Skip to content
recurance

Alex Blake

29 Jul 2019 · Coroner Andrew Harris · London Inner (South)

A similar concern from this report was raised again 1 time later. See the linked reports.

The coroner's concerns

  1. 1. unreliable witness testimony

    “During the course of the inquest, the evidence revealed concerns with the implications of the evidence of three witnesses employed by NHS Professionals at times when the deceased was already dead. This leads me to have an opinion that there is still a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken with respect to these individuals.”
  2. 2. failure to use lighting equipment

    “The first was RMN T, who gave evidence that the deceased was half out of bed, wearing pyjamas and she assumed to be asleep at 05.00. When asked whether he could have been dead, the nurse said she did not know, but it was too dark to see and no torch was used. She chose to wait until 06.00 to conduct a proper observation. She could not answer the question why she had not gone to get a torch or returned before 06.00. When found in the same position an hour later, she says she was concerned and ask”
  3. 3. inaccurate electronic documentation

    “The second was RMN E, whose evidence was read due to his unavailability. He made an entry in the electronic journal at 05.59, which is about the time which he was found dead, that”
  4. 4. misinterpretation of visual cues

    “The third was health care assistant K, whose evidence in court was that the deceased was observed at 03.00 and he held his phone in his hand which was lit up, and so assumed to be watching a film. The witness was unable to answer why he had then recorded the deceased as being asleep, as it would be likely then that the light of the phone would not be visible.”

Linked reports

Raised again laterJames Capstick2 Aug 2024 · 5 years later
Closely relatedConfidence 0.85 · high

This report

“During the course of the inquest, the evidence revealed concerns with the implications of the evidence of three witnesses employed by NHS Professionals at times when the deceased was already dead.”

Later report

“(1) To Westmorland Court. The General Practitioner who came to give evidence said that care had improved since Reg's death but he still had concerns about care given and had to visit regularly every week to check residents -the only one of six homes he covers that requires this level of support. He said it was a struggle to provide good quality care and felt this report would be helpful -as I stated at inquest it is not intended in any way to be punitive but to put focus on areas that may be im”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗
Full chain: Inaccurate documentation of deceased patients

Responses

2019-0259-Response-by-NMC.pdf ↗· NHS Professionals Limited

Stated action

“| have passed your report regarding the two registered nurses to our Fitness to Practise team for further investigation; we have now also received a formal referral from NHS Professionals in respect of these two nurses. The case of the two nurses is now with our screening team and they will use the information we have received from your office and NHS Professionals to consider the matter further.”
  • Built with
  • NVIDIA Nemotron Nano, Super and Ultra
  • Nebius Token Factory inference
  • Qwen3 Embedding 8B on Token Factory
  • Tavily follow-up web search
  • Postgres and pgvector search
  • Next.js site

Source: Prevention of Future Deaths reports and responses published by the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary at judiciary.uk. Crown copyright, used under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Data updated 26 Oct 2026.

A link shows that a similar concern was raised again, not why. It is not a finding about any organisation or person. Methodology and responsible use · Report an error