The wall that killed: follow up

January 25th, 2007

Today’s Camden New Journal splashes on the death of two-year old Saurav Ghai in last Thursday”s high winds. They report that

Detectives have discussed whether unprecedented manslaghter charges should be brought against Camden Council….

Part of this wall, as readers who read my blog last week will know, had been renewed three years ago after a similar storm three years ago. The section that fell down was adajacent to the renewed part, which was clearly visible from the brick colour when I went round with my camera as soon as I heard about the tragedy. (I hope to post a picture here later if I can sort my technology out).

The Ham & High also covers the story on Page Four. They quote a local bricklayer as saying:

It did not look secure at all for a boundary wall. For a structure that height it should have been nine inches thick not four and a half and it should have been interlocked.

Neither newspaper has yet this week’s story on their web site. So you may well be reading it here first.

As you should, because it might well have been my grand daughter, Dulcie, who walked by the same walk less than an hour before.

One Response to “The wall that killed: follow up”

  1. James Says:

    The CNJ was good. Not as good as I predicted but it got the tone right.

Leave a Reply