MoD ‘dishonest' to call 1994 Chinook crash an accident, say families
All 25 passengers – made up of personnel from MI5, the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the British Army – were killed, along with the helicopter's four crew members.
The families of those who died said earlier this month that they were beginning legal action against the Ministry of Defence (MoD) for not ordering a public inquiry.
They want a High Court judge to be able to review information which they say was not included in previous investigations, and which they believe will shed new light on the airworthiness of the helicopter.
The families, who have coalesced into the Chinook Justice Campaign, said failing to order a public inquiry is a breach of the UK Government's human rights obligations.
An MoD spokesperson said: 'The Mull of Kintyre crash was a tragic accident, and our thoughts and sympathies remain with the families, friends and colleagues of all those who died.
'We have received a pre-action protocol letter from the Chinook Justice Campaign and are considering our response. Therefore, it would be inappropriate to comment further.'
Solicitor Mark Stephens, who is representing the families, said: 'The statements issued by the Ministry of Defence in recent days are so blatantly at odds with the facts as we now know them that they have caused immense upset to the families and cast a further cruel and disgraceful shadow on this ongoing travesty of justice.
'We know that the RAF helicopter carrying the 29 service personnel who were killed, serving their country, had been grounded because of fatal flaws in the software on board.
'For the MoD to claim that this was a 'tragic accident' flies in the face of the facts and is blatantly and disgracefully at odds with the truth.
'It is nothing short of dishonest, deceitful and disingenuous and we demand a retraction.'
The families have also called for the release of documents that were sealed at the time of the crash for 100 years, something revealed in a BBC documentary last year.
The MoD has said that records held in the National Archives contain personal information and early release of those documents would breach their data protection rights.
Mr Stephens said: 'For the Government to believe that data protection laws were designed to protect someone who is living – and who may have made a dreadful decision that night – rather than the truth emerging over 29 service personnel who were killed in an unairworthy aircraft, is a total abomination.
'This decision must be overturned, these files must be seen by a judge, and we will fight this in court if necessary.'
Niven Phoenix, a commercial pilot whose father Ian was one of the senior RUC officers killed in the crash, said: 'This was about as far from a tragic accident as you could get. Locking the files away until we are all dead proves there is a cover-up about something.
'The MoD's statement that these files have been sealed to protect third party interests is yet another disingenuous, distasteful and outright dishonest assertion designed to hide the truth using data protection laws which only came into force in the UK long after the crash.
'The Government would prefer for all the children of the Chinook victims to die like their parents rather than provide access, answers and take accountability for past mistakes. This is not the duty of candour promised by Keir Starmer in his election manifesto.'
Following the crash, the Chinook's pilots, Flight Lieutenants Richard Cook and Jonathan Tapper, were accused of gross negligence, but this verdict was overturned by the UK Government 17 years later, following a campaign by the families.
A subsequent review by Lord Philip set out 'numerous concerns' raised by those who worked on the Chinooks, with the MoD's testing centre at Boscombe Down in Wiltshire declaring the Chinook Mk2 helicopters 'unairworthy' prior to the crash.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
an hour ago
- Scottish Sun
How Rachel Reeves will RUIN British horse racing for millions of fans in her desperation to increase taxes
The Racing Tax will put the sport's British success story in grave danger NICK TIMOTHY How Rachel Reeves will RUIN British horse racing for millions of fans in her desperation to increase taxes Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) AFTER increasing spending by EIGHT times more than she promised, Rachel Reeves has created a huge, £51billion black hole in the public finances – and she's going to make YOU pay the price for her failure. In the Budget this year, we are going to see record tax rises — and among the ideas in the Treasury is a new Racing Tax. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 3 Horseracing supports rural communities and towns all over Britain Credit: Alamy 3 Chancellor Rachel Reeves has created a huge, £51billion black hole in the public finances Credit: Reuters 3 A bookmaker pictured at Royal Ascot in 2022 Credit: Getty Horseracing is the second-largest spectator sport, with five million people watching every year across 59 courses. It generates £4.1billion for the economy and backs 85,000 jobs. We have the best horses, the best trainers and four of the top ten races in the world. It supports rural communities and towns all over Britain, including West Suffolk, home to the Newmarket racecourses, which I'm proud to represent in Parliament. But the Racing Tax will put this British success story in grave danger. Right now, bookies pay a 15 per cent tax rate on racing, but Labour's plan to combine all online gambling taxes into a single rate could increase it to 21 per cent. 