On 16 Dec 2009 at 1:10pm Prick Stein wrote:
Nathan Winter just been found guilty. A stitch up again me thinks!
On 16 Dec 2009 at 1:22pm Observer wrote:
You are clearly biased....
On 16 Dec 2009 at 1:26pm tom wrote:
its was the fire brigde that was guily in my eyes
On 16 Dec 2009 at 1:34pm Prick Stein wrote:
I agree with Tom
On 16 Dec 2009 at 2:28pm Curious wrote:
Just watched the lunchtime news.It showed the video that was taken of the fire and explosions and the firemen wandering about thinking it was all over.
The small box was clearly in view and was full of 'banned' fireworks.
It was very sad knowing what was about to happen...Then the film stopped just before the box went up.
Did the firemen not know what was in the box? I thought someone said they did....
Full story and sentences will be on tonights news.
On 16 Dec 2009 at 2:35pm ere be monsters wrote:
Did it actually say you could see the container?
On 16 Dec 2009 at 2:43pm Another firework maker wrote:
I run a very similar business to the Winter's, and what bothers me is the way the fire brigade seem to be escaping any share of the blame.
We do our best to stay within the law, but that is not always easy, and there are some very grey areas, especially when goods are being packed for shipment - as in the Winter's case.
We have agreed response plans with the emergency services that explicitly say that in the event of a fire, the fire brigade are to evacuate the area and let it burn; but when when smoke was reported coming from a place down the road, and they mistook the location for ours, we found the fire brigade crawling all over our magazines...
The fire brigade photgraphers who died were behaving like kids in a sweetshop, and had no reason to be anywhere close to the action - they should have learned from the Enschede disaster, when fire brigade photographers were also killed.
This was a tragic event, but the Winters cannot be held entirely to blame.
On 16 Dec 2009 at 2:52pm Banshee wrote:
I feel sorry for the families of the firemen but they should never have been anywhere near the place and whoever gave them the order to go in should also be blamed.
On 16 Dec 2009 at 2:56pm ere be monsters wrote:
There have been several of us saying exactly the same, it is the fire brigade's actions that ultimatly caused the death of those two firemen.
On 16 Dec 2009 at 2:59pm Curious wrote:
Watch the local news tonight and you will see what I mean.
The firemen were walking about and the fire was under control.The box was clearly in sight.I think it was one of the guys that died who was filming on a video camera.
One firefighter walked right in front of the box before it exploded.They apparently didn't know what the box contained.....
On 16 Dec 2009 at 3:09pm ? wrote:
Curious, do you know anything about Pyrotechnics ? Certain category fireworks are 'banned' from the general public, but not from professional companies. You are implying that they were storing fireworks that were 'banned' by the law. They do say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing and they are right.
On 16 Dec 2009 at 3:37pm Curious. wrote:
That is what they said on the news.
No.I didn't know that.Perhaps the news should state that too.
On 16 Dec 2009 at 3:47pm Anon wrote:
I think it's time everyone shut up and gave it a rest on this subject. There are family members from both sides of this terrible accident and the last thing they need is people making this subject open for nasty vile and judgemental comments. 3 families out there who have lost their husbands, 2 to a tragic accident and the other will be serving time with his son. Please just let this settle now because the pain that these families must be going through has to be every ones worst nightmare.
On 16 Dec 2009 at 3:51pm ere be monsters wrote:
What are the nasty and vile comments?
On 16 Dec 2009 at 3:53pm Anon wrote:
Read all threads concerning this matter !!!!
On 16 Dec 2009 at 3:58pm ere be monsters wrote:
Nothing specific then, another sweeping statement.
