Explosion experts had a failure to retrieve pieces of Air India plane

Vancouver, April 04, 2004

Failure to recover many of the pieces of bombed Air India Flight 182 has experts guessing at where the explosive may have been planted, a crash reconstructionist admitted Monday.

"What we are left with here are gaps in the evidence?'' asked Richard Peck, lawyer for accused bomber Ajaib Singh Bagri.

"Yes, there are missing pieces, no doubt, that we would very much like to view and consider,'' said Prof. Christopher Peel.

The cargo floor, where Peel believes the bomb was hidden in a suitcase loaded in Vancouver, was lost.

He told the court he can't account for a key area _ a 50-centimetre space in the baggage compartments that stowed luggage from Toronto and Vancouver.

That could leave the defence a small sliver of ground from which to argue the bomb was loaded in the Toronto baggage bay No. 51.

The distance between the two areas could be the distance between a finding of guilt or innocence for Bagri.

The prosecution has presented evidence that bags from two men, both named Singh, were checked in at Vancouver International Airport.

It has also heard evidence that Bagri wanted to borrow a car to take some bags to Vancouver International Airport just before the bombing. He told a female friend, whose name is protected by court order, only the bags would be leaving.

If the court finds the bomb was in cargo area 51, a scant distance from area 52 that contained bags originating in Vancouver, the connection between Bagri and the bomb vanishes.

Peel, though, said the structural damage indicates the blast came from area 52.

But under questioning by Peck on Monday, he admitted he can't account for the 50 centimetres _ 20 inches _ between the two luggage bays.

"What we have at the end of the day is 20 inches that can't be accounted for,'' Peck said.

"It's a question of where those inches are?''

"Yes, it is,'' Peel replied.

The defence needled away at the gaps in Peel's theory, asking him if all the members of the reconstruction team agreed with his version of events which he bases on how he imagines the explosion would have crumpled the plane.

"We are still in constant, vigorous debate,'' Peel said.

"I said, 'Let's look at the post-blast condition. I don't think anybody's ever done that before. If that's wrong, that's my fault.'''

Peck had trouble trying to further challenge the scientist though. Peel cut Peck off a number of times, telling him he had a "misconception'' of the science involved.

Peel is part of a team that reconstructed the wreckage which is set up in a secret Vancouver warehouse. He was also involved in investigations into the Lockerbie disaster and into the crash of TWA Flight 800 over Long Island, N.Y., in 1996.

The court moved to the warehouse last week to examine the reconstruction of mangled aircraft and will go back again later this week.

On Friday, images of Supreme Court Justice Ian Bruce Josephson walking around the model's wings and bays were shown in the courthouse via video link.

(The Canadian Press)