News Archive: August 2021

Watson Woodhouse & Macks Solicitors Celebrate Four Newly Qualified Solicitors!

Posted: 22nd March 2024

In a significant milestone for Watson Woodhouse and Macks Solicitors, we are proud to announce the qualification of four trainee solicitors. This incredible achievement marks a pivotal moment in their individual careers.

Annabelle Poole, Matthew Taylor, Paris Thompson, and Sarah Smith!

Annabelle Poole is currently working in the Watson Woodhouse Crown Court Department. During her training period, Annabelle also became an Accredited Police Station Representative where she gained the vital experience of seeing a case from the beginning to the end. After qualifying, Annabelle is set to join Watson Woodhouse’s Private Prosecution department, which specialises in fraud cases such as banking, investment, romance, and cryptocurrency-related offences.

“I have thoroughly enjoyed my time as a trainee at Watson Woodhouse and Macks. I have gained invaluable skills which have moulded me into the lawyer I am today. I have been lucky enough to be surrounded by supportive and experienced colleagues who I have been able to turn to at each hurdle. I cannot thank Watson Woodhouse and Macks enough for all the endless opportunities my period of training has afforded me. I am very excited for the future!”

Matthew Taylor currently works within the Wills and Probate department, where he assists clients in drafting their Wills, and Lasting Powers of Attorney and also offers legal support to families when their relatives have sadly passed away. He joined Watson Woodhouse and Macks after graduating from Northumbria University with a Master’s Degree in Law with First Class Honours.

“I have thoroughly enjoyed my time training across Watson Woodhouse and Macks, it is a truly welcoming and talent-rich firm. A special thanks to all those who have imparted their wisdom to me and have helped shape my journey so far. I am incredibly excited to be qualifying as a solicitor and look forward to my career ahead. Although it is undoubtedly my achievement, I dedicate it to my family and my wife, without whom, none of this would have been possible.”

Paris Thompson is set to qualify in Macks’ Family department, where she assists clients with divorces, child arrangement orders and more. Paris joined Watson Woodhouse and Macks in 2022, after graduating from Northumbria University with a First-Class Master’s Degree in Law.

“Completing my training contract at Watson Woodhouse and Macks has provided me with invaluable experience and prepared me for my next step as a Solicitor. The departments I have worked in have shaped my career as I have learned from amazing Senior Solicitors who were always approachable and took their time to guide me in the right direction. I cannot wait to get started as a newly qualified Solicitor.”

Sarah Smith is currently working in the Family department at Watson Woodhouse where she represents clients in public law care proceedings, private law family matters and those who have been the victims of domestic violence. Sarah joined Watson Woodhouse and Macks after working at the Student Law Office at Teesside University where she assisted students in providing free legal advice on a wide range of issues family, housing, employment, and civil/small claims matters.

“During my time as a Trainee Solicitor at Watson Woodhouse and Macks, I am grateful to have been given the opportunity to be hands on and learn by doing, which has provided me with invaluable experience and confidence. I have been exposed to complex matters to allow me to expand my legal knowledge and I have felt supported, both professionally and personally throughout. I am very pleased to be remaining with Watson Woodhouse as a Solicitor and hope to do so for many years to come as I progress my career”.

Watson Woodhouse & Macks Celebrations

In honour of the remarkable achievement and continued hard work of Annabelle, Matthew, Paris, and Sarah, Watson Woodhouse and Macks hosted a memorable celebration at The Dovecot. The event was a testament to their outstanding commitment and their journey to becoming fully qualified solicitors.

Joe Watson, Talent Manager, commented:

“Annabelle, Matthew, Paris, and Sarah have all worked extremely hard in their respective journeys from trainees to qualified solicitors. We are delighted at Watson Woodhouse and Macks to support them through their training and through their careers within their chosen areas of expertise. We seek to support all of our colleagues in developing their careers and we are extremely proud that Annabelle, Matthew, Paris and Sarah all share in our companies’ values and will be able to provide the very best level of service to our clients.”

Trainee Applications

If you want to find out more about our training contracts for the September 2024 intake, click here.

CQC Prosecute TEWV NHS Trust Following the Death of Emily Moore

Posted: 12th March 2024

In February 2020, 18-year-old Emily Moore from Shildon in County Durham lost her life while she was a patient in Tunstall Ward at Lanchester Road Hospital. The report into Emily’s death found 24 care and service delivery problems in her care under Tees, Esk and Wear Valley NHS Trust (TEWV).

