David Bennett Inquiry
Open-knowledge reference entry
The David Bennett Inquiry was held in the UK to look into the death of David "Rocky" Bennett on 30 October 1998 in a medium secure psychiatric unit in Norwich, after being restrained by staff.
David Bennett was a 38-year-old African-Caribbean patient, who had had mental illness for 18 years, and had a diagnosis of schizophrenia. The inquiry concluded that there was institutional racism within the mental health services.
The inquiry into the death of David 'Rocky' Bennett recommended that training in cultural competencies should become of paramount importance (Department of Health, 2003).
The incident under mental health services (leading to his death) is widely known. After racial abuse from a different patient in the same room, a fight occurred and David Bennett alone was removed from the room. The resentment of being targeted for blame has been understandably linked to his physical attack on a nurse afterwards. His subsequent physical restrainment included giving a dose of medication that is above the recommended limit (in the British National Formulary), and this directly preceded his tragic death.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “David Bennett Inquiry” as open-knowledge reference entry. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as open-knowledge reference entry. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Oct 30, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q5231314. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1998 and 2003.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “David Bennett Inquiry”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow David Bennett Inquiry primary sources, David Bennett Inquiry archive and David research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “David Bennett Inquiry”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “David Bennett Inquiry” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.