On 16 Dec 2009 at 4:08pm Also Curious wrote:
I don't know anyone involved in this case, so I was hoping someone could possibly clear up a couple of questions I'm confused about. Was part of the case to do with whether the fire brigade were clearly informed by the Winters exactly what was in the container that exploded? Was that one of the issues the jury had to decide on? All of the comments blaming the fire brigade for the tragic deaths seem to be assuming that they knew about the illegally stored fireworks that could cause such a severe explosion and chose to ignore that information for reasons of their own. I assumed that the fire brigades case was that while some of their guidelines weren't followed to the letter, given what the Winters were legally allowed to have stored on the site, there was no reason for them to expect such a concentrated explosion to take place. Presumably that's what the jury believed anyway, or is that not one of the aspects they were being asked to decide on? I ask because if the Winters rang the emergency services and said there was a fire on their property, and they needed help evacuating the area because there was a container with X amount of high explosives packed into it that could explode at any moment, and the Fire brigade went in there ignoring that clear and explicit warning I agree that there's no way they should have faced manslaughter charges. Let alone be convicted. Other charges, perhaps, but not that one. But if they didn't do that, or they did that too late for an evacuation plan to fully come into effect, then I can see how a jury could convict them.
On 16 Dec 2009 at 4:38pm Smoking Gun wrote:
If MSER was followed what was on site wouldn't have mattered one jot. MSER states that if there is a fire or incident involving explosives or pyrotechnics, or if the incident may contain explosives or pyrotechnics, then a 600m cordon should be set up and maintained. In evidence it was established that the people who should have been following MSER in response to the incident knew that explosives or pyrotechnics were or may be involved before arriving at the site.
MSER does not suggest wandering around the site. It does not suggest asking for clarification. It states set up a cordon and evacuate to outside that cordon.
I am utterly dumbstruck at the sentences handed down, but they were always going to be made an example of.
On 16 Dec 2009 at 4:41pm ere be monsters wrote:
You state "I assumed that the fire brigades case was that while some of their guidelines weren't followed to the letter" Does that mean it's ok for the fire brigade not to follow H & S to the letter but everyone else must? Everyone else must suffer the consequenses but not the firebrigade.
In evidence Mr Wells speaking of his conversation with Nathan, he said: "He expressed concern for a small metal container near the second gate. He actually said to me 'if the fire gets anywhere near this container I would advise you to run like f***." Nathan was so vociferous in his efforts to get people away he was actually arrested. His warnings were ignored. When the signal was eventually given to evacuate it was ignored.
On 16 Dec 2009 at 5:10pm Another firework maker wrote:
Reading through this thread I can see a lot of partly informed theorising; and apart from the 999 recordings, we will never be certain as to what was said by who and to whom at the time.
However, this event took place long after the events of May 13th 2000 at Enschede in the Netherlands - a tragedy that led to every aspect of pyrotechnics management, including emergency response; coming under thorough review.
Given the lessons learned from Enschede, it seems inexcusable for the British Fire Service to have made almost exactly the same errors as their Dutch counterparts only a few years before; also with tragic consequences.
I would urge people who are interested in this event (and especially journalists) to read up on Enschede, and note how the lessons were not learned.
On 16 Dec 2009 at 5:49pm Anon wrote:
'ere be monsters, you may not think some of the comments are offensive but i do and i know many more that think the same. You have your opinion, i have mine. As i have read Cliffbimbo is a member of the family and doesn't need to be reading nasty, negative comments.
On 17 Dec 2009 at 8:47am ere be monsters wrote:
Ok, I take your point.
On 17 Dec 2009 at 11:32am GIve it a rest wrote:
I suggest in future the fire service refuse to attend any fires, go into any fires or tackle them. They are obviously all a health and safety risk - then they can't be accused of negligence or manslaughter. The Winters shouldn't even have called them out if they knew how dangerous that container was. Which they did. Because they wanted to save their multi million pound business. We all know they have links to bonfire and Borough BS so inevitably will get a lot of support on this forum. What people are forgetting is that many surrounding homes were also affected by the fire and explosion and more could have been killed /injured if the caravan site had been occupied. Those surrounding homes are now having problems getting insurance and being compensated and no doubt will have problems selling. The culprits are the Winters - however much they are liked as a family, they are the ones responsible for that container and what was stored in it.
On 17 Dec 2009 at 11:39am Impartial wrote:
Hear hear.......totally agree...someone talking sense at last....
On 17 Dec 2009 at 11:44am Chris wrote:
You're right many other people were affected. I was half way through my meal at the Wok Inn when this happened and had to be evacuated. I think the Winters owe me some compensation for the good money I paid for the all you can eat Buffet which I didnt get to finish. Disgusting