Following the death of Emily Moore, the Care Quality Commission (CQC) prosecuted TEWV for alleged breaches of regulations 12 and 22 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. The trial began Monday 26th February 2024 at Teesside Magistrates Court, lasting four days.

In September 2023, TEWV pleaded guilty to failures in care after two patients died, Christie Harnett and Patient X. Christie Harnett, 17, from Newton Aycliffe lost her life while she was a patient at West Lane Hospital in Middlesbrough in 2019. Patient X, whose name is withheld for legal reasons, was a patient at Roseberry Park Hospital in Middlesbrough when they lost their life.

Emily Moore had suffered with her mental health for multiple years and had been an in-patient at mental health facilities twice before, including West Lane Hospital. Jason Pitter, prosecuting TEWV, said, “The trust failed to provide safe care and treatment, and exposed Emily to significant risk of avoidable harm.”

Although staff were aware of Emily’s suicide risk, the care plan at the hospital did not ‘guide staff’ on how to manage the risk. Tim McDougall, a mental health nurse and expert for the CQC, told the court “In my opinion elements of care provided to Emily were unsafe. The quality of the intervention and safety plan lacked guidance to keep Emily safe. I am not able to say they caused harm to Emily, but they may have contributed”.

Despite TEWV being found not guilty, this prosecution is a reminder to all organisations in this sector that they must provide a level of care.

Emily’s father, David Moore commented “I think it’s what we expected, to be honest with you but it’s not what we agree with. It was narrowed down to care plans but at the end of the day, to me, it felt like it was a plan and they’d taken away the word ‘care’ because certainly care wasn’t there for Emily – right from day one.”

Ann Ford, CQC’s director of operations in the north, stated “This is a tragic case, and my thoughts are with Emily’s family who are grieving for their loss.

If we find people are at risk of harm, we won’t hesitate to take action in line with our enforcement powers to keep people safe.”

Sentencing for Christie Harnett and Patient X will commence at Teesside Magistrates’ Court on the 19th of April.

Support Is Available

If the subject matter of this article or story has affected you in any way, then please know that support is available.

When life is difficult, Samaritans are here – day or night, 365 days a year. You can call them for free on 116 123, email them at jo@samaritans.org, or visit www.samaritans.org to find your nearest branch. Suicide and self-harm are preventable, and support is available.

Further resources and help can be found here.

In the media:

https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/2024-02-27/poor-quality-care-plans-may-have-contributed-to-harm-of-teen-court-hears

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13127645/teenager-emily-moore-suicide-mental-health-hospital-Durham-charged.html

https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/2024-03-11/mental-health-trust-not-guilty-over-death-of-18-year-old

A Day in the Life of a WW & Macks Apprentice Solicitor

Posted: 27th February 2024

Solicitor Apprentice – Lewis Austin:

I joined Watson Woodhouse and Macks Solicitors in 2023, embarking on the first stages of my Solicitor Level 7 Degree Apprenticeship. Currently, I am undertaking my first seat within the Civil Litigation department at Watson Woodhouse which encompasses a wide range of practice areas. So far, my work has found me providing professional services to clients on matters such as Personal Injury, Inquests, Claims Against a Public Authority, Debt Recovery and Clinical Negligence.

As an apprentice, I complete 1 full day of sole academic study a week and 4 days of vocational on the job learning, attending Northumbria University on a bi-monthly basis. The apprenticeship programme includes the traditional academic study and combines it with a practical hands-on approach, gaining exposure to real world legal matters that affect clients’ lives. One of the main personal attractions to the apprenticeship is the structure of learning is incomparable to the exposure to legal experience and knowledge I would have gained had I attended university.

Later this year, I plan to build upon my career journey by commencing my Police Station Accreditation with Cardiff University, another opportunity available to me as an apprentice.

I look forward to the opportunities ahead!

A Typical Day:

No two days are the same!  Our working day can vary – whether you’re in the office or at court, drafting legal documentation or holding client meetings – working as part of the Civil Litigation department can look like…

8:30 am:  I usually arrive at the office by this time to get settled in alongside my colleagues before beginning work at 8:45 am.

