Police question three over Grenfell Tower fire

‘New phase’ of investigation will look into allegations of corporate manslaughter

The City of London skyline seen behind the remains of Grenfell Tower
(Image credit: Carl Court/Getty Images)

Police investigating the Grenfell Tower fire have questioned three people under caution about potential offences relating to corporate manslaughter.

Scotland Yard said in a statement the investigation into the fire had “moved to a new phase” with a programme of interviews under caution planned for the coming weeks.

Detectives investigating possible charges of gross negligence manslaughter, corporate manslaughter and breaches of the Health and Safety Act began conducting interviews in late June, The Guardian reports.

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516.jpg

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

The fire, in June 2017, killed 72 people and raised questions about the flammable cladding used on the building, as well as failures in fire safety arrangements.

Officers have spent the last year scouring the tower for evidence and plan to hand back control of the building to Kensington and Chelsea council in early August.

No-one has yet been arrested in connection with the fire, although some people who falsely claimed to have lived in the block in order to claim compensation have been arrested on suspicion of fraud.

Yvette Williams, of campaign group Justice for Grenfell, said she was relieved by the development.

“We do welcome that people have been interviewed under caution,” she told the Press Association. “It’s unfortunate that it’s taken months after it happened, because if it had been somebody responsible like a member of the public, they would have been called in June last year.”

Explore More