Ozeivo Akerele

PFD Report All Responded Ref: 2017-0337
Date of Report 19 July 2017
Coroner Sean McGovern
Coroner Area Coventry
Response Deadline ✓ from report 19 July 2017
All 1 response received · Deadline: 19 Jul 2017
Response Status
Responses 1 of 1
56-Day Deadline 19 Jul 2017
All responses received
About PFD responses

Organisations named in PFD reports must respond within 56 days explaining what actions they are taking.

Source: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

Coroner’s Concerns
(1) failure to find the body of Mr Akerele despite an intensive search when in fact his body was found very close to the last confirmed sighting of him.

(2) failure to search the disused graveyard at or about the time of his disappearance. where Mr Akerele was eventually discovered 15 months later by children.- the graveyard was only a few metres away from the last sighting of him on CCTV on 31 January 2015.

(2) failure of the search team to find Mr Akerele when they did eventually search the disused graveyard in approximately late February 2015 despite the graveyard being approximately 60m x 30m.

(3) The recommendation by for a more thorough search was not followed up.

(4)The Police Search Advisor was unaware of the recommendation for a more thorough search by

(5) The Police Search Advisor was unaware of the (cursory) nature of the search of the graveyard in February 2015
Responses
West Midland Police
12 Sep 2018
Response received
View full response
Dear Mr McGovern, write in reference to your letter dated 20/07/17 , touching on the death of Ozeivo Andrew Akerele, who went missing on 31/01/15. In your letter you provided the outcome of the inquest as death by misadventure and using your legal powers you raised concerns regarding the police search under paragraph 7 Schedule 5, of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 and regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013. As you will be aware, matters arising from this incident were referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) and it was not appropriate to comment whilst the matter was still under investigation: The IOPC investigation has now concluded and we received their written response on 07/09/18. The outcome of the IOPC investigation is as follows:
1) No criminal case to answer.
2) No requirement to refer the matter to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS):
3) No formal recommendations_ The Appropriate Authority in our Professional Standards Department (PSD); has since reviewed the IOPC decision to assess whether the officer's conduct is capable of amounting to gross misconduct or misconduct subject to s.23(6)a)(i) Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002. The outcome of this review is that no further action will be taken: Under Paragraph 28(1)b) of Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002, as responded to the IOPC outlining opportunities for organisational learning: In relation to the searching, it does appear that a more comprehensive search strategy and updates could have been compiled, with absolute clarity around who had searched what area, to what extent and at what time_ The individual decisions by land appear reasonable,but a more comprehensive effort would have ensured that the relevant information thatl had accessed the land that thought inaccessible, and the relative limitations of the search that had carried out; would have been more apparent at an earlier stage_ It also appears that an earler invitation to the POLSA may have assisted in the tasking and recording of searches at the earliest opportunity: Preventing crime; protecting the public and helping those in need WWW West-midlands police uk 2 5

The case will now be referred to the National Missing Persons Operational Group to consider working with the Police Search Advisor (POLSA) to amend guidance around how a search is CO- ordinated in similar cases; specifically providing clarity around the tasking of the search, what is being searched for and the accurate recording of search, completed with oversight by Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) and POLSA trust that this response assists with your investigation and would like to apologise for the time that it has taken in responding_ would like to thank you for extensions that you have granted to allow for this matter to be thoroughly reviewed by the IOPC and PSD_ If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me_
Report Sections
Investigation and Inquest
On 25 April 2016 I commenced an investigation into the death of Ozeivo Andrew AKERELE. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 1 November 2016. The conclusion of the inquest was a Misadventure (Copy attached).
Circumstances of the Death
See attached Record of Inquest
Related Inquiry Recommendations

Public inquiry recommendations addressing similar themes

Simplify Emergency Preparedness Structures
COVID-19 Inquiry
Police investigation management
Improved Risk Assessment Approach
COVID-19 Inquiry
Police investigation management
UK-wide Civil Emergency Strategy
COVID-19 Inquiry
Police investigation management
Pandemic Data Systems and Research
COVID-19 Inquiry
Police investigation management
Triennial Pandemic Exercises
COVID-19 Inquiry
Police investigation management
Publish Exercise Reports and Lessons
COVID-19 Inquiry
Police investigation management
External Red Teams for Resilience
COVID-19 Inquiry
Police investigation management
Apply best offer principle equally in GLOS
Post Office Horizon Inquiry
Police investigation management
Close HSS Dispute Resolution Procedure when HSSA opens
Post Office Horizon Inquiry
Police investigation management
Establish standing public body to administer future redress schemes
Post Office Horizon Inquiry
Police investigation management

Data sourced from Courts and Tribunals Judiciary under the Open Government Licence.