Talk:Inquests in England and Wales

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Incorrect information

The information included in this article is incorrect - the legal purpose of an inquest under the British system is to answer an specific set of 4 questions using an inquisitorial approach. I will add what I can but would be grateful if a professional could help out! Totallycrazyman 17:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm inclined to do here is to reduce this article to the bare "comparative law" minimum (there's enough in EB to do this confidently). A subsequent article Inquest (England and Wales) can then be built and linked. I am going to delete a lot of content but I will verify it and bring it back in the E&W article soon.

No, changed mind already. I am going to move this to an E&W article, leaving templates in place, then revise the Inquest article, then go back and verify/ update the E&W article.Cutler 22:54, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Death by Misadventure

Death_by_misadventure rather confusingly redirects to the Verdict section here, where the term is used, buy not described or explained. The other Verdicts listed here point to pages explaining them. Perhapse we can do something similar, rather than present a dead end. I notice that the page Misadventure usefully redirects to Accident.75.68.16.228 (talk) 11:50, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Inquests in England and Wales. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:20, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Verdicts and burdens of proof

1) Coroners return conclusions, not verdicts, although everyone except the legal profession uses the term verdicts.

2) There was a case in 2018 which changed the burden of proof needed to return a conclusion of unlawful killing or suicide from "beyond all reasonable doubt" to "balance of probabilities". R (on the application of Thomas Maughan) v Senior Coroner for Oxfordshire [2018] EWHC 1955 (Admin) DanBCDanBC (talk) 02:05, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]