To ask the Scottish Executive when the Lord Advocate will announce his decision on whether there should be a Fatal Accident Inquiry into the deaths of Rory Blackhall and Simon Harris.
Following receipt of a report on the afternoon of 18 August 2005 that 11 year-old Rory Blackhall had, unbeknown to his family, failed to attend Meldrum Primary School that morning, Lothian and Borders Police immediately launched an investigation into his disappearance.
Tragically for the Blackhall family, following an extensive search involving large numbers of police officers, volunteer search and rescue agencies, and members of the local community, Rory’s body was found on 21 August 2005 in a wooded area to the rear of Woodlands Park, Livingston. The police investigation into his disappearance was immediately converted into a full-scale murder enquiry.
Over the course of the following week, a team of experienced police officers and forensic experts worked together to engather all of the available evidence. Their investigations led the police to identify Simon Harris as a potential suspect and, on 28 August 2005, officers forced entry to his home at Camps Rigg in Livingston. On searching within the house, the police found Simon Harris’ body. It was clear that he had taken his own life.
There was considerable speculation at the time about the circumstances of Rory’s death, much of which was unhelpful to the on-going inquiry, and some of which was upsetting for the Blackhall family, who have remained in touch with the Procurator Fiscal at Linlithgow throughout the subsequent inquiry. Out of respect for them, I do not intend to provide details of the evidence that was engathered by Lothian and Borders Police in the course of their investigation into Rory’s death save that, based on all the available evidence, it can be said with some certainty that Rory was killed shortly after his disappearance on the morning of 18 August 2005 and that he died as a result of being asphyxiated.
I am, also able to confirm that had Simon Harris been found alive, the available evidence would have been sufficient to charge him with Rory Blackhall’s murder. There is no evidence to implicate any other person in any way with Rory’s disappearance or his death.
This tragic death shocked and saddened the local community in Livingston, and the people of Scotland as a whole. Understandably, there was a desire to find out what had happened, and to have some reassurance that, where possible, steps would be taken to try to avoid a similar tragedy in the future.
A number of particular concerns have been raised, all of which have now been the subject of careful consideration by me, in the context of assessing whether there would be any benefit to be derived from further investigation or the holding of a Fatal Accident Inquiry.
Bail
Concern was expressed over the fact that Simon Harris was on bail at the time of Rory’s murder. Simon Harris had appeared on petition at Linlithgow Sheriff Court on 28 February 2005, in relation to charges of assault and lewd and libidinous behaviour towards three girls. These charges arose out of complaints of historical abuse, alleged to have occurred between 1983 and 2000. Simon Harris was released on the standard conditions of bail together with a special condition that he should have no contact with the complainers.
In deciding whether to oppose bail, the Procurator Fiscal must consider a number of factors. These include whether the accused is already on bail at the time of the commission of the alleged offence, or has a record of relevant previous convictions and whether there is any evidence that the accused will abscond, re-offend, or interfere with witnesses.
In the case of Simon Harris, the Procurator Fiscal had no basis upon which to oppose Simon Harris’ bail and seek his remand in custody. It was, however, appropriate to seek a special condition of bail and that was done.
This decision, which I believe was the correct one in the circumstances, was taken after careful assessment of all of the information available to the fiscal at the time, and in particular, the fact that
He was not charged with breaching any previous bail order and was not known to have any record of failing to appear in court
He had no pending cases for similar matters
His only previous convictions were for two minor matters (wasting police time and road traffic in 1988 and 1999 respectively) for which he had been fined on both occasions.
The offences were alleged to have been committed many years earlier, with no record of offending in the ensuing five year period.
Although, because of subsequent events, any present assessment of Simon Harris may be potentially different, at the time this decision was made there was no information to suggest that he was likely to re-offend, and no basis to suggest that he would carry out a crime such as the murder of Rory Blackhall.
Simon Harris’s failure to appear at court
When Simon Harris failed to appear on Monday 22 August 2005, a warrant was sought and granted for his arrest. This was received by the Procurator Fiscal the following day. In accordance with established practice, that warrant was not issued to the police, but the Procurator Fiscal prepared a fresh petition to the court so that the accused would face an additional charge of breaching bail through his failure to appear, and the police would have a warrant that would allow them to arrest him and bring him immediately before the court. The fresh petition warrant was received by the Sheriff Clerk on Wednesday 24 August and subsequently granted by the sheriff. The Procurator Fiscal received the warrant on Monday, 29 August 2005. Had Simon Harris’ body not been discovered by that point, this warrant would have been issued to the police at that time, allowing them to arrest him.
In terms of the protocol in place between COPFS and the Scottish Court Service, a request for a Petition warrant should be considered within two working days and the warrant transmitted back to COPFS within one further working day. These timescales can be expedited if there are reasons for doing so, but as there were no extraordinary features surrounding the non-appearance, and in particular, no link between Simon Harris and Rory Blackhall at that time, the warrant was dealt with under the usual procedures.
Concerns have also been expressed about the fact that no connection was made immediately between Simon Harris’ failure to appear at Linlithgow Sheriff Court on 22 August 2005 in relation to the charges of historical abuse and the on-going inquiry into and Rory Blackhall’s death.
