http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/apr/16/oliver-popplewell-bradford-valley-parade-disasterThe former high court judge who led the inquiry into the Valley Parade fire in 1985 has called on police to look at the “remarkable number” of fires allegedly connected to Bradford City’s then chairman “to see if there was anything sinister”.
Sir Oliver Popplewell, who led the original inquiry that ruled the blaze that killed 56 people was an accident started by a discarded cigarette or match, defended his original verdict and the timescale of the original probe. But although he maintained that any suggestion of arson was “bizarre” he has now called on police to look again at the other fires at businesses connected with Stafford Heginbotham uncovered by the author Martin Fletcher, who survived but lost his brother, father, uncle and grandfather in the disaster.
“I don’t think it’s going to affect what we decided but I think it is important from a public point of view that the police look at the other fires and see if there was anything sinister. It is a remarkable number,” said Popplewell. “I think it’s important to satisfy people’s minds that the other fires are unconnected.”
Popplewell earlier trenchantly stood by his verdict that there was no evidence of arson, reached in just five days in the weeks following the disaster on 11 May 1985. A new book, serialised by the Guardian, claims the fire at Bradford’s Valley Parade stadium was one of at least nine blazes at businesses owned by or associated with Heginbotham, who died in 1995.
Fletcher does not make any direct allegations in the new book but said Heginbotham’s history with fires, which resulted in payouts totalling Ł27m in today’s terms, warranted further investigation. “Could any man really be as unlucky as Heginbotham had been?” he asks.
Popplewell, now 87, had earlier said that he remained convinced that the fire, which claimed 56 victims, was “undoubtedly” started by accident by a discarded match or cigarette, despite the new evidence. “As to how it happened, there wasn’t any serious dispute,” he told the Guardian following the revelations published on Wednesday.
“Everyone accepted that at the particular place where the fire was first detected, something had gone through a hole in the stand and that was where the fire started. I find the suggestion absolutely bizarre, frankly.”
Popplewell’s inquiry lasted five days and was conjoined with a parallel investigation into the death of a Birmingham City fan at a home game with Leeds United on the same day as the Bradford fire, the 15-year-old supporter dying after violent clashes led to the collapse of a wall.
In his book, Fletcher, who spent 15 years re-examining evidence related to the fire, criticises the limited remit and short timescale of the inquiry and painstakingly questions whether it properly considered all of the evidence. Popplewell, though, defended the speed with which the inquiry was conducted.
“It was obviously very important to have an inquiry immediately,” he said. “One doesn’t want an inquiry lasting five years, as happened in Ireland or in other places where they have gone on for ever. The facts were absolutely not in dispute.
“There was no reason to make any more inquiries than we did. Subsequently there were civil actions between the various parties. I’m sure if there was anything untoward it would have come out in those civil actions. I wouldn’t say it was cut and dried but it was about as simple a finding of fact as anything I’ve ever been involved in.”
The disaster occurred at a time, according to Fletcher’s book, when Heginbotham was in desperate financial trouble – and two days after he discovered it would cost Ł2m to bring the ground up to safety standards required by Bradford’s promotion from the old Third Division (now League One).
Speaking to the BBC, Popplewell reiterated that he believed the claims were “nonsense”, saying: “I’m sorry to spoil what is obviously a very good story but I’m afraid it’s nonsense for a number of reasons.”
The retired judge said the main flaw in the implication that the fire might have been arson was that the stand involved had no insurance value because it was due for demolition.
He said the fire was examined by experienced and thorough investigators who found nothing suspicious. And he said no question of arson was ever raised in civil legal proceedings.
West Yorkshire police said the force would consider any new evidence concerning the fire. Det Supt Mark Ridley, of the homicide and major inquiry team, said: “The jury at the inquest in 1985 delivered a verdict of misadventure. However, should any evidence come to light which was not available to Her Majesty’s coroner at the original inquest, then we will consider its significance and take appropriate action.”
On Thursday the former sports minister Gerry Sutcliffe said the new allegations did not justify a new inquiry into the disaster. Sutcliffe, MP for Bradford South and deputy leader of Bradford city council at the time of the tragedy, said he knew Heginbotham “flew by the seat of his pants” in terms of the finances of the club, but remains convinced by the conclusion of the inquiry.
The new claims are contained in the book Fifty-Six – The Story of the Bradford Fire, by Martin Fletcher, who was 12 at the time and escaped from the blaze but lost three generations of his family including his father and brother. Fletcher’s 11-year-old brother was the fire’s youngest victim while his father John, 34, uncle Peter, 32, and grandfather Eddie, 63, also died.
The sometimes outspoken Popplewell caused widespread outrage among relatives and survivors of the Hillsborough disaster in 2011 when he questioned their continuing campaign for justice, which eventually resulted in the new inquests currently taking place in Warrington.
“The citizens of Bradford behaved with quiet dignity and great courage. They did not harbour conspiracy theories. They did not seek endless further inquiries,” he wrote then in a letter to the Times.
“They buried their dead, comforted the bereaved and succoured the injured. They organised a sensible compensation scheme and moved on. Is there, perhaps, a lesson there for the Hillsborough campaigners?”
