logo
More than 100 public servants who died in service awarded Elizabeth Emblem

More than 100 public servants who died in service awarded Elizabeth Emblem

Glasgow Timesa day ago
The award is the civilian equivalent of the Elizabeth Cross, which recognises members of the UK Armed Forces who died in action or as a result of a terrorist attack.
In the second list of Elizabeth Emblem recipients, some 106 police officers, firefighters, overseas workers and other public servants who died in service were recognised, with the award given to their next of kin.
Among the recipients is Metropolitan Police Constable Nina Mackay, who died aged 25 after being stabbed by a violent and mentally unstable man while searching a property in Stratford, East London in October 1997.
Her mother, Patricia Mackay, 80, said Nina had a 'great social conscience', adding 'everybody liked working with her because she was very hard working'.
She told the PA news agency: 'The Metropolitan Police have awarded her many accolades, and the commissioner at the time, just after she was killed, recommended her for the George Medal, which was turned down.
'So after all these years, there's actually something tactile that I can hold.'
Discussing the memorials to her daughter, Ms Mackay, who lives in Nairn, Scotland, said: 'She's got the Targa Boat on the Thames that's named after her, and that will be ongoing forever. The street where it happened was changed to Nina Mackay Close.
'There's been so much that I'm very grateful for, but this will actually be something tactile that I could hold to remind me what a brave young woman she was.'
Another recipient was school teacher Gwen Mayor, 45, who was killed in 1996 while protecting her pupils at Dunblane Primary School, Scotland, during a mass shooting.
Rod Mayor, whose teacher wife, Gwen, was killed in the Dunblane massacre, said the family was 'extremely proud' (Michael Stephens/PA)
In a statement provided by her husband, Rodney Mayor, who now lives in Cyprus, the Mayor family said they were 'extremely proud and honoured to be receiving this award on behalf of Gwen'.
They added: 'We always believed her actions that day deserved more recognition.
'You would have to have known Gwen to know that she would have done whatever trying to protect the children in her care. She paid the ultimate price for that commitment.
'Finally, we now feel that she has been honoured for what happened that day.'
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Pat McFadden said: 'We owe an enduring debt to the public servants who give their lives to protect others.
'The Elizabeth Emblem is a reminder not just of the ultimate price their loved ones have paid in service of our communities, it is a lasting symbol of our national gratitude for their incredible sacrifice.'
Firefighter John Liptrott, who died in 1968 while attempting to rescue three children who had entered a disused mineshaft, was also awarded the Emblem.
Another recipient was Police Constable Dennis Cowell, who died in the River Thames in 1965 after a police launch capsized following a collision between three boats.
Six people who contracted Covid-19 while working in healthcare were recognised in the list.
The Elizabeth Emblem is a national form of recognition awarded to the next of kin of police officers, firefighters, and other public servants who died in the line of duty (Cabinet Office/PA)
These included Dr Poornima Nair Balupuri, a GP living in Bishop Auckland, Co Durham, who died in 2020 doing frontline work.
Some 33 people on the list were police officers and firefighters based in Northern Ireland, including Constable Cyril Wilson, who was shot by the IRA in an ambush in 1974.
Reserve Constable Robert Struthers, who died in 1978 while serving in the Royal Ulster Constabulary, was also awarded the Emblem – he was shot by two members of the Provisional IRA while working in his office.
The design of the Elizabeth Emblem incorporates a rosemary wreath, a traditional symbol of remembrance, which surrounds the Tudor Crown.
It is inscribed with 'For A Life Given In Service' and will have the name of the person for whom it is in memoriam inscribed on the reverse of the Emblem.
The Emblem will also include a pin to allow the award to be worn on clothing by the next of kin of the deceased.
Families and next of kin of those who have died in public service are able to apply for an Elizabeth Emblem by making an application to the Cabinet Office.
The Elizabeth Emblem is awarded to the next of kin of a person who was employed in a role based on the source of a commission on behalf of, or formally funded by, an eligibility body.
An eligible body is defined as the UK Government, the Scottish Government, the Welsh Government, the Northern Ireland Executive, local government, a Crown Dependency or a British Overseas Territory.
The award of the Elizabeth Emblem is retrospective to 1948 and mirrors the eligibility criteria for the Elizabeth Cross.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Palestine Action terror ban comes into force after late-night legal action fails
Palestine Action terror ban comes into force after late-night legal action fails

