Coronial
VICother

Finding into death of Chas Birch

Deceased

Chas (Charles) Nigel Birch

Demographics

35y, male

Date of death

2008-05-28

Finding date

2011-01-28

Cause of death

Multiple injuries from a fall from height (level 8 of multi-level car park at 10 Latrobe Street, Melbourne)

AI-generated summary

A 35-year-old lawyer died from multiple injuries sustained in a fall from a car park at 10 Latrobe Street, Melbourne at approximately 11:10pm on 28 May 2008. The coroner concluded that while evidence was consistent with an intention to take his own life, the weight of evidence did not support a finding of intentional suicide, nor involvement of a third party. The death appears to have resulted from a fall or jump from level 8 of the car park. The coroner made no finding as to Mr Birch's state of mind at the time. Key factors included a blood alcohol level of 0.20% (four times the legal driving limit), which caused significant intoxication and impaired decision-making. Clinical lessons include recognition that fatal intoxication can occur without obvious early warning signs, and the importance of comprehensive scene investigation and forensic pathology in unclear deaths.

AI-generated summary and tagging — may contain inaccuracies; refer to original finding for legal purposes.

Contributing factors

  • acute alcohol intoxication (blood alcohol concentration 0.20%)
  • impaired judgment and motor control from intoxication
  • possible suicidal intention (evidence consistent with but not proven)
  • access to elevated location
  • removal of jacket and wallet suggesting possible deliberate act
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 —