Grenfell Tower fire in North Kensington - news and discussion

[bimble]

Maybe they'll build some scaffolding round it or something to prop bits of it up and help access over the weeks of work that are coming.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Although that's obviously jumbled in the aftermath, as well as being the result of people seeking answers where none are being given, it's not a conspiracy to note that access for emergency vehicles was woefully inadequate at Grenfell. It's one of the things raised as a concern in the Grenfell blog from a couple of years ago. And early reports in the media noted that although some 40 fire tenders turned up, only 2 were initially able to operate, probably due to this lack of access. Do we have to wait 3 years for the inquiry to say this before we can say it without being accused of being conspiracy theorists?

And just how hard is it for the council to provide a fairly accurate estimate of the numbers living in that tower block, something they are refusing to do? When you have a situation being mismanaged like that I don't think you can blame the people for inventing their own answers, even if those answers are inaccurate. The council was given a chance to quell the emotiveness with hard facts and they refused to take it.

W

I think it's just the queens's job to do stuff like that tbh, such as it is. I doubt it was motivated by any desire to shaft anyone.

Seeing her today, you cannot doubt her sincerity. I have never seen her so sombre looking, even the RHA ride-past, a real favourite, barely engendered a smile.

 

[mauvais]

Ive been thinking about the possibility of a possible criminal conviction...i know others here are quite hot on law so would be curious if you have an opinion

my understanding so far is that no one will be convicted...i say this partially from my own experience in dealing with fire regulations in my own place of work. When Fire Regs people come around there is a legal basic limit of what has to be there, and everything on top is recommended, or advised, but not mandatory. The level of what becomes recommended as opposed to essential seems pretty wide and deep

I'm very much not a lawyer but the answer to this is a question: was anyone criminally negligent?

Did anyone in a position of responsibility have good reason to believe that there might be a significantly probable risk to life, and then failed to act on it? In terms of people in managerial or executive roles, that would expose them to the possibility of being prosecuted for corporate manslaughter.

Getting a conviction is difficult for a variety of reasons. In this case, I think the blog and the residents' prior actions behind it are the closest thing to compelling evidence to make a case against anyone. Possibly also the people involved in the construction, in their own separate way.

I think on balance it's probably unlikely that anyone will be convicted, but I wouldn't rule it out. Since 2007 it's also possible to convict a corporation itself, which may be more likely, but also practically pretty useless - a big fine.

 

[bi0boy]

Seeing her today, you cannot doubt her sincerity. I have never seen her so sombre looking, even the RHA ride-past, a real favourite, barely engendered a smile.

The Queen's Speech clashes with Royal Ascot and it's all Theresa May's fault.

 

[J Ed]

W


Seeing her today, you cannot doubt her sincerity. I have never seen her so sombre looking, even the RHA ride-past, a real favourite, barely engendered a smile.

She always looks miserable to me

 

[PaoloSanchez]

It's probably a good time for me to unwatch this thread for the moment and this may be my last comment. I only posted because I saw the Ishmahil video and he's somebody that I know and respect.

I didn't participate in the Manchester and London Bridge response threads either because I don't want to add to the negative vibe that seems to be associated with these kinds of reaction threads. People are understandably angry and saddened that this has happened, however in my opinion the memory of those that have died would be better served by us collectively responding in a calm and civilised manner and to put policies and procedures in place to prevent it from happening again.
I'm really not keen on the witch hunt and lynch mob mentality. We love to find somebody to blame, and while it is probably true that there were mistakes made by one or more individuals, ultimately we are all responsible for this tragedy. It is us who elect the officials who make the decisions, WE PUT THEM THERE. It is easy to look for scapegoats especially when it diverts the attention away from ourselves. I'm probably as anti-tory as you can get, but I don't think it's right to be shouting out "murderer".
As Akala said, it is up to us to organise ourselves properly and participate effectively in the whole decision making process so that we do have competent people in charge. Pointing the finger at others is a bit of a cop out in my opinion. If we want good people making decisions then we need to put them there in a civilised, orderly and well organised manner, not by burning down buildings or threatening behaviour, beating up on police etc.
We had the opportunity to elect a potentially more caring government and didn't do it. We will have other opportunities to try again, lets see what happens. I'm not saying that Jeremy Corbyn will fix everything overnight like a fairy godmother, but his moral compass is more aligned with where I'm at. I think that's enough of my ranting for the moment and I'll leave the thread with an example of the sort of vibe I'd like to see more of :-

 

[Lurdan]

Probably obvious, but from what I've read to date, the fire service's prohibitive concerns about structural integrity seem to be very different from concerns about the structural integrity of the whole thing. That is, more about a floor collapsing in any given area than the whole thing coming down.

