Autism damages case: Met Police lose damages appeal

  • 10 Replies
  • 2061 Views

Dic Penderyn

  • *
  • Charter Member
  • Super Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5228
Autism damages case: Met Police lose damages appeal

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21457138
Be careful in what you wish for, God has a sense of humour

devine63

  • *
  • Guest
how could it ever be necessary to restrain anyone to the extent reported in this case?   
regards, Deb

Otter

  • *
  • Charter Member and Volunteer
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1428
good grief, their lucky they did not kill him
the focus we have to focus on the unpleasantness we are going through

Dic Penderyn

  • *
  • Charter Member
  • Super Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5228
What trouble me is that even after all that the police do not see themselves as in the wrong.

ZH's father said Met Police Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe had refused to apologise to his son and refused to agree that officers should not shackle children with disabilities in similar circumstances.

"This makes me afraid for my son and others with disabilities," he said.
Be careful in what you wish for, God has a sense of humour

seegee

  • *
  • Charter Member and Volunteer
  • Super Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5166
A Met Police spokesman said the commissioner has "recognised that there are improvements to be made in how the Met Police respond to those in our communities suffering from mental health".
How about those who suffer from mental illness?  I don't know anyone who "suffers from" either mental or physical health, it's generally seen as a condition to maintain or aspire to.
Autism isn't a mental illness anyway, so that quote just makes the spokesman look stupid. >doh<

devine63

  • *
  • Guest
I agree - though it is very common these days for people to say "mental health" when they mean mental illness

regards, Deb

Sunny Clouds

  • *
  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4819
I have a certain sympathy for the police.  They had a 14 year old seemingly flailing around.  A 14 year old can be quite big and strong.  If they hadn't secured him and he'd been injured, they'd also have been sued.  It seems like they're in a no-win situation and much as I sympathise with the young man concerned, I'm also concerned that they may be less inclined to do their best to keep other young people safe.

Wait until a similar thing happens and they stand back and the young person drowns, or they rescue him and let him go and he jumps in again.

I sympathise with this lad, but I think this case will have endangered others who are engdangering themselves.
(I'm an obsessive problem-solver, so feel free to ignore any suggestions or solutions I offer, even if they sound terribly insistent.)

Dic Penderyn

  • *
  • Charter Member
  • Super Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5228
Dismissing the appeal, Lord Dyson sitting with two other judges, said  "nothing could justify the manner in which the police restrained ZH".

I agree with him.
Be careful in what you wish for, God has a sense of humour

devine63

  • *
  • Guest
Hi Sunny

I can understand the need to restrain the boy if the circumstances were appropriate for that - but he was secured with multiple sets of restraints and I believe that they said 7 police officers were on top of him - that must have been terrifying for a non-verbal person with limited capacity to understand.
regards, Deb

DarthVector

  • *
  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1164
I have a certain sympathy for the police.  They had a 14 year old seemingly flailing around.  A 14 year old can be quite big and strong.  If they hadn't secured him and he'd been injured, they'd also have been sued.  It seems like they're in a no-win situation and much as I sympathise with the young man concerned, I'm also concerned that they may be less inclined to do their best to keep other young people safe.

Wait until a similar thing happens and they stand back and the young person drowns, or they rescue him and let him go and he jumps in again.

I sympathise with this lad, but I think this case will have endangered others who are engdangering themselves.

I had a similar line of thought. However, when I checked a previous article:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21130210

I found a part that said:

During the trip, he became fixated by the water and approached it, staying by the pool side for at least half an hour. His carers told swimming pool staff that his behaviour was consistent with his condition and he had to be given time to move away of his own accord.

When police officers called by the pool manager arrived, they tried to take hold of ZH. ...


...and it all snowballed from there. Neither the pool manager nor the police did what the boy's carers were telling them to do. At that point, the people who failed to listen to what they were being told became liable for the consequences.

Sunny Clouds

  • *
  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4819
That makes better sense.  Thank you.
(I'm an obsessive problem-solver, so feel free to ignore any suggestions or solutions I offer, even if they sound terribly insistent.)