Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2019

Archie Spriggs

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2019-0405, written 2 Dec 2019. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report2 Dec 2019
Reference2019-0405
DeceasedArchie Spriggs
CoronerJohn Ellery
Coroner areaShropshire, Telford & Wrekin
CategoryChild Death (from 2015)
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

The report

Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

1. 

, Independent Chair, Shropshire Safeguarding Children’s Board, 
The  Shropshire  Safeguarding  Partnership,  Shropshire  Council,  Room  GN94, 
Ground Floor, Shirehall, Abbey Foregate, Shrewsbury SY2 6ND 

2.  Ms  Jacky  Tiotto  Chief  Executive  of  CAFCASS,  16th  Floor,  Southern  House, 

Wellesley Grove, Croydon, Surrey, CR0 1XG.  

CORONER 

I am Mr John Penhale Ellery, Senior Coroner, for the coroner area of Shropshire, Telford 
& Wrekin. 

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS 

I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 
and regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013. 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 

On  the  22nd  September  2017  I  commenced  an  investigation  into  the  death  of  Archie 
David  SPRIGGS,  7  years  of  age.  I  opened  an  inquest  on  the  26th  September  2017  and 
adjourned  it  on  the  23rd  January  2018,  having  suspended  my  investigation  pending 
criminal  proceedings  brought  against  Archie’s  mother  Leslie  Speed  for  his  murder. 
Following her conviction for his murder and completion of a Serious Case Review (SCR) 
by  Shropshire  Safeguarding  Children’s  Board  (SSCB). I resumed  the inquest  on  the  2nd 
April 2019 which was heard on the 11th, 12th, 14th, 19th, 20th & 21st November 2019. 

The  medical  cause  of  death  was  Ia)  Pressure  to  the  neck  with  features  raising  the 
prospect of occlusion of the external airways. 

The  conclusion  of  the  inquest  followed  the  outcome  of  the  criminal  proceedings  and 
was “Unlawful Killing”. 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

Archie was murdered by his mother on the morning of the 21st September 2017. Archie 
was  the  subject  of  a  bitter  and  acrimonious  dispute  between  his  parents.  A  child 
arrangements  hearing  was  due  to  take  place  that day  at  Telford  County  Court.  Archie 
and his parents were known to Social Services (and other agencies). Opportunities were 
lost  to  hear  Archie’s  voice  in  2014  and  2017  but  they  cannot  be  said  to  have  been 
causative of his death. 

CORONER’S CONCERNS 

During  the  course  of  the  investigation  matters  were  raised  giving  rise  to  concern. 
Although they could not be said to be causative of Archie’s death in my opinion there is 
a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken. In the circumstances it is my 
statutory duty to report to you. 

These  concerns  are  based  upon  the  SCR  whose  author  was 
,  Independent 
Safeguarding  Consultant.  Whilst  the  SCR  is  a  public document  feeding  into  it  were  15 
Individual  Management  Reviews  (IMRs)  which  predated  the  SCR  and  are  restricted  
documents. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 The  concerns  are  covered  within  the  8  recommendations  of  the  SCR  which,  for 
consistency  of  approach,  I  adopt.  The  8  recommendations  are  set  out  verbatim  as 
follows:  

a)  SSCB to clarify, and subsequently audit the application of the referral pathway and 
decision-making process for referrals to Early Help and Children’s Social Care. This 
should  include  the  use  and  quality  of  written  referral  forms  and  feedback  to 
referrers.   

b)  SSCB to seek regular assurance that:  

i. 

ii. 

Professionals understand how to refer urgent concerns in respect of cases 
open to Children’s Social Care;  
Children’s Social Care provide a timely and child centred response to this 
information.  

c)  SSCB 

to  provide 

the  multi-agency  workforce  with 

the  knowledge  and 

understanding of  

i. 

ii. 

iii. 

the impact of protracted private law proceedings on children’s emotional 
wellbeing;   
the  factors  to  be  considered  and  assessed  in  circumstances  whereby 
separated parents make allegations about the welfare of their children  
the features of filicide cases.  

d)  To test the impact of recommendation (c) SSCB to conduct a multi-agency audit of 
the services provided to children referred to Children’s Social Care whose parents 
are  separated  and  where  private  law  proceedings  have  taken  place.  The  audit 
should consider  the completion  of  whole family  assessments  and  the response  to 
safeguarding concerns and allegations of domestic abuse.  