The Herald Scotland

timean hour ago

  • The Herald Scotland

Palestine Action terror ban comes into force after late-night legal action fails

The move to ban the organisation was announced after two Voyager aircraft were damaged at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire on June 20, an incident claimed by Palestine Action, which police said caused around £7 million worth of damage. Proscribing the group under anti-terror laws makes membership of, or support for, the direct action group a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison (Lucy North/PA) In response to the ban, a group of around 20 people are set to gather and sit in front of the Gandhi statue in London's Parliament Square on Saturday afternoon, according to campaign group Defend Our Juries. They will hold signs saying: 'I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.' The newly proscribed group lost a late-night Court of Appeal challenge on Friday to temporarily stop it being banned, less than two hours before the move came into force at midnight. Earlier that day Huda Ammori, the group's co-founder, unsuccessfully asked the High Court to temporarily block the Government from designating the group as a terrorist organisation, before a potential legal challenge against the decision to proscribe it under the Terrorism Act 2000. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes was 'disgraceful' and that the group had a 'long history of unacceptable criminal damage'. MPs in the Commons voted 385 to 26, majority 359, in favour of proscribing the group on Wednesday, before the House of Lords backed the move without a vote on Thursday. Four people – Amy Gardiner-Gibson, 29, Jony Cink, 24, Daniel Jeronymides-Norie, 36, and Lewis Chiaramello, 22 – have all been charged in connection with the incident. They appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court on Thursday after being charged with conspiracy to enter a prohibited place knowingly for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the United Kingdom, and conspiracy to commit criminal damage, under the Criminal Law Act 1977. Lawyers for Ms Ammori took her case to the Court of Appeal on Friday evening, and in a decision given at around 10.30pm, refused to grant the temporary block. Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, made a bid to have the case certified as a 'point of general public importance' to allow a Supreme Court bid, but the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr said they would not get to the Supreme Court before midnight. The judge added that any application should be made before 4pm on Monday and refused a bid to pause the ban coming into effect pending any Supreme Court bid. Protesters gathered outside the Royal Courts of Justice on Friday (Lucy North/PA) In an 11-page written judgment, Baroness Carr, Lord Justice Lewis and Lord Justice Edis said: 'The role of the court is simply to interpret and apply the law. 'The merits of the underlying decision to proscribe a particular group is not a matter for the court…Similarly, it is not a matter for this court to express any views on whether or not the allegations or claims made by Palestine Action are right or wrong.' They also said: 'People may only be prosecuted and punished for acts they engaged in after the proscription came into force.' In his decision refusing the temporary block, High Court judge Mr Justice Chamberlain said: 'I have concluded that the harm which would ensue if interim relief is refused but the claim later succeeds is insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force.' Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, for Ms Ammori, told the Court of Appeal that the judge wrongly decided the balance between the interests of her client and the Home Office when deciding whether to make the temporary block. She said: 'The balance of convenience on the evidence before him, in our respectful submission, fell in favour of the claimant having regard to all of the evidence, including the chilling effect on free speech, the fact that people would be criminalised and criminalised as terrorists for engaging in protest that was not violent, for the simple fact that they were associated with Palestine Action.' She also told the Court of Appeal that Mr Justice Chamberlain 'failed properly to consider' that banning the group 'would cause irreparable harm'. Ms Ni Ghralaigh said: 'There was significant evidence before him to demonstrate the chilling effect of the order because it was insufficiently clear.' She continued that the ban would mean 'a vast number of individuals who wished to continue protesting would fall foul of the proscription regime due to its lack of clarity'. Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, told the Court of Appeal that Mr Justice Chamberlain gave a 'detailed and careful judgment' and that the judge was 'alive' to the possible impacts of the ban, including the potential 'chilling effect' on free speech.

