This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/feb/14/met-police-autistic-teenager

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Met police loses bid to overturn award to autistic teenager Met police loses bid to overturn award to autistic teenager
(about 1 month later)
The court of appeal has rejected an attempt by the Metropolitan police commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe to overturn an award of £28,250 in damages to a severely autistic teenager who was put in handcuffs and leg restraints and held in a police van after jumping into a swimming pool.The court of appeal has rejected an attempt by the Metropolitan police commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe to overturn an award of £28,250 in damages to a severely autistic teenager who was put in handcuffs and leg restraints and held in a police van after jumping into a swimming pool.
The boy, known as ZH, successfully sued the force for trespass to the person, assault and battery, and false imprisonment after he was lifted out of Acton Baths, west London, in 2008 by police officers and forcibly held down before police secured two sets of handcuffs and leg restraints on him.The boy, known as ZH, successfully sued the force for trespass to the person, assault and battery, and false imprisonment after he was lifted out of Acton Baths, west London, in 2008 by police officers and forcibly held down before police secured two sets of handcuffs and leg restraints on him.
ZH, who also has epilepsy and is now 20, sued the police commissioner through his father, GH, who said his son had changed from a "lovable little kid into an upset child" who did not want to bathe, shower or go into water after the incident.ZH, who also has epilepsy and is now 20, sued the police commissioner through his father, GH, who said his son had changed from a "lovable little kid into an upset child" who did not want to bathe, shower or go into water after the incident.
But the Metropolitan police appealed against the damages, awarded in March last year, claiming that it would set a dangerous precedent for policing and make officers "wary and defensive" when attending emergencies which involved individuals who were disabled or mentally ill.But the Metropolitan police appealed against the damages, awarded in March last year, claiming that it would set a dangerous precedent for policing and make officers "wary and defensive" when attending emergencies which involved individuals who were disabled or mentally ill.
Lord Dyson, sitting with two other judges, dismissed the appeal, however. In his judgment published on Thursday, he said "nothing could justify the manner in which (the police) restrained ZH".Lord Dyson, sitting with two other judges, dismissed the appeal, however. In his judgment published on Thursday, he said "nothing could justify the manner in which (the police) restrained ZH".
He rejected the submission that the decision to find the Met liable and award damages interfered with the operational discretion of the police, or made practical policing impossible.He rejected the submission that the decision to find the Met liable and award damages interfered with the operational discretion of the police, or made practical policing impossible.
The judge declared: "Operational discretion is not sacrosanct. It cannot be invoked by the police in order to give them immunity from liability for everything that they do."The judge declared: "Operational discretion is not sacrosanct. It cannot be invoked by the police in order to give them immunity from liability for everything that they do."
ZH's solicitor Tony Murphy, of Bhatt Murphy, described it as a "landmark" decision.ZH's solicitor Tony Murphy, of Bhatt Murphy, described it as a "landmark" decision.
"The ongoing refusal of the Commissioner to learn from this terrible incident can only be understood as a failure of leadership," he said."The ongoing refusal of the Commissioner to learn from this terrible incident can only be understood as a failure of leadership," he said.
"It provides yet another example of a vulnerable person being let down by the criminal justice system, on this occasion at the very highest level."It provides yet another example of a vulnerable person being let down by the criminal justice system, on this occasion at the very highest level.
"If the approach of the Met's chief officer (Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe) is to blame the victim, what hope is there for policing at the front line?""If the approach of the Met's chief officer (Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe) is to blame the victim, what hope is there for policing at the front line?"
ZH's father said: "Sir Bernard has refused to apologise to my son and refused to agree that officers should not shackle children with disabilities in similar circumstances.ZH's father said: "Sir Bernard has refused to apologise to my 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. My family would much rather that the hundreds of thousands of pounds of public money used by the commissioner to fight this case had been used to train his police officers to humanely treat people with disabilities.""This makes me afraid for my son and others with disabilities. My family would much rather that the hundreds of thousands of pounds of public money used by the commissioner to fight this case had been used to train his police officers to humanely treat people with disabilities."
The case arose after ZH, then aged 16, plunged in jacket and trousers into Acton Baths in 2008. The judgment said he was not in danger of drowing as the water came up to his chest. He was enjoying himself, splashing the water and making excited noises. But police officers pulled him out and restrained him, with five officers all applying force to his body. At one point the boy's carers asked the police not to restrain him in the way they were doing as he was autistic and epileptic.The case arose after ZH, then aged 16, plunged in jacket and trousers into Acton Baths in 2008. The judgment said he was not in danger of drowing as the water came up to his chest. He was enjoying himself, splashing the water and making excited noises. But police officers pulled him out and restrained him, with five officers all applying force to his body. At one point the boy's carers asked the police not to restrain him in the way they were doing as he was autistic and epileptic.
