Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2024

Paul Gobell

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2025-0047, written 3 Dec 2024. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report3 Dec 2024
Reference2025-0047
DeceasedPaul Gobell
CoronerSimon Burge
Coroner areaNottingham City and Nottinghamshire
CategoryState Custody related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published2

The report

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

Regulation 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS

NOTE: This form is to be used after an inquest.

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT DEATHS

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

1 Ministry of Justice - MOJ
2 HM Inspectorate of Prisons
3 Chief Coroners Office for PFD's

1

CORONER

I am Simon BURGE, Assistant Coroner for the coroner area of Nottingham City and
Nottinghamshire

2

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.

3

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST

On 18 November 2021 I commenced an investigation into the death of Paul Martin GOBELL
aged 59. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 18 November 2024. The
conclusion of the inquest was that:

See attached

4

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

See attached

5

CORONER’S CONCERNS

During the course of the investigation my inquiries revealed matters giving rise to concern.
In my opinion there is a risk that future deaths could occur unless action is taken. In the
circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you.

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows:
(brief summary of matters of concern)

1. Paul Gobell was serving a life sentence for rape. He had served fifteen years in a closed
prison, most recently at HM Prison, Whatton. In August 2021, he was deemed by the Parole
Board to be suitable for a move to open conditions and was therefore transferred to HM
Prison Hollesley Bay on 20/10/21. He was there for just two and a half weeks. Within a few
hours of his return to HM Prison, Whatton on 04/11/21 he was subject to a Control &
Restraint incident. His behaviour at this time was reported to be refractory and aggressive.
During the incident he received a soft tissue injury which necessitated a trip to the A&E
department at the local hospital. As a result, the usual First Night Interview did not take
place that evening, nor on the following day. As a result there was no welfare check and no
ACCT was opened. There is no national or local policy in place stating what arrangements
should be made to carry out a welfare check when, for operational reasons, the First Night
Interview cannot take place.
2. Paul Gobell was assessed as being suitable to share a cell in June 2021, having
previously been considered high risk. He was not informed off this change until immediately
prior to the C&R incident on 04/11/21 and had never had to share a cell before. The Cell

Regulation 28 – After Inquest
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021

 Sharing Risk Assessment carried out by Healthcare and Reception staff upon his return to
HM Prison, Whatton on 04/11/21 deemed him to be a standard risk. He felt that he should
have been designated as high risk. He was concerned for the safety of whoever he might be
required to share a cell with, due to the fact that he (Gobell) suffered from parasomnia.
Despite protesting to staff, he was told that he would have to share and it was this that
sparked the incident leading to the use of control and restraint techniques. Had he been
pre-warned of the change to his cell sharing status this incident would not have happened.
Consideration should be given to ensuring that any such change of cell sharing risk is
communicated promptly to the prisoner concerned.
3. Whilst at HM Prison, Hollesley Bay, Paul Gobell rang the Probation Officer (who had dealt
with his Parole Board hearing in August 2021) and told her that he felt he was a poor fit in
open conditions, that the environment there was hostile and unpleasant and that he had let
slip to another prisoner that he was serving a term of imprisonment for offences of a sexual
nature. The Probation Officer concerned did not see fit to report these disclosures to the
Offender Management Unit. An Open Conditions Suitability Assessment ('OCSA') was
subsequently held at HM Prison, Hollesley Bay on 02/11/24, after Mr. Gobell spoke to an
Orderly Officer and asked to be returned to HM Prison, Whatton. Despite the multi-
disciplinary nature of the OCSA, no input was obtained or requested from Probation staff at
HM Prison, Hollesley Bay or elsewhere. Had the relevant Probation staff been involved this
would have better informed the OCSA and steps could have been taken to offer Mr. Gobell
additional support, designed to encourage him to remain in the open conditions of a 'D'
category prison rather than taking the regressive step of being returned to closed
conditions. Consideration should be given to imposing a requirement that the input of
Probation (both from the Offender Management Unit and outside) is obtained whenever a
OCSA is undertaken.

6

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you (and/or
your organisation) have the power to take such action.

7

YOUR RESPONSE

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report,
namely by January 22, 2025. 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

8

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

Practice Plus Group LIMITED

I have also sent it to

who may find it useful or of interest.

I am also under a duty to send a copy of your response to the Chief Coroner and all
interested persons who in my opinion should receive it.

I may also send a copy of your response to any person who I believe may find it useful or
of interest.

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

Regulation 28 – After Inquest
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021

 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.

9  Dated: 03/12/2024

Simon BURGE
Assistant Coroner for
Nottingham City and Nottinghamshire

Regulation 28 – After Inquest
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021

Responses

2 responses 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 Hmip (PDF)
HM INSPECTORATE OF PRISONS 
3rd floor 
10 South Colonnade 
Canary Wharf 
London E14 4PU 

E-mail: 

     Tel:  

17 January 2025 

HM Chief Inspector of Prisons 

Simon Burge 
Assistant Coroner 
Nottingham City Council  
Council House 
Old Market Square 
Nottingham 
NG1 2DT 

Dear Mr. Burge, 

Paul Martin GOBELL – Prevention of Future Deaths Report 

Thank you for sharing your regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths with His Majesty’s 
Inspectorate  of  Prisons  (HMI  Prisons).  We  are  saddened  to  learn  of  the  findings  of  your 
investigation. 

