Report of the Inquiry into the circumstances of the Death of Bernard (Sonny) Lodge at Manchester Prison on 28 August 1998 August 28 on Prison Manchester at Lodge (Sonny) Bernard of Death the of circumstances the into Inquiry the Report of Report of the Inquiry into the circumstances of the Death of Bernard (Sonny) Lodge at Manchester Prison on 28 August 1998 December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reating a safe, just and democratic society Report of the Inquiry into the circumstances of the Death of Bernard (Sonny) Lodge at Manchester Prison on 28 August 1998 Presented to Parliament pursuant to section 26 of the Inquiries Act 2005 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 15 December 2009 HC 127 LONDON:THE STATIONERY OFFICE £26.00 Crown Copyright 2009 The text in this document (excluding the Royal Arms and other departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document specified. Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. For any other use of this material please contact the Office of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU or e-mail: [email protected]. ISBN: 9780102963113 Printed in the UK by The Stationery Office Limited on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office ID P002339043 12/09 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum. FOREWORD Sonny Lodge died by his own hand in the segregation unit of Manchester prison on 28 August 1998. He had been due for release that day, from a five month sentence, but remained in prison remanded on a charge of assaulting a prison officer. The purpose of the inquiry was to examine the care of Mr Lodge by the Prison Service in the period leading to his death, in order to identify any deficiencies that may have had an influence on his death, and to help prevent similar tragedies. During his sentence, there were two critical incidents when Mr Lodge was accused of assaulting or attempting to assault prison officers. Both incidents were contentious and reflected poor practice by certain members of staff. The inquiry discovered that prison managers had cause for concern about the good faith of an officer whom Mr Lodge was said to have assaulted. The concerns about the officer were not disclosed to the police who charged Mr Lodge with assault. The inquiry found instances of care and concern for Sonny Lodge and some acts of kindness. Sonny Lodge could be truculent, but people who sat down with him and listened found him pleasant and cooperative. When Mr Lodge started his sentence it was known that he had self-harmed in the past and a self-harm prevention plan was adopted. After two weeks Mr Lodge assured the staff he had no problems and the plan was closed. The next day he cut his arms with a razor blade. The alleged assault on an officer occurred at an outside hospital where Mr Lodge was taken for treatment. On his return to prison a new self-harm prevention plan was opened. It was closed three weeks later. After that, staff assessed Mr Lodge’s state of mind, and made decisions about his care, without knowing the history. A few days after the self-harm prevention plan was closed, Mr Lodge committed a disciplinary offence. The punishment meant he spent the next week on a restricted regime, with no association periods, tobacco, radio, publications or any other means of occupation or distraction. It was an unusually stringent punishment. At the end of the week, he was supposed to be going back to E wing where he could have resumed employment. Instead he spent three weeks on K wing. i Reports from HM Prisons Inspectorate show that K wing was a grim place in 1998. It had small cells designed for one prisoner but occupied by two, with unscreened toilets.1 For most K wing prisoners there was no work or education. Men spent long hours locked up, or out on the landings with no structured occupation, watched from a distance by staff who were often wary and hostile. Sonny Lodge wrote that being on K wing was “doing his head in”. It was not a healthy environment for a young man who had recently self- harmed; a young man who, his sister said, “needed help more than punishment”. Sonny Lodge believed he was victimised for the alleged assault on a prison officer. The inquiry found no evidence of any concerted victimisation but some foundation for his sense of injustice. In the last week of Mr Lodge’s life, when he learned he would not be released, his girlfriend was alarmed about his state of mind and telephoned the prison. A series of people who did not know Sonny Lodge talked to him. Each decided he was not going to harm himself. Each made their judgment in good faith but information was not brought together. If it had been, Mr Lodge might have been protected. The day before Mr Lodge died, he had two altercations with members of staff. He was charged with attempted assault and placed in cellular confinement by a governor who did not know about his history of self-harm or about his girlfriend’s warnings. The prison sentence he received in 1998 might have been a turning point for good in Sonny Lodge’s life. He had a poor start in life and a 14 year drug habit but, at the age of 28, he had an important relationship, a new home to go to with his girlfriend, and sisters who cared about him. He was sensitive to his failings as a father and was able to imagine a different kind of life. Prison meant enforced withdrawal from drugs. It might have been a chance to turn his life around. It would have been an uphill struggle, and he needed all the help he could get. Mr Lodge was one of many short sentence prisoners. Like many other short sentence prisoners he had complex needs. Doctors said he needed psychiatric follow-up, counselling and support to stay off drugs. None of this was provided. If short spells in prison for relatively minor offenders are to have any reformative value they should be focussed from day one on preparing for release. That means engaging with prisoners as individuals, helping with practical problems, supporting family links, putting in place support to help them stay off drugs, providing appropriate mental health care, and 1 Double occupancy remains the norm. The toilets now have a privacy curtain. ii improving social skills and skills for employment. It does not mean isolation, idleness and hostile authority. Nor does it mean “keeping your head down”, as prisoners are often urged to do, if that means not drawing attention to yourself and not bothering the staff. Prison officers who know how to talk to prisoners appropriately can have a profound influence. Constructive engagement between staff and prisoners can save lives. By contrast, lack of fairness and respect increases prisoners’ distress. Much has changed for the better since 1998 in the policies and procedures of Manchester prison and the Prison Service generally. It is beyond the scope of the inquiry to say how successfully these changes operate in practice, but there is no doubt that the Prison Service has shown a strong commitment to learning from past tragedies. It has invested substantial resources in new strategies for preventing suicide and self-harm. The current policy seeks to reduce risk by “ensuring all prisoners (whether identified at risk or not) receive individual support in managing any problems”. Among the goals of the policy is “reduction in distress and improved quality of life for all who live and work in prisons”. From the evidence to this inquiry, that was not the ethos in significant parts of Manchester prison in 1998. What is the benefit of an inquiry of this kind, over a decade after Mr Lodge’s death? I am conscious of the costs, the time and energy diverted from present services, and the emotional demands placed upon everyone who had some personal involvement. Counsel for the family told the inquiry their aims were uncovering the truth, securing accountability for Mr Lodge’s death, and preventing future tragedies where possible. Through Sonny Lodge’s letters, and the evidence of those the inquiry spoke to, we have seen something of what it felt like for a troubled young man to be a prisoner at Manchester in 1998. We have learned how the face he put on for people he did not know or trust did not tell the whole story, how he responded differently to people according to how they treated him, and how casual mistreatment – by systems or people – can breed despair. Looking back over more than ten years, I must not present a sentimental view of Sonny Lodge because of the tragic manner of his death. But recounting his personal experience shows – if it were not already clear – that the basis of decent prisons is the principle that prisoners are complex individuals who deserve to be treated with humanity and respect.