Rose Gentle, the Glasgow mother whose 19-year-old son, Fusilier Gordon Gentle, died in a roadside bomb blast in Iraq, finally heard a coroner deliver the verdict she wanted to hear yesterday. Knowing that her son was unlawfully killed will not assuage the bitterness, but it will help that the truth has been established, and criticism officially levelled at the Army's "chaotic" supply chain in Basra.
In the three years and four months since her son was killed, Mrs Gentle has insisted that his death could have been prevented by bomb-jamming equipment that should have been fitted to his vehicle. Yesterday, her persistence in having information disclosed to the inquest was vindicated when Selena Lynch, assistant deputy coroner for Oxfordshire, ruled: "It is more likely than not that the bomb would not have detonated had Element B (a bomb jamming kit) been fitted."
It must be particularly galling for Rose Gentle to have it confirmed that the electronic counter-measure (ECM) intended for his vehicle was gathering dust in a Basra storeroom, just one kilometre away from the Royal Highland Fusiliers' base, but a proper account of the conduct of the war in Iraq - and military intervention elsewhere - is vital. One of Mrs Gentle's main motivations in her quest for the truth was to ensure that lessons would be learned from the mistakes which led to the death of her son. The publicity from this inquest should ensure that communication procedures are tightened, but there are wider issues. The Ministry of Defence has traditionally fallen back on the argument that in the inevitable disruption and changing scenario of war, the best preparations can fail. That is true, but it is no excuse for logistical back-up not being as efficient as possible, nor does it mean that no-one should be held to account when it fails.
Although the armed forces minister, Bob Ainsworth, yesterday gave assurances that lessons had been learned from the internal board of inquiry into Fusilier Gentle's death and its recommendations accepted, a sense of unease remains over the difficulties coroners face in getting the MoD to disclose evidence. Yesterday, Ms Lynch criticised their policies for disclosure as "illogical and based on errors of law".
Of course there are some pieces of information which no army should disclose publicly, but that need not prevent establishing the facts of death. If necessary, certain details can be restricted, as happened at the inquest into the death of Lance Corporal Matty Hull, when a cockpit tape from the American aircraft involved in the friendly-fire incident was played only to family and the coroner. Yet that was achieved only after high-level negotiations following a campaign by Lance Corporal Hull's young widow.
The general difficulty in obtaining evidence is adding, unnecessarily and unacceptably, to delays in inquests.
The possibility of holding inquests for service personnel repatriated through Brize Norton outside Oxfordshire should be explored, but the MoD must also adopt a more open approach. That it is out of touch with the requirements of the 21st century was underlined by the insensitive timing of the announcement yesterday that the defence equipment minister, Lord Drayson, is to leave the government to pursue his motor-racing "dream". Compare that with the ambition of Rose Gentle, an ordinary housewife from Pollok, who campaigned for three years to say: "Justice has been done. The truth has come out."
As we prepare to honour the memory of all those who have fallen in conflict, there is added sorrow for a new generation; in saluting their courage we should also acknowledge the bravery of the families whose grief remains so raw.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article