Some deaths are more equal than others

I often learn things when I conduct interviews, and believe me I have a lot to learn, but the new information I get rarely shocks me. However, when I recently talked with Wendy Sinclair-Gieben, newly-appointed chair of the Independent Advisory Panel on Deaths in Custody, she raised an issue that really needs investigation. It concerns deaths of those in the community who are on probation or under court orders. Not in the care of the state, which is for those in custody, but people under supervision of the state.

The number, she told me, for each of the past two years has been in excess of 1,400 people, and one third of these deaths were self-inflicted. That is close on nine people a week, not in prison but out in the community, who are taking their own lives. And this is not exposed as the scandal it really should be. Wendy said she would want her panel to look at this. Charity Nacro (the National Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders) has recently published a report on the matter and I will come to that soon, but first, a spokesperson for the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman (PPO), Adrian Usher, told me this:

“A quick overview of the ONS data for suicides in England and Wales in 2024 and the MOJ’s 2025 update of deaths of offenders in the community appears to suggest that a higher percentage of people on probation take their own lives when compared to those in prison. There will inevitably be a crossover of risk in both groups, and although we cannot say for certain that people are more likely to die of suicide due to being on probation specifically, the statistics suggest this should be investigated further. We would welcome an exploration of what this data means and why these outcomes appear to be the case. We would have expected the self-inflicted deaths rate to be higher in prisons.”

The PPO investigates, in depth, all deaths within 14 days of release, and they have sent me a list of those who sadly died within that period in 2025. It amounts to 128 lost lives. As paragraph headings I shall name just a few of them so they are not forgotten, and to protect their families I shall just use their first names. I cannot name all 128, but remember, even if I could, that would be less than 10 per cent of those who died whilst under state supervision during the year.

In 2025, families lost Luke, Colleen, Ashley, Mark, Lewis. Think of them.

I believe our inquest system is excellent. Inquests start by hearing the story of the person who has died. Their family and friends are invited to supply photos and also personal stories of their lives. They are seen as real people, deserving of the respect we should give to those who have passed away. This is a contrast to the way the verdicts of such hearings for those who have died in prison are reported in the press. In these they are defined by the reason for their imprisonment and the length of their sentence, dehumanising them and all too often almost encouraging the reader to consider the death to have been a good thing, and not an individual tragedy.

Everyone who dies had a parent. Many had a partner, and children, as well as relatives and a full family. They left friends behind. They were all people, not statistics. Their life may have taken a wrong turn, but death may have stopped them from putting matters right. And once the inquest is over, they are all too often confined to having their history found on the internet, which neither forgets nor forgives people. Type their name into the search engine, and all you get is their criminal record.

Perhaps that is why over 1,400 people under state supervision die each year, which should be proclaimed a scandal but is ignored. It is certainly why nearly 100 people have been allowed to take their own life whilst locked in prison under Imprisonment for Public Protection, an indefinite term for often petty crimes, despite the sentence being struck out of UK law in 2012 because it is contrary to any definition of human rights. Its equivalent in Scotland, Orders for Lifelong Restriction, are still passed on to people today. With no release date, they lose hope. Too many take their own life.

Mourn Robert, Lee, Rosie, Jason, Adam, Paul, who all died under state supervision.

When someone dies in prison, in addition to an inquest the PPO will carry out a full, independent, investigation into the circumstances. Once the inquest is completed, the PPO will issue a report, and these are not only forensic and detailed, but very often damning to all those who could have done better. There is usually three weeks within which the recipients must respond. Once an inquest is over, the coroner may issue a Prevention of Future Deaths Notice, which will be sent to the prison, to HM Prison and Probation Service, perhaps to the prison’s healthcare provider, and any other party who may be involved. They have eight weeks within which they must reply.

However, Wendy told me that she would want to see Prevention of Future Deaths Notices given teeth. She says, quite rightly, there may then be an announcement of a programme of improvements being put in place, but the same problem occurs time and time again. Failure to check observation panels in doors are kept open. Failure to undertake proper cell checks on vulnerable inmates. Falsifying check sheets.

The new law requiring government employees to be honest when giving information and evidence, the so-called Hillsborough Act, may well change that. However, I believe that all prison staff should, as part of their training, be sat in front of recordings of previous inquests and see how experienced prison officers collapse at the hearings when faced with their failures. No one would want to be in that position, and I am certain that many would leave the room realising exactly why the rules are in place, and why they should follow them.

However, for those who are outside prison within the community, it is very different. Nacro identified the same causes for those who die after 14 days as the Ombudsman has listed for those newly-released. Drugs, alcohol, homelessness or poor housing, and despair. They suggest better preparation for release, and education of prison leavers in dealing with drug overdoses. But I also believe the figures highlight the problem as to how a person who has left prison on licence can find advice and help.

Think of those who cared for Samuel, Paul, Michael, Peter, Melissa, Terry, Kevin.

An idea that has been proposed is that, post-release, people on IPP sentences should be assisted back into society by mentors; people with lived experience both of prison and of life after jail. If you are living outside, and relapse into taking narcotics, you cannot tell your probation officer, but you could have an approved mentor who can help you into rehabilitation. When you screw up, you would have someone you trust who can straighten you out. There are many people who leave the prison walls and want to help others, and this is a way it could happen. These mentors can be used by probation to give additional assistance to those under supervision and reduce the number of recalls.

