THREE Island Energy workers should be found guilty of gross negligence manslaughter for making the “utterly reprehensible” decision to reintroduce gas to Haut du Mont without conducting a “basic” test to check for a leak, a prosecutor has said in his closing speech.
Neil Armstrong (58), John Wright (60) and Lee Ward (59) are charged with unlawfully killing the ten victims of the Haut du Mont explosion on 10 December 2022.
The three men, who worked alongside each other on the Island Energy network operations team, each deny ten counts of gross negligence manslaughter – one for each of those who died as a result of the disaster.
Crown Advocate Simon Thomas, prosecuting, said yesterday during his closing address to jurors that each defendant had “acted in a manner that was exceptionally bad” prior to the fatal blast.
The gas engineers, he said, collectively failed to conduct a “pressure test” – which tests for gas leaks – on pipework leading to Haut du Mont on 9 December.
“The evidence you’ve heard consistently throughout the trial is that a test – a pressure test – is regarded as essential in the circumstances that these defendants found themselves,” he stated.
“Each of the defendants agree that a pressure test should have been carried out, and that gas shouldn’t have been reintroduced into the main without a pressure test being carried out.”
Advocate Thomas argued that the defendants were aware of “serious and obvious” risk of death when making the decision not to conduct the pressure test on the reconnected pipework leading to Haut du Mont.
“The prosecution says that it is utterly reprehensible in these circumstances for gas engineers to take that risk, he said. “A risk that could be eliminated by a basic and fundamental test that everyone should know about.”
Mr Wright: “A man of his experience cannot simply shift the blame”
Advocate Thomas reminded jurors that they are required to consider each defendant’s alleged breach of duty separately.
The court has heard that Mr Wright was working to “decommission” gas supply to the Haut du Mont housing block on 9 December as part of a team led by Mr Armstrong.
During a video recorded police interview conducted after the explosion, Mr Wright said that he had been instructed by Mr Armstrong not to apply the “vital” pressure test.
“F*** the test, get it back on – that’s what I was told,” the gas engineer told investigators. “If he says don’t, I don’t. What Neil says goes, basically.”
But the prosecutor said that Mr Wright had advanced no “compelling reason” for simply following Mr Armstrong’s dangerous instructions.
“He was the one doing the work on that site,” Advocate Thomas said. “A man of his experience cannot simply shift the blame onto Mr Armstrong.
“He should have been more than aware of his own obligations as an experienced gas engineer to ensure that things are done safely.
“You have seen someone aware that something seriously wrong has happened, who has simply passed the buck, saying: “I can’t go against Neil””.
Mr Ward: “Any sympathy that you might have for him is misplaced”
Working alongside Mr Wright to reconnect the gas supply to Haut du Mont on 9 December was Mr Ward – who was employed by Island Energy as a Team Leader.
The jury has heard that he arrived to the excavation site at 4pm as a replacement for his Island Energy colleague Luke Le Brocq, who was employed as an apprentice.
Advocate Thomas said that Mr Ward was “as culpable” as his supervisor Mr Armstrong for the Haut du Mont explosion on 10 December.
“It may well be that at first blush you have some sympathy for Mr Ward,” he reflected. “You may even think it is a little harsh for him to be in court given that he arrived into the work so late in the day.
“But the prosecution says that when you carefully analyse Mr Ward’s position in relation to this work, you’ll appreciate that any sympathy that you might have for him is misplaced.”
The prosecutor told jurors that Mr Ward, like Mr Wright and Mr Armstrong, “knew the importance of carrying out a pressure test” on the Haut du Mont pipework.
“He was a duty team leader,” Advocate Thomas continued,“and he was being paid as such by Island Energy.
“Mr Ward was a man with considerable experience. He’d worked with Island Energy for 15 years and in March 2019 he’d been promoted to team leader.
‘He had ample time to properly assess the situation and to recognise the risk involved in what was being done, and to ensure they were being mitigated by carrying out that test.”
Mr Armstrong: “He was rushing and distracted by other matters”
Advocate Thomas told jurors that Mr Armstrong, the manager of Mr Wright and Mr Ward, had instigated the gas reconnection work on 9 December.
The first of Mr Armstrong’s alleged breaches of duty, he said, involved him leaving an Emergency Control Valve (ECV) “open and unplugged” at Haut du Mont having reintroduced gas to the social housing block.
“Mr Armstrong didn’t check properly,” the prosecutor continued, “he was rushing and distracted by other matters, and it was negligent of him not to check properly.
“If gas leaks through any one of those ECVs, the consequences, and the risk of exactly the sort of event that we saw on 10 December taking place – an explosion that kills ten people – was all too readily obvious.”
This breach, the prosecutor said, was followed by Mr Armstrong failing to make sure that a pressure test was applied and then lying about it to two senior Island Energy employees.
“Taking all these matters together,” he concluded, “you may think it difficult to conceive of more serious negligence than the behaviour of Mr Armstrong in relation to work carried out on 9 December.”
Island Energy: “It had failed to get round to implementing crucial safety measures”
The prosecutor added that Island Energy – which denies two alleged breaches of the Health and Safety at Work (Jersey) Law 1989 – are also culpable for the explosion which killed ten Islanders because of its “systemic non-compliance” in relation to health and safety.
Advocate Thomas stated that the work carried out on 9 December also illustrated the “inadequacy” of how Island Energy responded to emergencies.
It was argued that the blast represented an example of what can happen “when work is not controlled in the way it should be, and workers start cutting corners.”
He concluded: “The unavoidable conclusion, the prosecution say, is that Island Energy had for years failed to get round to what it knew it should be doing.
“It had failed to get round to implementing crucial safety measures because it didn’t want to spend money.
“It took an explosion and the deaths of ten people to make the company sit up and put in place what it should have put in place years earlier.”
Commissioner Andrew Oldland is presiding.
The trial continues.
