Inquest verdict 'does not help prove crime was committed'
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 VERDICT of unlawful killing at yesterday's inquest has no legal implications in terms of helping to prove that a criminal offence has been committed, writes Jason Bennetto.
Any decision to bring a corporate manslaughter charge against the company involved will be made by the Director of Public Prosecutions. However, it is extremely difficult to bring a criminal charge against a corporate defendant because the prosecution has to show a single person was responsible at a sufficiently high level of seniority. This was one of the stumbling blocks in the unsuccessful prosecution following the capsize of the Herald of Free Enterprise in 1987.
Gareth Williams QC, the former Bar Council chairman, said: 'An inquest's . . . findings no longer have any direct legal implication in terms of crime.' They will, however, help victims' relatives obtain compensation.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments