Chinyere Inyama
A controversial London coroner who bullied staff and once left sensitive inquest files on a train has been sacked for misconduct.
Chinyere Inyama, the senior coroner for West London, has been removed from office by top judges after an investigation into claims he misled the Chief Coroner.
Mr Inyama, a qualified solicitor who became a coroner in 2013, had a series of high-profile controversies during his time in the post.
In 2014, he left a highly-sensitive police file about the murder of schoolgirl Alice Gross on a train.
The 14-year-old was snatched and murdered by builder Arnis Zalkalns after she went for a walk along a canal towpath in Ealing, west London.
Mr Inyere had been charged with overseeing her inquest, and was later sanctioned for the way he handled the aftermath of the lost file incident.
Shortly afterwards, the coroner faced fury for reportedly holding inquests late at night, in an apparent bid to catch up on a backlog which had left families and friends of the deceased waiting months for inquests.
In 2017, Mr Inyama was back in the firing line over his management of the coroner’s court in Fulham and interactions with staff.
A Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) statement at the time revealed Mr Inyama had “bullied a member of coronial staff” and sent inappropriate texts and made remarks to a second member of staff.
The senior coroner was given a reprimand but held on to his job, reportedly worth £120,000 a year.
The series of scandals caused a internal breakdown in relations between Mr Inyama and some staff, and he spent a long period of time in post but not actively overseeing inquests.
His sacking was announced in a JCIO notice published this weekend, following a secretive misconduct process.
The statement reads: “The Lord Chancellor, with the Lord Chief Justice’s agreement, has removed Senior Coroner Mr Chinyere Inyama from office for misconduct.
“Judicial office-holders are required to inform their judicial leaders (in this case the Chief Coroner) of any conduct-related matters which might affect their position or the reputation and standing of the judiciary.
“The JCIO received information which indicated that Mr Inyama may have misled the Chief Coroner about serious allegations regarding his conduct.
“Following an extensive investigation, a disciplinary panel found that he had deliberately minimised the allegations when he told the Chief Coroner’s office about them. Mr Inyama accepted that he had done so.
The disciplinary panel, having considered the mitigation offered by Mr Inyama, found that he must have known he was obliged to give a full and accurate account of the allegations. By deliberately minimising their seriousness, he knowingly misled the Chief Coroner. This showed a serious lack of integrity and a profound lack of judgement, which was misconduct of a serious nature.”
Despite recent promises to improve transparency in the misconduct process, the JCIO notice does not disclose which misconduct process is involved in Mr Inyama’s sacking, or the nature of the mitigation put forward to the panel.
