The public inquiry into the Nottingham attacks opened on 23 February 2026, and its hearings have continued this month with explosive testimony. On 20 March 2026, Nottinghamshire's chief constable acknowledged that Valdo Calocane — who killed three people in June 2023 — should have been arrested months earlier, after a warrant had been issued and ignored. For the families of Grace O'Malley-Kumar, Barnaby Webber, and Ian Coates, the question of accountability has never been more urgent.
What the inquiry has revealed so far
Calocane admitted to the manslaughter of two University of Nottingham students and a caretaker in June 2023. He accepted a plea of diminished responsibility — meaning he was not convicted of murder — and was sentenced to an indefinite hospital order at a high-security psychiatric facility.
The inquiry, chaired by retired judge Sir John Brighouse, is examining whether police, NHS mental health services, and other agencies could have intervened earlier to prevent the attacks. Evidence presented in March 2026 shows that a warrant for Calocane's arrest had been outstanding for months before the killings. Officers had multiple opportunities to detain him and did not.
The families have consistently argued that the hospital order rather than a murder conviction left them without the full recognition of their loss — and potentially without access to the compensation frameworks that attach to a criminal conviction.
What is a mental health defence, and how does it affect victims' rights?
Under English law, a defendant can plead "diminished responsibility" under the Homicide Act 1957 (as amended by the Coroners and Justice Act 2009). This reduces a charge of murder to manslaughter if a recognised mental disorder substantially impairs the defendant's responsibility for their actions.
The consequence is significant: a manslaughter conviction carries no mandatory life sentence, and the outcome is often an indefinite hospital order under the Mental Health Act 1983 rather than a prison term. From a victim's perspective, this can feel as though the legal system has minimised what happened.
According to the Crown Prosecution Service guidance on victims' rights, victims and bereaved families retain a number of rights regardless of the outcome of a criminal trial:
- The right to be informed about the progress of any investigation or prosecution
- The right to receive a needs assessment and support
- The right to make a Victim Personal Statement to the court
- The right to review decisions to charge, caution, or discontinue a case
However, compensation is where the outcome of the trial matters most.
Can victims' families claim compensation?
There are two main routes:
1. The Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA). This is a government-funded scheme for victims of violent crime in Great Britain. It does not require a criminal conviction — only that the crime has been reported to the police and that the claimant meets the eligibility criteria. A family member who has lost a qualifying relative to a violent crime can apply for a bereavement award, funeral costs, and dependency claims where applicable.
The CICA scheme has strict time limits: claims must usually be submitted within two years of the incident, though exceptions exist. The current standard bereavement award for close family members is £11,000 per qualifying claimant.
2. Civil proceedings against third parties. Where institutional failures contributed to the harm — for example, a failure by the police to act on a warrant, or a failure by a mental health trust to provide adequate care — civil litigation against those institutions may be possible. These are complex claims requiring specialist legal advice, as public authorities have significant defences in tort law. But the inquiry's findings could substantially assist any such claim.
The role of the Victims' Right to Review
If you are a bereaved family and you believe that the prosecution accepted a plea that should not have been accepted — or that the charge should have been different — you can challenge this through the Victims' Right to Review Scheme. This allows victims to request a review of a CPS decision to discontinue, offer no evidence, or accept a plea to a lesser offence.
This is a formal legal process, and making an effective application requires a clear understanding of both the facts and the legal framework. A solicitor with experience in criminal justice or public law can help you navigate it.
What should families do now?
The Nottingham inquiry is still ongoing. Its final report, expected later in 2026, may contain recommendations that affect how police and mental health services interact in future. But families should not wait for a report to understand their current legal position.
If you are a victim or bereaved family member in a case involving a mental health defence, the following steps matter now:
- Contact the CICA if you have not already done so — two-year time limits apply from the date of the incident
- Request a copy of your Victim Personal Statement and the court record
- Speak to a specialist criminal injuries or public law solicitor about whether a civil claim against institutions has merit in your case
- Engage with the inquiry process through your legal representative if you have one
Legal expertise is not only for defendants. On ExpertZoom, you can find specialist solicitors with experience in victims' rights, criminal injuries compensation, and public law — and get advice at a time that works for you.
Disclaimer: This article provides general legal information and does not constitute legal advice. Always consult a qualified solicitor for advice specific to your situation. Legal aid may be available for certain claims.