8:45 am:  I log on to my laptop and respond to any correspondence. I then diarise my tasks for the day ahead, such as reviewing key documents, drafting letters, and holding appointments with clients.

10:00 am:  Liaise with my mentor to discuss my own files and ones that we are working on together. We then collaboratively work together to identify tasks that need prioritising over others and this provides me the chance to ask any questions I have. The tasks recognised often keep me focused up until 1:30 pm.

1:30 pm:  Lunch time! I prefer a later lunch and take this time to chill before the afternoon rush.

2:30 pm:  Then, I look to contact any new enquiries that have been directed to me or our department, translating client issues into legal terms. Often these can include very personal and private information that our clients confide in us with.

3:30 pm:  As an example, the team can often gather around the conference table and watch training webinars to update us on new and ever-changing points of law. Alternatively, I have attended prisons to meet with clients and often their homes.

4:30 pm:  We complete any pending tasks to ensure a smooth transition into the following day.

5:15 pm:  Home time!

Solicitor Apprentice Applications

 If the prospect of university fees is a concern, consider our solicitor apprenticeship program – a distinctive six-year initiative that allows you to earn a salary while studying for an LLB (Hons) in Legal Practice, without the financial strain of tuition fees. This comprehensive program is not just a job; it’s a tailored pathway to becoming an exceptional solicitor.

 Starting your journey with us means being a part of a team that believes in your potential. You are not just an apprentice; you are the future of our firm. Work alongside leading lawyers regionally and nationally, benefiting from their expertise and guidance every step of the way towards qualification.

We invite candidates who have achieved or are predicted to achieve at least ABB at A-Level (or equivalent) (128 UCAS points) and possess a minimum of 5 GCSEs (or equivalent) with grades C/5 or above to complete the application form.

Apply Now!

A Day in the Life Of a WW & Macks Trainee Solicitor

Posted: 23rd February 2024

Trainee Solicitor – Lakota Teyen:

I was fortunate to join Watson Woodhouse & Macks Solicitors as a Trainee Solicitor in July 2023, shortly after graduating from Northumbria University with a Master of Law (LPC Exempting) degree. The degree combines the traditional LLB (Hons) degree with an integrated master’s and incorporates the knowledge and skills required to succeed as a solicitor. I also had the opportunity to gain practical experience by electing to participate in the Student Law Office in the penultimate year of my studies and assisted with the Family Team.

During my time in the Student Law Office, I developed and acquired key skills such as conducting legal research, drafting documents, interviewing and advising clients under the guidance of a qualified solicitor. It is safe to say that this experience reaffirmed my ambition to enter the legal profession and become a solicitor. Following completion of the Student Law Office module, I successfully applied for my first role within the legal profession and gained further hands-on experience in Conveyancing and Personal Injury with a local firm, where I continued to develop and gain new skills.

I have recently completed my first seat in Family (Legal Aid) over at Watson Woodhouse Solicitors. Following completion of my first seat, I have recently joined the Personal Injury & Clinical Negligence Team over at Macks Solicitors. I have thoroughly enjoyed my time as a Trainee Solicitor here at Watson Woodhouse and Macks Solicitors. Everyone is approachable and there is a genuine commitment to ensure that you get the most out of your training.

A Typical Day:

Often, your day can vary greatly and no two days are the same. A typical day in Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence can look like…

8:30 am: I usually arrive at the office by this time to get settled in before we start the day at 8:45 am. You will always find me with a coffee to start my day!

8:45 am: I respond to any emails and diarise my tasks for the day ahead, such as reviewing key documents and drafting letters.

10:00 am: Meet with my supervisor to discuss matters, their general progress and prioritising which tasks need to be completed. The tasks identified often keep me busy up until 1:00 pm and such tasks often include reviewing medical records, expert reports, drafting letters, conducting legal research or assessing quantum (the monetary value of a claim).

1:00 pm: Lunch time! I like to get up and move around, such as having a walk into the town centre to make sure I get some fresh air and steps in for the day!

2:00 pm: Usually, I tend to continue with the tasks I have for the day and ensure they are completed. However, whilst completing tasks, you should also expect new enquiries throughout the day regarding a potential claim. Therefore, I will call prospective clients to obtain further details, discuss the nature of their accident and assess whether there is merit in taking on their case. It is important to ring prospective clients as soon as possible. Limitation is key in this area of law and we should avoid delays wherever possible.

