Fire Farce Continues

Joe Canberran 28 November 2007 6

The 2003 fire culprits named in the Coroner’s Report are upset because they think that the Coroner had no place or jurisdiction to attribute blame or responsibility for the fires according to this ABC story.

So even if it was their fault they’re saying that the Coroner isn’t allowed to say it was. Just like she’s too mean to the Chief Minister. So who is funding this part of the never ending saga of a legal challenge?

What's Your Opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
6 Responses to Fire Farce Continues
Mr Evil Mr Evil 11:23 am 29 Nov 07

Yes, it may have been an act of God; but if the idiots in the ESB and NSWRFS had sent teams out to aggressively tackle the fires when they first started after the lightning strikes, then the fires wouldn’t have had a chance to developed into the firestorm that they later became!

sepi sepi 10:42 am 29 Nov 07

The fire may have been a one-off act of god disaster, but the major failing of those involved was in not warning anyone that it was coming.

If I’d lost my house cos I was down the coast or out at the movies while it burnt down I’d be pretty annoyed still too.

jemmy jemmy 11:45 pm 28 Nov 07

I can understand your anger and a wish to blame, but sometimes it really is just an act of god. You need to recognise this and stop looking for someone to blame for your personal loss. From your comments, you seem to think that the outcome would have been different if those 4 weren’t there. What, the flames would have just magically stopped? Do you think the senior people weren’t trying their best? Same with other comments about Stanhope being out for dinner, what was he going to do, stand in front of the firewall and wave his hands? It was a terrible one-off situation and blaming some people who were doing their best in very trying circumstances doesn’t help. Far better to examine the fire-control and management processes and the funding and recommend changes there.

Coroners would have to be the loopiest part of the quasi-judicial system. They often make recommendations that are nonsensical or don’t take the cost of implementing them into account. I remember one in a motorcycle crash where the recommendation was that a sticker be placed on all motorcycles that the user should exercise care when operating the motorcycle (gee, that’ll change the world); another was that all occupants of a motor vehicle should wear crash helmets. They are fruitloops, just like aneasthetists in the medical world, off on a different planet.

I thought this particular report was way over the top and went way outside the normal area of a coroner’s responsibility. It was like a political report in some of its comments. If this was the USA, I would have thought she was running for re-election.

cranky cranky 9:57 pm 28 Nov 07

The only individual to come out of the whole sorry mess with any credibility is Doogan. The buck passing, selective memory, and being paid for talents totally beyond the competence of these 4 clowns should never have arrived before this court.

If a Coroner is not allowed to apportion responsibility for fatal, if not criminal incompetence, who is?

I would love to hear Rick Hingees’ comments at this time.

Mr Evil Mr Evil 12:43 pm 28 Nov 07

Good to see that some people’s image and credibility is more important than the fact that 4 people died in the firestorm.

I hope their whinge gets chucked out of Court.

neanderthalsis neanderthalsis 10:29 am 28 Nov 07

I may be way off track here, but I was under the impression that a coroners enquiry is normally established to determine the facts surrounding an incident, and if necessary approprite blame to the relevant quarter.

“He said she also went too far by attributing blame and responsibility and a real injustice was done to those who were criticised. “

What about the real injustice that was done to those who perished or lost there homes in the fires?

Gormless, whining twats…

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter


Search across the site