HMI Prisons is an independent inspectorate. We provide scrutiny of the conditions for and 
treatment of prisoners and other detainees and report publicly on our findings. 

HMI Prisons’ inspections are carried out against published inspection criteria known as 
Expectations. The Inspectorate sets its own inspection criteria to ensure transparency and 
independence. Many of the issues highlighted in your report are covered via our 
Expectations, and therefore matters which our inspectors will consider on each inspection. 
For example, in relation to first night interviews, one of our safety expectations states: 

“Prisoners are safe and treated with respect on their reception and first night in prison. Risks 
are identified and prisoners are supported according to their individual needs.” 

Other issues raised in your report such as the importance of prisoners being appropriately 
and safely located, the need for these decisions to be conveyed to prisoners, and the 
importance of prisoners being held in the appropriate security conditions, with all relevant 
departments involved in reviews, are also covered via our Expectations. 

Where we identify concerns that need to be addressed by leaders and followed up by 
inspectors at the next inspection or independent review of progress, these are set out in our 
published reports. In line with agreed protocols, inspected prisons then provide an action 
plan three months after publication of the report.  

17/01/25 

www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 We will keep your findings on file so that, when we next inspect HMP Whatton and HMP 
Hollesley Bay, inspectors are aware of this information and can follow up as appropriate. 

For completeness, it would also be helpful if your office could please share the circumstances 
of the death, which we understand are set out in a separate attachment. 

Yours sincerely, 

17/01/25 

www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons
Response from Hmpps (PDF)
Director General of Operations
HM Prison and Probation Service
8th Floor Ministry of Justice
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ

Email: 

20 January 2025

Mr. Simon Burge
HM Assistant Coroner
Nottingham City and Nottinghamshire
Nottingham City Council
Council House
Old Market Square
Nottingham
NG1 2DT

Dear Mr Burge,

Thank you for your Regulation 28 report of 3 December 2024 following the inquest into the death
of  Paul  Gobell  at  HMP  Whatton,  which  was  sent  to  the  Ministry  of  Justice.  I  am  responding  on
behalf  of  His  Majesty’s  Prison  and  Probation  Service  (HMPPS)  as  Director  General  of
Operations.

I know that you will share a copy of this response with Mr Gobell’s’ family, and I would first like to
express  my  condolences  for  their  loss.  Every  death  in  custody  is  a  tragedy  and  the  safety  of
those in our care is my absolute priority.

You  have  raised  concerns  regarding  welfare  checks  when  the  first  night  interview  cannot  take
place,  communicating  changes  to  Cell  Sharing  Risk  Assessments  (CSRA) to  prisoners and  the
involvement  of  probation  whenever  an  Open  Conditions  Suitability  Assessment  (OCSA)  is
undertaken.

All  prisons  have  well  established  first  night  induction processes and policies  in  place  to  ensure
that  prisoners  receive  appropriate  care  when  entering  prison  custody.  Welfare  checks  and
conversations form part of this process and, in most cases, prisoners coming into reception are
inducted  in  line  with  existing  national  and  local  policies.  However,  there  may  be  exceptional
circumstances when this does not happen, such as in the situation you have described involving
Mr  Gobell.  HMP  Whatton  will  update  their  Induction  policy  so  that,  when  a  normal  induction
cannot  be  facilitated,  the  prisoner  will  be  asked  to  complete  the  “late  arrivals  form.”  This  form
asks the prisoner to provide information that can then be used to consider the prisoner’s welfare
until a face-to-face interview can be conducted.

The  HMPPS  CSRA  policy  is  currently under  review  and  is  due  to  be  reissued  during 2025. As
part  of  this  review,  we  will  ensure  that  the  need  to  inform  prisoners  as  soon  as  possible  of

 changes to their CSRA status is made clear. In support of this HMP Whatton have amended their
local  safety  strategy  to  now  include  the  line Prisoners  must  be  informed  in  writing  when  their
CSRA levels change following a CSRA review.

HMP  Hollesley  Bay  have  provided  assurance  that  wherever  possible  (for  example  where  an
immediate  OCSA  for  public  protection  reasons  is  not  required)  they  will  seek  Prison  Offender
Manager (POM) attendance at local stability meetings where OCSAs are being discussed.

Thank you again for bringing your concerns to my attention. I trust that this response provides
assurance that action is being taken to address this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Director General of Operations

Related reports

Other reports by Simon Burge

See all →

More reports categorised “State Custody related deaths”

See all →

Track State Custody related deaths

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching State Custody related deaths, 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.