I've now heard the report of the hearing: the Jury was not told that racist text messages were found on the cellphones of two of the accused, Terence Hughes and Stuart Tribelnig, and that Hughes subsequently to the death posted racially offensive photographs on Facebook. As the BBC report says, given the Inquest jury returned a verdict of unlawful killing, and the CPS is not willing to prosecute their employers G4S, then who exactly is responsible for the death? My own comment is that this is within a hair's breadth of a similar death at Zaventem airport in Brussels some ten years ago or more, where the person being deported was smothered with a pillow and the guards, similarly orientated, took an equally long time to discover they had killed their charge. Surely in the light of that, G4S should not have had procedures in place which caused this, procedures which have since been radically overhauled.
When a former neighbour of mine in Brussels, fallen on hard times by his own stupidity and the avarice of a certain religieuse, took up with the Russian mafia, driving a van with a kidnapped German businessman in the back, who died because he was trussed up so tightly he could not breathe, he was sent down for murder. I don't see the difference here, other than that the death was not in the pursuit of a crime, a difference taken into account in the charge of Manslaughter.
From a legal point of view, I hope the Prosecution appeals (we have the right in the UK where such errors in Law have been made): there are three tests for the different degrees of murder-manslaughter, motive, means and opportunity. The last two were there, they got off by claiming they had no motive and never heard their prisoner complaining, although others did. The evidence that the Judge suppressed bears on motive: they had a duty of care, and motive not to attend to it diligently, and that caused the death. I seriously wonder about the competence of some UK Lawyers...