The Aberdeen Tiger And other Musings

   I'm sure that most of you are aware of the good news about the long awaited return of the former APG Tiger I to the U.S., as related in the story here. Through the efforts of the U.S. and U.K. governments, the Tiger, and other historically significant vehicles, were finally retrieved from the Wheatcroft Collection, where the Tiger has languished in a state of deterioration for over a decade. Lots of promises were made by the collector regarding restoration of the vehicle; but, nothing was done. Nothing, except for the possible removal of parts which were deemed important for future requirements by the collector. I was in contact with officials from the Center for Military History, the Judge Advocate General and Aberdeen Proving Grounds. All of the people with whom I spoke with corroborated the information I presented. One official even commented that "this guy is essentially holding our tank hostage and, most likely, is cannibalizing it for parts." CMH and JAG both assured me that they were doing everything possible to regain rightful custody of U.S. Government property and return it stateside. "This tank", the CMH official said, "belongs to the people of the United States." Well, they made good on their word.


   About two years ago, I attempted to bring the plight of the APG Tiger to the attention of people who have an interest in the preservation of historical military vehicles by posting the information at different sites. Unfortunately, I was regarded as a troublemaker and was accused by certain site owners of engaging in defamatory and libelous behavior. The information I posted was deleted and these site owners threatened me with permanent bans from their websites if I continued to make unsubstantiated comments. Meanwhile, individuals, like Brian Balkwill of The Research Squad, were given free rein to make disparaging remarks about the credibility of those of us who voiced our views and opinions on this subject. The Research Squad, for those of you unfamiliar with the group, is closely associated with Kevin Wheatcroft. I guess there's no conflict of interest, right?


   Wheatcroft's attorneys sent out a ponderous legal statement to the various website owners where discussions were taking place regarding Wheatcroft's practices. It seems that Kevin was upset about all of the attention he was receiving. The statement is posted in its entirety below:

Statement of Kevin Wheatcroft – April 2011
INTRODUCTION

Kevin Wheatcroft has instructed us, his lawyers, to prepare this statement in
answer to a number of wildly inaccurate and defamatory statements which have
appeared on various sites in the last 12-24 months. Kevin Wheatcroft has so far
refrained from making any comments in reply to the many unfounded allegations.
However, as the posting of persistently inaccurate information and allegations
continues particularly after publication of documents relating to a trial in Sweden
he has given us instructions to prepare this statement.
Also he will establish an internet mail address for a period of seven days from
today’s date. He will reply to any reasonable questions arising from this statement
or the facts giving rise to it.

The allegations relate to the circumstances in which a Tiger Tank came into his
possession and also relate to the circumstances in which an engine and gear box
formerly in a museum in Sweden came into his possession.

This statement is intended, first, to set the record straight so that all concerned
may know the true circumstances leading to the items coming into his possession.
It is also the intention of this statement to put an end to the substantial malicious
and erroneous speculation that appears on the various websites. Having taken this
step of publishing full particulars of his involvement and offering to answer any
reasonable questions arising from this statement, if further unfounded allegations
are repeated he will take action as necessary to protect his reputation including
action against individuals, internet service providers and internet forums who
permit publication of defamatory and abusive material.

WHEATCROFT COLLECTION

Kevin Wheatcroft is a reputable business man with an interest in the collection and

restoration to a usable condition of World War II military equipment principally

tanks. His collection is extensive and well known. It is a private collection but

illustrations of items that can be found in the collection are given at website

www.wheatcroftcollection.com. The collection is entirely legitimate. Kevin

Wheatcroft does not and will not engage in any unlawful activity to procure any of

his collection. Any suggestion that he has obtained improperly any item in the

collection is false and defamatory.

