advertisement


Grenfell: inquest or public inquiry?

As much as possible to enable prosecution if that is the right course.

Details are hard to find, so far I hear that the manufacturers recommend the external panels used to go up no more than 10 metres.
Grenfell is 60 metres.
Many boilers in unsafe places it is said.
How much else could have been prevented by joined up thinking ?
My money is on the council being most at fault.

Bring in a "Doing it right / Whislteblowers" Government department, NGO or agancy where people at all levels can bring attention to wrong doing and stupidity with protection in law - before, during or after while the thing is going on.

Urgently rehouse everyone in similarly clad buildings or give a damned good reason why not
 
Coroners are very careful not to make political statements and only deal with the facts being investigated. They will determine the cause and make recommendations without apportioning blame.

I believe there should an inquest led by a senior coroner and then a public inquiry to assign blame and ensure the guilty are convicted.

The public inquiry should also have a mandate that any safety recommendations are enshrined in law.



(I suspect little of the above will happen and tories will drag out starting the inquiry as long as possible so it fades from public attention)
 
The Lakanal report, taken from Change.org

https://www.change.org/p/implement-...xZj1Ellf1TjM9JQLDxVL/tX/ImoekReINnbmc3fMd7ai1

....Containing distressing content) on the Lakanal inquest was written by Inside Housing: http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/lakanal-house-the-verdict/6526499.article#

Lambeth Council's website includes inquest reports: https://www.lambeth.gov.uk/elections-and-council/lakanal-house-coroner-inquest

Southwark Council have included the letter from the coroner and their response: http://www.2.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/3461/fire_at_lakanal_house

If the councillors lived there a different outcome
 
IMG_0038.jpg


from Private Eye
 
Apparently terrorist threats and propping up property prices are valid reasons not to reveal which blocks are affected.
I guess the timetable for remedial action will also remain secret - Guardian News
 
Seanm said:
This has come up on the Grenfell thread but no answers so far.

Sophie Khan, lawyer for those affected by the Lakanal House fire in 2009, was interviewed on Newsnight last night, arguing vehemently that an inquest (or inquests?) would be preferable by far to a public inquiry, because it would allow families to cross examine experts and get their own experts, because it would not be government led, and because a jury would be able to deliver its own verdict, regardless of what the government might think of it. She seems very suspicious of the decision to hold a public inquiry.

Link to the interview below:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08vf77q/newsnight-15062017#t=31m31s

Can any legal minds out there help make sense of this?
Click to expand...

I was Sophie's client's barrister in the Lakanal inquest. Sophie is a successful, dynamic and determined solicitor. She is a force to be reckoned with. By the letter of the law an inquest only determines who the deceased was, how, when and where death occurred. The reality is however that dealing with the 'how' an inquest will hear all relevant evidence. i.e in Lakanal over 3 months we heard from all concerned in the decades of renovations in the block to planning decisions and the police and fire brigade on the fateful day. The residents and of course the relatives all were able to contribute.
An inquiry will typically have a narrower remit. There will be the perception, rightly or wrongly that not every avenue has been explored.
 
andrew d said:
I was Sophie's client's barrister in the Lakanal inquest. Sophie is a successful, dynamic and determined solicitor. She is a force to be reckoned with. By the letter of the law an inquest only determines who the deceased was, how, when and where death occurred. The reality is however that dealing with the 'how' an inquest will hear all relevant evidence. i.e in Lakanal over 3 months we heard from all concerned in the decades of renovations in the block to planning decisions and the police and fire brigade on the fateful day. The residents and of course the relatives all were able to contribute.
An inquiry will typically have a narrower remit. There will be the perception, rightly or wrongly that not every avenue has been explored.
Click to expand...
That’s interesting, thank you. She took a bit of a beating in the days following the interview.
 
Whether it's an Inquiry, Inquests, or a casting of the Runes.. it will almost certainly take far too long, fail to change anything much and allow the culprits off scot free. It has always been that way and I have little hope of it changing.
 
Surprised nobody's picked up on this.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-fire-death-dame-judith-hackitt-a8355466.html

Govt. will now apparently 'consult' on 'possible' banning of flammable cladding. FFS!! I didn't notice them entering into extensive 'consultations' bfore tendering half of the NHS to crooks, or introducing the Bedroom Tax, or attacking the sick and disabled...

It's our old friend 'political will' as usual.

Question time last night, before I turned off for the usual reasons, featured Tory minister's stonewalling and wittering on about 'technical' issues whilst those affected and Diane Abbot demanded action.

Meanwhile the vested interests just carry on regardless.

I was about to say 'You couldn't make it up', but of course you don''t have to. It happens every time. The 'establishment' close ranks and real change comes slowly, or never. I've even seen people on TV who stand to lose their properties because THEY are being forced to pay for the replacement of cladding installed by dodgy builders.

Shambles.
 
Still said:
He can afford to, much of his wealth is a result of property transactions, he's not a sociopath, etc.
Click to expand...
Undoubtedly he can afford to. He can also afford to fund UKIP, or build houses for all the homeless in London, or fund a campaign to prove that the earth is flat.
But he doesn't.
That in no way reflects on his character.

Chris
 
Poor Chris so bereft of normal human compassion he can only leap to the defence of the poor Duke of Westminster while thousands live in fire traps not of their making.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top