'Mindless free-for-all' Because racing is also subject to the Betting Levy, ministers would put racing at a competitive disadvantage against the most addictive kinds of online gaming. It could mean £330million of lost revenue for racing in just the first five years, and put 2,752 jobs at risk in the first year. This would lead to higher prices and less racing because of lost income. This proves Labour doesn't understand racing at all. Punters who follow the horses, on the whole, tend to be more selective and use their knowledge, judgment and skills when placing their bets at the bookies, on the course or online. British Horse Racing to Strike for the First Time: Industry Unites Against Betting Tax Hike Plus there are only so many races that you can put money on. But online gambling is a mindless free-for-all and incredibly addictive. There is simply no reason why horseracing should be treated in the same way. Yet, in the desperation to increase taxes, racing — and millions of racing fans — will suffer. Some assume racing has the cash to spare, but this is not true at all. While the industry is very valuable to the economy, its profit margins are tight for breeders and trainers. They invest a lot, but don't always see a return. We are already at risk of falling behind global competitors — such as France — because we are breeding fewer thoroughbred horses. But our racing industry isn't taking this lying down. On September 10, the day before the St Leger festival at Doncaster, no races will take place in Britain. Everyone in the industry knows the financing of horseracing needs reform. Nick Timothy The four race meetings at Lingfield Park, Carlisle, Uttoxeter and Kempton Park will be cancelled. The industry is taking a financial hit to prove its point. Usually, races are only cancelled because of awful weather, equine virus outbreaks or national crises. But the whole industry, from owners to trainers to jockeys, is standing together to protest against Labour's plans. It will be the first time in the sport's modern history that the industry will voluntarily refuse to hold races. Together, they will head to Westminster and make their voices heard. Everyone in the industry knows the financing of horseracing needs reform. Australia and France give horseracing a lot more government support through direct funding or betting taxes than us. Private investors have deeper pockets in the USA and Japan. Prize money is more modest in Britain — which means races in places like the Middle East might become more appealing to owners and trainers than races at home. But the industry keeps getting punished. No progress has been made on reforming the Horserace Betting Levy, which provides a third of the industry's income. 'Nobody has any fun' Affordability checks have been introduced for anyone betting more than £150 on racing within 30 days, driving customers away and costing £3billion in lost turnover in just two years. Labour ministers keep offering us warm words, but fail to deliver. The Racing Tax is the last straw. Opposing Labour's tax plans does not mean we don't want change. The Horserace Betting Levy can be improved by applying it to bookies' total turnover rather than just their profits. It could cover bets placed on overseas races so long as the bookies are based in Britain. The rate could be raised above ten per cent. This would be done to the benefit of the industry and punters alike. There is also more the sport can do to modernise and increase revenue. But the Racing Tax is classic Labour — faceless bureaucrats interfering with people's lives, undermining a successful industry and making sure nobody has any fun. They just don't understand how the economy works, which is why they are killing it with more tax and regulation. We should all stand with horseracing to protect this vital but endangered industry.
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Does no one care about Britain's soaring gilts?
The Chancellor Rachel Reeves is threatening a round of tax rises. RMT is on strike over the bank holiday. And something or other is going on with Masterchef. As the summer unfolds, British domestic politics is worrying about all its familiar issues. In the background, however, something far more serious is happening. The country is going quietly broke, and hardly anyone cares. On the bond markets, the yield on the UK's 30-year gilt rose yesterday to 5.6 per cent, overtaking the equivalent US yield for the first time in a generation, and approaching its highest level since 1998. The 30-year yield is significant, because it represents investors' views of the long-term solvency of the British state. It is a judgement on whether the money you lend to the government now will be returned in 2055 and whether the interest will be paid in the meantime. And while the answer to that is still 'yes', it is a far less definite 'yes' than it has been at any time over the course of this century. It is fast getting close to the level where it is more like a 'well, maybe'. It is not just 30-year debt. The yield on benchmark 10-year gilts has been soaring as well, rising to 4.7 per cent. It is above the level that provoked the meltdown in the wake of Liz Truss's mini-budget back in 2023, when it spiked up to 4.3 per cent, a level that, at least according to every Labour front-bencher, 'crashed the economy'. That matters, for two reasons. First, we are already spending vast amounts of money servicing our debt. According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, over the course of this financial year, the UK will spend £111 billion on debt servicing alone, or 8.3 per cent of total public spending. As the debt becomes more expensive, and as it has to be refinanced, that figure will only grow and grow. Very soon the Chancellor will be raising our taxes not to pay for more hospitals, or better schools, but simply to pay the interest on our outstanding debt. The rising yield also reflects a consensus view that the British government has lost control of its finances, and once the markets have formed that opinion it will be very hard to get investors to change their minds. The harsh reality is this. If the 30-year yield goes above 6 per cent, Britain is almost certainly broke. We have not quite got there yet, but we are getting dangerously close. When it happens, no one can say they weren't warned.
