The Deep Cut PDF Download

Nicholas Blake QC was appointed on 15th December 2004 to review the circumstances surrounding the deaths of four soldiers at Deepcut between 1995 and 2002. The Review covers in detail the deaths of three soldiers, Sean Benton, Cheryl James and Geoff Gray: the fourth death, that of James Collinson, was subject to an outstanding inquest and so was not investigated in detail, nor are the inquest results. The Review also deals with aspects of Army policy on recruitment and training over a ten year period, and matters relating to the Training Regiment at Deepcut. The review has concluded that, on the balance of probabilities, the deaths of Sean Benton, Cheryl James and Geoff Gray were self-inflicted, and that the opportunity for self-infliction was afforded by the policy of frequently assigning trainees to armed guard duty at Deepcut, unsupervised by experienced soldiers or members of the Military Provost Guard. The Review does not feel that a public inquiry into the immediate or broader events surrounding the deaths is necessary. Sean Benton, who had attempted self-harm on at least two occasions in the months before he died, had had disciplinary problems in his Army career, had been notified that his discharge from the Army was being applied for, and had previously been denied access to a weapon on guard duty; on the day of his death he obtained the weapon from another trainee under false pretences. There was no evidence that Cheryl James or Geoff Gray posed a risk of self-harm, and no certainty as to what might have led them to their actions. They had both performed frequent armed guard duties at remote locations, which might have made them unhappy, and combined with other personal factors may have made them more susceptible to self-harm at the time of their deaths. There was no evidence of bullying in any of the three cases. Factors contributing to the deaths might have been: the training environment at Deepcut, causing low morale through poor accommodation, limited recreational facilities, and the balance between privacy and dormitory life; unsupervised access to weapons; supervision of trainees; discipline, bullying and informal sanctions; ventilation of grievances; poor instructors. The Review makes 34 recommendations covering: recruitment, screening of recruits and parental involvement; training for minors and the length of training; provisions for minors during training; supervisory ratios; the quality of instructors; information on standards of conduct; collective responsibility; making and responding to complaints; investigating complaints; record-keeping; an ombudsman for the armed forces; guard duty; sudden deaths; disclosure and confidentiality; whether there is a need for a public inquiry.