EWJ August 62 2025 web - Journal - Page 20
possible that the Inquiry will consider whether
Prevent officers were sufficiently trained and
resourced to manage emerging threats.
bodies. Whatever the findings, they may have
far-reaching implications for public authorities, legal
practitioners and policymakers.
Safeguarding arrangements
Local Authorities and Safeguarding Boards may be
required to explain their role in multi-agency safeguarding arrangements. The Inquiry could investigate whether concerns were raised by social care or
youth services, how those concerns were managed
and whether statutory duties under the Children Act
1989 and associated safeguarding guidance were met.
Critical moment for legal reform
The Southport Inquiry represents a critical moment
for public accountability and legal reform in the UK.
As the Inquiry progresses, it’ll provide valuable
insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the current safeguarding and counter-extremism frameworks and offer a path forward to ensure that such a
tragedy is never repeated.
National safeguarding and counter-extremism
policies
The Home Office and Ministry of Justice are expected
to be examined in relation to their oversight of national safeguarding and counter-extremism policy. Potential areas of focus include funding allocations, the
effectiveness of interdepartmental coordination and
whether lessons from previous incidents or inquiries
were adequately implemented.
For individuals, families and organisations involved in
public inquiries — whether as core participants, witnesses or affected parties — the process can be complex, sensitive and mentally and legally demanding.
Our specialist public inquiries team is comprised of
highly specialist lawyers with decades of experience in
advising clients on all aspects of statutory inquiries, including representation, disclosure obligations and
reputational risk.
Teacher concerns
Schools and education providers — although not
designated as core participants — may be examined
on whether any safeguarding concerns were identified by staff, whether referrals were made to Prevent
or social services and how those referrals were handled. It may also consider the adequacy of training
provided to staff on identifying radicalisation risks and
the effectiveness of communication between schools
and external safeguarding bodies.
If you need advice or representation in connection
with a public inquiry or related legal matter, get in
touch with us today for a confidential consultation.
Author
Georgina Rothwell
Georgina is a Trainee Solicitor.
www.brabners.com
Victim testimony
The families of the victims will have the opportunity to
provide testimony regarding their experiences and
their views on institutional responses. Their evidence
is expected to be central to the Inquiry’s understanding of the human impact of systemic failings and will
likely inform its recommendations for reform.
Mr Graham Dilloway
Computer Expert Witness
Legal & policy implications
The Inquiry is expected to examine whether public
bodies failed in their legal obligations under Article 2
of the Human Rights Act 1998 to take reasonable steps
to prevent the attack. This may involve assessing
whether there were sufficient warning signs, whether
those signs were appropriately escalated and whether
inter-agency communication and safeguarding mechanisms were fit for purpose. If the Inquiry concludes
that the state failed to discharge its duty to protect life,
it could amount to a finding of a substantive breach of
Article 2.
CITP MBCS
Mr Graham Dilloway is a Chartered IT Professional and a member of the British
Computer Society and the Academy of Experts. Since 1971, he has specialised in
the design, implementation and support of computer service infrastructures.
Mr Dilloway has assisted lawyers with evidence from computers and phones for
more than twenty years. He has over 45 years eperience working with computers
and over 20 years working as an Expert Witness. He specialises in criminal work and
has seen evidence in more than 400 cases. Mr Dilloway has given spoken testimony
in Court.
Previous cases have included:
Indecent images
G Computer misuse
G Cached and deleted files
G Financial crimes
G Drug importation
G Terrorism
G Illegal modification of Cable TV decoders G Counterfeit cards
G False accounting
G Disability discrimination
G Drug importation
G Civil disputes
G Proceeds of crime
G Family Court
G
Beyond human rights considerations, the Inquiry will
likely explore compliance with statutory duties under
the Children Act 1989, the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015 and associated safeguarding frameworks. It may also assess the adequacy of training,
oversight and governance structures within the
Prevent programme and related safeguarding bodies.
Assistance has been provided to solicitors who have drafted letters to the CPS that
have led to cases being dropped. Has given evidence at court and assisted counsel
regarding cross examination of police device examiners.
Reports describe evidence in plain language and avoid technical jargon. In
conferences and informal documents, the police evidence is described in terms that
show strengths and weaknesses in the prosecution case.
Without wishing to pre-judge the outcome of the
Inquiry, its final report is likely to recommend reforms
to the Prevent programme, enhanced safeguarding
duties, improved inter-agency communication and
strengthened accountability mechanisms for public
EXPERT WITNESS JOURNAL
Contact: Graham Dilloway
Tel: 0117 947 7162 - Mobile: 0797 332 4333
Email: graham@dilloway.co.uk - Website: www.dilloway.co.uk/index.html
Address: Pine Tree Cottage, 39 Conham Hill, Bristol, BS15 3AW
Area of work: Nationwide
18
AUGUST/SEPT 2025
