[JohnFiorentino]

July 11, 2002

Secret FBI report refutes sworn testimony of William Tobin

A recently declassified FBI report appears to refute the sworn testimony of the FBI's former chief metallurgist assigned to the TWA800 crash case.

As disclosed in the recently declassified document (excerpts printed below) it appears William Tobin's testimony before the Senate during the Grassley hearings had little basis in fact.

Tobin testified that by September of 1996, approximately 4-6 weeks after his arrival on the case, there was a general consensus that there was "no bomb or missile damage" evident on the TWA wreckage. At the time frame indicated in Tobin's testimony, approximately one half of TWA800 was still at the bottom of the ocean.

The FBI's James Kallstrom, dismissed Tobin from the probe. Kallstrom believed Tobin's "conclusions" were hasty and unprofessional.

As evidenced by the once secret FBI report, it wasn't until November of 1996 that the FBI considered alternate investigative methods. This was two months after Tobin had already arrived at his conclusions. The report also states that even in November 1996, salvage efforts were still ongoing.

The document indicates that investigators had "little forensic documentation or guidance on large-body aircraft missile engagements, and no supportable mechanical or operational explanation for the crash."

FBI, TWA Flight 800 Brookhaven National Laboratory Examinations. Declassified FBI Report, 1997. (excerpts)

"It became apparent by the end of November 1996, about four months into the FBI's criminal investigation, that no aircraft debris recovered to that time had clear indicia of a high explosive event, although evidence recovery (i.e., ocean trawling for aircraft debris) and subsequent examination by bomb technicians for such indicia was continuing. In the face of no "classic" explosive artifacts little forensic documentation or guidance on large-body aircraft missile engagements, and no supportable mechanical or operational explanation for the crash of Trans World Airlines (TWA) Flight 800, FBI management decided that "... any investigative or scientific avenue that was reasonable and which could assist in providing a factual cause of the incident should and would be pursued."

The report goes on to say, that the initial metallurgical findings were reviewed, stating: A "cursory metallurgical peer review was conducted......" The report further states however, "No analysis or microscopic examinations were conducted." This would seem to indicate a review of the methodology used, and not a review of actual findings, as no further tests were performed.

Reproduced below, are excerpts from William Tobin's sworn testimony at the Grassley hearings.

Excerpts of FBI Metallurgist William Tobin’s testimony during the Grassley hearing.

GRASSLEY: Within 30 days of arriving at Calverton, what was your professional assessment of as to whether the cause of the crash was a bomb?

TOBIN: It progressed from an inclination of viewing the earmarks as possibly a bomb, but it changed rather quickly to confirmation within my mind that there was no indication of a bomb and unlikely to be that of a missile within the first 30 days.

GRASSLEY: At some point, did the bomb techs agree with yours and the NTSB's assessment that the cause of the crash was not a bomb?

TOBIN: Yes, Senator. I would estimate that probably four to six weeks -- after about four to six weeks, we were all unanimously or near unanimously on the same page. And all being the bomb techs, the National Transportation Safety Board and the metallurgy or the material science interests in the FBI laboratory. We were all unanimously -- we were united in our observations and conclusions that there was no bomb or missile damage evident on those aircraft parts.

GRASSLEY: The term four to six weeks brings you to what date on the calendar approximately? Just approximately.

TOBIN: My guess would be mid September, early to mid September.

It would appear that the FBI report and Tobin's testimony are at odds. This is just another glaring example of the inept and inconclusive investigation into one of the worst air disasters in history.

Copyright 2002, John E. Fiorentino -- All rights reserved. Distribution to wire services and recognized news media is allowed. No other use, distribution, or reproduction can be made without the express consent of the author.

[Asmodeus]

"It would appear that the FBI [FBI TWA Flight 800 Brookhaven National Laboratory Examinations Declassified FBI Report, 1997] report and Tobin's testimony are at odds."

It appears that your #57 was cut and pasted from "Summary of new evidence by John Fiorentino" dated 11 July 2002. Please provide us with your supporting reference source URL for the FBI TWA Flight 800 Brookhaven National Laboratory Examinations Declassified FBI Report, 1997 you refer to.

On 8 November 2002 you started a new thread in FreeRepublic which you dramatically titled - "Physcial Evidence Points to Foul-Play in TWA Flight 800 Disaster" but you didn't provide the "evidence", indicating instead that you were still working on it. Another month has now gone by. Can you provide the readers with that "evidence" now?

Your earlier also made the following postings elsewhere:

[1] Yahoo TWA800 forum - 15 March 2002
From: John Fiorentino
Subject: Re: [twa800] A little sensitive, aren't we?
[excerpt][quote]
However, based on Meyer's statements, I don't believe he witnessed the IE. Fl. 800 didn't explode in a MF at 13000+, the MF was somewhere 7500-8500ft. Look at his timeline, Please explain, HOW he could have witnessed the IE?
[end quote]

[2] Yahoo TWA800 forum - April 12, 2002
From: John Fiorentino
Subject: Re: [twa800] Kabofovic revisited
[excerpt][quote]
Most here are convinced a "missile" did the dirty deed. I'm not, not yet at least. The initial assessment was "bomb". I thought so to. I still do.
[end quote]

Do you still believe that Flight 800 was the victim of a bomb? If so, are you contending it was the source of the alleged "pellets"?