Press Not Informed About Opening of Inquest into London Bridge Terrorist Deaths

The opening of the inquest into the death of three terrorists shot dead following the London Bridge attack went unreported after Southwark Coroners’ Court failed to alert the press until after the inquest had begun.

Journalists received notification of the event, along with details regarding other proceedings taking part in the same week, eighteen minutes after the inquest opened.

As a result, it is believed that not a single journalist attended the event.

The Evening Standard’s court reporter, Tristan Kirk, tweeted his outrage by stating: “This is three men who committed a terrible terrorist atrocity on British soil, and were shot dead by police. Can’t see much interest in that.”

Kirk later told the Press Gazette: “Hearings like that will be over in ten minutes. It looks like nobody has gone down to cover it. A hearing like that going on without any press coverage is fairly scandalous.”

Kirk explained the importance of attending such events by saying: “These openings tell you a little bit about how the death happened and what they [police] know now. It’s an opportunity on the record to know where the investigation is at.”

Following its opening, the inquest was adjourned until a full police investigation into the event has been concluded. This could mean it could be “many months until we actually get a proper hearing on these guys.”

He continued: “It’s a no-brainer that there would have been significant press interest.”

While Kirk blames a failure in the system for the lack of openness he also criticised Southward Coroner’s Court which has “generated a little bit of a reputation for not being as amiable to the press as perhaps a coroner’s court should be.”

So was this a simple oversight or perhaps a clerical error? Or was it just another example of public offices not playing ball with the press?