R M Wiseman
R M Wiseman
Shell UK limited
London WC2R 0XD.
Your Ref: UKLG
Dear Mr Wiseman,
you for your letter dated 24th September 1998, however, I find that despite my
request for a response from the appropriate individual from either Shell
Research Limited or Royal Dutch Petroleum Company you have chosen to ignore the
the outset the policy has, apparently, been for Shell UK Limited and not Shell
Research Limited to respond to all enquires concerning the events of 1968 at
Shell Research Limited, Thornton Research Centre. I fear the unkind may draw the
conclusion that this is part of a carefully thought out policy of deception.
Legal Director of Shell UK Limited, you are, no doubt, conversant with company
law. In the light of this may I ask:
1. Who, and when, authorised Shell UK Limited, to speak on behalf of Shell Research Limited and or the Shell Group?
At what level was authorisation given?
you made the owners of Shell Research Limited (Royal Dutch Petroleum Company)
aware of the position. If so, when
and at what level?
Have the Royal Dutch Petroleum Company, granted you authority to speak on
their behalf concerning these matters. so, when and at what level was authority
understand that Shell UK Limited is itself a subsidiary of Royal Dutch Petroleum
Co. Can you confirm that the UK parent company-The Shell Transport and Trading
Company p.l.c.-has been informed of this matter. If so, when and at what level?
Due also to the involvement of Shell International
Chemical Company Limited/Shell Chemical Limited and the Shell Petroleum Company
Limited in these matters, and to avoid necessary of having to go through this
performance again, I require details of either the appropriate individuals to
contact at the above company’s or details of your (Shell UK Limited) authority
to speak on behalf of these company's.I note that your current position is to
defend the Narrative that was constructed in order to try and explain away the
events. ‘68, as set out by Ms Fran Morrison in her letter of 7/2/94.
It is of some concern to me, that one of the world’s largest
multinationals should have ever allowed its name to he associated with such a
In light of the serious nature and consequences of this
issue I am prepared, either to communicate directly to the Shell company's
outlined or once your authority to speak on their behalf and or the Shell group
as a whole has been satisfactory demonstrated, to enter into discussions with
you concerning my findings.
I wish to make it clear that I will not engage in long or
protracted correspondence unless you (Shell) treat this matter in a responsible
and serious manner. I feel that it
is only right and proper that I indicate, at this point, that my findings are
extensive and conclusive.