The boy was put in two pairs of handcuffs and leg restraints. The judgment said: "It was only when two pairs of handcuffs and the leg restraints were applied that the application of force ceased. The swimming instructor, who was watching nearby, said that during the course of the restraint ZH lost control of his bowels."The boy was put in two pairs of handcuffs and leg restraints. The judgment said: "It was only when two pairs of handcuffs and the leg restraints were applied that the application of force ceased. The swimming instructor, who was watching nearby, said that during the course of the restraint ZH lost control of his bowels."
The judgment said the boy suffered "consequential psychological trauma as a result of this experience and an exacerbation of his epileptic seizures … The use of considerable restraint would have been particularly distressing for him."The judgment said the boy suffered "consequential psychological trauma as a result of this experience and an exacerbation of his epileptic seizures … The use of considerable restraint would have been particularly distressing for him."
In the judgment Lord Dyson expressed "some sympathy" for the police, saying they were "intent on securing the best interests of everyone, not least ZH". But he said they had behaved as if they were faced with an emergency when there was none.In the judgment Lord Dyson expressed "some sympathy" for the police, saying they were "intent on securing the best interests of everyone, not least ZH". But he said they had behaved as if they were faced with an emergency when there was none.
"Had they consulted the carers, the likelihood is that ZH would not have jumped into the pool in the first place," he said."Had they consulted the carers, the likelihood is that ZH would not have jumped into the pool in the first place," he said.
The police should also have consulted them before lifting ZH out of the pool.The police should also have consulted them before lifting ZH out of the pool.
"Had they done that, it is likely, with their help, the need to restrain him would have been avoided."Had they done that, it is likely, with their help, the need to restrain him would have been avoided.
"Finally and most seriously of all, nothing could justify the manner in which they restrained ZH.""Finally and most seriously of all, nothing could justify the manner in which they restrained ZH."
He rejected all parts of the Met's challenge and ruled that the high court trial judge Sir Robert Nelson had "examined the issues with meticulous care and reached a conclusion which he was entitled to reach".He rejected all parts of the Met's challenge and ruled that the high court trial judge Sir Robert Nelson had "examined the issues with meticulous care and reached a conclusion which he was entitled to reach".
Lord Dyson agreed with Sir Robert that what was called for when officers first arrived on the scene was for one of them to take charge and inform themselves of the situation.Lord Dyson agreed with Sir Robert that what was called for when officers first arrived on the scene was for one of them to take charge and inform themselves of the situation.
In his summary, Sir Robert said this did not happen. The officers' responses were "over-hasty and ill-informed".In his summary, Sir Robert said this did not happen. The officers' responses were "over-hasty and ill-informed".
After ZH had gone into the pool, matters escalated to the point where "a wholly inappropriate restraint of an epileptic boy took place".After ZH had gone into the pool, matters escalated to the point where "a wholly inappropriate restraint of an epileptic boy took place".
Sir Robert concluded the officers did not consult properly with the carer who was present when the officers arrived, even if the carer was not as proactive as he might have been in informing them of what was happening.Sir Robert concluded the officers did not consult properly with the carer who was present when the officers arrived, even if the carer was not as proactive as he might have been in informing them of what was happening.
Although the case against the police was established, Sir Robert said he was satisfied that no one involved was at any time "acting in an ill-intentioned way towards a disabled person".Although the case against the police was established, Sir Robert said he was satisfied that no one involved was at any time "acting in an ill-intentioned way towards a disabled person".
Lord Dyson said he endorsed that summary. "Operational discretion is not sacrosanct. It cannot be invoked by the police in order to give them immunity from liability for everything that they do.Lord Dyson said he endorsed that summary. "Operational discretion is not sacrosanct. It cannot be invoked by the police in order to give them immunity from liability for everything that they do.
"I do not believe that anything said by the judge or by me in this judgment should make it impossible to carry out policing responsibly.""I do not believe that anything said by the judge or by me in this judgment should make it impossible to carry out policing responsibly."
guardian.co.uk today is our daily snapshot of the top news stories, sent to your inbox at 8am Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. Enter your email address to subscribe.