3:00 pm: An example I would use that has happened most recently, is attending the scene of where an accident has taken place. My supervisor and I will attend the location and assess any defects that may have caused injury. When you receive an enquiry regarding a potential claim, it is also important to attend the location as soon as possible to take photographs of any defects and to take measurements so that you have evidence!

4:00 pm: We complete any pending tasks to ensure a smooth operation for the upcoming day.

5:15 pm: Home time!

Trainee Solicitor Applications

If you are seeking a dynamic training contract in a modern and forward-thinking law firm that offers diverse experiences and support from accomplished lawyers, all while enjoying life in Teesside, then your search has led you to the right place.

If you aspire to join us in September 2024, we are eager to hear from you. We invite applications from both LPC and SQE graduates.

Please complete our online application form anytime from February 1st 2024, until the closing date on April 15th 2024.

For those shortlisted for the next stage of our assessment process, we extend an invitation for you to interview with us in June 2024.

Apply now!

Matthew Terrill Inquest

Posted: 19th February 2024

Matthew Terrill with his daughter, Calesto Terrill

The inquest into the death of Matthew Terrill found issues around training, documentation, and communication with South Yorkshire Police.

Sarah Finney of Watson Woodhouse Solicitors has been instructed to support the family of Matthew Terrill who died at Shepcote Custody Suite, Sheffield on 22 April 2020. Counsel, Ciara Bartlam of Garden Court North was instructed to represent the family at the inquest which commenced on 19 February 2024. The three weeklong inquest took place in South Yorkshire (West) Coroner’s Court before a jury.

On 22 April 2020, Matthew was approached by South Yorkshire Police Officers on suspicion of being in breach of Covid 19 lockdown restrictions. Matthew was agitated having been stopped by the Police and in a strange turn of events, was knocked to the ground by a civilian male. Police Officers had initially called an ambulance, however, they proceeded to cancel the ambulance whilst Matthew was lying unresponsive on the floor. Police Officers simply referred to Matthew as being asleep as they believed he was snoring. Matthew was roused and helped into the back of the Police van and taken to Shepcote Police Station.

It is believed that Matthew was suffering from an Acute Behavioural Disorder as he was displaying signs of severe agitation and distress resulting in him banging his head against a wall on several occasions. In response to Matthew’s behaviour, Officers restrained him by handcuffing him to the rear, applying double leg restraints and placing him on a mat on his cell floor. There is a dispute as to whether Matthew was left in the prone or semi-prone position. The two arresting Officers were instructed to carry out Level 4 (close proximity) Observations whilst Matthew was in his cell. Despite being on the highest level of observation, it appears that they did not make any attempts to rouse Matthew despite the Level 4 (close proximity) Observation Sheet instructing that this should be done. Matthew was left for a period of around 1 hour and 12 minutes before being found unresponsive. The Officers say that during this time, Matthew had been snoring and they believed him to be asleep. Matthew did not receive any medical intervention whilst he was in Shepcote Police custody until it was believed he had stopped breathing. Matthew was later pronounced dead by Paramedics who were called to the scene.

Conclusion

At the conclusion of the inquest, assistant coroner Alexandra Pountney found that Matthew Terrill’s death had been a result of a cardiorespiratory arrest, hypoxic brain injury and ingestion of drugs. The jury was highly critical of the circumstances surrounding Matthew’s death and found “fundamental failures” around training, documentation, and communication stating there had been a “missed opportunity” to medically assess Matthew on arrival because of “a lack of integration of health care professionals with police staff”.

The assistant coroner said a prevention of future deaths report will be sent to South Yorkshire Police and the College of Policing reflecting the concerns the jury highlighted.

Matthew’s family commented on the conclusion, “Matthew has left behind a much-loved daughter, his mum and dad, 3 siblings and his granddaughters who he will sadly never meet. Nearly 4 years after Matthew’s death, we have finally received the jury’s conclusion and as a family, we are exceptionally grateful to them. They have highlighted serious concerns that we as a family have been saying for years. We cannot understand why police officers called and then cancelled an ambulance, even though they can be seen on camera discussing whether parts of Matthew’s body were blue. We were horrified that Matthew was left lying in a cell on his front for 1 hour and 12 minutes without anyone trying to speak to him.