That was what I drew from the last fire brigade press conference I saw yesterday. There was specific reference to the outer edges of the upper floors.

Mentioned on the BBC just now that the fire brigade is also concerned about vibrations from the railway but that this doesn't express a concern about the whole building coming down.

 

[Sasaferrato]

I'm very much not a lawyer but the answer to this is a question: was anyone criminally negligent?

Did anyone in a position of responsibility have good reason to believe that there might be a significantly probable risk to life, and then failed to act on it? In terms of people in managerial or executive roles, that would expose them to the possibility of being prosecuted for corporate manslaughter.

Getting a conviction is difficult for a variety of reasons. In this case, I think the blog and the residents' prior actions behind it are the closest thing to compelling evidence to make a case against anyone. Possibly also the people involved in the construction, in their own separate way.

I think on balance it's probably unlikely that anyone will be convicted, but I wouldn't rule it out. Since 2007 it's also possible to convict a corporation itself, which may be more likely, but also practically pretty useless - a big fine.

I'm not a lawyer either, but I would imagine that Corporate Manslaughter is not out of the question.

 

[bi0boy]

That was what I drew from the last fire brigade press conference I saw yesterday. There was specific reference to the outer edges of the upper floors.

Mentioned on the BBC just now that the fire brigade is also concerned about vibrations from the railway but that this doesn't express a concern about the whole building coming down.

The BBC were speculating, the Guardian quoted the LFB as saying the tube lines were closed due to the risk of debris falling on to the tracks.

 

[Sasaferrato]

She always looks miserable to me

So would I if I thought that I had to go on working until I die.

 

[ska invita]

I'm very much not a lawyer but the answer to this is a question: was anyone criminally negligent?

Did anyone in a position of responsibility have good reason to believe that there might be a significantly probable risk to life, and then failed to act on it? In terms of people in managerial or executive roles, that would expose them to the possibility of being prosecuted for corporate manslaughter.

Getting a conviction is difficult for a variety of reasons. In this case, I think the blog and the residents' prior actions behind it are the closest thing to compelling evidence to make a case against anyone. Possibly also the people involved in the construction, in their own separate way.

I think on balance it's probably unlikely that anyone will be convicted, but I wouldn't rule it out. Since 2007 it's also possible to convict a corporation itself, which may be more likely, but also practically pretty useless - a big fine.

agree, however it seems to me the legal defence "we did everything within the guidelines of the law" is a tight one...i would imagine that for a conviction there would have to be a direct contravention of a specific law??
Not sure if its worth pursuing this armchair legal speculation that far, but thought it worth bringing up

 

[DotCommunist]

she used to have a sly smile on the old 20 pound notes where the portrait was from her younger years.

 

[Casual Observer]

As well as not being a lawyer, I'm not a structural engineer either but Grenfell Tower has a concrete frame which is known for it's fire resistance qualities so is unlikely to collapse. The twin towers, which were built around the same time, were steel framed and thus more likely to buckle when exposed to extreme prolonged heat. That's my amateur assessment.

 

[alex_]

Pretty sure the Chief Executive isn't outsourced, and knows how to use a telephone and access the council's £150million+ reserve fund.

The problem is the only people who are left to help him spend it work for capita.

Alex

 

[gosub]

agree, however it seems to me the legal defence "we did everything within the guidelines of the law" is a tight one...i would imagine that for a conviction there would have to be a direct contravention of a specific law??
Not sure if its worth pursuing this armchair legal speculation that far, but thought it worth bringing up

no precedent is actually on spirit of the law not letter of the law

 

[ska invita]

no precedent is actually on spirit of the law not letter of the law

some small hope then, thanks

 

[mauvais]

agree, however it seems to me the legal defence "we did everything within the guidelines of the law" is a tight one...i would imagine that for a conviction there would have to be a direct contravention of a specific law??

Not really - there would just have to be overall negligence. An organisational culture of carelessness and poor risk management would be sufficient. Law rarely covers every specific scenario and eventuality, so inevitably much of it comes down to duty of care & reasonable behaviour/expectations.

