Stuart Berry
Evidence boundary. This page is a structured project extraction from the linked primary Prevention of Future Deaths source. It is not the report text. Do not infer cause, prevalence or product-wide performance beyond the source and the explicit qualification below.
Open the primary Judiciary source · Source register: SRC-199 · Return to all included reports · Open the case–mechanism/evidence map
Report metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| PFD reference | 2026-0015 |
| Registered primary source | SRC-199 |
| Report date | 2026-01-12 |
| Coroner area | Essex |
| Clinical setting | Community mental health and prison healthcare |
| Care transition | Community and court suicide-risk information to prison reception and care |
| Primary workflow group | Risk, care planning and safeguarding |
| Primary browsing context | Secure and custodial care |
| Predominant information boundary | Across health and non-health sectors |
The workflow, browsing-context and predominant-boundary fields are retained navigation aids. They are not additional coronial findings, and a single primary value cannot express every aspect of a multi-setting or multi-mechanism report.
Care-pathway classification
This classification distinguishes where safety-relevant information or work arose, where action was expected and where the digital or information workflow failed. It is a project coding of the source, not a coronial statement. “Origin” does not mean the organisation caused the harm.
| Dimension | Project classification |
|---|---|
| Settings and pathway participants | Community mental-health care, Prison, custody or secure healthcare, Police, local authority or other non-health agency |
| Information or work-item origin | Multiple settings or services |
| Origin care context(s) | Community care, Non-health agency |
| Expected action destination | Prison, custody or secure healthcare |
| Destination care context(s) | Secure or custodial healthcare |
| Directional pathway | Multiple settings or services → Prison, custody or secure healthcare |
| Care-setting span | Multiple care settings |
| Sector boundary | Health and non-health sectors |
| Failure point | Multiple points |
| Classification confidence | high |
Classification note: Community and court risk information required transfer into prison healthcare and operational supervision; both handover and receiving documentation failed.
Classification confidence applies only to this care-pathway coding. It is separate from extraction confidence, source authority and causal certainty.
Evidence status and qualification
| Field | Status |
|---|---|
| Extraction confidence | high |
| Verification status | Primary source linked; high-confidence extraction |
| Response evidence status | Response evidence noted |
| Registered response sources | SRC-249, SRC-250, SRC-251 |
| Non-exclusive mechanism codes | LOOP, GOV, VIS, HF, INT, PROV |
Qualification recorded in the dataset: The jury found gross failures in constant supervision and the report contains extensive training, environmental and staffing concerns; digital documentation is one material strand. The embedded report is signed 2026-01-12; the Judiciary page says 2025-12-01, before the stated 2025-12-05 inquest conclusion
“Response evidence noted” means only that the row qualification refers to response/respondent evidence or records a recipient's post-report position. The linked IDs enumerate the official response attachments registered for this row; they do not imply that every response supports every part of the qualification, and they do not establish implementation. “Not assessed” makes no claim about whether a response exists.
Structured project extraction
These fields are analytical summaries, not quotations.
Project summary of the coroner's concern
Comprehensive information-sharing, documentation, assessment and escalation failures indicated serious training and assurance deficits
Requested action
EPUT, HCRG, HMPPS and the Ministry of Justice to address record, care-planning, training, supervision and suicide-prevention concerns
Digital safety characterisation
| Dimension | Project extraction |
|---|---|
| System or record type | SystmOne and prison operational records |
| Digital function | Suicide-risk documentation, care planning and escalation |
| Failure mode | Material suicide risk was not documented in SystmOne, electronic records were inadequate and information from community care did not reach prison decision-makers |
| Human-factors issue | Staff relied on transient presentation and incomplete documentation rather than the known longitudinal risk picture |
| Workflow issue | No reliable handover, urgent mental-health referral or quality-control process reconciled court, community and reception information |
| Information issue | Extreme suicide risk, care plans and assessments were absent or inconsistent in the receiving record |
Downstream Defence trace
No canonical candidate Defence requirement currently cites this report. This does not imply that the mechanism is irrelevant; any mapping must be added and qualified in the controlled requirements register.
The included-case dataset preserves early legacy_military_relevance and legacy_derived_requirement fields for audit history. They are not published here as requirements and must not override the canonical REQ register. New report rows do not need to populate them.
Return to all included reports · Open the corpus profile · Review assurance and uncertainty · Open the case–mechanism/evidence map