Deaths in Custody and the Inquest System

Abstract

The Coroner, the Coroner's Investigation, and the Coroner's Inquest hearing are placed at the fulcrum between ‘Public’ concerns and ‘Private’ relationships. The function of the procedure is to give voice to those issues surrounding an individual death which are legitimately concerned with Policy and social management. When death occurs in ‘State’ care the function of the coroner is fundamental to the public airing of concern over any issue of state control. This article considers the implication of that function where death is considered self inflicted, and takes place in prison. In these circumstances, it appears that the function of the coroner and the hearing is to personalize and individualize circumstances of care and control. This in turn obscures Public consideration of State control, and creates a sub-category of ‘prisoner and family’ with concerns not raised in Public court.

Researching deaths after police contact: challenges and solutions

“…Authors have speculated that this area is ripe for research (see, for example, McLaughlin, 2007;Beckett, 1999;Scraton and Chadwick, 1987). Using the available literature enables the contextualisation of key issues in both cases of DAPC and the coronial system.…”

Sickle Cell Anaemia and Deaths in Custody in the UK and the USA

“…In contrast, as far as sickle cell anaemia itself is concerned, the lack of urgency in policy has been striking, and health and social care services for treating people with sickle cell have been slow to develop (Prashar, Brozovic and Anionwu 1985;Ahmad and Atkin 1996). Beckett (1999) has shown how in England the function of the coroner system is restricted to confirming the name of deceased, and the place and immediate cause of death. As such, she argues, the function of the coroner inquest into sudden deaths is to 'personalize and individualize circumstances of care and control ' Beckett (p.271), and State responsibility for the wider circumstances of the death is thus obscured from public scrutiny.…”

“…Lack of care/self-neglect is one of five possible verdicts for deaths in custody (the others are killed unlawfully, misadventure, open or suicide), and Beckett (1999) suggests that coroners are extremely reluctant to return lack of care verdicts, possibly because of concerns that it may trigger civil actions. In this section we document some of the cases where a lack of care of those living with sickle cell anaemia is in evidence.…”

Deaths in Custody: The Utility of Data Collected from County Coroners

“…If a death resulted from unnatural causes, the coroner may assign responsibility or determine whether the death was avoidable. As a public servant, the coroner may be placed in a difficult, even compromising position, when a death occurs at the hands of the state, such as a death while in the custody of law enforcement officers (Beckett, 1999). Incorporating county coroners in the research and data collection process not only enhances the efficiency of the research but also increases our understanding of a rarely considered component of the criminal justice system.…”