The jury have concluded that there were ‘fundamental failures in areas of training, documentation and communication’, ‘inadequate’ training to Police Constables and in particular inadequate training on the risks of leaving someone who is intoxicated lying on their front.

The jury also confirmed that the ‘key requirements’ of constant observations were not prioritised.

The level of communication between all custody staff and healthcare professionals in the custody suite were described by the jury as ‘poor, ineffective, and disorganised’. As a family we fundamentally agree with this finding.

We agree, with the jury’s finding of fact, that there was a missed opportunity to medically assess Matthew especially during Constant Observations at which detainees are at their highest risk.

The Police Officers and Police Force have tried with all of their strength to reduce the jury’s conclusion and today the jury have fought back. It has been a rollercoaster three weeks, however, we 100% agree with the fundamental failings that the jury have highlighted. It has restored our faith in the justice system and in particular the jury.

We feel very strongly, this could have all been avoided if the ambulance had not been cancelled and Matthew would have been taken to A&E. The outcome for Matthew could have been very different.

We welcome the Coroner’s decision to issue a prevention of future death’s report as we still have concerns particularly around the training of the officers and fear that this could so easily happen again. We, as a family, hope that this brings about meaningful change and that another family do not have to go through what we have.

We wish to say thank you to the Court staff and Sarah Finney and Watson Woodhouse Solicitors for their support.

In particular, I would like to thank Ciara Bartlam of Garden Court North Chambers for representing our family and giving Matthew a voice.”


Inquest updates

19.02.2024 – Day one

11 members of the jury were sworn in. The inquest was shown CCTV footage that showed Police Officers had initially called an ambulance however, they proceeded to cancel the ambulance despite him lying unresponsive on the floor and suspecting that he was under the influence of drugs.

The inquest then heard there was a period of around half an hour when Matthew’s brain had been deprived of sufficient oxygen prior to death and possibly during CPR.

20.02.2024 – Day Two

The inquest heard from pathologist Dr Robinson who identified possible and probably contributory factors to Matthew’s death. Dr Robinson concluded that there are several factors that could have caused Matthew’s death, including police restraint.

Statements made to the investigatory body, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) by some of the officers involved were read into evidence.

21.02.2024 – Day Three

The inquest heard from three witnesses today, Inspector Hogg, PCSO Needham and PC Ward.

Inspector Hogg stated the policies and procedures at the time. This included explaining the role of custody sergeants and detention officers. Hogg shared that the custody sergeant is responsible for establishing whether the detained person needs any healthcare before they go to their cell.  Once in the cell, if the detained person is under the influence they will be woken up and engaged with every 30 minutes.

PCSO Needham discussed her interactions with Matthew, stating that she thought that he had fallen asleep due to loud snoring after being ‘rugby tackled’ to the ground by a friend. She explained that she was involved in the discussion to cancel an ambulance, but it was not her who made the final decision.

PC Ward also spoke about his interaction with Matthew, particularly walking him to the police van, he commented that Matthew was sleepy but jovial at the time.

22.02.2024 – Day Four

On day four, the jury heard evidence from PC Sian Ahmed who had been with Matthew whilst he was on Verdon Street up to his death in Shepcote Police Custody. PC Ahmed told the jury that she did not know of Matthew before approaching him on 22 April 2020. In evidence, PC Ahmed radioed the control room to request an ambulance after a civilian male made comments that Matthew’s lips had turned blue. PC Birch informed PC Ahmed that Matthew’s lips weren’t blue however, the ambulance was not initially cancelled as PC Ahmed believed she would have been leaving Matthew in the community and wanted to have him checked out.

HMAC Alexandra Pountney asked PC Ahmed if at any point Matthew was aggressive towards her to which she responded ‘no’ and explained that Matthew wouldn’t engage with the police.

A decision was made, and PC Ahmed proceeded to cancel the ambulance whilst Matthew remained on the floor unresponsive however, PC Ahmed felt this was not anything “other than him being asleep”.

Following the ambulance being cancelled, there is a discussion among police officers present about whether Matthew’s hand/arm was blue. PC Ahmed was informed it could have been due to the way he had been lying on it whilst on the floor.

After being roused, Matthew appears to gain some level of consciousness however, PC Ahmed admitted that Matthew had difficulty walking and understood this to be as a result of his intoxication and due to a bad hip or ankle.

