At the first inquest into terrorist attack at Fishmongers’ Hall on November 29, 2019, a coroner’s jury returned a verdict that Saskia Jones and Jack Merritt were unlawfully killed. A separate inquest into the death of the terrorist, shot dead by police afterwards on London Bridge, is following.
On the final, 31st day of the inquest a statement was read that the attack was at an event at Fishmongers’ Hall in London; held for the five−year anniversary of Learning Together; part of the Institute of Criminology at the University of Cambridge, which brought together scholars and offenders. Jack was at the event as an employee of Cambridge University, and worked for Learning Together; Saskia was a researcher. An attendee of the event who was on licence having been convicted of an offence under the Terrorism Act 2000, armed with two knives, attacked.
A member of the jury then thanked “the astonishing individuals who put themselves in real danger to help, and our incredible emergency services for their response both that day and every day. Once again to the families , we are so incredibly sorry. The world lost two bright stars that dreadful day.”
The jury stated earlier that there was ‘omission or failure in the management’ of the terrorist as an offender in the community; and likewise ‘omission or failure’ by the Probation Service and others ‘in the sharing of information and guidance by agencies responsible for monitoring or investigation’ of the terrorist. As for the event venue, Fishmongers’ Hall, the jury also found ‘lack of communication and accountability, inadequate consideration of key guidance between parties’; again, ‘serious deficiencies in the management’ of the terrorist once out of jail, ‘and a failure to complete event−specific risk assessment’ by anyone.
The seven-week inquest ran at the Guildhall in the City of London, due to the covid pandemic, rather than at the more usual Old Bailey. In evidence the inquest heard – as leading counsel Jonathan Hough put it on May 25 – that an important aspect of the case was ‘whether enough was done to prevent’ the terrorist posing a danger to the public. Also important was that the two young people whose lives were cut short had ‘a profound commitment to the good of society’; and the bravery of members of the public in response – improvising weapons, such as a decorative pike, narwhal tusks, and a fire extinguisher, to fight the terrorist. The terrorist confronted a maintenance engineer and threatened him, forcing the engineer to use his key fob to let him out of the access-controlled building.
The public and the emergency services went to the aid of those injured, ‘including at a time when the scene was not known to be safe. The police responded to the emergency with speed’, and firearms officers dealt with the terrorist on London Bridge at close quarters, ‘when most or all thought that they may be dealing with an IED [improvised explosive device’. “Lives were saved as well as lost in this terrible attack.”
As for the terrorist – the inquest heard that he travelled unescorted from Stafford to London on the morning of the attack, having previously bought the knives and other things that he used, such as gaffer tape. It is thought that he put on the hoax IED belt he had made, in the train toilet.
The terrorist had been released from prison in December 2018 (even though, as the inquest heard, while in prison he was known to be a ‘radicaliser of others’ and had ‘expressed extremist views’).
Mr Hough said that it was ‘at least arguable’ that the State agencies responsible, ‘knew or ought to have known in autumn 2019 that he presented a risk to the lives of the public which was more than remote and was present and continuing’. For example, agencies were concerned enough in August 2019 to prevent him doing a dumper truck course to find construction sector work – presumably because it might equip him to carry out ‘vehicle as a weapon’ terrorism. At that same meeting, his visiting Fishmongers’ Hall was discussed. As the inquest heard, ‘decisions concerning the management’ of the terrorist were taken largely ‘in a multi−agency forum attended by the representatives of multiple agencies’.
Comments
For a statement from City of London Police Assistant Commissioner Alistair Sutherland, visit the force’s website. And for a statement from Learning Together co-founders and directors Dr Ruth Armstrong and Dr Amy Ludlow, who were among those giving evidence at the inquest, visit the Cambridge University website.
You can read the transcripts and other documentation of the inquest at https://fishmongershallinquests.independent.gov.uk/documents/.
More in the July 2021 print edition of Professional Security magazine.
