You know very well what happened between these two events:Now, do you mind to try to explain to this forum readers what happened in between those 2 facts ?
Fact number 1.1 should include that "both Leach and Wake-Walker stayed in their positions of trust and enormous responsibility, were not censured in any way by Pound, and so therefore the threat whatever it was, if it existed, was not followed through."
"This operation EF involved an unsuccessful carrier raid commanded by W-W on Petsamo and motivated entirely for political reasons to support the newly-attacked USSR and lasting from 22nd July -4th August. 24 hour daylight and inadequate strike aircraft made failure a forgone conclusion but W-W did his best, receiving a stony silence when he went to commiserate with surviving aircrew in Victorious on return. However, orders are orders. Groping their way into Seidisfjord in fog meant risk had to be taken and Achates' dead were the price. I have yet to read the National Archive file on this, but their Lordships' opinion looks superficially like appalling hindsight and back-seat driving.
Contrary to any imaginary official unhappiness with his general performance after this, and now three whole months after Pound was supposed to have wanted him court-martialled W-W set off again with a twin carrier task force on operations Dervish and Strength again supplying support for the Russians around Murmansk. His covering force had the complex task of covering the Dervish convoy, the very first Russian convoy, and also the transfer of a flight of 24 RAF Hurricanes to North Russia, flown off the Argus. He fitted in some air strikes against German shipping in the Tromso area as well. These operations lasted from 19th August through to 10th September."
"A further accolade for Wake-Walker was that he was on the Parliamentary Committee, as expert advice, set up to investigate the loss of PoW and Repulse "Battleship" Middlebrook."
"Leach was in command of HMS Prince of Wales from commissioning until the day she sank apart from his hernia operation and convalescence, that is complete approval of his performance. If there had been any other opinion, another Captain would have been appointed."
"Except that Winston was full of praise and bonhomie when sailing with Leach to Placentia Bay five days after Brockman made his mistaken guess. Pound's green ink says I will take the C-in-C's report with me- where? Why on board PoW to America with Winston and Leach of course."
As a remembrance of his pleasant trip under Leach's protection, Winston sent him a signed photograph. It did not say "to the man who did the worst thing since Troubridge turned away from the Goeben in 1914"
The idea that this totally imaginary Conspiracy was created so the Bismarck's destruction could be presented as a "good news" PR stunt (not that wasn't wonderful news already) and solely so everybody could be dished out with medals has been laughable since the start. Whatever bits of ribbon these men got, they were fulfilling their positions of trust and responsibility from 24th May 1941 to the day of their deaths.
These are facts between the other two facts. These facts make it clear that Sir Dudley Pound had complete faith in the abilities of these men. If the 28th May letter from Pound did request a Board of Inquiry IMHO it was purely to mollify the ill-informed, hasty and unfair outburst of WSC, and not because, as has been claimed "ADM 205/10 is stating that the PoW retreat was an aspect that had to be investigated" Only this explanation fits with Pound immediately abandoning the idea, and keeping these excellent officers in their posts of considerable responsibility.
All the best