Coroner's Finding: Cashion, Dale John
Deceased
Dale John Cashion
Demographics
61y, male
Date of death
2018-09-28
Finding date
2020-07-13
Cause of death
Multiple severe crushing injuries sustained when run over by a motor vehicle
AI-generated summary
Dale John Cashion, a 61-year-old man with a history of schizophrenia and suicidal ideation involving methods of being struck by vehicles, was struck by a car on Davey Street, Hobart, shortly after leaving his GP's surgery where he had reported a recent syncope episode. The coroner could not determine with certainty whether Mr Cashion fell due to loss of consciousness or deliberately placed himself in front of the vehicle. The driver was travelling at 45 km/h (below the 50 km/h limit), was unimpaired, and did not have sufficient stopping distance to avoid the collision. The clinical lessons centre on the assessment of syncope and mental health risk: the GP's documentation noted 'no suicidality' on the day of death despite Mr Cashion's documented history of specific suicidal ideation involving being struck by vehicles. The assessment of vasovagal syncope may have been incomplete given the acute presentation and mental health context.
AI-generated summary and tagging — may contain inaccuracies; refer to original finding for legal purposes.
Error types
Drugs involved
Clinical conditions
Contributing factors
- Recent syncope episode two days prior to death
- History of suicidal ideation with method involving being struck by vehicle
- Uncertainty regarding whether loss of consciousness or deliberate act led to patient being in roadway
- Possible incomplete assessment of suicide risk at time of GP consultation despite documented history
Full text
Source and disclaimer
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 —