A risk assessment expert has told the Noah Donohoe inquest he is “quite certain” that there was a “public safety issue” at a culvert which the schoolboy entered.
Dr Mark Cooper told Belfast Coroner’s Court that he would have been “alert” to the risk if he had visited the site before the schoolboy died in 2020.
The inquest into the death of the schoolboy, which is being heard before a jury, is in its 13th week.
Noah, a pupil at St Malachy’s College, was 14 when his naked body was found in a water tunnel in north Belfast on June 27 2020, six days after leaving home on his bike to meet two friends in the Cavehill area of the city.
A post-mortem examination found the likely cause of death was drowning.
The court heard further evidence from civil engineer Brian Pope and Dr Cooper on Wednesday.
They were among a group of four experts who had their joint responses to a series of questions read to the inquest earlier in the month.
Barrister for the Department for Infrastructure (DFI) Neasa Murnaghan KC questioned the witnesses about the culvert at Linear Park in north Belfast.
Ms Murnaghan asked about the risk of “hindsight bias” when considering access to the culvert, due to the death of Noah.
Mr Pope said: “There is a risk of hindsight bias and that is what I was acutely aware of, so I looked at the scenarios in different ways.”
Ms Murnaghan said: “You weren’t aware of any comparable deaths to this type of death anywhere in the UK or the Republic of Ireland?”
Mr Pope said: “I didn’t have specific details of those.”
The barrister referenced two other deaths in the UK of people who had become pinned against screens at culverts.
The witness said: “They appear to be linked to entrapment but I don’t know the specific details of those and whether that is comparable.”
Ms Murnaghan said: “Statistically the risk of loss of life was greater from being pinned against a screen than being trapped inside a culvert?”
Mr Pope said: “I don’t have detailed statistics to prove that one way or the other.”
The barrister then asked Dr Cooper about hindsight bias.
Dr Cooper said he had “thought about this greatly”.
He added: “I am quite certain that had I gone to that culvert and seen what I had seen in terms of the public access to it, and also the picture I have seen of an employee walking through the screens, at that point before anything may have happened I think I would have been alert to the public safety issue here.
“It is very persuasive seeing those photographs of an adult walking through the bars.
“That would have caused, without any bias, on its own would have caused me to be concerned about the public safety issue.”
The barrister said the witness had made the assumption that because Noah was able to access this culvert that “therefore general members of the public also accessed this area”.
Dr Cooper said: “If you said can somebody access the culvert, then the risk is eventuated if it has happened.
“After that point your view would be different because the risk has happened.”
Ms Murnaghan said the witness had no evidence that members of the public other than Noah were “habitually accessing this site”.
He said: “No, other than just looking at the layout and seeing for myself the location and the access.”
Ms Murnaghan asked the witness if he accepted the department did not have knowledge that members of the public were accessing the site.
He said: “I don’t agree with you. I would believe that anybody looking at that site would believe it to be a foreseeable risk that there could be access, it could be those with riparian rights and it could be other people who had access to the backs of those gardens, they potentially could have access to the culvert.”
Coroner Mr Justice Rooney asked: “It seems to me that now you have been put on notice that the department did not have knowledge of anyone accessing this area, what can you say to that?”
Dr Cooper said: “They are putting forward they don’t have any evidence. What do they mean by that?
“Do they mean there is no evidence of children playing, there is no litter, all those other factors?
“You use your common sense and you look at the environment and the fact that all these houses back on to this ground which is quite clearly being used.
“I think you would be on notice there is potential access to it, that would be my view.”
Mr Justice Rooney said: “Dr Cooper is taking issue with the matter of fact put forward by the department that they didn’t have knowledge.
“Dr Cooper is saying ‘I don’t know how that can be, they should have had knowledge’.”
After lunch the questioning about the accessibility of the culvert entrance continued.
Ms Murnaghan asked: “Were you given any information that prior to June 2020 the location of the culvert entrance was near to a location where children were known to congregate?”
Dr Cooper said: “Not evidence other than my own observations of going on site.”
The barrister said: “Your own observation was not to the effect that children were known to congregate there… it was your assumption that it was an area where children could congregate?”
He said: “I think that is correct.”
The inquest will resume on Tuesday.
