Death of man in Westminster Tube Station

[LittleLostLion]

So, I saw this as I was walking to work this week. I experienced a range of emotions when I read the man had died [for those of you that don't know this man was experiencing homelessness and died a few hundred feet from the Houses of Parliament].

Quite an outpouring of how unacceptable this was from some MPs including Jeremy Corbyn, as well as charities who were supporting the man.

It's now being reported that he had been deported twice, the first time because he had sexually abused a child and had a prison sentence, the second for re-entering the UK illegally.

Connections have been reporting on how they have been supporting this man to find a job - AIBU to think they should be doing background checks on people before they start helping them source work?

All I can think of is this had the potential to be Alice Gross all over again. Why the hell haven't we learnt our lessons?

Just wanted to clarify some points on agencies supporting homeless people who are not in the UK legally.

Homeless support charities do have to define the immigration status of their guests and most London based charities share a database of information about guests so they can be tracked through their interactions with different groups

If they are "no recourse to public funds" then no public service or charity recieving government or council funds can assist with accomodation etc. This is why some charities do have to check immigration status

Only charities that are entirely funded through public fundraising can provide accommodation. I volunteer for one of these types of charity.

There are only around 70-80 beds in the whole of London for people who are no recourse to public funds.

When temperatures are below freezing for more than 2 nights in a row, London's severe weather Emergency protocol (SWEP) comes into play and emergency beds (or at least mattresses on floor) are opened up and charities which take government funds are for a few days allowed to ignore the "no recourse" bit and can accomodate anyone.

But SWEP beds can be a collection of mats on the floor in the lounge of a more permanent shelter or even a sleeping bag on the floor of an empty room on a police station (not many people know that the police effectively run emergency homeless accomodation sometimes, it's not all stations though but genuinely a good place to ask for help in a crisis)

but SWEP is crowded, full of vulnerable people and quite a few homeless people would rather stay on the streets than go in there.

SWEP is in force at the moment, I think but I've not been volunteering for the last two weeks so I'm not 100pc certain.

Anyway the point I am making is that actually it's bloody hard for homeless people without the right to be here and yes, their immigration status is checked and recorded at various points and databased.

And about 50pc of our guests who are "no recourse to public funds" end up winning on appeal at immigration tribunals so the idea that we should just throw them out would mean throwing out lots of people who are actually here legally, it just takes time to prove it.

These are two broad groups (for our shelter)
Eritreans who get turned down for asylum almost always win on appeal. It's a stupid stupid inhumane government policy to reject them and then drag it out for a year with no funds until they inevitably win on appeal.

Older people from the Caribbean who came here a long time ago (in some cases before independence from the UK) and its legally complicated to sort out and prove but they are almost all legal eventually. In some cases they are actually British citizens depending on when and where they were born but have no paperwork. So it requires a lot of research and document requests by volunteer lawyers to fix.

Do we always deport Europeans who have committed crimes after their sentence has finished?

Depends on the crime usually

Here's Portuguese report:

www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/sem-abrigo-morto-expulso-por-pedofilia

It says he was deported in 2014 from the UK for child sex abuse, and was 'institucionalizado' (I presume this is mental hospital) in Lisbon, but ran away back to the UK, from where he was deported again, in 2016, before returning again.

He lived on the streets with "saúde mental, alcoolismo e automedicação" again, do your own translation.

He had dual Angolan/Portuguese nationality, but his mother in Portugual, died, and all the rest of his family are in Angola.

He was alive at 5am but dead at 7am. He may have been killed by the cold, but that does appear to be conjecture, as there hasn't been an autopsy, it could have been drugs/alcohol/whatever.

mojo thanks for that - I want sure if charities who received public funds were restricted; you've confirmed that.

Can I ask, though - what sort of reasons are given by people for rejecting a SWEP place? I can fully imagine they are crowded, and rather unpleasant, but if the alternative is likely death on the street, then couldn't their refusal in those circumstances be considered as being life-threatening to themselves?

SWEP is in force at the moment - Yes - I was told on Monday evening that it was on force for at least three days (not sure if it's still in force currently, but it was on Tuesday night, Wednesday morning).

MojoMoon I am curious (thanks for your informative post), but do the charities ever pass details on to the police or immigration? I guess I would like to know is whether they knew why he was here illegally and if they would have acted on that information if they had known. In the quote from Connections it says his background was "complex" but little more. I was wondering if that wording was used as they were aware of his background, or because they were respecting his privacy.

Thank you Pisa. It will be interesting to see if the likes of the guardian and the indie, who were so quick to damn the Tory MPs, also comment on that, or if they ignore it.

Why isn't there a balanced medium between the daily mail screaming: "dead homeless man was foreign sex pest paedophile" and the guardian screeching: "evil tories kill off innocent person inches from their platinum palace"? I can't be the only person who'd want to read that version, surely?

HatsontheWardrobe

The reasons I've heard of are lack of accomodation for dogs, and because they can't use drugs or alcohol on the premises (usually). There are probably many more, but that's from the people I have spoken too.