Palestine Action terror ban comes into force after late-night legal action fails
Palestine Action terror ban comes into force after late-night legal action fails

South Wales Argus

timean hour ago

  • South Wales Argus

Palestine Action terror ban comes into force after late-night legal action fails

It makes membership of, or support for, the direct action group a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. The move to ban the organisation was announced after two Voyager aircraft were damaged at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire on June 20, an incident claimed by Palestine Action, which police said caused around £7 million worth of damage. Proscribing the group under anti-terror laws makes membership of, or support for, the direct action group a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison (Lucy North/PA) In response to the ban, a group of around 20 people are set to gather and sit in front of the Gandhi statue in London's Parliament Square on Saturday afternoon, according to campaign group Defend Our Juries. They will hold signs saying: 'I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.' The newly proscribed group lost a late-night Court of Appeal challenge on Friday to temporarily stop it being banned, less than two hours before the move came into force at midnight. Earlier that day Huda Ammori, the group's co-founder, unsuccessfully asked the High Court to temporarily block the Government from designating the group as a terrorist organisation, before a potential legal challenge against the decision to proscribe it under the Terrorism Act 2000. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes was 'disgraceful' and that the group had a 'long history of unacceptable criminal damage'. MPs in the Commons voted 385 to 26, majority 359, in favour of proscribing the group on Wednesday, before the House of Lords backed the move without a vote on Thursday. Four people – Amy Gardiner-Gibson, 29, Jony Cink, 24, Daniel Jeronymides-Norie, 36, and Lewis Chiaramello, 22 – have all been charged in connection with the incident. They appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court on Thursday after being charged with conspiracy to enter a prohibited place knowingly for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the United Kingdom, and conspiracy to commit criminal damage, under the Criminal Law Act 1977. Lawyers for Ms Ammori took her case to the Court of Appeal on Friday evening, and in a decision given at around 10.30pm, refused to grant the temporary block. Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, made a bid to have the case certified as a 'point of general public importance' to allow a Supreme Court bid, but the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr said they would not get to the Supreme Court before midnight. The judge added that any application should be made before 4pm on Monday and refused a bid to pause the ban coming into effect pending any Supreme Court bid. Protesters gathered outside the Royal Courts of Justice on Friday (Lucy North/PA) In an 11-page written judgment, Baroness Carr, Lord Justice Lewis and Lord Justice Edis said: 'The role of the court is simply to interpret and apply the law. 'The merits of the underlying decision to proscribe a particular group is not a matter for the court…Similarly, it is not a matter for this court to express any views on whether or not the allegations or claims made by Palestine Action are right or wrong.' They also said: 'People may only be prosecuted and punished for acts they engaged in after the proscription came into force.' In his decision refusing the temporary block, High Court judge Mr Justice Chamberlain said: 'I have concluded that the harm which would ensue if interim relief is refused but the claim later succeeds is insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force.' Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, for Ms Ammori, told the Court of Appeal that the judge wrongly decided the balance between the interests of her client and the Home Office when deciding whether to make the temporary block. She said: 'The balance of convenience on the evidence before him, in our respectful submission, fell in favour of the claimant having regard to all of the evidence, including the chilling effect on free speech, the fact that people would be criminalised and criminalised as terrorists for engaging in protest that was not violent, for the simple fact that they were associated with Palestine Action.' She also told the Court of Appeal that Mr Justice Chamberlain 'failed properly to consider' that banning the group 'would cause irreparable harm'. Ms Ni Ghralaigh said: 'There was significant evidence before him to demonstrate the chilling effect of the order because it was insufficiently clear.' She continued that the ban would mean 'a vast number of individuals who wished to continue protesting would fall foul of the proscription regime due to its lack of clarity'. Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, told the Court of Appeal that Mr Justice Chamberlain gave a 'detailed and careful judgment' and that the judge was 'alive' to the possible impacts of the ban, including the potential 'chilling effect' on free speech.

