GRENFELL FIRE PUBLIC INQUIRY - JUDGE NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE

_{More evidence why MARTIN MOORE-BICK must not,}

_{Preside over, the, GRENFELL FIRE PUBLIC INQUIRY,}

 

_{Here, in yet another instance of what he says, he demonstrates yet again, that he must not be in control of this, PUBLIC INQUIRY.}

 

_{Today he invites "PEOPLE AFFECTED" by the fire, to write to him with suggestions as to what questions the INQUIRY should pursue.}

 

_{Typical of the way that he is, his education, and the ruling class he represents; he demonstrates that he is already, before the INQUIRY has even began, wholly and completely the 'tool' of government. He seeks to LIMIT the remit of, THE PUBLIC INQUIRY.}

 

_{Here, he attempts to 'limit' the PUBLIC INQUIRY to only, the people that were “AFFECTED" by that fire, at the Grenfell Tower Block.}

_{Yet, EVERYONE IN THE DAMNED COUNTRY, has been seriously affected by the "MURDERS" that took place in that terrible fire. We are all concerned, we all want answers as to why ‘eighty people’ were killed by that ‘fire’. We all have the right to pose ‘questions’ to that, PUBLIC INQUIRY.}

 

_{GET RID OF ‘MARTIN MOORE-BICK’ HE IS NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE.}

 

THE PUBLIC INQUIRY

 

A.          MUST BE TELEVISED THROUGHOUT.

B.           TRANSCRIPTS OF EVIDENCE AND DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE MUST BE POSTED ON THE INTERNET EVERY DAY.

 

“MURDER”

The assertion that all those that died in that ‘fire’ were ‘murdered’ is fully established by this criterion.

 

If the local authority decided to install ‘cladding’ on the tower block; and had the option to install ‘cladding’ that was,

1.            Fire resistant.

2.            Non fire resistant.

And, they then selected the ‘non resistant’ cladding, which imposed a PREVIOUSLY WELL KNOWN ‘fire risk’, to the tenants of that building. That local authority, with sheer intent, blatantly exposed all their tenants to that fire risk.

When there was a fire, a horrific fire, in which eighty people (or more) were killed as a result of that ‘cladding’; that is MURDER.

Because, that local authority, with sheer, INTENT, exposed them to that ‘fire’ risk.

The crime of MURDER, and, the charge of MURDER, must be supported by the “Intent to Kill”. Here, that, INTENT TO KILL, by sheer calculated ‘negligence’; is fully established, without any shred of ‘doubt’ at all.