Corporate manslaughter in English law - Wikipedia

Following R v. Prentice,[5] a breach of duty amounts to 'gross negligence' when there is:

... indifference to an obvious risk of injury to health; actual foresight of the risk coupled with the determination nevertheless to run it; appreciation of the risk coupled with an intention to avoid it but also coupled with such a high degree of negligence in the attempted avoidance as the jury consider justifies conviction, and inattention or failure to advert to a serious risk which goes 'beyond inadvertence' in respect of an obvious and important matter which the defendant's duty demanded he should address.

The Law Commission's 1996 report on involuntary manslaughter found that the gross negligence formula overcomes the problems of having to find one particular officer who has the mens rea for the offence and allows emphasis to be placed on the company’s attitude to safety.[6] This question would only arise where the company has chosen to enter a field of activity that carries a risk to others, such as transport, manufacture or medical care. The steps the company has taken to discharge the "duty of safety" and the systems devised for running its business, will be directly relevant.

 

[Mogden]

I'm inclined to believe Lily and her assertion that the final count will unfortunately be in 3 figures. My mate has said, again quite strong content:

Spoiler: Graphic

We just had one of the search officers in
They were up to the sixteenth floor
And the stairwells were full of bodies
There's going to be fucking hundreds of the poor fuckers

So I've no doubt they're currently downplaying numbers just because it shouldn't have happened and the sheer horror of it.

 

[Wilf]

I'm no expert - legal, structural, anything - but with regard to the sitting on reports, not learning the lessons of other fires at home and abroad, the cuts affecting fire service, impact of austerity on housing management and inspections, the chances of prosecution are NIL. Fucking hell, may hasn't even sacked that disgusting shit barwell.

 

[equationgirl]

I'm inclined to believe Lily and her assertion that the final count will unfortunately be in 3 figures. My mate has said, again quite strong content:

Spoiler: Graphic

We just had one of the search officers in
They were up to the sixteenth floor
And the stairwells were full of bodies
There's going to be fucking hundreds of the poor fuckers

So I've no doubt they're currently downplaying numbers just because it shouldn't have happened and the sheer horror of it.

Hope your mate is OK mogden, that is such a lot to deal with.

 

[killer b]

I'm inclined to believe Lily and her assertion that the final count will unfortunately be in 3 figures. My mate has said, again quite strong content:

Spoiler: Graphic

We just had one of the search officers in
They were up to the sixteenth floor
And the stairwells were full of bodies
There's going to be fucking hundreds of the poor fuckers

So I've no doubt they're currently downplaying numbers just because it shouldn't have happened and the sheer horror of it.

People keep reporting some chinese whisper stuff which could be real, or which could have been just made up from putting two and two together - I think it's pretty pointless reporting stuff you've been told by a friend of a friend, or an anonymous screenshot from someone you've never heard of on twitter unless you know you've spoken directly to someone who's been in there (tbh even then I don't think it's a good idea).

 

[Mogden]

Hope your mate is OK mogden, that is such a lot to deal with.

I've been reaching out to him all week. He's just there in an admin capacity and it's not sitting well with him as you can imagine. Goodness only knows how you do it if you're on the front line He does say the atmosphere in the office has been a collective one so all office politics and ill feeling have vanished for now.

 

[Mogden]

People keep reporting some chinese whisper stuff which could be real, or which could have been just made up from putting two and two together - I think it's pretty pointless reporting stuff you've been told by a friend of a friend, or an anonymous screenshot from someone you've never heard of on twitter unless you know you've spoken directly to someone who's been in there (tbh even then I don't think it's a good idea).

He works in the offices at LFS otherwise I'd not mention it. This kind of stuff will never reach the papers, certainly not yet, and he is a very trusted friend. In the interests of balance I'm letting people know that it looks like the whispers are more factually accurate than we are led to believe.

 

[Lurdan]

The BBC were speculating, the Guardian quoted the LFB as saying the tube lines were closed due to the risk of debris falling on to the tracks.

The two things are not necessarily in contradiction - I'd imagine that there are multiple safety concerns at play. I don't envy the people who have to carry out the shoring up work.

 

[bi0boy]

The two things are not necessarily in contradiction - I'd imagine that there are multiple safety concerns at play. I don't envy the people who have to carry out the shoring up work.

The tube lines were not closed due to a danger of the building collapsing. This has been stated by the LFB, so unless you think they are lying then it's down to baseless speculation by the BBC.

 

[xenon]

One thing I'd suggest to anyone heading to the local area is don't go with a big camera and don't take pictures in people's faces. It got very tense at times around people who were taking photos, to the point of violence (people grabbing cameras demanding they delete pics etc)

People doing that are fucking vultures.