Metro
2 hours ago
- Metro
Woman sexually assaulted on a plane denied compensation because of loophole
A woman who was sexually assaulted on a flight to the UK can't be compensated due to a legal loophole. Kelly – who is using a fake name for anonymity – was attacked on a Qatar Airways flight from Doha, Qatar, to Gatwick in September last year. Momade Jussab, 66, of Feltham, was sitting next to her and put his hands down her trousers. He was arrested at Gatwick and jailed in May. Kelly, who was 24 at the time of the attack, has been denied a payout under the Criminal Injuries Compensation (CIC) scheme. Officials said that because the incident happened on a plane not registered in Britain, Kelly cannot make a claim. Her lawyers have written to the justice secretary, Shabana Mahmood, urging her to close what they believe is a gap in the law. Kelly, a Londoner in her 20s, told the BBC that Jussab pulled a second blanket over them both as she slept. She said: 'His hands were down my trousers and I said to him, 'What are you doing?' I said, 'Stop'. He said, 'No, please'. 'And I had to force his hand out of my trousers and that just made me get up straight away. I left my phone, I left my bag, I left my passport, I left everything. I left my shoes and ran into the toilet, left the door open [and] told the flight attendant.' Kelly said she should be entitled to compensation as the incident was investigated and prosecuted by the British authorities. 'I haven't been out in almost a year – to events or summer parties with my friends. I can't do that. I'm too scared,' she added. 'I don't want to be touched or looked at. So it's never leaving me. It's literally there every single day before I sleep, I'm thinking about what happened.' The CIC scheme provides compensation for people 'physically or mentally injured because of a violent crime in England, Scotland or Wales', according to its website. Kelly applied for the payout in April, only to receive a letter from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority, which processes applications, denying the claim as it did not happen in a 'relevant place'. Such a 'place' is defined by section 92 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982, which concerns 'British-controlled aircraft'. As the incident happened on a Qatari-registered plane, officials told Kelly, she was ineligible for compensation. Leigh Day says that the law was updated in 1966 to allow crimes that occur on UK-bound foreign aircraft to be prosecuted in British courts. Yet a near-identical loophole in the compensation scheme has not been closed. Solicitor Claire Powell said: 'Our client suffered a horrific sexual attack on a UK-bound flight. 'She was refused compensation under the Criminal Injuries Compensation scheme simply because it was a foreign flight and the rules have not been amended in line with the updates to the Civil Aviation Act. 'It is a gap that needs closing urgently and we trust the Justice Secretary will agree, particularly in light of this Government's commitment to addressing violence against women and girls.' Jussab was jailed for six and a half years as part of an extended sentence in May for one count of sexual assault by penetration and two counts of sexual assault. In-flight sexual assault incidents have been rising for years – in the US, the FBI investigated 27 sexual misconduct cases aboard aircraft in 2018. More Trending By 2022, that number had more than tripled to 90 cases. A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: 'Our thoughts remain with this victim, and we remain resolute in our mission to halve violence against women and girls in a decade. 'The rules that the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority follows, and the values of payments for injuries, are set by Parliament. 'Other routes are available for victims to receive support.' Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: EasyJet pilot suspended after walking 'drunk and naked' around five star hotel MORE: Airspace closure that grounded over 120 flights caused by 'software collapse' MORE: London airspace closure: Your rights if your flight is delayed or cancelled