Matthew was transported to Shepcote Custody Suite where he appears visibly agitated but not aggressive and proceeds to hit his head against a wall. Matthew was placed in handcuffs and leg restraints were applied. A suggestion was made to PC Ahmed that Matthew was placed in the prone position however, it was her view that Matthew had been placed in the semi-prone position whilst restrained in his cell.

The jury was told that the Custody Sergeant PS Furniss stated that “there’s going to have to be two of you on him” to which PC Ahmed and PC Birch found themselves responsible for monitoring Matthew whilst in his cell. PC Ahmed informed the jury that she thought her job was to check that Matthew was not self-harming but stated that she only ‘skimmed’ a form which gave instructions on how to carry out close proximity observations. A requirement of close proximity observations was to rouse Matthew every 30 minutes however, PC Ahmed did not believe this was necessary as she could see Matthew’s chest moving and he was snoring loudly.

The jury asked PC Ahmed whether Matthew’s mouth and nose were obstructed. PC Ahmed explained that Matthew’s mouth and face were facing away from the cell door.

The Court timetable has overrun as PC Ahmed’s evidence took 1 day. The jury will hear from PC Birch on Monday.

That concludes the end of week 1 of this inquest.

26.02.2024 – Day Five

The inquest heard evidence from both PC Birch and PC Fysh. PC Birch first approached Matthew alongside PC Ahmed on Verdon Street, Sheffield. Whilst PC Birch was not the officer who called the ambulance, she was involved in the discussion to cancel an ambulance.

PC Birch was the arresting officer, however, she was unable to say with any accuracy at what point she placed Matthew under arrest whilst he was on Verdon Street. PC Birch told the jury that she suspected Matthew was under the influence of drugs and commented that Matthew had been waking up and falling back asleep. During questioning, PC Birch was asked how she would establish if someone was asleep or unconscious to which she drew the distinction that an unconscious person cannot be woken (cannot be roused).

On arrival at Shepcote Custody Suite, PC Birch accepted that she did not inform the Custody Sergeant, PS Furniss that an ambulance had been called due to concerns Matthew’s lips were blue or that the ambulance had been cancelled.

Later at the Police Station, PC Birch accepted the task (along with PC Ahmed) to carry out observations on Matthew. PC Birch referred to this task as ‘sitting duties’ however, the task is more accurately described as ‘level 4, close proximity observations’. Unlike PC Ahmed, PC Birch was not given a copy of the level 4, close proximity observations form which included detailed instructions on how to carry out such observations. Nevertheless, PC Birch stated that she did understand what the requirements were, save for the requirement to rouse the detainee as she did not think arousals were ‘necessary’. PC Birch was reminded of the evidence she gave earlier regarding how she would distinguish between someone asleep or unconscious. Whilst PC Birch answered that an unconscious person cannot be woken, she accepted that she did not attempt to rouse Matthew as she had not been specifically asked to do this. PC Birch believed that the intention of the level 4 close proximity observation was only to ensure Matthew was not self-harming in his cell.

PC Fysh believed Matthew was intoxicated as he hadn’t been steady on his feet and he was ‘a little bit sweaty’. This is particularly relevant in understanding whether Matthew was suffering from Acute Behavioural Disorder; a disorder that carries a known risk of sudden death as a result of positional asphyxia, especially where restraint is applied.

An expert in Accident and Emergency Medicine will be giving evidence to the jury on Friday 1st March 2024.

27.02.2024 – Day Six

Today, the jury heard evidence from PC Yeardley, Nurse Gough, and Nurse Wilson (Nee Leyland).

PC Yardley confirmed he had been called to attend the scene as the driver of a police van to assist in the transportation of Matthew from Verdon Street to Shepcote Custody Suite. HMA Coroner asked PC Yeardley when he would consider getting an intoxicated detainee urgent medical attention. PC Yeardley stated that he would seek urgent medical attention for a detainee intoxicated if they were incapable of speech or walking.

It was Nurse Gough’s evidence that when he found out Matthew had taken cocaine and heroin, he informed an unidentified Detention Officer that Matthew should be taken to hospital. He explained that when Matthew was in the cell, he was unable to assess him due to him being restrained but maintained that when he did go into the cell, he checked Matthew was breathing. Nurse Gough stated he would be worried about someone’s presentation if they were unable to hold a conversation and would want to find out the reason why. Nurse Gough was shown CCTV footage from Matthew’s cell and corridor in which the Court room could hear an individual saying “I can’t watch this it is going to be a catastrophe” though, Nurse Gough denied this was him. However, it is worth noting that in PC Ahmed’s statement, she confirmed that one of the nurses stated that they couldn’t watch.

