Expert calls for new investigation into Bradford fire

Nigel Adams says is is ‘moralistically impossible’ not to reopen case in wake of new book

A leading fire investigator has called for the Bradfird fire case to be reopened in the wake of the release of a new book about the 1985 disaster. Photograph: PA
A leading fire investigator has called for the Bradfird fire case to be reopened in the wake of the release of a new book about the 1985 disaster. Photograph: PA

A leading fire investigator has described it as "moralistically impossible" that there is not a new investigation into the Bradford City fire in the wake of Martin Fletcher's book about the 1985 disaster.

Nigel Adams, the founder of Fire Investigation Services, said there were fundamental errors in the inquiry and Fletcher's book was "one of the best accounts of a fire, as seen from a victim's point of view, and as a piece of investigative writing, I have ever read".

Adams spent 30 years in the fire service, the last 12 of which were as a specialist investigator, and now works to educate police forces and fire professionals about the forensics of his industry. He agrees with Fletcher that the inquiry into Bradford, led by the judge Sir Oliver Popplewell, was inadequate and that there are many unanswered questions.

“In 1985 fire investigation in this country was in its infancy,” Adams said. “Some would say at that time most fire investigators were not much more than dust-kickers. Like all areas of forensic investigations, it has come on leaps and bounds. However, there is a lot in this book that troubles me about the science, or lack of it, used in the testing of the investigators’ hypothesis as to the source of the ignition.

READ SOME MORE

“The book also raises concerns about the speed of the inquiry and the fact that it commenced a few weeks after the fire and lasted for only a few days, whereas other inquiries into similar incidents, pre and post the Bradford fire, have taken years to come to fruition and months to be heard. The fact the inquiry also embraced the investigation into another incident which happened on the same day, a riot in which a young boy died at Birmingham City, makes it seem more frivolous.

“These days I lecture to students and professionals about fire investigation. I will recommend this book as essential reading and use it to set a project. That project will be entitled: ‘How would you conduct this investigation if this incident happened today?’ If the answer reflects the investigation which actually took place, the student will fail.”

Fletcher, who was at 12 at the time, escaped from the fire, but his brother, Andrew, was the youngest victim, aged 11. Their father, John, 34, uncle Peter, 32, and grandfather Eddie, 63, were among the 56 to die.

Fletcher’s book, 56 – The Story of the Bradford Fire, is the culmination of a 15-year investigation into the tragedy, leading the author to sacrifice his career as a tax accountant in pursuit of the truth. His evidence uncovered there had been at least eight major fires at other business premises either owned by or connected to the club’s chairman at the time, Stafford Heginbotham. Fletcher has asked why this was not investigated and Popplewell has admitted he had not known about these details when he chaired the inquiry.

“The book is written by a well-informed layman allowing anybody with an interest in this particular incident to read and understand the facts,” Adams said. “It is the remarkable story of a survivor of the incident and his troubled journey through his teens and young adulthood. It is the account of a man who is looking for answers, and to some extent finds them, but I don’t think it’s the end of his story, just the first instalment.

“I have read in some newspapers that he is being berated for his campaign to have a new inquiry. I don’t see that. There is no malicious vendetta, there is no over-exaggeration, there are no trumped-up facts. It is a simple account laid out for all to see. Fletcher has taken facts and presented them in such a way that it should make it moralistically impossible for this incident not to be looked at again.”

(Guardian Service)