‘Grossly negligent’

By Fernella Wedderburn

At least six prison officers who did not escalate medical care for a sick inmate who eventually died at Dodds have been found grossly negligent, and the family’s lawyers now intend to go after the State for damages.
The plan to seek compensation for the family of Shawn Omar Hinkson was disclosed to Barbados TODAY by King’s Counsel Michael Lashley on Thursday, hours after Coroner Graveney Bannister delivered his ruling in the inquest into the death of the convict a year ago.
Bannister said the prison officers at Dodds Prison, including the assistant chief officer on duty on the K-Block where Hinkson was housed, failed to “escalate” medical care after the prisoner complained of being unwell between April 16 and 17, 2022.
“The cause of the death, in my view, was as a result of several officers, who are employees of Dodds Prison, failing to escalate care in the face of complaints; and with the knowledge that the inmate was coughing and vomiting blood, they did not call the prison doctor, they did not use the prison ambulance to convey the inmate to hospital,” the Coroner said as he brought the inquest to a close.
“The facts surrounding the inmate’s death, in all the circumstances, may amount to a criminal act or omission and the officers assigned to the 7 p.m. – 7 a.m. shift and others assigned to monitor the inmate on K-Block on the relevant dates and the assistant chief officer . . . in my view, were grossly negligent.”
At the time of his death, Hinkson was serving four consecutive 12-month sentences for burglary.
According to the evidence given in the inquest, the former Pavilion Road, Bank Hall, St Michael resident had complained of being unwell at the start of the officers’ shift on April 16. The information book at the prison showed that at 7:50 p.m.,he was vomiting blood.
When a prison officer checked on him around 12:30 a.m. on April 17 and asked whether he was all right, he replied, “No”. The medical officer on shift was informed and Hinkson was given Gravol and Dica, which he refused. He was found unresponsive in his cell at 4:46 a.m. lying on a mattress on the floor next to a bunk bed.
A postmortem concluded that Hinkson’s death was a result of duodenal ulceration with upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage by aspiration pneumonitis.
“[They] should have escalated care on learning that the prisoner was ill and vomiting blood, in pain and coughing,” Magistrate Bannister said.
He recommended that all institutions and agencies responsible for the care or custody of vulnerable persons, including prisoners, be mindful not to breach that duty of care owed to those individuals.
“Persons within the prisons should be au fait, should be aware of what their responsibilities are when it comes to the custody and care of inmates because there is a duty, and if they are going to be in breach of that duty they may be liable in negligence or criminally,” the magistrate stated.
The Coroner pointed to the Police and Criminal Evidence (PACE) Act in the United Kingdom which, among other things, makes provisions in relation to the powers and duties of the police.
“There is contention now that we should adopt that modern practice of PACE . . . to the treatment of prisoners. The local police force has its own rules . . . but I think we need to come into the modern era where all these institutions are concerned,” he said.
Magistrate Bannister was adamant that “all complaints of illness should be addressed”.
“Care should be escalated to the hospital, or a doctor should be called when there are complaints for illness. In other words, there should be a referral process immediately to a medical practitioner as soon as reasonable,” he added.
“It should not stop there. There should be follow-up care which should be scheduled when there is a postponement or delay in seeing a doctor . . . . There is a need for proper documentation in the prison/prisoner’s log book; proper documentation of inmates’ treatment, of inmates’ complaints or incidents which may lead to illness.”
In an immediate reaction to the judgment, attorneys for Hinkson’s family, Dave Porter and Adora Howell in association with Lashley, said they were awaiting instructions from the family to determine their next move.
“Going forward, we wait on the DPP [Director of the Public Prosecutions] as well because, obviously, the matter has to go to the Registrar [of the Supreme Court], the DPP as well, and she will decide her next course of action. So we will wait on that particular decision to make our next move,” Porter told the media.
However, Lashley told Barbados TODAY on Thursday night that he had sent a letter to the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Home Affairs on behalf of Hinkson’s dependents seeking damages.
“We are asking them to settle the matter amicably; failing which, lawsuit,” he said.
Meantime, Porter also concurred with the Coroner’s recommendation.
“It is good advice because there are rules for managing prisoners who are considered vulnerable persons and these rules were broken. They are owed a duty of care and the care was breached by the Prison Service and their agents and they are vicariously liable,” Porter said.
“To avoid such in the future, you have to put those protocols in place so that on the next occasion when an inmate gets sick, you escalate care immediately . . . . Obviously there were protocols or procedures that were not followed and we are saying going forward, these things must be put in place to ensure the safety and the medical condition of inmates.”
The deceased’s brother, Damian Hinkson, who was present during Thursday’s sitting, said he was “happy in a way” with the judgment.
However, he added: “Not even seeing my brother is a hard thing. I never even see he since. All I get is one phone call from the prison and that was it.”
fernellawedderburn@barbadostoday.com