In Suspicious Circumstances

Product Information

The Coroner has the discretion to resume an inquest (or not) following the conclusion of criminal proceedings (see paragraph 7 of Schedule 1 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009); there will sometimes be a resumption of an inquest, despite a suspect being convicted of one of the offences listed in paragraph 1(6) of Schedule 1 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. When a coroner resumes an inquest following criminal proceedings, the coroner must ensure the outcome of the verdict is not inconsistent with the relevant criminal proceedings or other reason(s) that the Coroner's investigation had been originally suspended (paragraph 8 of Schedule 1 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009). whether the explosives were handled and stored responsibly and with care or whether their storage was hazardous Typically, the police will inform the Coroner of any reporting restrictions in place as a result of criminal proceedings ongoing and any subsequent impacts thereafter. In most cases, reporting restrictions will be lifted following the finalisation of criminal proceedings, but it is for the police to ensure the Coroner is apprised of restrictions where required for a longer period. In cases where the cause of death is not in issue, it is unlikely that a second post-mortem examination will be needed. In Suspicious Circumstances is a British true crime drama television series produced by Granada Television for ITV between 3 June 1991 and 11 October 1996. Re-enactments of historical crimes were introduced by Edward Woodward.

In Maughan, R (on the application of)v Her Majesty's Senior Coroner for Oxfordshire [2020] UKSC 46 (13 November 2020) the Supreme Court clarified that the standard of proof for suicide and unlawful killing in an inquest is the civil standard of the balance of probabilities and not the criminal standard of beyond reasonable doubt. There is a common duty upon all citizens to give information which will inform a Coroner of circumstances for when an inquest should be held. It is a common law offence to obstruct a Coroner, whether by disposing of a body before a Coroner can openly inquire into the circumstances of a death or acting to prevent an inquest. What will a Coroner do when a death is reported? The Office of the Chief Coroner was created by the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, with the first Chief Coroner being appointed in September 2012. The Chief Coroner heads the coroner system and has overall responsibility and national leadership for Coroners in England and Wales.Since the enactment of the Criminal Law Act 1977, Coroners are no longer able to consider criminal liability as part of their investigations. There is no power available for the Coroner to frame their determination in such a way as to appear to determine criminal liability on the part of a named individual or organisation or civil liability (as defined by section 10(2) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009). Office of the Chief Coroner Jamieson' and 'Middleton' inquests as they are sometimes known, consider neglect on the part on of an individual, and system neglect, under Article 2, respectively. Jamieson inquests

Rule 25(4) Coroners (Inquest) Rules 2013 - Under Rule 25(4) a Coroner must adjourn an inquest and notify the DPP if during the course of the inquest, it appears to the Coroner that the death of the deceased is likely to have been due to a homicide offence and that a person may be charged in relation to the offence. Inquests will, in most cases, remain adjourned whilst criminal proceedings are being considered. However, where an inquest takes place and a criminal act has not been suspected as leading to the cause of death, the Coroner may restrict any evidence being heard at the inquest if he/she thinks it might prejudice any future criminal proceedings. The coroner will suspend his or her investigation (and adjourn any inquest held as part of that investigation) upon the police notification, pending completion of the police investigation (and, where appropriate, prosecution).

See also

A Coroner will conduct an investigation (legal inquiry) when informed that the body of a person (the 'deceased') is lying within their district (geographical 'jurisdiction'). However, following the commencement of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013 the Coroner will no longer be restricted to holding inquests within their own districts and will have the option to relocate if it is in the interests of the bereaved family. Granada's Head of Factual Drama Ian McBride described the show as revisiting "an atmospheric past as Edward Woodward intrigues the viewer by walking through period sets and examining the unknown quirks of a crime gone by." [1] Coroners may request updates on the progress of a case, and there should generally be no obstacle preventing the prosecutor providing an update. Coroners most commonly seek a legal explanation of a CPS charging decision made or question its premise, and as a result ask to see a copy of the MG3. As legal guidance on Disclosure of Material to Third Parties cites, the MG3 should not be routinely disclosed; however, information may be extracted to provide the Coroner with further details where required. Prosecutors should refer to the legal guidance on Disclosure of Material to Third Parties for further information. Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB) (as introduced by section 13 of the Children Act 2004) are required to conduct a multi-agency Serious Case Review (SCR) where there has been a serious sexual abuse or impairment to the health and development of a child; or, where a vulnerable adult is experiencing abuse or neglect and has died following a serious incident. When applying section 6 of the Code for Crown Prosecutors, prosecutors may wish to consider the following, in particular when considering which charges reflect the seriousness and extent of the offending, give the court adequate powers to sentence and enables the case to be presented in a clear and simple way.