THIRD PARTY DEALINGS

Because of his reputation as a collector he receives invitations to purchase items

from various sources that will supposedly enhance his collection. If Mr Wheatcroft

has any doubt about the integrity of the person offering items or the integrity of

the item itself he will not deal with that person nor will he acquire the item on

offer. However from time to time notwithstanding his best endeavours to satisfy

himself of the integrity of the people with whom he comes in contact there are or

there emerge facts which were previously unknown that cast doubt on the integrity

of the transaction.

ENGINE AND GEAR BOX

Insofar as the engine and gear box is concerned Kevin Wheatcroft was approached

by Daniel Misik in 2004 when Mr Misik offered a Maybach engine to him. Mr

Wheatcroft agreed to make the purchase and the Maybach engine is now part of his

collection. There was never any suggestion that the transaction undertaken with

Mr Misik on that occasion was anything other than lawful.

On a later occasion Daniel Misik again approached Kevin Wheatcroft with the offer

of an engine and gear box then on display by a Swedish museum. He was told the

items were available in exchange for other display items. In view of the previous

experience with Mr Wheatcroft in dealing with Mr Misik at the time of first contact

he had no reason to believe that there was anything wrong with the transaction. It

only later turned out that the circumstances whereby Mr Misik was in a position to

offer the engine and gear box were unlawful.

Kevin Wheatcroft accepted the offer and in due course took possession of the

engine and gear box. The first time he was aware of anything untoward with these

items was when his home was raided by the police early one morning. He was

accused of theft by the police. He and his family were shocked by the unfounded

allegation. When the full nature of the transaction was explained to him he

immediately offered to return the items to the museum and he co-operated fully

with the police so that criminal proceedings could be brought against Mr Misik. No

allegations of wrong doing were ever made against Mr Wheatcroft nor have

proceedings ever been brought against him. He is aware that court papers relating

to the prosecution are circulating on the internet. He has not authorised the

publication of any documents but it is manifest from these documents that he was

not engaged in any unlawful activity nor has he sought to cause any harm to any

person in relation to the acquisition of these articles.

TIGER TANKS AND THE US ARMY

The second series of emails relates to his interest in a Tiger Tank.

There is confusion and consequently inaccurate information circulating regarding

the tank. The items now in his possession do not constitute a complete tank. They

were held in a German museum. Its curator is well known to Kevin Wheatcroft. He

was approached by the curator of a US museum to ask for help in retrieving three

tanks from various German museums as the German museums were uncooperative

in returning them to America. Kevin Wheatcroft agreed to rescue the three tanks in

question and deliver them to the UK, where he was to take over control. The

vehicles were to remain in the Wheatcroft Collection for an unspecified time for

the purposes of restoring them. Sadly the restoration work did not take place

because the American museum would not agree to a contract for the work. The

tanks were recovered in accordance with the arrangement with the American

museum over 10 years ago. All shipping and movement documents are in Mr

Wheatcrofts possession.

The American Army has indicated that it would like to recover possession of the

parts and other items in the collection. Mr Wheatcroft has not refused to return

the tank but not unreasonably, he has asked that all his expenses incurred in

connection with restoration and removal to the UK be reimbursed. He has offered

to retain the items for the purposes of making a replica and restoring an original.

So far the US Army has not made any further response to these proposals. It is

entirely erroneous to suggest Mr Wheatcroft has refused to return the items. It is

for the US Army to decide how it wishes to proceed.

FUTURE ACTION

The continued repetition of inaccurate information is damaging to Mr Wheatcroft’s

reputation and must cease if legal action is to be avoided.

Some of the unreasoned and unreasoning postings indicate that the authors have no

interest in understanding the truth of the situation but only an interest in

publishing defamatory and abusive statements about Mr Wheatcroft. The authors

of the postings are all warned that further repetition of their actions will have

grave consequences.

As stated earlier Mr Wheatcroft is prepared to answer any reasonable questions

emailed to wheatcroftquestions@gmail.com in the course of the next 7 days (the 7

day period for questions to be put is 21 – 28 April 2011 – questions received after 28

April 2011 will not be answered). Mr Wheatcroft will require a period of 14 days to

answer any reasonable questions received. Thereafter any repetition of the

defamatory remarks made on the websites will result in action. This statement has

been sent to the internet forums responsible for hosting defamatory content on

blog sites.