There are many who find it easy to adjust once out, but for others just having a settled home to go to is not enough. Nor is having a family to whom they will return. Even if you have a family, it may not be easy to settle in with your partner and kids again after a spell away. They will have changed, and filled in gaps left by your absence, and you may feel snubbed and unwanted, causing tension. Their life has moved on, and you have to adapt rapidly. It can be stressful. Support is needed.

Families and friends lost Moses, Michael, Steven, David, Wayne, Amanda.

You might think that sympathy for those who have lost loved ones as victims of criminal acts would be universal, but that is far from the truth. There is considerable, and understandable, sympathy for victims of crime and their families. We have seen, in the news, recent discussions concerning a police officer who died trying to stop a robbery, because two 17-year-olds who were in the back seat of the car which dragged him down the road as he got tangled in straps may be due for early release. His family are distressed, and we would all empathise.

We think of the dreadful death of Ann Widdecombe, that rightly made newspaper headlines, and feel sympathy for her family and friends. Another tragic loss to those who knew her, and those who had watched her career changes since she left Parliament. 

However, that sorrow at needless loss of life does not transform into sympathy for the many who die in prison or afterwards who were also victims of crime and abuse in their youth, which led to their offending in the first place. Dame Vera Baird, Chair of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), told me that her organisation is now looking, as a priority, at victims of grooming gangs who get caught up in crime and are convicted despite their shocking back story. One conviction has already been overturned, and other referrals are likely. It is too late for some.

But there are other victims who are completely overlooked, and whenever I see opposition politicians claiming, as they are now, that this Government prioritises perpetrators over victims, I seek their quotes on Bloody Sunday. Leader of the Opposition Kemi Badenoch does not come off well in these comparisons. 

For those who do not know, Bloody Sunday in Derry was on 30 January 1972 and saw 14 unarmed peaceful demonstrators against the policy of internment shot dead by troops from 1 Para Regiment. The same Army corps had just five months earlier shot dead 11 unarmed protesters in the Ballymurphy Massacre in Belfast. Illegal dum dum bullets were used, many were shot in the back, and no one has ever been convicted. Only one soldier was ever charged, and he was acquitted just a year ago, 53 years after the event. 

After the tragedy, there was an attempted cover-up of these incidents from top to bottom of the Government and military. Despite the British government admitting in 2010, 38 years late, that it had participated in a major cover-up during the initial public inquiry and apologising, the families of the victims have had no justice. The current Government is moving to replace the Legacy Act 2023, which gives protection against future action to people who perpetrated violence during that dark period in Northern Ireland, including troops. 

Ms Badenoch posted a video on social media opposing the Government’s intentions to make changes. She said she was supporting the troops, and her video included footage of soldiers entering the area of Bogside in Derry where, later that day, the Bloody Sunday shootings happened. Victims, quite rightly, found it offensive. After this was revealed, she said she did not realise the significance and did not create the video. She probably didn’t, but that in itself is inexcusable given she was expressing opinions on giving blanket pardons to the perpetrators of 14 killings. I have never seen her expressions of concern for the families of those who died or her demands for justice for them. She does not get filmed sitting down with those bereaved families.

I will admit to having a personal interest in this. I know one family who lost a brother on Bloody Sunday, and I actually met him at a party four weeks before his death. After many years apart, we are in regular touch, and I have met them for the first time since the funerals of the victims in 1972. I first met the whole family in Derry when I got engaged to their cousin, who later had to leave England for the USA with her parents to get away from political harassment. They do not want the guilty locked up, they know the culprits are old men who made a dreadful mistake in difficult times. They just want the truth. Who supplied the illegal bullets? Who told them shooting to kill was justified? They would like to meet those responsible and discuss it, in a form of Restorative Justice, and then get closure. Those who claim to support victims always forget these.

All these were free but did not live to enjoy it. Troy, Daniel, James, Tony, Jamie, Ryan

That is why I believe some deaths are more equal than others. Those who die in state care, in prisons, are remembered only for their crimes. Those who die under state supervision, on licence or on court orders, are largely ignored. Even though the same events that lead to the deaths happen time after time, we do very little apart from drawing up new systems, on new bits of paper. The victims seemingly do not count.

But even where people die tragically due to the actions of others, we have a clear two-tier system. The police officer’s widow has, understandably, received public and political support over her distress regarding the early prison releases. I can understand her emotions, and the reactions. However, those responsible were arrested, prosecuted, convicted of manslaughter, and imprisoned.

But the families of the 25 innocent people in Northern Ireland who were shot dead by elite British soldiers are abused for trying to get the truth and some form of justice. Laws are actually passed to block and silence them.

I have listed 30 names, at random, from the list of those who died within 14 days of release from prison in 2025. Look at them again, and think of them plus the 98 others on that list. Think also of all the others who died under state supervision that year, a staggering 1,413 in total. 

We should think of all who die before their time, with respect and compassion for their families. We should not judge the dead as heroes or villains, but remember they too were alive just as we are and deserve eternal sleep without having scornful faces looking on their legacy. We should see equality in death.

When life is difficult, Samaritans are here to listen – day or night, 365 days a year. You can call them for free on 116 123 or visit samaritans.org