Brian Cathcart: Deepcut is becoming the Army's Stephen Lawrence case

Share
Related Topics

Why is the Government so determined to prevent a full, independent inquiry into Deepcut? The question must have occurred to many who observed the undignified contortions of the armed forces minister, Adam Ingram, over the past week. In the Commons on Tuesday, he set up a "review" of the new allegations of abuse - but insisted its only purpose was to show that everything was fine. Then on Channel 4's Dispatches on Thursday, he explained that, if he didn't act on warnings of a crisis at the barracks, it was because he was waiting to find out whether the Navy and RAF were just as bad.

Why is the Government so determined to prevent a full, independent inquiry into Deepcut? The question must have occurred to many who observed the undignified contortions of the armed forces minister, Adam Ingram, over the past week. In the Commons on Tuesday, he set up a "review" of the new allegations of abuse - but insisted its only purpose was to show that everything was fine. Then on Channel 4's Dispatches on Thursday, he explained that, if he didn't act on warnings of a crisis at the barracks, it was because he was waiting to find out whether the Navy and RAF were just as bad.

This is political discourse worthy of Gilbert and Sullivan, but it is also a measure of the desperation now infecting government efforts to block an inquiry. They've tried all their tricks but the stench of scandal just won't go away.

And yet we must brace ourselves for plenty more bluster and skewed logic before ministers eventually give in to the demands of the bereaved families, and the reason is that the stakes are so very high.

Any full-scale public inquiry into Deepcut, it is now clear, threatens to do to the Army what the Stephen Lawrence inquiry did to the police service. It would be a historic cultural earthquake for an institution long accustomed to doing things its own way and with a minimum of accountability.

We think of the Lawrence inquiry as being about race, and it was, but its impact was wider and more profound. After the London teenager was murdered in 1993, no police officer involved in the investigation, nor any of their superiors up to the highest ranks, ever imagined they might be called to account for their actions.

And when, after four years of dogged resistance by the police leadership and the Tory government, the incoming Labour Home Secretary, Jack Straw, authorised a full inquiry, negligence and complacency on a breathtaking scale were exposed.

Scene-of-crime procedures and first aid training were damned as inadequate. Dealings with crime victims and their families had to be completely overhauled. Shocking ignorance and high-handedness in matters of race were exposed. Record-keeping and information handling were revealed as behind the times and the whole book of rules for tackling murders had to be rewritten.

Most telling of all, the procedures by which the police policed themselves emerged as a mockery - or even worse, a means of covering up mistakes.

The experience of seeing all this go under a public magnifying glass, month after month, was shocking for police at all levels and, though all is not perfect now, it has transformed attitudes throughout the system.

With the Army, the Deepcut scandal now embraces such a breadth of concerns that there is no doubt a proper inquiry would be equally far reaching.

The deaths of four young private soldiers, all from gunshot wounds sustained while on guard duty, remain at the heart of it. Their families and the public need to know, so far as it is possible to know, how and why they died.

In every case the Army decided it was suicide and in every case the parents are not satisfied with that. Is it physically possible, for example, that Sean Benton shot himself five times in the chest, and that Geoff Gray put two bullets into his own head?

These matters on their own will be difficult enough to unravel, but they are just the beginning. However they died, James Collinson and Cheryl James were both too young by Army rules to be on their own with a gun, so if they were, how did that happen?

As in the Lawrence case we need a full account of how the bereaved families were treated, because all of them felt the Army had been offhand and thoughtless, if not downright negligent. How could officers justify telling the parents these were suicides even before investigations had begun?

Then there are the investigations themselves, which, as the families have said, carry echoes of the Keystone Cops. Sean Benton's bloodstained shirt was laundered; the bullet that killed Cheryl James was lost; the records of the issue of guns at Deepcut on the night Geoff Gray died were destroyed; no fingerprints were taken from the gun that killed James Collinson. In each case there is much more like this.

The ripples from the deaths now move steadily outwards and upwards, but the need to satisfy public concerns does not diminish.

A proper inquiry would need to establish who took responsibility for these cack-handed investigations - at what rank the buck stops. Also pressing is the matter of lessons not learned, since the later deaths were handled no better than the early ones.

Why were senior officers not ensuring that all forensic procedures were pursued, that no doubts were allowed to arise? It is remarkable in this context that Collinson, the last to die, was not even given a full post mortem.

Anyone with any imagination, when confronted with this picture, will be inclined to wonder about a cover-up. At the very least it was a cock-up. Either way, the public has a right to know.

And out the ripples travel. The evidence of self-harm incidents, bullying, sexual abuse and even rape at Deepcut is alarming and could not be ignored by a public inquiry, not only because it could have a bearing on some of the deaths but also because it sheds light on the culture and management of the camp.

Did instructors (Deepcut is a training establishment) have a licence to toughen up young soldiers and forcibly weed out the weaker links? Were NCOs and junior officers keeping commanders in the dark?

And then the ripples pass beyond the camp perimeter into other camps, such as Catterick in Yorkshire, and other strata of the army, from the training administrators to the top brass themselves. What did they know and at what point did they know it? Why did they fail to act on those reports warning of the problems?

