in a few seconds? How could this sturdy, perfectly functioning fishing vessel sink so quickly off Lizard Point in South West England?
All these questions will be at the heart of the public inquiry opened this Monday by the British High Court and which will be held until October 22 to try to unravel the truth. Almost eighteen years after the tragedy, the families of the victims have not been able to fully mourn the missing sailors, for lack of evidence explaining the sinking. They are even convinced that they are not told everything and that it is indeed a submarine that dragged the Bugaled Breizh to the bottom of the water. A thesis far from far-fetched.
Thirty-seven seconds. This is the unusually short time it took for the trawler to sink. Thirty-seven seconds that killed five men. And crushed so many families. “Never has the hope of families, who have never given up, been so great”, confided Dominique Tricaud, lawyer for the children of Georges Lemétayer, before the hearing. The hooking of the Bugaled Breizh’s net by a submarine would explain why the sailors did not have time to put on a life jacket or throw a raft in the water. And why one of the warps (cable of the fishing train) was stretched 140 meters more than the other.
British justice examines the sinking of the Bugaled Breizh https://t.co/vzv1BAT8hL
– 20 Minutes (@ 20Minutes) October 4, 2021
During these three weeks, around forty testimonies are expected. Among these witnesses, do some know things that they have never dared to say? In 2016, a French soldier maneuvering aboard the French submarine Le Rubis sowed doubt. “We had to do maneuvers with one of the British submarines. At breakfast time, a message arrived on board, informing us that the exercise was canceled following a damage to our partner for the day. The latter had already set sail for his home port in order to carry out repairs. The Ruby is not involved, but I have great doubts about our English friend, ”he said.
Photos to remove doubts?
The submarine in question is called the Turbulent and was supposed to perform maneuvers in the area. Questioned on many occasions, its commander Andrew Coles has always sworn that his vessel was docked on the day of the tragedy. A version disputed by several witnesses, who affirmed that the nuclear attack device was not present that day. And that he would even have come back slightly damaged. His testimony expected on October 12 will be closely scrutinized. The civil parties hope that the production of satellite images of the port of Devonport carried out on January 15, 2004 will be able to invalidate the commander’s thesis. Unless they dismiss the Royal Navy submarine for good.
In this case, lawyers for French families often come up against the issue of defense secrecy. The English submarine HMS Turbulent, for example, produced the recordings of the messages received on board on January 16, 2004. But not those of the day before, the day of the sinking! His argument? Top secret. A silence that legitimately reinforces the conspiracy theory in the eyes of families. In France, the legal proceedings had resulted in a frustrating dismissal for the families.
Another testimony will be listened to with attention. On October 7, a helicopter pilot will be heard. At a previous hearing, Peter Culdrose had explained that it was not necessary “not to mention the presence of a submarine” in the area of the sinking as reminded The Telegram. A clear admission of a truth that it would be better to suppress? It will be for the English courts to decide.