This is particularly amusing:

  He is aware that court papers relating to the prosecution are circulating on the internet. He has not authorised the publication of any documents but it is manifest from these documents that he was not engaged in any unlawful activity nor has he sought to cause any harm to any person in relation to the acquisition of these articles.

Newsflash, bro! Since, as I have indicated further down, these court documents (and other related items) are part of the public record and available to anyone requesting them, your authorization is neither asked for nor required. You need to find better shysters.

So is this: 

    Mr Wheatcroft has not refused to return the tank but not unreasonably, he has asked that all his  expenses incurred in connection with restoration and removal to the UK be reimbursed.

You can't charge for work you never performed, Kev. You also know that it didn't cost you a penny to have the Tiger I shipped from Germany and why that was possible. On this side of the pond, that's known as fraud. Fraud is a felony in these parts. Trying to pull a fast one can get one into a heap o'trouble.

Another snicker-inducing tidbit: 

He has offered to retain the items for the purposes of making a replica and restoring an original.

It takes a really magnanimous guy to make an offer like that! And he's funny, too. He should do standup. What did he mean by "and restoring an original"? That could be construed to mean he has another Tiger I sitting around waiting for parts. He certainly couldn't be referring to Chassis number 250031; since, it's in an even sorrier state than when it left APG. He blanched at the fact that it would cost SEK 250,000 (that's $36,036.74 at today's exchange rate) to manufacture a new crankshaft for a Maybach tank engine; so, how, in all seriousness, can he even talk about making a complete replica Tiger I?

Then, there's this:

It is entirely erroneous to suggest Mr Wheatcroft has refused to return the items. It is

for the US Army to decide how it wishes to proceed.

Actually, it;s not entirely erroneous; and, The U.S. Army certainly did decide how it wished to proceed, didn't it? Don't worry. We'll be by to pick it up. And, you don't get to collect shipping and handling, either.



This is the joker of the deck:
Mr Wheatcroft will require a period of 14 days to answer any reasonable questions received.

Really? 14 days to formulate a response to a question for which you should already know the answer. A suspected serial killer needs far less time to establish a halfway plausible alibi; yet, you need two whole weeks to think of an answer. Being truthful should be a natural reaction that doesn't require extended preparation.

This statement is known as a "gorilla" letter, designed to intimidate and dissuade individuals from publishing certain information which might cast the attorney's client in a negative light. Website owners do not want to take the chance that some kind of legal action might actually be undertaken; so, they remove the material which has been identified as possibly defamatory. There are more than a few site owners who, because of the type of forums they host, are pretty much pom-pom waving cheerleaders for good ole Kevin. They ingratiate themselves in order to stay in his good graces and allows them access to his toys. Therefore, no one is allowed to write anything which can be construed as sullying his reputation among the sycophants who inhabit the world of military vehicle collecting. More often than not, any mention of his questionable practices is quickly removed and the shouts of "hearsay" and "unsubstantiated innuendo and lies" are heard. Well, the one thing that these mouthpieces didn't count on was the availability of documents relating to an incident involving the engine and transmission of what is known as the Axvall King Tiger. These items were on display at the military museum, in Axvall, Sweden. All of the documents are part of the public record and are available to anyone who cares to obtain them. Shysters and brown-nosing suck ups can't do a thing to stop the free flow of information; and, it literally tears them up from the inside.

Below, you can peruse the documents at your own leisure, compare the information contained within them with the legal statement and form your own opinion from what you have read. 

Wheatcroft First Interview With City of London Overseas Anti-Corruption Unit, 9 Feb 2010

Wheatcroft Second Interview, 9 Feb 2010

Wheatcroft Third Interview, 1 Sep 2010

Emails