Billings has refused to pay the legal costs

Ex-CS Duckenfield who was the police match commander on the day, is facing charges of manslaughter by gross negligence of 95 people. Dr Billings is quoted as saying that “it was not appropriate to fund the request”. Mr Duckenfield’s lawyer said his client had “no comment to make”.

How refreshing to have a PCC, elected by the South Yorkshire community, who has the courage and principle to take a decision which I suggest is in the best interest of the community as a whole. While it has previously been customary for senior police officers, who have faced court charges relating to events occurring while on duty, to have their legal fees paid by the police authority, in this exceptionally severe case it can be perceived as a police boss snub to the costs bid.

Under the current criteria for granting legal aid, applicants are financially assessed to see if they meet the requirements for acceptance. Many people of comparatively low income/assets are refused – yet others of a much higher income/assets have rightly or wrongly previously had their costs paid for them by their employer or the State.

If Mr Duckenfield’s financial circumstances – state and police private pension, property and savings investments, preclude him from receiving full or part legal aid so be it. There should be a level playing field for all legal aid applicants – if you cannot afford adequate representation it should be granted to you.

All too often defendants with financial substance have engaged QCs and barristers to represent them. Fair enough if they are paying the bill. For people living on the minimum wage and low savings this privilege is not available to them, they must rely on a system which was originally intended to cater for them – but has, I regretfully suggest, been abused in the past by the powers that be when reaching their funding decision.

Cyril Olsen

Busk Meadow, Sheffield, S5