Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

1 2 3

News

Why was Nicholas Salvador not shot instantly?

74 replies

FujimotosElixir · 23/06/2015 22:26

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-33239870 he murdered an elderlery woman horrifically and was inches away from children brandishing a weapon,an imminent threat, why wasn't he shot quickly? Now he's been contained indefinitely costing 1000s a year no doubt, being a huge danger for every staff member who goes near him and never being safe for release ever. Who does that benefit ?

OP posts:

Report

AndNowItsSeven · 23/06/2015 22:32

Well it benefits him to have his life. His actions although abhorrent were carried out whilst he was mentally unwell.
We also, quite rightly do not have the death penalty in this country.

Report

FujimotosElixir · 23/06/2015 22:37

His to just dwell in Broadmoor?to become more mentally unwell ...he'lln Never be safe for release.

OP posts:

Report

AndNowItsSeven · 23/06/2015 22:39

Yes I am sure his quality of life won't be great but that doesn't mean he would be better off dead.

Report

scaevola · 23/06/2015 22:40

He was arrested after being tasered.

I don't think that going to straight to lethal force would have changed anything in this case. And it's generally something the police avoid, unless the suspect appears to have a gun.

Report

NoArmaniNoPunani · 23/06/2015 22:42

Because we are better than that.

Report

BualadhBos · 23/06/2015 22:46

What he did was horrific but he is unwell. There are men on C4 at the moment talking about how hard it is to get help for their mental health problems.

Report

mamadoc · 23/06/2015 22:51

Because our police do not kill people except in a very last resort.

His mental illness may be treatable. The article describes that he is not dangerous unless psychotic. He may have a perfectly good quality of life with treatment and not present a risk as long as there are mechanisms to ensure he always stays on treatment.

There may come a day (likely in a very long time) when he is released although he will always be monitored very closely. It is at the discretion of the Home Secretary acting on forensic psychiatry advice ultimately.

It is a tragedy for the lady's family absolutely but why would it be better for 2 families to lose a loved one?

Report

mamadoc · 23/06/2015 22:58

A huge danger to staff- not true
Never suitable for release- not true
Who does it benefit? Er him, his family, anyone who loves him or cares for/ about him

Report

MrsLeighHalfpenny · 23/06/2015 22:58

Because in this country unlike America everyone is entitled to a fairly trial. No matter what the crime is they are alledged to have committed.
There can be mitigating circumstances, such as being unwell, or being coerced, threatened etc.

Report

AnyoneForTennis · 23/06/2015 23:09

I think there was confusion over what he had done at that point anyway. The full picture emerged later

Not sure I'd want to live near him if he was released!

Report

bideyinn · 23/06/2015 23:13

The crime was committed as a direct result of his illness when his mind was disturbed. It's not the same at all of the more usual sorts of murders and is actually a very uncommon court disposal. It's a tragedy for his victim and her family but also for him.

Report

RJnomore · 23/06/2015 23:17

Can you imagine the horror of being so unwell and delusional and committing an atrocity like that then becoming better and aware of what you had actually done?

Report

MaryMotherOfCheeses · 23/06/2015 23:22

Please don't assume that anyone who has had psychosis would never be safe in the community. It's simply not true.

Report

MyNameIsInigoMontoya · 23/06/2015 23:26

Not to mention if police had started shooting at him in a stressful scenario while he was "inches away from children"... he might not have been the one who ended up shot. Even with the best training available, a mistake could easily have happened I'm sure.

Report

mamadoc · 23/06/2015 23:29

You would be very safe living near him. He would be subject to a very high degree of supervision if he were ever released and on a 'conditional discharge' so that he could be recalled to prison if he ever broke a supervision condition.

I would like to just emphasise that only a very, very tiny proportion of people with psychotic mental illness would ever present a danger to other people even when unwell.

Report

GiddyOnZackHunt · 23/06/2015 23:30

A police officer has to kill someone and live with that forever.
Tasering someone to detain them without anyone else being injured is the better option.
We have spent millions detaining innocent people over the years. Should we have killed them?

Report

Pagwatch · 23/06/2015 23:32

Because hopefully we don't kill people who are mentally ill.

Report

RJnomore · 23/06/2015 23:33

Sorry I've just realised my comment w ambiguous. It was prompted by the post above speaking about the tragedy for him as well.

I think the right thing happened. I haven't read the whole story but the only thing that did puzzle me from the bits I have read is that it seemed to take so long for him to be tasered.

I would suggest shooting people because they are ill is not a path I wish our society to choose to take.

Report

mamadoc · 23/06/2015 23:40

The more I read back the OP the angrier I get.
It displays a horrible attitude to mental illness.
It basically suggests he should have been put out of his misery like a dog or shot first, ask questions later.
That is offensive.
I work with people with severe psychotic mental illness and they have enough to deal with the symptoms and the side effects of treatment without the horrible stigma being heaped on too.
You can feel sympathy for the lady and her family and for a young, mentally ill man and his family too.

Report

GiddyOnZackHunt · 24/06/2015 00:25

mamadoc I agree that there was nobody unscathed by this. So horrible for everyone especially the victim's family. Shooting the ill person would have made 2 more victims. Him and the armed officer.

Report

stareatthetvscreen · 24/06/2015 00:29

are you for real op?

Report

cuntycowfacemonkey · 24/06/2015 00:39

Dumbest OP I've read in a long time.

Report

Kampeki · 24/06/2015 00:46

Horrible OP

Report

mawbroon · 24/06/2015 01:11

I have had psychosis.

I have had extremely violent intrusive thoughts and was probably only days away from acting on them had I not got treatment when I did.

I am fully recovered and am living a totally normal life with my family, hey you might even live near me or know me.

It could happen to anyone. I have nothing but sympathy for everyone involved in this case.

And irritation at the ignorance and stigma surrounding mental illness.

Report

FlumptyDumpty · 24/06/2015 01:27

OP, you seem to have no conception that Nicolas Salvador was extremely ill. He is not evil, but somebody in need of intensive treatment. Imagine for a second that you suffer from psychosis (yes, it can happen to everybody, including you) and while in its grips commit a violent crime you would never dream of carrying out while in your right mind. When, after receiving treatment, you recover your mind, how would you feel? That poor man will have to live with what he has done for the rest of his life. He deserves proper medical treatment and understanding. It's a pity he didn't get that before.