Nurse Wilson (nee Leyland) was unable to recall Nurse Gough’s conversation with the Detention Officer about Matthew needing urgent care at a hospital due to taking heroin and cocaine however, she agreed that this didn’t mean he did not say this. Whilst Nurse Wilson stated that, in her opinion, Matthew didn’t need urgent medical attention, when questioned by the Coroner, she agreed she was unable to assess Matthew to determine this.

28.02.2024 – Day Seven:

On day seven, the inquest heard evidence from PS Furniss, a Custody Sergeant at Shepcote Custody Suite responsible for booking Matthew into custody on 22 April 2020.

PS Furniss informed the jury that he would expect Officers carrying out Level 4 (close proximity) observations to rouse a detainee every 30 minutes. According to the Code of Practice, PS Furniss stated that to rouse, good practice would involve attempting to wake a sleeping detainee, asking them their name and where they are. This process is intended to assist the Officer in carrying out Level 4 (close proximity) observations to assess the detainee and make an informed decision as to whether the detainee is okay.

It is understood that PS Furniss provided the Detention Officer with a Level 4 (close proximity) observation form and that the Detention Officer gave the form to PC Ahmed. We heard earlier in the inquest that PC Ahmed accepted instructions to carry out close proximity observations alongside PC Birch. In this case, PS Furniss accepted that he did not give any verbal instruction to either the Detention Officer or the Police Constables as to how the constant observations should be carried out. Similarly, PS Furniss accepted he did not give any instructions to the Detention Officer or the Police Constables to advise them when Matthew had calmed down that he could be medically assessed by the Healthcare Professionals.

When giving evidence, PS Furniss stated that he accepted he should have rung the Healthcare Professionals call centre earlier (this was the process for requesting medical assessments by the Healthcare Professionals whilst in Shepcote Custody Suite). He stated the reason this did not take place at an earlier stage was because he had not been informed by PC Ahmed, or PC Birch that Matthew had calmed down and that he had other professional duties to attend to.

HMA Coroner asked PS Furniss whether the guidance provided that a detainee could be at risk of positional asphyxia related only to an individual in the prone position who was restrained. PS Furniss replied that the guidance would apply to ‘anyone who’s been restrained’.

Overall, it was the evidence of PS Furniss that he expected the Police Constables to carry out Level 4 (close proximity) observations. Furthermore, it was the evidence of PS Furniss that he expected the Police Constables, having read the guidance, to rouse and move a detainee to prevent obstruction of an airway.

PS Furniss was asked to comment on the word ‘spaz’ written on the top of a form placed on the custody desk. He concluded that this was disrespectful.

01.03.2024 – Day Eight:

On day eight of the inquest, we heard evidence from Mr David Kirby, a consultant in Emergency Medicine with dual accreditation in Paediatric Emergency Medicine.

Mr Kirby was instructed by HM Assistant Coroner for South Yorkshire (West), Ms Alexandra Pountney, to prepare a report regarding the death of Matthew Terrill on the 22nd of April 2020. He was asked to comment upon survivability, and whether earlier medical intervention would on the balance of probabilities have improved Matthew’s chances of survival. Furthermore, Mr Kirby was asked whether Matthew would have survived had he been conveyed to hospital by ambulance before midday or at any point following his arrival at the custody suite before he stopped breathing. Specifically, he was asked whether an action or inaction has more than minimally, negligibly, or trivially contributed to a worse outcome for Matthew.

Mr Kirby gave clinical evidence and his expert opinion in which he concluded that had Matthew been brought to an Emergency Department, on the balance of probabilities his chances of survival would have been increased and it is likely that he would not have died.


In the media

BBC News: Sheffield custody death: Man had a heart attack after a cocktail of drugs, inquest told

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-68512022

Mia Janin Inquest

Posted: 29th January 2024

On the 12th of March 2021, Mia Janin was found dead in her home in Harrow. The 14-year-old was believed to have taken her own life after she was bullied both in person and online.

