The mother of 14-year-old Jools Sweeney has said that she hopes the High Court’s decision that a new inquest should be held into his death is a “turning point” in making the “online world safer for every child”.
Jools, from Gloucestershire, died in April 2022 but a 23-minute inquest into his death recorded a narrative conclusion after hearing no live evidence.
Ms Roome has since raised concerns that her son died through an online challenge gone wrong, and took legal action against the senior coroner for Gloucestershire.
Her lawyers told a hearing on Thursday that the new evidence had come to light concerning the role of social media in Jools’ death, and that a “number of lines of inquiry” had not been pursued.
At the end of the hearing in London, two senior judges quashed the original conclusion and ordered that the inquest be reopened.
Ms Roome said that the ruling meant that “the legal system has finally recognised that there are questions which deserve to be answered”.
She said: “Every bereaved family deserves to know that every possible avenue, including a child’s digital life, has been properly investigated.
We hope this is a turning point, not only in finding the truth about Jools, but in making the online world safer for every child.
“But our greatest hope is that one day no family has to walk this path. Social media companies must do everything in their power to stop children dying in the first place.
“No parent should ever have to bury their child because dangerous content was allowed to reach them.
“This ruling means that, at last, a coroner can examine Jools’ digital life using legal powers that did not exist when he died in 2022.
“We hope this is a turning point, not only in finding the truth about Jools, but in making the online world safer for every child.”
Lord Justice Warby, sitting with Mrs Justice Heather Williams, said that a new inquest was “desirable in the interests of justice”, as it was “now clear that there are various potentially relevant lines of inquiry” that had not previously been considered.
The judge also said it was “simply not possible to know at this stage whether the same conclusion will be reached after appropriate investigations”, and that it would be for the coroner conducting the new inquest to decide its scope.
Harry Lambert, for Ms Roome, said in written submissions that a new inquest should be held following a “considerable body of new evidence and a number of investigative insufficiencies” that had come to light, “in particular concerning the role of social media, and of TikTok specifically”.
He also said that several lines of inquiry that had not been pursued did not concern TikTok, including that Jools had been contacted by a fraudulent Instagram account operated by an African crime gang shortly before his death, and that evidence from his phone found a “possible attempt at extortion or ‘sextortion’”.
Mr Lambert said that Ms Roome “seeks only the truth about how her son died, wherever the evidence may lead”.
The coroner and TikTok did not oppose the bid to reopen the inquest, with Anthony Jones, for the social media firm, stating that it could “certainly see the force” in the bid for a new inquest.
Ms Roome is one of five British parents separately suing TikTok in the United States after the deaths of their children, and she has been fighting for a change in the law to force social media firms to hand over children’s data to bereaved parents.
Thursday’s ruling came on the same day as Ofcom announced an investigation into TikTok over children’s risk of exposure to harmful content, with the regulator questioning whether the platform’s methods of checking children’s ages are good enough.
Ms Roome said that it showed that platforms are “not stepping up enough” to protect children, and thanked the regulator for investigating.
Gary Miller, a partner at law firm Mischon de Reya, which represents Ms Roome, said that current investigative processes “are not fit for purpose in this new world”, which “deprives parents of the answers they are entitled to”.
He said: “What we are calling for is not radical; it is common sense.
“The protocols and the powers of all state bodies involved in the death of a child must be thoroughly reviewed, updated, and critically, harmonised across all agencies so that every single piece of evidence, in particular, relevant social media data, is preserved and available to the coroner from the earliest opportunity.”
He told the Press Association that Thursday’s ruling was “stunning” and “lights the taper of the firework that is ready to move”.
When asked what precedent he thought the ruling set, he said: “Don’t accept no, don’t accept that it can’t be done.
“Don’t accept that you don’t have any right to get more information, and if you’re dissatisfied with the way that the inquest was run, or that the police investigation was conducted, don’t be shy.
“Put your hand up and make a noise.”
Read MoreTikTok under Ofcom investigation over child safety concerns
Tech firms must ‘stamp out’ scam adverts or face fines, under Ofcom proposals
The $16 billion AI project that has one town worried about its water supply
OpenAI launches $230 keyboard amid Apple theft allegations
Scientists warn of ‘unintended harm’ from teen social media ban