Palestine Action terror ban comes into force after late-night legal action fails
Palestine Action terror ban comes into force after late-night legal action fails

Western Telegraph

timean hour ago

  • Western Telegraph

Palestine Action terror ban comes into force after late-night legal action fails

It makes membership of, or support for, the direct action group a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. The move to ban the organisation was announced after two Voyager aircraft were damaged at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire on June 20, an incident claimed by Palestine Action, which police said caused around £7 million worth of damage. Proscribing the group under anti-terror laws makes membership of, or support for, the direct action group a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison (Lucy North/PA) In response to the ban, a group of around 20 people are set to gather and sit in front of the Gandhi statue in London's Parliament Square on Saturday afternoon, according to campaign group Defend Our Juries. They will hold signs saying: 'I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.' The newly proscribed group lost a late-night Court of Appeal challenge on Friday to temporarily stop it being banned, less than two hours before the move came into force at midnight. Earlier that day Huda Ammori, the group's co-founder, unsuccessfully asked the High Court to temporarily block the Government from designating the group as a terrorist organisation, before a potential legal challenge against the decision to proscribe it under the Terrorism Act 2000. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes was 'disgraceful' and that the group had a 'long history of unacceptable criminal damage'. MPs in the Commons voted 385 to 26, majority 359, in favour of proscribing the group on Wednesday, before the House of Lords backed the move without a vote on Thursday. Four people – Amy Gardiner-Gibson, 29, Jony Cink, 24, Daniel Jeronymides-Norie, 36, and Lewis Chiaramello, 22 – have all been charged in connection with the incident. They appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court on Thursday after being charged with conspiracy to enter a prohibited place knowingly for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the United Kingdom, and conspiracy to commit criminal damage, under the Criminal Law Act 1977. Lawyers for Ms Ammori took her case to the Court of Appeal on Friday evening, and in a decision given at around 10.30pm, refused to grant the temporary block. Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, made a bid to have the case certified as a 'point of general public importance' to allow a Supreme Court bid, but the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr said they would not get to the Supreme Court before midnight. The judge added that any application should be made before 4pm on Monday and refused a bid to pause the ban coming into effect pending any Supreme Court bid. Protesters gathered outside the Royal Courts of Justice on Friday (Lucy North/PA) In an 11-page written judgment, Baroness Carr, Lord Justice Lewis and Lord Justice Edis said: 'The role of the court is simply to interpret and apply the law. 'The merits of the underlying decision to proscribe a particular group is not a matter for the court…Similarly, it is not a matter for this court to express any views on whether or not the allegations or claims made by Palestine Action are right or wrong.' They also said: 'People may only be prosecuted and punished for acts they engaged in after the proscription came into force.' In his decision refusing the temporary block, High Court judge Mr Justice Chamberlain said: 'I have concluded that the harm which would ensue if interim relief is refused but the claim later succeeds is insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force.' Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, for Ms Ammori, told the Court of Appeal that the judge wrongly decided the balance between the interests of her client and the Home Office when deciding whether to make the temporary block. She said: 'The balance of convenience on the evidence before him, in our respectful submission, fell in favour of the claimant having regard to all of the evidence, including the chilling effect on free speech, the fact that people would be criminalised and criminalised as terrorists for engaging in protest that was not violent, for the simple fact that they were associated with Palestine Action.' She also told the Court of Appeal that Mr Justice Chamberlain 'failed properly to consider' that banning the group 'would cause irreparable harm'. Ms Ni Ghralaigh said: 'There was significant evidence before him to demonstrate the chilling effect of the order because it was insufficiently clear.' She continued that the ban would mean 'a vast number of individuals who wished to continue protesting would fall foul of the proscription regime due to its lack of clarity'. Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, told the Court of Appeal that Mr Justice Chamberlain gave a 'detailed and careful judgment' and that the judge was 'alive' to the possible impacts of the ban, including the potential 'chilling effect' on free speech.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store