The news report it's the fourth homeless person to die in Westminster this year.. This seems to have attracted more news maybe because he wasn't British or died so close to Parliament.

News report he had recently left a shelter and had been in an institution in Portugal when he was deported.

He had been in the previous shelter for four weeks and was expected to go to another one.

Apparently he had no family left in Portugal, although he had been born there.

www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/sem-abrigo-morto-expulso-por-pedofilia

itsmeimcathyivecomehome

You are not! I'd like to read that too.

@pisacake

Ah, sorry, cross post.

This seems to have attracted more news maybe because he wasn't British or died so close to Parliament.

I think it may have been because of the timing of it; there was a full incident response team at Westminster Station at 07:30 in the morning which is when it starts to get busy (Two ambulances, paramedics cars, two bikes, police, the TFL incident van). People were wanting to know what had happened.

I do think the agencies supporting him are not doing any good by describing an illegal immigrant and convicted child abuser as having "complex circumstances".

In any case, the issue still is that people are dying in the streets in London. This man could have been anyone and in that respect it's irrelevant if he was a paedophile or not.

And on that topic, I don't know if enough is being done but I don't know if more can be done.

On his crimes, I find it surprising that his ID card (doubt he had a passport) wasn't flagged up when entering the UK.

Mind you, that newspaper from Portugal is our main tabloid. It is well known to report all crimes and in detail.

On his crimes, I find it surprising that his ID card (doubt he had a passport) wasn't flagged up when entering the UK.

What makes you think he came through legitimate entry points?

And on that topic, I don't know if enough is being done but I don't know if more can be done.

I think: Over the longer term, our society isn't, and hasn't, been functioning as it should which has led to various symptoms, one which is homelessness.

Over the short term, to help rough sleepers, homelessness, I think a lot is being done, but it may not be the right type of things (and really, I think that it's bollocks that some groups automatically get excluded from any help).

itsmeimcathyivecomehome
Definitely not the only person who would want to read that. Its interesting how often you only get decent background information, like MojoMoon's, on mumsnet.

When it comes to foreign immigrants and sex offenders on our streets, it's not just our own broken society which is the issue - it's the problem of being tied into wider arrangements. I voted remain, but I can understand why some people thought these issues required Brexit, and they were never listened to.

amp.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/07/charities-giving-home-office-details-of-rough-sleepers-says-report

Sometimes the big charities do refer people to immigration control, yes.

But they do that when they feel there is no other option to improve that person's life in the UK and the person is not making rational decisions by demanding to stay here.
This is also primarily EU people.

But we cannot expect front line charities to be responsible for enforcing immigration law. They work with the most isolated people and need to gain their trust.

There is a "well me them starve if they are illegal" group of thought but really, their lives are crap already. The idea that if they were totally refused any assistance with food, support etc from charities, then they would pack up and go home straight away, is ridiculous.

re, why people don't go to swep
Won't go to a police station even for SWEP.
Incapable of not fighting or arguing with other guests (swep places will still throw them out of they fight).
Anxiety/paranoia about being around other people (this is the biggest one I would guess, lots of paranoia and anxiety).
Chaotic drug problems and a total inability to make a rational decision because of it.
History of violence. If they are thrown out for violence, this is logged on database and many swep providers will refuse to take them for a whole at least as they have a duty of care to staff and guests.
Split up from other homeless friends sent to other swep places.

But we cannot expect front line charities to be responsible for enforcing immigration law. They work with the most isolated people and need to gain their trust.

That's what I was thinking, but then, and particularly with the child abuse in this scenario, I wondered if they weighed up risks.

I would never want front line charities to become responsible for enforcing immigration law - except in exceptional circumstances - it would be a huge detriment to the work they do.

I really just don't see how the death and presence of this man in London justifies Brexit, though.

Death - it could have been any homeless person.

Presence - there are far more sex offenders (including paedophiles) not only British, but also in regular jobs and living next to families.

And regarding borders, apart from requiring every foreign national to have a visa (and then forget easily going to mainland Europe, US, etc) I don't think UK borders are that easy to cross. The UK wasn't even a Schengen country and require ID.
What are people actually suggesting?

Sometimes the big charities do refer people to immigration control, yes.

But they do that when they feel there is no other option to improve that person's life in the UK and the person is not making rational decisions by demanding to stay here.

Which means that there will always be some rough sleepers - people who the charities haven't referred to immigration control but who cannot access housing/support as they are in the uk illegally.

I'm increasingly uncomfortable with the demands that society has somehow failed if it doesn't completely eliminate rough sleeping as it imposes the values of those in positions of power on others.

It hardly does by itself, but together with issues such as the Cologne attacks it raises the question of just what behaviours and attitudes are we importing. Yes I am fully aware of how much home-grown misogyny, sex offences and plain ol' violence there are, believe me: but I can see why people would not want to import more.

I don't think UK borders are that easy to cross.

I've spent most of my life living near coastal marinas. It's a lot easier than you might think.

If rough sleeping is really just down to the individual choices of the rough sleepers themselves, it's a funny coincidence that a lot more of them seem to make those choices whenever the Conservatives are in government.