Security barriers were not initially installed along Westminster Bridge because it was not deemed a likely location for a terror attack, one of the country’s most senior police officers has told the March 2017 attack inquest.
Metropolitan Police Chief Superintendent Nick Aldworth, who is tasked with making the country “resilient to terror attacks”, said the bridge linking Big Ben and the Houses of Parliament to the west of the Thames, and the London Eye and Waterloo to the east, was “not seen as a location” where those protective measures were needed.
Terrorist Khalid Masood mowed down pedestrians on the landmark before stabbing Pc Keith Palmer to death as he stood guard at the Palace of Westminster on March 22 last year.
On Tuesday, Dominic Adamson, representing two of the five victims’ family members, asked Mr Aldworth why the decision had not been made to introduce barriers on the bridge, particularly in the wake of the terror attacks in the French resort of Nice on Bastille Day 2016, and at the Berlin Christmas markets in December 2016 – both of which involved vehicles ploughing into crowds to maximise casualties.
Cross-examining the policeman during the inquests at the Old Bailey in central London, Mr Adamson said: “Despite the events in Nice and Berlin, no decision was taken to erect barriers on Westminster Bridge?”
Mr Aldworth replied: “You’re correct. It was not seen as a location where we needed to have barriers.”
Asked if such a barrier could have been put on the bridge swiftly had it been decided the location was at risk of a vehicle-based terror attack, Mr Aldworth replied: “A barrier solution could have been implemented.”
Mr Aldworth said Westminster Bridge was not seen “as a specific location for a specific threat” and therefore there was no cause “to mitigate against that threat”.
Retired window cleaner Leslie Rhodes, 75, mother-of-two Aysha Frade, 44, American visitor Kurt Cochran, 54, and Romanian tourist Andreea Cristea, 31, were killed when Masood drove his hire vehicle into pedestrians, while Mr Palmer was stabbed to death inside the Parliamentary estate by the armed terrorist.
An inquest into the death of 52-year-old Masood – who was shot dead by armed officers during the attack – will take place at a later date.
Gareth Patterson QC, representing the families of those who died on the bridge, pressed Mr Aldworth on why more was not done to protect pedestrians.
Mr Aldworth agreed that London was the “biggest tourist attraction in the UK”, and that Big Ben was “going to be at the top of the list” of places for tourists to see, but said the landmark did not fall within the National Counter Terrorism Security Office (NaCTSO) “crowded place” definition which provides guidance on how to make such an area safer.
Mr Patterson also identified several other bridges in central London that had security barriers and asked why Mr Aldworth “never applied your mind to the fact Westminster Bridge had no pavements that were wide open to attack?”
The witness replied: “The various attack methodologies and locations are absolutely at the forefront of people’s minds.”
He said not all the bridges listed by Mr Patterson would have had barriers installed as part of a counter terror strategy – simply that protecting pedestrians was a side-effect of their implementation.
Referring to security for officers around the Palace of Westminster, Mr Aldworth said there were occasions when officers were not where they were supposed to be, such as near an exit gate, which consequently could pose a risk.
But he denied suggestions – prompted by posts on social media read at the Old Bailey on Tuesday – that constables had been “hung out to dry” by senior management following the attack.
One post, read to the court, included the allegation that Mr Aldworth had Pc Palmer’s “blood on his hands” following changes to police strategy in the Palace of Westminster before the attack, with further accusations of bullying.
Mr Aldworth said he could not comment on anonymous posts on social media apparently directed towards him, but, when asked if he felt there was anything more he could have done to improve security, he replied: “It troubles me every day that I wasn’t louder, more forceful or aggressive towards the authorities in listening to the risk I had identified.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here