e)  SSCB  to  work  with  Local  Family  Justice  Board  (LFJB)  and  CAFCASS  to  review  the 
notification  process  for  Section  37  reports  to  ensure  timely  and  consistent 
arrangements.  

f)  CAFCASS  to  update  their  Child  Protection  Policy  to  include  when  and  how 

safeguarding referrals (child in need) should be made.  

g)  SSCB  to  engage  with  multi-agency  frontline  staff  as  well  as  parents/carers  to 
explore their experiences, and any barriers, to working with fathers. The findings of 
this work should be considered and acted on by SSCB.  

h)  SSCB  to  create  learning  opportunities  for  the  multi-agency  workforce  to  come 
together and reflect on their approach to providing a whole family focus; including 
how they consider the impact of parenting capacity on children.  

This Regulation 28 report is directed to the SSCB so they with CAFCASS may provide a 
holistic approach with collective responses from those feeding in to the SCR as may be 
appropriate.  

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In  my  opinion  action  should  be  taken  to  prevent  future  deaths  and  I  believe  your 
organisations have the power to take such action. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 7 

8 

9 

YOUR RESPONSE 

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, 
namely by 27th January 2020. I, the coroner, may extend the period. 

Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting out 
the timetable for action. Otherwise you must explain why no action is proposed. 

COPIES and PUBLICATION 

I  have  sent  a  copy  of  my  report  to  the  Chief  Coroner  and  to  the  following  Interested 
Persons: 

Birnberg Peirce Solicitors – 
Shropshire Council – 
West Mercia Police – 

, representing 

and to the Local Safeguarding Board (including the Child Death Overview Panel). 

I am also under a duty to send the Chief Coroner a copy of your response. 

The  Chief  Coroner  may  publish  either  or  both  in  a  complete  or  redacted  or  summary 
form.  He  may  send  a  copy  of  this  report  to  any  person  who  he  believes  may  find  it 
useful or of interest. You may make representations to me, the coroner, at the time of 
your  response,  about  the  release  or  the  publication  of  your  response  by  the  Chief 
Coroner. 

Mr John Penhale Ellery 
Senior Coroner 
Shropshire, Telford & Wrekin 

2nd December 2019

Responses

1 response published against this report on judiciary.uk. A response is a body's written reply to the coroner's concerns; publication is at the discretion of the Chief Coroner's office, so an absent response does not mean nobody replied.

Response from Ssp (PDF)
Shropshire’s Safeguarding Partnership 
Room 1N126, First Floor
Shirehall
Abbey Foregate
Shrewsbury
SY2 6ND

24th January 2020

Dear H.M. Coroner Mr. Ellery 

I am writing in response to the Regulation 28 report regarding the late Archie Spriggs deceased, 
received on 2nd December 2019. 

As you will be aware the serious case review was commissioned by the then Shropshire 
Safeguarding Children’s Board (SSCB) whose duty it was to receive the report, accept the 
recommendations and direct an action plan to support the delivery of them. 

Following the publication of Working Together 2018 SSCB was de-constituted but it’s functions are 
now the responsibility of the Shropshire Safeguarding Partnership (SSP). The SSP is now 
responsible for owning and governing delivery against the action plan which I have included in full, 
together with related timescales. 

Although CAFCASS are also required to respond to you, I have included their specific actions as 
the SSP also have a role in holding CAFCASS to account. 

A small number of actions will not have been concluded by the due date for response to you, being 
27th January 2020. 

I would be obliged if you could give direction regarding your expectations on how you would like to 
be updated on progress. Please be assured that the SSP will be monitoring delivery of these 
outstanding actions as they become due. 

Yours sincerely 

Independent Chair – Shropshire Safeguarding Partnership 
Email SSCBChair@shropshire.gov.uk  
Web www.safeguardingshropshireschildren.org.uk

Related reports

Other reports by John Ellery

See all →

More reports categorised “Child Death (from 2015)”

See all →

Track Child Death (from 2015)

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Child Death (from 2015), and how often a new one appears.

What would an alert for this have sent me? Search the full text

Free to try — the preview shows the real matches and how many arrived in the last 12 months. Your first email alert is free.

These reports are published by the Chief Coroner's office at judiciary.uk and are © Crown copyright. The text here is reproduced from the published PDF so it can be searched. If something on this page is wrong, or you are a person named in it and want it reviewed, email drcjar@gmail.com and we will act promptly.