At the end of the inquest, coroner Richard Travers said the victims were killed by a “violent, intense and devastating” explosion caused by a bomb remotely detonated by “a young man and woman often referred to as a ‘court couple’”. . The investigation had stalled after the so-called Guildford Four were jailed for the 1975 bombings in an infamous miscarriage of justice, which was overturned by the Court of Appeal in 1989. It was decided to reopen in 2019 after a campaign by victims’ relatives, survivors and the wrongly convicted. Responding to the verdict, the family of Ann Hamilton, of the Women’s Royal Army Corps, who was 19 when she was killed by the bomb, expressed their disappointment that the coroner had decided not to carry out an Article 2 (of the European Convention on Human Rights) inquest , which requires enhanced investigation and can be conducted when there are questions about state involvement. Hamilton’s relatives said that would allow questions of foreseeability and preventability to be considered. They also expressed regret that, unlike bereaved relatives at other heritage inquests into Ireland’s Troubles, including the 1974 Birmingham pub bombing, they were not granted legal aid. Combined, those two decisions diminished the value of the research, they said. “An investigation should serve to put to rest suspicions and rumours,” the family said. “An investigation must serve the interests of the victims’ relatives. We do not believe that this research has served any of these purposes. First, families were excluded because there was no public funding. Second, the research was limited in scope due to the current state of crown law and regulations. Both must be addressed if this process is to continue with any credibility for the benefit of bereaved families. Many of our questions remain unanswered.” Caroline Slater, 18, also from the Women’s Royal Army Corps, and Scots Guardsmen William Forsyth, 18, and John Hunter, 17, along with a civilian, Paul Craig, 22, were also killed in the unannounced blast at Horse and Groom , known as the military pub, on 5 October 1974. None of the families were represented in court, apart from limited pro bono work by Belfast solicitors KRW Law. In addition, Patrick Armstrong, one of the two surviving members of the Guildford Four, was denied “interested person” status, meaning his lawyer, Alastair Logan, could not join and provide a balance to lawyers representing the Ministry Defense and Surrey Police and the Met. respectively. The Hamilton family had previously questioned why the barracks were not on lockdown and the state of alert was not changed, given IRA bombings of army premises since 1973, before the Guildford attack. Surrey Police attracted controversy when inquest documents revealed it had successfully applied to the Home Office for files relating to the Guildford bombing, due to be released in 2020, to be held back for decades. The files were made available to the inquest if required, but the inquiry’s junior counsel, Matthew Flynn, ruled only two were relevant. Subscribe to First Edition, our free daily newsletter – every morning at 7am. BST Travers said in his conclusions: “I find there was nothing specific about the date of the attack or the choice of pub which could have made the bombings reasonably foreseeable or preventable.” Speaking outside court, Deputy Chief Constable Nev Kemp of Surrey Police said the force would “consider whether a new investigation is a viable option”.
