INQUEST has launched a damning new report exposing the fact that after an inquest into a death in police custody, there is no mechanism to stop exactly the same situation from happening again and again.
In the report called: ‘Learning from Death in Custody Inquests: A New Framework for Action and Accountability’ co-directors Deborah Coles and Helen Shaw argue that once the inquest is over there is nothing in place to make sure those failings are addressed and acted upon by the relevant authority.
On Monday, the same day as the release of the new report, the inquest into the death of Jacob Michael in police custody in Runcorn began.
In 2011 Jacob Michael, after calling the police himself, was restrained in his own house, in Widnes, pepper sprayed, ran into the street, was beaten to the ground by police batons, restrained in the back of the police van and then thrown face down on the floor of a police cell where he died.
INQUEST’s report on the details of the inquest that began last Monday states: ‘Jacob Michael died on 22 August 2011 aged 25 following arrest and restraint by police.
‘He had called the police himself in an agitated state after telling his family he had been threatened.
‘The police arrived at the house and forced their way into his bedroom, spraying incapacitant spray at him, whereupon Mr Michael ran out of the house and down the street.
‘The police pursued him, striking him with batons and restraining him before putting him in the back of a police van to take him into custody at Runcorn police station.
‘He was then left face down on the floor of a police cell for several minutes with police officers standing on his legs, where he died.
‘On the first day of the inquest, the jury will be shown disturbing CCTV film of Jacob Michael being pursued by police officers wielding batons in the street outside his home, being transported in the police van, arriving at the custody suite and then being held face down on the cell floor where he died.
‘More than 60 witnesses are listed to give evidence including Jacob’s mother, civilian eye witnesses and police officers. The inquest is scheduled to last for four weeks.
‘Jacob Michael’s family hope the inquest will answer serious questions concerning the officers’ actions when they entered his bedroom, the use of force by police in the street, the restraint itself, the failure to treat him as a medical emergency rather than take him to the police station.
‘His treatment in the police station, and the overall attitude of police to a young man who was clearly confused, frightened and unwell.’
Ann Michael, Jacob Michael’s mother, said: ‘My son called the police for help and they sprayed him with pepper spray and arrested him.
‘Two hours later there was a knock on my door by the police to say that he had passed away.
‘He was a fit twenty five year old man. I want to know why. I just can’t understand it.’
Deborah Coles, INQUEST co-director said: ‘Yet again, we begin an inquest into a death following restraint in police custody of a young black man.
‘This is a particularly disturbing and distressing death, made all the more so by the existence of CCTV footage for much of his last minutes alive.
‘Serious questions must be asked about how a young man in distress came to be hit with batons, restrained, and disregarded while he lay dying on a police cell floor.
‘It is vital both for Jacob Michael’s family and the public that this is a far reaching and thorough inquest into his death.’
The family is being represented by INQUEST Lawyers Group members Adam Sandell of Matrix Chambers, instructed by Kate Maynard of Hickman & Rose Solicitors.
The INQUEST statement accompanying its ‘Learning from Deaths in Custody Inquests’ report declares: ‘The Prisons and Probation Ombudsman’s recent annual report noted the ‘deeply troubling’ rise in the number of deaths in custody in the past year, the highest since 2004.
‘The report analysed 50 rule 43 reports received by INQUEST between 2007 and 2009.
‘The analysis reveals a series of trends and patterns that show that the same issues are consistently identified as possibly contributing to the death.
‘These include such issues as failures in communication and recording procedures, healthcare treatment and resources, treatment of those identified as being at risk of self harm, training, cell design, and mental health issues among others.
‘Learning is lost by: the inconsistent approach by coroners to the use of their powers to report matters of concern to the relevant authorities; the lack of analysis, publication and dissemination of the reports or narrative verdicts across custodial sectors, and the lack of transparency and accountability of the detaining agencies about action taken to rectify identified and dangerous systemic problems.
‘This presents an overwhelming case for the creation of a new mechanism in the form of a central oversight body tasked with the duty to collate, analyse critically, publish and report publicly on the accumulated learning from coronial narrative verdicts and rule 43 reports and a more co-ordinated response by the regulation investigation and inspection bodies once an inquest has taken place.’
Deborah Coles, co-director of INQUEST and co-author of the report said: ‘INQUEST’s frustration is with how the same systemic failings repeat themselves with depressing regularity at inquests into deaths in custody.
‘A proactive post inquest strategy in response to verdicts and reports and a more co-ordinated and active response by the investigation, inspection and regulation bodies can not only avert future deaths, but improve standards of custodial care and ensure that the human rights of detainees are protected.
‘The more effective use of narrative verdicts and Coroners Rule 43 reports is overwhelmingly likely to assist in the saving of lives.
‘The appointment of the Chief Coroner, the legal official who orders a post-mortem and who is in charge of the inquest procedure, presents us with a unique opportunity for real, fundamental reform.
‘With the incorporation of deaths in custody into the Corporate Manslaughter Act there is the need for a statutory mechanism to be put in place that ensures proper monitoring and analysis of narrative verdicts and Rule 43 reports to see whether action has been taken to rectify dangerous practices and systems identified during an inquest.
‘This is an important instrument for accountability.’
