This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/03/coroner-summing-up-westminster-attack-inquest

The article has changed 10 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Westminster attack inquest: coroner begins summing up Westminster attack coroner says armed police could have prevented PC's death
(about 3 hours later)
The Westminster Bridge attack was a deliberate act of terrorism in one of the most iconic areas of London, an inquest has heard. The death of PC Keith Palmer, who was stabbed multiple times at the gates to the Palace of Westminster last year, could have been avoided if there were armed officers near the gate, a coroner has ruled.
The chief coroner, Mark Lucraft QC, described 22 March 2017 as “a day like most others” in London, with tourists and residents going about their business. But the lives of many on the bridge and the surrounding area were dramatically changed by an attack that lasted just 82 seconds. The chief coroner, Mark Lucraft QC, said: “Due to shortcomings in the security system at New Palace Yard, including the supervision of those engaged in such duties, the armed officers were not aware of a requirement to remain in close proximity to the gates.
Khalid Masood, 52, killed Kurt Cochran, 54, Leslie Rhodes, 75, Aysha Frade, 44, and Andreea Cristea, 31, when he drove into pedestrians on Westminster Bridge, before stabbing PC Keith Palmer to death at the gates to the Palace of Westminster. Masood had driven his car “with a clear murderous intent”, Lucraft told the inquest. He said the attack was also life altering for 29 survivors who received serious injuries. “Had they been stationed there, it is possible that they may have been able to prevent PC Palmer suffering fatal injuries.”
Lucraft praised the doctors and nurses who rushed from the nearby St Thomas’ hospital to assist the injured, as well as the members of public who helped. But he said some members of the public chose to photograph and film the aftermath of the attack rather than respond. “Sadly some people, for whatever reasons, have posted some material on the internet,” Lucraft said, calling on the material to be removed as it is “distressful” to the families. Lucraft gave his verdict after a month-long inquest into the attack, in which Khalid Masood, 52, killed Kurt Cochran, 54, Leslie Rhodes, 75, Aysha Frade, 44, and Andreea Cristea, 31, when he mowed down pedestrians on Westminster Bridge, before stabbing Palmer. All five of those who died in the attack were “unlawfully killed”, the coroner said.
Lucraft is reading his conclusions, which is expected to last three hours, at the Old Bailey. As well as recapping the evidence that was heard during the inquest, Lucraft’s conclusion will consider whether factors such as barriers at Westminster Bridge, the security arrangement at the Palace of Westminster, and what MI5 knew about Masood played a role in the victims’ deaths. Lucraft said that article 2 of the European convention on human rights – protecting the right to life – was engaged in relation to Palmer’s death
Earlier Hugo Keith QC, representing the Metropolitan police, argued against claims by Palmer’s family that having armed officers at the carriage gates could have saved his life. He said that even if the armed officers had been at the gates, there was little evidence they would have been in the position to “neutralise” Masood. He described suggestions they would have been able to take a shot as “entirely speculative”. Lucraft said the attack was a deliberate act of terrorism in one of the most iconic areas of London.
He described 22 March 2017 as “a day like most others” in London, with tourists and residents going about their business. But the lives of many on the bridge and the surrounding area were dramatically changed by an attack that lasted just 82 seconds.
Masood had driven his car “with a clear murderous intent”, Lucraft told the inquest. He said the attack was also life-altering for 29 survivors who sustained serious injuries.
Lucraft praised the doctors and nurses who rushed from the nearby St Thomas’ hospital to assist the injured, as well as the members of public who helped. But he said some members of the public chose to photograph and film the aftermath of the attack rather than respond. “Sadly some people, for whatever reasons, have posted some material on the internet,” Lucraft said, calling on the material to be removed as it was “distressful” to the families.
Earlier, Hugo Keith QC, representing the Metropolitan police, argued against claims by Palmer’s family that having armed officers at the carriage gates could have saved his life. He said that even if the armed officers had been at the gates, there was little evidence they would have been in the position to “neutralise” Masood. He described suggestions they would have been able to take a shot as “entirely speculative”.
Two armed officers, PC Lee Ashby and PC Nicholas Sanders, were on duty in New Palace Yard at the time of the attack. The inquest previously heard that the two officers had unknowingly disobeyed instructions, which required roving firearms officers to be in close proximity to the gates but not outside them, and not to work in pairs. Instead, the officers were near the members’ entrance to parliament. CCTV footage showed that the last time armed officers were at the gates was at about 1.45pm, almost an hour before Palmer was attacked at 2.41pm.Two armed officers, PC Lee Ashby and PC Nicholas Sanders, were on duty in New Palace Yard at the time of the attack. The inquest previously heard that the two officers had unknowingly disobeyed instructions, which required roving firearms officers to be in close proximity to the gates but not outside them, and not to work in pairs. Instead, the officers were near the members’ entrance to parliament. CCTV footage showed that the last time armed officers were at the gates was at about 1.45pm, almost an hour before Palmer was attacked at 2.41pm.
Counsel to the inquest, Jonathan Hough, rejected Keith’s arguments that article 2 of the European convention on human rights – protecting the right to life – did not apply to the inquest in relation to Palmer’s death. He said there could have been a breach of the state’s general duty to safeguard life because it could be argued there was a failure to establish and maintain adequate security arrangements at the Palace of Westminster.Counsel to the inquest, Jonathan Hough, rejected Keith’s arguments that article 2 of the European convention on human rights – protecting the right to life – did not apply to the inquest in relation to Palmer’s death. He said there could have been a breach of the state’s general duty to safeguard life because it could be argued there was a failure to establish and maintain adequate security arrangements at the Palace of Westminster.
“The carriage gates entrance had been recognised as a particularly vulnerable point,” Hough told the inquest, adding it was a position in need of armed protection. “It cannot be that it is unarguable that there was a means of ensuring that all or at least almost all of the time officers in this critical place were complying with their instruction,” Hough told the inquest. “The carriage gates entrance had been recognised as a particularly vulnerable point,” Hough told the inquest, adding it was a position in need of armed protection. “It cannot be that it is unarguable that there was a means of ensuring that all or at least almost all of the time officers in this critical place were complying with their instruction.”
Hough said there was a “real prospect” that had one or more of the armed officers been at the gates, one of them could have taken an “effective shot”.Hough said there was a “real prospect” that had one or more of the armed officers been at the gates, one of them could have taken an “effective shot”.
The article 2 obligation does not apply to Cochran, Rhodes, Frade or Cristea.The article 2 obligation does not apply to Cochran, Rhodes, Frade or Cristea.
Westminster attackWestminster attack
UK security and counter-terrorismUK security and counter-terrorism
Police
newsnews
Share on FacebookShare on Facebook
Share on TwitterShare on Twitter
Share via EmailShare via Email
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn
Share on PinterestShare on Pinterest
Share on Google+Share on Google+
Share on WhatsAppShare on WhatsApp
Share on MessengerShare on Messenger
Reuse this contentReuse this content