2nd September 2026
Part 14 of an investigation into Stockport Council’s handling of Michael Parnell, 2010–2011
This part deals directly with a documented suicide attempt. It is written carefully, and only to the extent the record itself requires, because what happened to Mr Parnell in custody in March 2010 is central to understanding how the following two years played out — but it deserves to be handled as what it is, not as material for effect.
The Arrest
On 10 March 2010, Mr Parnell was arrested and taken to Cheadle Heath Police Station, held over an alleged breach of a restraining order. The custody log records the routine details of his detention: what he was wearing on arrival, and a series of welfare checks — drinks offered and accepted, meals offered and in several instances refused, a hot drink given in the early hours of the following morning.
What Happened at 01:32
In the early hours of 12 March 2010, the log records the following, verbatim: “D/p banging on cell door. Wrapped blanket around neck. Medacs nurse in custody. Dp conscious and breathing. No real injury from Nurse.”
That is the entirety of how it appears in the official record — a single, clinical line, logged alongside routine notes about meals and drinks. Mr Parnell was seen by a nurse, found conscious and breathing, and the log moves on to the next welfare visit as though nothing had changed.
He was released the following morning, 12 March 2010, at 08:25, handed over for court disposal.
What Followed
Nothing in the record suggests this moment changed the course of what came next. The Crown Prosecution Service went on to authorise five separate charges against him for breach of the restraining order, covering incidents between 22 February and 10 March 2010 — the same period that included the night in the cell. Those charges were dealt with at Minshull Street Crown Court in December 2010, resulting in a suspended prison sentence and a requirement to complete unpaid work.
Two and a half years later, in October 2012, a police officer — PC Cem Azakli — wrote to Mr Parnell following a meeting with the ACT Family support organisation, responding to a complaint about his treatment in custody. The letter confirms the welfare visits recorded in the log, states that Mr Parnell’s own legal representative, reviewing the log at the time, “made no representations… regarding your treatment,” and states plainly: “GMP are taking no further action in respect of these incidents.” It closes by directing Mr Parnell to the IPCC or GMP Force Headquarters if he felt he’d been treated unfairly.
Why This Belongs in the Record
Ms Oliver’s point, made directly, is this: a man came close to taking his own life in a police cell, over a set of restraining order allegations this series has already shown to rest on genuinely disputed, at times contradictory, grounds — and it changed nothing about how the case against him proceeded. He continued to be arrested. He continued to be prosecuted. Years later, the Council continued to pursue him over disputed council tax arrears while he was, by multiple accounts in this file, seriously unwell.
None of that is offered here as a verdict on any individual officer’s conduct on the night in question — the nurse’s assessment, on the record available, was that he suffered no physical injury, and his own solicitor raised no complaint about his treatment at the time. What the record does show, without needing embellishment, is an institution — across police, prosecution, and council — that did not treat a documented crisis point as a reason to stop and reconsider whether the underlying campaign against one man had gone too far. It simply continued.
If you are affected by anything raised in this article, Samaritans can be contacted free, any time, on 116 123.
