Damian John Cook, aged 24, died by hanging in his cell at Adelaide Remand Centre after 5 months in custody. His suicidal ideation on the day of death (following difficult phone calls with his ex-partner regarding access to their daughter) was not detected by staff, though fellow inmates knew he was distressed. His initial screening on admission noted his brother's recent suicide but did not identify him as at-risk. The critical clinical lesson is that formal risk assessment is a 'snapshot in time'—circumstances change during extended remand detention. Cook had access to an obvious hanging point (metal grille over air vent) that had been identified as a safety hazard in multiple previous coronial inquests. Early recognition of deteriorating mental state, more frequent risk screening, visitor/family reporting mechanisms, and urgent elimination of hanging points through 'safe cell' design principles are all preventable interventions.
AI-generated summary and tagging — may contain inaccuracies; refer to original finding for legal purposes.
lack of ongoing risk screening during custody (only done at admission)
obvious hanging point accessible in cell
single cell occupancy allowing unobserved opportunity
failure of staff to observe or act on earlier self-harming behaviour (wrist cuts observed by inmates but not reported to staff)
poor communication between inmates and staff regarding fellow inmate welfare
deteriorating mental health due to relationship breakdown and inability to see daughter
difficult phone conversation with ex-partner preceding the death
Coroner's recommendations
DCS forthwith remove or modify the hanging points in Cell 20, Unit 4 identified in this Inquest so as to eliminate or minimise to the greatest extent possible the risk that they will be used by an inmate for the purpose of self-harm or suicide.
In so far as those same potential hanging points exists in other cells in the ARC, that the DCS forthwith remove or modify them so as to eliminate or minimise to the greatest extent possible the risk that they will be used by an inmate for the purpose of self-harm or suicide.
All other hanging points within the cells at the ARC be identified and either removed or modified so as to eliminate or minimise to the greatest extent possible the risk of an inmate using them for the purpose of self-harm or suicide.
The 'safe cell' principles be adopted and implemented by the DCS in prisons throughout South Australia and done so as a matter of urgency.
DCS expedite its current audit and then, as a matter of urgency, make a further submission to Government for the necessary funding to implement safe cell principles in prisons throughout South Australia.
The South Australian Government, upon receipt of such further submission from DCS, reconsider its earlier decision not to accord priority to the implementation of the safe cell principles in prisons throughout South Australia.
Continuing efforts should be made by DCS to encourage prisoners to pass on concerns or information they may have that a fellow prisoner may be at risk either to custodial officers, Aboriginal Liaison Officers, or any other appropriate person.
DCS make continuing efforts to educate prisoners, and families, friends and associates, of the urgent need to pass on any concerns about the mental health of a prisoner to the medical or custodial authorities at the prison so that adequate measures can be taken to protect the prisoner from self-harm.
DCS place in visitor's waiting areas in the ARC information that would enable a visitor or other person concerned for the welfare and safety of an inmate, particularly in relation to the possibility of self-harm, to register formally their concerns.
DCS establish a formal procedure to enable expressions of concern so made to be registered and acted upon by ARC staff.
DCS establish a panel to examine the feasibility of introducing a regime whereby inmates at the ARC are formally screened for risk of self-harm on a more regular basis.
This page reproduces or summarises information from publicly available findings published by Australian coroners' courts. Coronial is an independent educational resource and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting on behalf of any coronial court or government body.
Content may be incomplete, reformatted, or summarised. All court orders for redaction and non-publication are respected; documents with technically defective redaction have been excluded from the database entirely. Always refer to the original court publication for the authoritative record.
Copyright in original materials remains with the relevant government jurisdiction. AI-generated summaries and tagging are for educational purposes only, may contain inaccuracies, and must not be treated as legal documents. We welcome feedback for correction —