Report of the Inquiry into the circumstances of the Death of Bernard ...

2.21 Before inviting witnesses to give oral evidence, I obtained written statements
covering specified questions from 16 people. I wrote to seven individuals to notify them
of the inquiry and to invite them to provide relevant information if they could. Five did so.
The statements were circulated to the interested parties. Witnesses were provided with
copies of relevant documents. Those asked to give oral evidence were told in advance
the general areas about which they would be questioned and given notice, in
confidence, of possible criticisms so that they had fair opportunity to reply. The inquiry
did not want to ‘ambush’ anyone.
2.22 I am grateful to staff in the Ministry of Justice who helped me contact former
members of staff. I was unable to contact Mr Lodge’s girlfriend, who was a witness at the
inquest and who had a significant involvement in some of the events that the inquiry has
examined. Because I have not heard from her I do not know whether she is aware of the
inquiry, the subject matter of which may be distressing to her. I have decided not to use
her name in the inquiry’s report and have called her ‘Ms A’. I have also been unable to
trace two men who were prisoners at the time of Mr Lodge’s death and who gave
evidence to the Prison Service investigation and for the inquest.
The hearings
2.23 Public hearings took place at Manchester Civil Justice Centre over five days in
September and October 2008, and on a further day in March 2009. One witness was
initially unwilling to provide a statement or attend the public hearings. This was a prison
officer who is currently taking a career break with an option to return to Prison Service
employment. Strenuous efforts were made by the Prison Service to encourage the
witness to comply with the inquiry’s requests but his view was that if attendance was
voluntary he would exercise his choice not to cooperate. This was a witness who was
central to the events and who said he had been subjected to harassment when he gave
evidence at the inquest.
2.24 After the first five days of hearing evidence, I considered that I could not
complete my commission satisfactorily without this officer’s evidence. I wrote to the
Minister of State, who decided to convert the inquiry into a statutory inquiry under the
Inquiries Act 2005. This meant that the inquiry had authority to require witnesses to
provide evidence and attend to answer questions. The witness attended on 19 March
2009. .The need for conversion part way through the hearing of oral evidence caused
additional delay and expense. This was frustrating for all concerned.
13