Inquest Adjourned
I have had several phone calls and e-mails saying how angry and upset people are, especially for bereaved families, now that the Inquest has been postponed. One person has channelled their anger by writing to the Newbury Weekly News as follows:
It was with horror and disbelief that I heard the news that families of those killed in this disastrous incident are now to be saddled with yet another burden - that of trying to challenge Network Rail and First Great Western on safety issues without Legal Aid. Lord Falconer has obviously not suffered the utter devastation experienced by passengers on this fateful journey. I speak as a "lucky" survivor, whose physical injuries were negligible compared to some. However, my whole life has been turned upside down since November 6 th 2004 in a way that I could never have imagined possible. The suffering goes on in almost every aspect of my life and I will never regain the life I once knew because of this terrible incident. Imagine, then, how much more than this has been inflicted on those whose loss was greater than mine. This latest intervention by the Lord Chancellor is not simply a case of adding insult to injury - it is a despicable travesty of justice which robs the innocent victims of the right to defend and uphold the memory of loved ones lost in this ongoing carnage and denies them the chance to ensure that new safety measures are made compulsory by law. It is yet another example of bullying by the big boys. What does a human life mean to them? There were more than 200 passengers on that train who all have their own stories to tell and whose lives have been changed because of this. Let the Lord come to Newbury and sit with us for an hour or two and hear our stories, see our struggles, witness our loss. I doubt he has the courage."
Peter Webster sent us the following reaction:
Its worth noting that part of the reason for rejection aside from that it did not meet the requirements of public interest was that legal aid was not applicable in respect of inquests. In fact in the Marchioness disaster the Lord Chancellor said"I believe it is in the interests of justice that the families should be represented at the inquest" Clearly, they are happy when it is a private company but not when public bodies and policies are being questioned. I am certain that an appeal will win but of course it appears that there is no legal aid in order to pursue this appeal. Perhaps they considered that, so for families who have suffered such personal and financial loss, they will find this difficult. In any event, I will be quite happy to question the various bodies directly and in this respect have my witnesses ready and am very well prepared to address the court myself. David should not be disheartened, we will ensure that all necessary questions are answered and can certainly address his concerns as well.