On the 23rd of January 2024, a four-day inquest into the death of Mia Janin commenced, Abigail Gowland of Watson Woodhouse Solicitors was instructed by Mia’s brother to assist with the process.

The inquest heard that Mariano Janin, Mia’s Father, believed she was cyberbullied by other pupils at her school. Mia’s parents had raised multiple concerns with the school that she was feeling lonely and isolated. Within five years, Mia’s death was the third at her school.

In statements given to the police following Mia’s passing and presented at Barnet coroner’s court, her friends revealed that she endured bullying from fellow students, which included one of Mia’s TikTok videos being shared in a Snapchat group of male pupils. Additionally, Mia’s TikTok videos had received a lot of negative comments from other students. Mia’s friends also revealed the boys would share edited photos, “They used girls’ faces on porn stars’ bodies to upset us.”

On the 26th of January 2024, the inquest concluded that Mia Janin took her own life after being bullied by boys at her school.

Mr Janin states, “I’m still alive, physically, I have a heartbeat – but in other ways, my life is gone. I will never see my beautiful daughter grow up. I will never meet her kids, or her grandchildren. There’s no future for me, there’s no future.”

Support Is Available

If the subject matter of this article or story has affected you in any way, then please know that support is available. When life is difficult, Samaritans are here – day or night, 365 days a year. You can call them for free on 116 123, email them at jo@samaritans.org, or visit www.samaritans.org to find your nearest branch.

Further resources and help can be found here.

If you require support following the death of a loved one, please contact the Inquest team:

Call us for a FREE and confidential consultation with a specialist solicitor on 01642 247656.

Alternatively, complete our online contact form and one of our solicitors will be in touch.

In the Media:

Mia Janin: Schoolboys made fun of girl before her death – BBC News

‘Beautiful’ girl, 14, took own life after TikTok ‘bullying’ at London school, grieving father says

Mia Janin took own life after bullying – inquest – BBC News

Awaab's Law: Compels Landlords to Resolve Housing Disrepair

Posted: 12th January 2024

Proposed new legal changes, known as Awaab’s Law, would force landlords to promptly investigate housing disrepair issues within two weeks and start repairs within a further seven days.

In December 2020, two-year-old Awaab Ishak died from a respiratory condition after he was exposed to mould in his home in Rochdale. Awwab’s father, Faisal Abdullah, continued to raise concerns with Rochdale Boroughwide Housing but sadly no action was taken.

In June 2020, Mr Abdullah instructed solicitors and was undergoing a claim for the persistent mould problem. However, policy dictated that repairs would only begin after an agreement had been reached. The proposal would establish new timelines for addressing repairs in homes deemed unsafe.

Housing Secretary, Michael Gove, states “The tragic death of Awaab Ishak should never have happened. His family have shown courageous leadership, determination and dignity to champion these changes and now it’s time for us to deliver for them through Awaab’s Law.  
    
Today is about stronger and more robust action against social landlords who have refused to take their basic responsibilities seriously for far too long. We will force them to fix their homes within strict new time limits and take immediate action to tackle dangerous damp and mould to help prevent future tragedies.”

Faisal Abdullah, Awaab’s Father said “We hope that Awaab’s Law will stop any other family going through the pain that we went through. Landlords need to listen to the concerns of tenants and we support these proposals.”

Watson Woodhouse are here to help. If you are experiencing housing disrepair in your rented property, get in touch today.

Mr Bates vs The Post Office - Leads to More Justice

Posted: 11th January 2024

A compelling new ITV drama, Mr Bates vs The Post Office, unfolds the story of one of the most significant miscarriages of justice in British legal history. The four-part series sheds light on the experiences of 736 former subpostmasters and postmistresses who were wrongly convicted due to a faulty IT system, causing irreparable damage to families and reputations.

In a significant development, the Post Office, in September 2023, pledged a minimum compensation of £600,000 to all former subpostmasters whose convictions are overturned. However, the quest for justice is far from over, with more than 600 individuals still seeking justice.

Watson Woodhouse Solicitors successfully overturned the wrongful conviction of a subpostmaster led by solicitor Denise Jackman, which gained attention on BBC One’s ‘Northern Justice’ program. Peter was a former police officer and subpostmaster accused of stealing £46,000 from the Post Office.

For more information on overturning a conviction or claiming compensation, click here.