There was, however, no information available to suggest that Simon Harris might have been involved in a crime such as this. The circumstances of the charges he faced were different, involving historical allegations in relation to persons who were known to him. His failure to appear and the subsequent warrant for his arrest were therefore dealt with in line with existing procedure. Simon Harris had committed the murder over a week before he failed to attend court.
It is also now known that Simon Harris was in hospital when his case called on 22 August 2005 and that he had asked hospital staff to inform his legal representatives of the position. Unfortunately, that message did not reach them. Had the information been available to the court, the warrant would not have been granted.
Best practice in relation to warrants for the arrest of accused persons is constantly under review, to ensure that the most effective systems are in place. There is an on-going comprehensive review of the present system for processing and prioritising warrants under the auspices of the National Criminal Justice Board. This will lead ultimately to revised arrangements between the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland (ACPOS), the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) and the Scottish Court Service on the prioritisation of warrants and service level agreements that will ensure that there are fast, accurate and workable practices throughout the whole warrants process.
Patient Confidentiality
Simon Harris had admitted himself to St John’s Hospital, Livingston in the early hours of 22 August 2005, the day he was due to appear in court. He was discharged later that day. During the period he was in the hospital some of the nursing staff thought he may have been a person of interest to the police. They passed on that information on 26 August 2005. The delay appears to have been due in part to some uncertainty over the extent of their duty of confidentiality. It is unlikely that that information, even if it had been supplied earlier, would have changed the course of events but the uncertainty suggests that further clarification in this area is required.
I am aware that the Minister for Health has set in motion further work in this area involving officials from his department, ACPOS, Crown Office, Justice Department and relevant professional bodies. The group will examine the national guidance on information sharing between the NHS and the police to ensure that staff who may have to make decisions which call for them to balance issues about patient confidentiality, public safety and the investigation of serious crime have ready access to support and guidance from senior staff.
School non-attendance guidelines
During the investigation into the circumstances of Rory’s disappearance, it became clear that the alarm over Rory’s disappearance was only raised after his grandfather attended to collect him at his primary school, at the end of his school day. The Blackhall family had received no intimation of his non-attendance until that point. They have expressed concern about this.
Investigations have revealed that Rory’s school, Meldrum Primary in Livingston, did have procedures in place to deal with absenteeism, based on the working guidelines set down by the Scottish Executive Education Department but they were not fully effective in this instance.
Following Rory’s death, the Scottish Executive Education Department asked all local education authorities to provide information on their current practice where a child, who is expected at school, does not arrive. The information that was received from the local authorities will lead to new guidance being issued to all Education Authorities later this year. This guidance will advise on best practice and the procedures to be followed when a child is absent without parental notification.
In addition, West Lothian Council themselves conducted an extensive consultation following Rory’s death. I understand that the council now propose that every school in their area should use an automated call system to contact parents when an absence is recorded without any notification from a parent. They also propose that every primary school in the area be provided with funding to employ a playground supervisor every morning for twenty minutes before school starts, to deal with any issues that may arise at that time.
The police investigation
The police investigation into Rory’s disappearance and subsequent death also came under scrutiny. There were some criticisms over the speed at which the police operation had progressed and suggestions that there might have been scope for the police to have prevented Rory’s death.
On Monday 29 August 2005, as the investigation into Rory’s murder had not reached a conclusion, Lothian and Borders Police requested a review of their investigation. This is standard ACPOS procedure in the investigation of this type of case. In this case, even after Simon Harris had been identified as the likely perpetrator of this crime, Lothian and Borders Police asked Strathclyde Police to continue with their review in order to identify areas of best practice or any areas worthy of improvement, which would help to shape future investigative and operational practice.
The review report is generally positive. It makes a series of recommendations designed to enhance processes. They are more developmental than fundamental and include issues such as Access to Restricted Information. The report also highlights areas which are considered best practice, including, for example, Command Meetings and Investigative Processes.
However, the review concluded that there was no course of action open to Lothian and Borders Police which could have prevented the death of Rory Blackhall, or would necessarily have led to Simon Harris being identified more expeditiously as the perpetrator. It also concludes that the actions taken in respect of Simon Harris’s non-appearance were appropriate. I am aware of the considerable degree of support that the force afforded the Blackhall family and the family’s acknowledgement of the professionalism and care shown to them by police throughout that difficult time.
Conclusion
In deciding whether it would be appropriate for me to instruct any further inquiry into these matters, I have had the benefit of a full report from the Procurator Fiscal at Linlithgow as well as the information arising from consideration by others of the issues to which I have already referred.
After careful consideration of all these issues, and all the information and evidence available to me, I have decided that there is no necessity to instruct any further investigation or formal inquiry into the circumstances surrounding Rory Blackhall’s tragic death. Nor will there be any further investigation or inquiry into the death of Simon Harris.
I believe that, where necessary, action has been taken to review and, if required, improve systems in place in relation to the issues which have arisen in the course of this investigation and which I have set out in this statement. I do not believe that anyone could have foreseen the tragic events of 18 August 2005, and there is no evidence to suggest that any one person or organisation could have done anything to prevent them. It is on that basis that I have decided that no Fatal Accident Inquiries will be held.
The Blackhall family and the family of Simon Harris have been made aware of this decision, and it is in accordance with their wishes.
