A coroner has branded the police response to a terror attack which killed a Nottinghamshire man as ‘shambolic, at worst, cowardly’.
John Stollery and 37 other people were killed when a gunman targeted a resort near Sousse, Tunisa, in June 2015.
Mr Stollery, who was 58 and from Walesby, was on holiday with family including his wife Cheryl.
An inquest has been examining the UK Government and travel firms’ conduct in the build-up to the massacre.
Coroner Judge Nicholas Loraine-Smith delivered his conclusions at the Royal Courts of Justice in London on Tuesday (February 28).
He said he could not rule there had been “neglect” by holiday firm TUI or the owners of the five-star Riu Imperial Marhaba Hotel, where most of the victims, including Mr Stollery, were staying.
He ruled all 30 British victims were ‘unlawfully killed’ by the attacker.
But he added: “The response by the police was at best shambolic, at worst cowardly.”
Mr Stollery worked for Nottinghamshire County Council for 33 years and was a social worker who supported children in care.
After the hearing, more than 20 families, including Mr Stollery’s, announced they will now sue travel firm TUI, the parent company of Thomson, which sold them their holidays.
Islamic State claimed responsibility for the attack, which was carried out by Seifeddine Rezgui.
He was shot dead by police in a back street close to the hotel some 40 minutes after the attack began.
It came three months after an attack at the Bardo National Museum in Tunisia, which led to the deaths of 22 people.
The Foreign Office has already told the inquest it decided to keep travel advice at the same level after this attack, and not to advise Britons against any travel to tourist areas of Tunisia, but the phrase “further attacks are possible” was added to the Government’s travel advice website.
Earlier the inquest was told some Tunisian police response units delayed confronting the gunman because they wanted to gather more men and weapons.
Mrs Stollery and the couple’s son Matthew both survived the attack.
Earlier she had told the inquest she felt that any information that she needed to know about the risk of an attack would be communicated to her.
“I felt or I believed that should there be anything untowards, the people in the Thomson’s shop in Retford would have alerted me, told me,” she told the hearing last month.
“I had contacted them on other occasions before March 28 and after March 28 in respect of some problems in booking the seat arrangements.
“So I expected them to inform me of any essential information that I had needed to know.”
