Should The Senior Officers Of The London Fire Brigade Be Prosecuted?

[anotheoldgit]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grenfell-tower-fire-brigade-report-public-inquiry-prosecution-a9177686.html

[Zacs-Master]

Absoloutly not. Nor should they resign. The guidelines regarding evacuation were based on the facts and projected scenarios at the time (and wholly, I suspect, on INTERNAL fires only not the possibility of the external cladding burning and spreading the fire at an exponentially faster rate).

There's now a classic retrospective / hindsight forensic picking apart of the Fire Brigades actions for a scenario which they never anticipated. Very unfair IMO.

[naomi24]

No.

[vulcan42]

Totally agree Zacs, as been said this inquiry has been done backwards. The manufactures of this cladding, the designers and builders should be on trial, not the Fire Brigade.

[anotheoldgit]

They made the correct decision in telling the residents to stay put then?

[ummmm]

The correct decision on the information they had.

[Zacs-Master]

Absolutely.

[Ken4155]

I don't believe they should. However, what is needed is a major rethink on Standard Operating Procedures. The present SOPs are perhaps fine in a situation where there are sprinklers and several stairwells down which to escape. However, the decision to change tack to deal with any unexpected occurrences (such as the highly combustible cladding) should be left to those on the ground.

[spathiphyllum]

Fact is shortcomings on behalf of the fire service have been revealed. Who is responsible for these shortcomings should maybe be assessed.

Ultimately, they told people to "stay put" in a death trap, which was clearly evident from approach.

Yes, this should not be swept under the carpet simply because they're fire fighter's in the public sector and people feel they should be respected and thanked.

It is not a thankless task, they're constantly being praised.

Something goes tragically wrong and out comes that carpet.

[spathiphyllum]

I can't imagine there being a fire going on around a building and people telling someone to stay put. Makes zero sense whatever information they were given.

If a building is on fire, you get out. Basic knowledge.

[andy-hughes]

I am not minded to support prosecution for people doing their jobs as advised based on available information at the time.

As pointed out, 20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing, but it's not a basis for legal action.

[spathiphyllum]

the information they had:

"The building is on fire"

.....


Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that people should be evacuated.

[spathiphyllum]

Maybe if after you got literally told to stay put by a fire authoritarian figure, then watched your OH burn in the fire, you'd also want someone to be responsible.

[ummmm]

You wouldn't watch someone burn. Most people die of smoke inhalation.

[albaqwerty]

the installers and signing off of the cladding should be prosecuted, not the fire-fighters.

[spathiphyllum]

I'm sure that makes a lot of difference for that person told to stay put, to then watch their OH die.

[Old_Geezer]

Incorrect decision in hindsight. But probably the best known at the time.
I'm unsure what all this blame passing is meant to achieve apart from more ill feeling. If improvements can be made for the future, so be it.

[ummmm]

Spath...In your made up scenario the spouse would probably be dead too.

[Zacs-Master]

'Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that people should be evacuated.'

But the action plan was based on evidence that people are more likely to survive in a NORMAL tower block fire if they stay put. By the time the FB were alerted, the fire was raging and it would have been riduculous to have countermanded the action plan.

[Zacs-Master]

ridiculous

[spathiphyllum]

That's what happens when you blindly follow authoritarian figures.

Always do what you personally think is best.