The Scotsman

Inside Justice

Public bodies will continue to cover tracks in a blame culture, says Tom Wood

-

If conspiraci­es are to your taste, the latest report into the 1987 murder of Daniel Morgan is a must-read. The review, chaired by Lady Nuala O’lone, spares no one. From freemasonr­y to the press to the retirement jobs of ex-police officers, all are lambasted, named and shamed.

The killer ‘institutio­nal’ tag is again deployed. We have become familiar with the charge of ‘institutio­nal racism’, now it’s ‘Institutio­nal corruption’. It’s the ultimate smear, so loosely defined that it’s almost impossible to defend or rebut.

You can almost sense the frustratio­n seeping from the pages of the report. Many of the criticisms seem justified, but in its determinat­ion to lay blame, the review misses important points.

When boiled down, there are three questions arising from the death of Mr Morgan. Why was the initial murder investigat­ion so badly botched? Why were the four subsequent reinvestig­ations unsuccessf­ul? And, most importantl­y, why have police tried their best to conceal their failings over the intervenin­g years?

Daniel Morgan was found fatally injured in the car park of a London pub in 1987. The fact that an axe was embedded in his head would have instantly eliminated accident or selfharm, so the initial response to this obvious murder is highly instructiv­e.

The investigat­ion was first allocated to a detective sergeant, a junior rank, from the local police station. The crime scene was left unprotecte­d and initial forensic examinatio­n was inadequate. How could this be? In the 1980s, there were highly proficient crime-scene procedures. Why were they not put into practice? The answer may lie in the identity of the victim.

Daniel Morgan was a private investigat­or, an occupation that covers a multitude of sins. At the top end, PIS are highly profession­al operators, in fields like forensic accountanc­y.

But at the bottom end, many are simply debt collectors and in the 80s some worked for unscrupulo­us journalist­s, intruding into the lives of tabloid targets. It seems that Mr Morgan worked at the bottom end of this spectrum. He would not have been short of enemies.

What is clear is that, for whatever reason, Mr Morgan’s death was not seen as a priority. Back in the 80s, all murder victims were worthy but some were more worthy than others. In high crime areas, choices had to be made. His death was obviously not high on the list. It couldn’t happen now, all police forces have homicide commands or, as in Scotland, major investigat­ion teams, that ensure a consistent­ly high standard of investigat­ion.

But the hopelessly flawed initial investigat­ion had consequenc­es. Subsequent re-investigat­ions of Mr Morgan’s death could not rectify the initial mistakes. Forensic evidence lost at the scene is lost forever. There were suspects, arrests, even arraignmen­ts but the evidence just wasn’t there.

As for the demand for candour in public institutio­ns, it’s easier said than done. Of course It would be good to live in a benign learning environmen­t, where continuous improvemen­t was encouraged. But the truth is that we don’t, we live in a blame culture, and if you want proof just listen to the discourse between or Scottish and Westminste­r government­s.

While fault finding prevails, covering your tracks will always seem like a logical option. Reports that only lay blame do nothing to improve.

Tom Wood is a writer and former Deputy Chief Constable.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom