Home   News   Article

Fight for answers over Inverness man's death boosted by appeal


By Louise Glen

Easier access to your trusted, local news. Subscribe to a digital package and support local news publishing.



Click here to sign up to our free newsletters!
Ramsay and Pan Ei Phyu on their wedding day on February 4, 2018.
Ramsay and Pan Ei Phyu on their wedding day on February 4, 2018.

The father of an Inverness man found dead in a pool of blood has had a complaint upheld against a coroner.

Murdo Urquhart, made a complaint after a breakdown in communication led to his son being cremated without the opportunity for a second post mortem.

Mr Urquhart’s son Ramsay died alone in a London flat in April 2019, aged 33 – days after police were called to his home in regard to 31 threatening phone calls he had received. In an appeal against its previous decision, the Independent Office of the Police Conduct (IOPC), found that Mr Urquhart was not given the proper information that would have led to an independent post mortem on his son’s remains.

Ramsay teaching in China.
Ramsay teaching in China.

Ramsay Urquhart, a former Holm, Lochardil, Inverness Royal Academy and Nairn Academy pupil had been living with his parents in Aberdeenshire up until two weeks before his death, when he moved to London to find a job. His body was found in a room in a home of multiple occupancy by police.

They were alerted by the family who were concerned about his mental health and have since learned Ramsay received death threats in the days leading up to the tragedy.

But officers who found his body – covered in blood – said there was nothing suspicious, which Mr Urquhart refuses to accept.

Mr Urquhart senior (67), a former technician at Inverness College UHI, believes his son’s death was an “unlawful killing” and says he will not rest until he has justice for Ramsay, a former Ukip candidate and English teacher.

In a report to Mr Urquhart, the IOPC, said: “Whilst a second post mortem was not specifically denied by Coroner’s Office staff, it is my opinion that you were not provided with the correct guidance and information in respect of how to proceed with your request, which ultimately resulted in a second post mortem not being able to take place if you deemed it to be necessary.

“In my view, this was also likely due to a breakdown in communications between you and the Coroner’s Office staff.

The ruling continued: “Having suffered the loss of your son, it was the responsibility of Coroner’s Office staff to give advice and guidance to members of the deceased’s family in difficult times. It is also important that the family’s wishes are granted where operationally, legally and ethically possible and the responsibility of Coroner’s Office staff to make sense of those requests by family members, who may be unfamiliar with the policies and procedures which need to be followed.

“That Coroner’s Office staff should seek clarity regarding the wishes of the deceased’s family. That no evidence has been identified to suggest that coronial guidance material was provided to you or you family.

“A date could have been made to facilitate and agree a viewing and that your request to see your son should have been acted upon.”

Mr Urquhart said the fight to have an inquest into his son’s death continued. He added: “I am doing this for justice for Ramsay. If we had been allowed to have had a second post-mortem undertaken independently I think the outcome of these investigations would have delivered a verdict of unlawful killing."

Read more about Mr Urquhart's fight for justice for his son.




This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More