Terror victims' families must receive legal aid for inquests, says partner of London Bridge hero nurse
Government accused of 'double standards of the highest order' after using public money for own representation
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The partner of a nurse killed in the London Bridge attack has launched a campaign calling for families of terror victims to receive legal aid.
James Hodder, whose girlfriend Kirsty Boden was stabbed to death while trying to help injured people, said relatives of the eight victims had been refused financial help towards representation at inquests.
“The denial of funding is especially shocking considering every other public authority at this inquest had some of the UK's best barristers and solicitors representing them at the expense of the taxpayer,” he wrote in a petition. “Put simply, this is not a level playing field.”
Last week, the chief coroner of England and Wales stopped short of blaming police and MI5 for failing to prevent the London Bridge attack, despite families arguing that opportunities were missed.
Mr Hodder was represented pro bono by lawyers from Hogan Lovells at the inquest into the atrocity, which was one of four deadly terror attacks that struck the UK in 2017.
Relatives of the Westminster attack inquests were also refused legal aid and the same decision is expected for the upcoming Manchester bombing inquests.
“A coroner's inquest is vital to examine wider circumstances of the attack and find lessons that must be learnt to prevent future deaths - without representation, it would be impossible for families to properly engage in the process,” Mr Hodder said.
The accountant, from London, has launched a petition calling for the families of terror attack victims to automatically receive legal aid.
He highlighted a recent review by the Ministry of Justice that said the government was “determined to ensure that bereaved families are properly supported and able to participate in the inquest process”.
Mr Hodder wrote: “We couldn't agree more, and we call upon the government to review and update the funding for victims of terrorism to align to its own review.
“No family should have to face a battle for legal representation in these circumstances.In memory of Kirsty, we would like the Ministry of Justice's policy to change to ensure that it is the right of victims of terrorism.”
Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, previously wrote to the government on the issue and the city’s victims commissioner said the situation “beggars belief”.
Claire Waxman added: “The government is changing the goalposts when it comes to accessing this vital funding and support for these bereaved families, while using taxpayer funds to fund their own legal representation.
“It’s double standards of the highest order and it’s time the government put an end to this so that victims’ families have access to the legal support they deserve and need to help support their recovery.”
The “public interest test” applied by the Legal Aid Agency specifies that an inquest must be likely to provide significant benefit for a group of people, beyond victims’ relatives, for it to grant funds.
A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “Our recent legal aid review found representation for bereaved families is not necessary at the vast majority of inquests because the process is designed to establish the truth and learn lessons, rather than apportion blame in an adversarial way.
“Legal aid funding for inquests is available through an exceptional case funding scheme, with around two-thirds of those applications approved, and we’re also making changes to ensure there is more support for bereaved families.”
On Friday, chief coroner Mark Lucraft QC criticised the lack of security barriers on London Bridge as he concluded the eight victims were unlawfully killed.
But he found that missed opportunities by MI5 and police, who had been monitoring ringleader Khuram Butt for two years, could “not realistically have prevented the attack”.
Jurors were sworn in for a separate group of inquests into the deaths of the three attackers at the Old Bailey on Monday.
They will consider the deaths of the London Bridge and Borough Market attackers but have been told there is “no question of attributing blame” as the inquest got under way.
Butt, 27, Rachid Redouane, 30, and Youssef Zaghba, 22, were shot dead by armed police around 10 minutes after starting their rampage on 3 June 2017.
They ploughed a hired van into pedestrians on London Bridge before launching a stabbing attack around Borough Market, killing eight people and injuring 48 more.
“There is no question of attributing blame – an inquest is simply a way of establishing facts,” Mr Lucraft said in his opening remarks.
”You are not allowed to express an opinion on any other matters. You may not determine any criminal liability or question of civil liability.“
The inquests are not sitting on Tuesday and will resume on Wednesday.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments