Letter: Moral questions raised by Philby sale

Mr Phillip Knightley
Thursday 08 September 1994 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

sir: Nicholas Bethell ('Profits and losses of treachery', 6 September) may have a moral case for the seizing of the pounds 150,000 raised by Sotheby's sale of Kim Philby's books, papers and medals. But he has no legal case at all. British law says convicted criminals may not benefit from their crime. But Philby was never convicted of anything. He left his belongings to his wife in a legally recognised will (I have seen it) and she has never been convicted of anything.

The British Government gave her a visa to come to London to sell Philby's effects. Under what law could the proceeds of that sale be taken from Mrs Philby?

Yours faithfully,

PHILLIP KNIGHTLEY

London, W2

6 September

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in