Explosives-related offending which may be terrorist in nature should be considered in conjunction with Counter Terrorism Division: see the Referrals, Approvals and Notifications prosecution guidance. Explosives-related incidents which are being investigated by the Health and Safety Executive should consider the Relationships with Other Prosecuting Authorities prosecution guidance. Evidential considerationsCoroners or a jury may also deliver a 'narrative' conclusion which sets out the facts surrounding the death in more detail. This longer explanation will include the coroner's or jury's conclusions on the main issues arising in the surrounding circumstances of the death. The Coroner is also not bound by the list of suggested conclusions above; this means that as long as the Coroner can form a conclusion which is concise and indicates how the deceased came by their death, a narrative verdict is acceptable. The Coroner is unable to apportion any blame or civil or criminal liability of another individual (as defined by section 10(2) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009). Coronial jurisdictions

Coroners may resume inquests where the State's agents have been involved following criminal proceedings, for example, such as in R (on the application of Middleton) v HM Coroner for Western Somerset [2001] EWHC Admin 1043. The involvement of the State was raised in this case when the inquest jury communicated to the coroner that an agent of the State (in this case, the Prison Service) had failed in its duty of care to the deceased. The deceased had hanged himself in prison, and whilst he had been identified as at risk the proper safeguards were never put in place. The decision of the Supreme Court in Maughan means that the ordinary expectation that a prosecution should follow a verdict of unlawful killing, found in cases such as R v DPP ex parte Manning [2001] QB 330 and R v (on the application of Dennis) v DPP [2006] EWHC 3211, no longer applies. This is because an unlawful killing verdict can now be reached on the balance of probabilities. However, where a decision is taken not to proceed with a prosecution following a verdict of an unlawful killing prosecutors should continue to provide a clear explanation for that decision. consider ESA 1883 charges or charges contrary to section 28, 29, 30 or 64 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (explosives offending involving grievous bodily harm, caused or intended – or other intent contrary to the Act) The Chief Coroner’s guidance identifies that often in road traffic collision deaths, the cause of death is not the issue, rather it is the causal link between the death and the manner and the standard of driving which is the important factor. In such cases, other than toxicology tests, there should be no need for a forensic or further post-mortem examination. This may merit further discussion between the CPS and the coroner in individual cases. An exception is made if you write to an inspector at least two days before you plan to bring your tubers over, giving a list details about said spud, its destination and the like.

No Results

Coroners are aware the CPS cannot initiate criminal investigations, and will provide the same material to the police. The coroner can discharge this function under Rule 28 in two scenarios: The coroner should disclose a post-mortem examination report to a suspect, (Rule 13(2)(a) of The Coroners (Inquests) Rules 2013). The coroner may refuse to provide the report where the document relates to contemplated or commenced criminal proceedings (under Rule 15(d)). Prior to disclosure the coroner is advised to consult with the police and / or CPS. Road traffic collision deaths This applies to non-terrorist offending. Potential Terrorism Act offences would fall to the Counter Terrorism Division to consider. The Coroner's statutory power to refer the case to the CPS will require a prosecutor to consider whether the material needs to be passed to the police. The prosecutor should consider whether any new evidence or information within the Coroner's proceedings has the capability to change any previous CPS decision not to bring criminal charges (that is, any evidence or information which had not been previously available during the CPS' initial consideration). Coroners cannot refer a case for the CPS to reconsider charges based on public interest alone; further evidence is required for a Rule 25(4) referral to be made to the CPS. For further information on contempt, prosecutors should refer to legal guidance on Contempt of Court and Reporting Restrictions. Other proceedings