Any serious inquiry would have to ask whether the shortage of supervision at Deepcut was a result of government policy. How far did ministers force the Army to move resources "from the tail to the teeth", leaving unglamorous training establishments short-staffed? Last but not least comes that question prompted by Mr Ingram's latest flounder-ings: why has the Government resisted the inquiry so doggedly? Perhaps, at some time in the past two

years, a promise

was made by a minister to a soldier as they chatted beside a map of Iraq. Somebody needs to ask.

At the Lawrence inquiry, the interrogations began at police constable level and finished with the Metropolitan Commissioner, Sir Paul Condon, who endured one of his worst days in uniform giving evidence to Sir William Macpherson. Picture now the cavalcade of privates and sergeants, civil servants and possibly government ministers who will have to account for themselves to an intensive Deepcut inquiry.

All the signs are that this is what the public wants, and before long, it may be the least they will accept if they are to go on allowing their sons and daughters to sign up to fight.

For the Army, however, it represents a nightmare. Everything about its behaviour since the death of the first victim in 1995 suggests that it never expected to be held accountable, which means that when the shock comes it will be all the greater. No wonder senior commanders and their ministerial allies are desperate to stop it happening.

React Now

Latest stories from i100
Have you tried new the Independent Digital Edition apps?
iJobs Job Widget
iJobs General

SQL Implementation Consultant (VB,C#, SQL, Java, Eclipse, integ

£40000 - £50000 per annum + benefits+bonus+package: Harrington Starr: SQL Impl...

SQL Technical Implementation Consultant (Java, BA, Oracle, VBA)

£45000 - £55000 per annum + Benefits + Bonus: Harrington Starr: SQL Technical ...

Head of IT (Windows, Server, VMware, SAN, Fidessa, Equities)

£85000 per annum: Harrington Starr: Head of IT (Windows, Server, VMware, SAN, ...

Lead C# Developer (.Net, nHibernate, MVC, SQL) Surrey

£55000 - £60000 per annum + Benefits + Bonus: Harrington Starr: Lead C# Develo...

Day In a Page

Read Next
 

i Editor's Letter: Still all to play for at our live iDebate

Oliver Duff Oliver Duff
 

The leak of Jennifer Lawrence's nude photos isn't her fault. But try telling that to the internet's idiots

Grace Dent
Alexander Fury: The designer names to look for at fashion week this season

The big names to look for this fashion week

This week, designers begin to show their spring 2015 collections in New York
Will Self: 'I like Orwell's writing as much as the next talented mediocrity'

'I like Orwell's writing as much as the next talented mediocrity'

Will Self takes aim at Orwell's rules for writing plain English
Meet Afghanistan's middle-class paint-ballers

Meet Afghanistan's middle-class paint-ballers

Toy guns proving a popular diversion in a country flooded with the real thing
Al Pacino wows Venice

Al Pacino wows Venice

Ham among the brilliance as actor premieres two films at festival
Neil Lawson Baker interview: ‘I’ve gained so much from art. It’s only right to give something back’.

Neil Lawson Baker interview

‘I’ve gained so much from art. It’s only right to give something back’.
The other Mugabe who is lining up for the Zimbabwean presidency

The other Mugabe who is lining up for the Zimbabwean presidency

Wife of President Robert Mugabe appears to have her sights set on succeeding her husband
The model of a gadget launch: Cultivate an atmosphere of mystery and excitement to sell stuff people didn't realise they needed

The model for a gadget launch

Cultivate an atmosphere of mystery and excitement to sell stuff people didn't realise they needed
Alice Roberts: She's done pretty well, for a boffin without a beard

She's done pretty well, for a boffin without a beard

Alice Roberts talks about her new book on evolution - and why her early TV work drew flak from (mostly male) colleagues
Get well soon, Joan Rivers - an inspiration, whether she likes it or not

Get well soon, Joan Rivers

She is awful. But she's also wonderful, not in spite of but because of the fact she's forever saying appalling things, argues Ellen E Jones
Doctor Who Into the Dalek review: A classic sci-fi adventure with all the spectacle of a blockbuster

A fresh take on an old foe

Doctor Who Into the Dalek more than compensated for last week's nonsensical offering
Fashion walks away from the celebrity runway show

Fashion walks away from the celebrity runway show

As the collections start, fashion editor Alexander Fury finds video and the internet are proving more attractive
Meet the stars of TV's Wolf Hall... and it's not the cast of the Tudor trilogy

Meet the stars of TV's Wolf Hall...

... and it's not the cast of the Tudor trilogy
Weekend at the Asylum: Europe's biggest steampunk convention heads to Lincoln

Europe's biggest steampunk convention

Jake Wallis Simons discovers how Victorian ray guns and the martial art of biscuit dunking are precisely what the 21st century needs
Don't swallow the tripe – a user's guide to weasel words

Don't swallow the tripe – a user's guide to weasel words

Lying is dangerous and unnecessary. A new book explains the strategies needed to avoid it. John Rentoul on the art of 'uncommunication'
Daddy, who was Richard Attenborough? Was the beloved thespian the last of the cross-generation stars?

Daddy, who was Richard Attenborough?

The atomisation of culture means that few of those we regard as stars are universally loved any more, says DJ Taylor