PFD report

Casper Blackburn · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 3 Apr 2018•Manchester South

Report record

Published report and response evidence

This page connects the concerns raised in this report with statements found in recipients’ published responses. A link shows a clear evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
2

Raised in this report

Recipients
3

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 3 recipients

Stated actions
2

Described in responses

Recipients and published responses

Source document

Full report text

This is the full text from the original published report.

Open published report

Concerns and recipient responses

Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

Concerns raised2

  1. Lack of CCTV coverage in the area
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable safety CCTV monitoring systems
  2. Extremely poor lighting in the canal area
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate outdoor safety lighting
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.5

  1. Position

    The Canal & River Trust has no jurisdiction or responsibilities regarding the Bridgewater Canal or land at the incident location.

    Stated by Canal & River TrustOutside remitThe respondent said that this matter was outside its role or authority.

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of CCTV coverage in the area

Wider context from the report

“The lighting in the area where Casper likely accidentally entered the canal was extremely poor. There is no CCTV in the area and therefore what precisely happened on the morning of Casper’s death is unclear. Evidence was heard that police attended the scene at night on a date following Casper’s death. The area was so dark that it was very difficult to discern the canal from the grass verge or the path. I am concerned that future deaths might occur if action is not taken to address this. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable safety CCTV monitoring systems.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Extremely poor lighting in the canal area

Wider context from the report

“The lighting in the area where Casper likely accidentally entered the canal was extremely poor. There is no CCTV in the area and therefore what precisely happened on the morning of Casper’s death is unclear. Evidence was heard that police attended the scene at night on a date following Casper’s death. The area was so dark that it was very difficult to discern the canal from the grass verge or the path. I am concerned that future deaths might occur if action is not taken to address this. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate outdoor safety lighting.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

The Canal & River Trust has no jurisdiction or responsibilities regarding the Bridgewater Canal or land at the incident location.

Verbatim wording from the response

“However, the Canal & River Trust has no jurisdiction or responsibilities regarding the Bridgewater Canal or the land at this location. I believe this is in fact the responsibility of Peel Holdings and because I can see that the Regulation 28 report is being sent to Peel Holdings, in the circumstances I do not believe the Trust is required to take any further action.”

Source location

2018-0094-Responses_Redacted
Page 4 · response
Published 17 June 2018

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

The Council has limited ability to act because it neither owns the canal path nor controls the public right of way.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Unfortunately, the Council has a very limited ability to take direct action as it is not the relevant landowner in respect of the path which runs alongside the canal, nor is it responsible for the public right of way which runs over that path. In both instances the responsible party is the Bridgewater Canal Company Limited. However, the Council has approached the Bridgewater Canal Company to seek to find a resolution to improve the safety of the users of the path and to improve safety measures.”

Source location

2018-0094-Responses_Redacted
Page 1 · response
Published 17 June 2018

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Responsibility for the Bridgewater Canal and location is attributed to Peel Holdings, so the Trust considers further action unnecessary.

Verbatim wording from the response

“However, the Canal & River Trust has no jurisdiction or responsibilities regarding the Bridgewater Canal or the land at this location. I believe this is in fact the responsibility of Peel Holdings and because I can see that the Regulation 28 report is being sent to Peel Holdings, in the circumstances I do not believe the Trust is required to take any further action.”

Source location

2018-0094-Responses_Redacted
Page 4 · response
Published 17 June 2018

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

BCC will not introduce canal lighting because of significant adverse effects on heritage, environment, ecology, wildlife and potential night-time safety.

Verbatim wording from the response

“It is not intended that lighting will be introduced to the canal by BCC. To introduce lighting in the urban and rural areas would have a significant adverse impact on the heritage and natural environment of the canal which would be entirely detrimental to local areas for users of the canal, residents and the ecology and wildlife which thrives along the canal. It may also present other safety issues and encourage night time use which is not advisable. We understand that this is also the policy of the Canal and River Trust.”

Source location

2018-0094-Responses_Redacted
Page 3 · response
Published 17 June 2018

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Responsibility for the canal path and public right of way rests with Bridgewater Canal Company Limited.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Unfortunately, the Council has a very limited ability to take direct action as it is not the relevant landowner in respect of the path which runs alongside the canal, nor is it responsible for the public right of way which runs over that path. In both instances the responsible party is the Bridgewater Canal Company Limited. However, the Council has approached the Bridgewater Canal Company to seek to find a resolution to improve the safety of the users of the path and to improve safety measures.”

Source location

2018-0094-Responses_Redacted
Page 1 · response
Published 17 June 2018

Open published response

Other statements in published responses

These actions and other statements could not be clearly connected to one concern in this report.

Recipient-stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.2

  1. 1

    Engage Bridgewater Canal Company Limited to seek a resolution improving the safety of path users and safety measures.

    Stated by Trafford Borough CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 17 June 2018.
  2. 2

    Establish a multi-agency Trafford Water Safety Group to consider water safety across the borough.

    Stated by Trafford Borough CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 17 June 2018.

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Engage Bridgewater Canal Company Limited to seek a resolution improving the safety of path users and safety measures.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Unfortunately, the Council has a very limited ability to take direct action as it is not the relevant landowner in respect of the path which runs alongside the canal, nor is it responsible for the public right of way which runs over that path. In both instances the responsible party is the Bridgewater Canal Company Limited. However, the Council has approached the Bridgewater Canal Company to seek to find a resolution to improve the safety of the users of the path and to improve safety measures.”

Source location

2018-0094-Responses_Redacted
Page 1 · response
Published 17 June 2018

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Establish a multi-agency Trafford Water Safety Group to consider water safety across the borough.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Trafford Council takes this matter very seriously and since the unfortunate and tragic death of Casper has set up a multi-agency Trafford Water Safety Group to consider matters of water safety across the Borough.”

Source location

2018-0094-Responses_Redacted
Page 1 · response
Published 17 June 2018

Open published response
Back to top

Information checked against the published report and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026