Officials who decided
not to proceed with criminal charges against Hamilton - despite
police fears - look set to escape a grilling at the Cullen Inquiry
into the school massacre. LINK
The Crown Office is insisting
the decisions taken by the Procurators Fiscals' offices cannot
be scrutinised in public. LINK
Police reports on Hamilton in 1988 and 1991 suggested he was a
danger - but failed to prompt charges.
a request for a warrant to search Hamilton's home was rejected
by the Procurator Fiscal's office in Stirling in 1993.
But Lord Cullen's inquiry
yesterday was told legal precedent suggested public prosecutors
should not have to explain their decisions at a later date.
Crown counsel Iain Bonomy
interrupted cross examination of a police officer whose request
to the fiscal for a warrant was turned down.
Detective Sergeant Gordon
Taylor went to the fiscal while investigating a complaint from
a parent that Hamilton had taken photographs of her son in a "questionable"
Mr Bonomy said it was "quite
wrong" for witnesses to be asked what they thought was in the
mind of a fiscal when taking such a decision.
"It's a matter of law the
decisions of a procurator fiscal are not subject to scrutiny by
a court of law or any other tribunal in Scotland."
But a parents' group, campaigning
for gun laws to be changed, said the public had a right to know
why action was not taken.
Anne Pearston of the Dunblane
Snowdrop Petition, said: "People sitting in the public gallery
have expected all along that all of the decisions will be fully
She added: "The murder of
16 children should mean that nobody involved is above explaining
their reasons for what they did."
A spokesman for the Crown
Office said no decision had been taken about whether fiscals would
give evidence. LINK