John Gogarty

PFD Report Historic (No Identified Response) Ref: 2019-0200
Date of Report 17 June 2019
Coroner Christopher Dorries
Response Deadline ✓ from report 20 August 2019
Coroner's Concerns (AI summary)
A mental health trust failed to follow up and share information with the Probation Service regarding a patient associating with a high-risk individual. This breakdown in inter-agency communication prevented consideration of further safeguards.
View full coroner's concerns
The MATTER OF CONCERN is as follows. –

Your Trust was solely concerned with the care of . During that care your patient was associating with who had a very considerable history and was under the supervision of the National Probation Service following a sentence for murder. Although original efforts were made to contact the Probation Service to pass on information, these came to nothing because insufficient details about the male were known. However, within a relatively short time further information to identify this male became apparent but there was no further follow up with the Probation Service.

No specific criticism is made of the member of staff involved at that time, it might very well be that many staff might have assumed that there was nothing to be gained. However, in reality, if the Probation Service had been aware of your patients background they would have at least had the opportunity to consider the conditions of the parole afresh, potentially putting in place further safeguards.

It is respectfully suggested that the lesson here is that small pieces of information properly shared on an inter-agency basis might well add up to a bigger picture for other organisations.
Sent To
  • National Probation Service
  • RDaSH NHS Trust
Response Status
Linked responses 0 of 2
56-Day Deadline 20 Aug 2019
About PFD responses

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

Source: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

Report Sections
Circumstances of the Death
The circumstances of the death are set out in some detail in the findings and conclusion previously supplied to the Interested Persons but a copy is attached hereto.
Copies Sent To
of Mr Gogarty. A copy will also be sent to National Probation Service
Related Inquiry Recommendations

Public inquiry recommendations addressing similar themes

Single agency for high-risk children
Southport Inquiry
Public protection planning
Shared multi-agency risk-assessment tool
Southport Inquiry
Public protection planning
Operation Encompass cross-border extension
Southport Inquiry
Inter-agency benefit data sharing
Cross-force information sharing review
Southport Inquiry
Inter-agency benefit data sharing
Sharing information about closed Prevent referrals
Southport Inquiry
Inter-agency benefit data sharing
Taxi driver duty to report criminal activity
Southport Inquiry
Public protection planning
Publish Exercise Reports and Lessons
COVID-19 Inquiry
Public protection planning
Amend GLOS to allow claimants oral submissions at panel hearings
Post Office Horizon Inquiry
Public protection planning
Post Office to engage in negotiations during HSSA appeal period
Post Office Horizon Inquiry
Public protection planning
Clarify whether HCRS and OCS assessment processes differ
Post Office Horizon Inquiry
Public protection planning

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