 

[mauvais]

I didn't participate in the Manchester and London Bridge response threads either because I don't want to add to the negative vibe that seems to be associated with these kinds of reaction threads. People are understandably angry and saddened that this has happened, however in my opinion the memory of those that have died would be better served by us collectively responding in a calm and civilised manner and to put policies and procedures in place to prevent it from happening again.

This isn't mutually exclusive from holding people to account for their (in)actions - indeed the two are inevitably interwoven. Updated policies and procedures mean nothing without accountability for them.

I'm really not keen on the witch hunt and lynch mob mentality. We love to find somebody to blame, and while it is probably true that there were mistakes made by one or more individuals, ultimately we are all responsible for this tragedy. It is us who elect the officials who make the decisions, WE PUT THEM THERE. It is easy to look for scapegoats especially when it diverts the attention away from ourselves ... We had the opportunity to elect a potentially more caring government and didn't do it.

This in itself is nonsense and comes close to victim blaming, not to mention self-flagellation.

There is a good point in there somewhere and I'll make it for you: when a plane crashes, at least in British jurisdiction, the ensuing investigation deliberately avoids blame in the interests of future prevention. If you go in pointing fingers, the people with the most important evidence withhold vital information or even lie. It's crucially important that this doesn't happen. You can have an accident that consists in its practicalities entirely of basic human errors and is thus entirely preventable, but which simultaneously didn't involve malice or abject unreasonableness on anyone's part. Instead it can be something that's only enabled by the compound failure of systems and processes, and any resolution needs to recognise that in order to fix them, not pin the blame on the unfortunate meatsack that happened to be at the centre of it on that particular occasion.

So it is here. But it's also important that if good process based on prior lessons did already exist, or could have existed were it not for negligence, that someone be held accountable for their part in it. Otherwise you can have all the structural reform you can shake a stick at, but it's totally empty because noone ever need comply. Oh it's not your fault, we are all to blame. Sod that.

 

[bi0boy]

People keep reporting some chinese whisper stuff which could be real, or which could have been just made up from putting two and two together - I think it's pretty pointless reporting stuff you've been told by a friend of a friend, or an anonymous screenshot from someone you've never heard of on twitter unless you know you've spoken directly to someone who's been in there (tbh even then I don't think it's a good idea).

Right there we see 'full of' become 'hundreds'

 

[T & P]

According to the Mail, the Royal Family has been 'defiant' in the face of tragedy by going ahead with Brenda's birthday bash

 

[SpookyFrank]

It's probably a good time for me to unwatch this thread for the moment and this may be my last comment. I only posted because I saw the Ishmahil video and he's somebody that I know and respect.

I didn't participate in the Manchester and London Bridge response threads either because I don't want to add to the negative vibe that seems to be associated with these kinds of reaction threads. People are understandably angry and saddened that this has happened, however in my opinion the memory of those that have died would be better served by us collectively responding in a calm and civilised manner and to put policies and procedures in place to prevent it from happening again.
I'm really not keen on the witch hunt and lynch mob mentality. We love to find somebody to blame, and while it is probably true that there were mistakes made by one or more individuals, ultimately we are all responsible for this tragedy. It is us who elect the officials who make the decisions, WE PUT THEM THERE. It is easy to look for scapegoats especially when it diverts the attention away from ourselves. I'm probably as anti-tory as you can get, but I don't think it's right to be shouting out "murderer".
As Akala said, it is up to us to organise ourselves properly and participate effectively in the whole decision making process so that we do have competent people in charge. Pointing the finger at others is a bit of a cop out in my opinion. If we want good people making decisions then we need to put them there in a civilised, orderly and well organised manner, not by burning down buildings or threatening behaviour, beating up on police etc.
We had the opportunity to elect a potentially more caring government and didn't do it. We will have other opportunities to try again, lets see what happens. I'm not saying that Jeremy Corbyn will fix everything overnight like a fairy godmother, but his moral compass is more aligned with where I'm at. I think that's enough of my ranting for the moment and I'll leave the thread with an example of the sort of vibe I'd like to see more of :-

View attachment 109560

If you live in London you can choose between a tory council that will run down and clear out social housing or a labour council which will do the same. You can't lay these things at the door of ordinary people when you've got a broken system in which no democratic choice, no action permitted within that system will bring the changes needed.

E2a: and in somewhere like Kensington you've got to remember that every working class voter is up against however many mega-rich wankers who are not gonna give a shit about housing for the people who clean their houses and drive their cabs.