to believe that this man should not be allowed to live at Student Halls?

[Sep200024]

At Cardiff University, one of the largest Halls of Residence, housing mostly first year students, is called Talybont.

At Talybont this year, a man (Sean Hughes) who has recently been released from prison for strangling a woman, has been given a live-in safeguarding role at the Halls.

His crime was to attack and strangle a young woman, and he is currently out on license after being released from prison in May of this year.

His role at the university is to live in the Halls of Residence as a ‘life assistant’, where his role is to “support vulnerable students and manage crisis situations”.

AIBU to think that this should not be allowed? How on earth have the application and vetting procedures at Cardiff University allowed this to happen?

Newspaper article here

This.

@PeekabooAtTheZoo Where I worked with vulnerable adults he wouldn't have been given allowed to, especially as he lives in.

How are you defining “vulnerable adults” though?

That’s absolutely shocking. They’ve done checks and they let him have the job. Massive failure on Cardiff Universities part.

I thought the dbs check would have ruled this put unless he was put in post before it was done.

I'm the article it said he declared the conviction so a dbs, in this case, would be moot.

How the fuck did he only get 9 months for strangling someone?! Strangulation needs to be made a specific crime in its own right with far more severe sentences than that. IMO, strangulation is closer to attempted murder than anything else.

What the hell were the university thinking? Their statement is about criminals having a right to study, but doesn't address that he has been given a role with responsibility towards the welfare of others. A clean enhanced dbs should be a minimum standard for that role.

Also, why did his parole officer not flag this as unsuitable? Surely that's the point of parole checks - to ensure the criminal is participating in society in a way that minimises risks to everyone else.

Oh yes peek I didn't think of it being post 18 and not required for dbs.

But other roles such as carers for adult do require it so I guess in this case it's because it isn't an employed role but rather a mentoring role?

I know some other former criminals who've studied criminology etc at masters level and they can really be a great asset to that area of work. Especially those who have made one mistake due to circumstances. (See judges comments).

But putting someone recently released into that position without them even knowing they are rehabilitated yet is just so stupidly risky.

I think supporting vulnerable students is enough for a DBD fior vulnerable adults. There's no actual definition is there? Let me check.

At my college all adults up to the age of 24 were considered vulnerable.

The irony that he was studying a criminology course

We did an open day in the summer and totally discounted Cardiff as everything was really badly organised and the affordable accommodation was a shithole (and the Pres and Vice Pres of the SU could barely string two words together - I sat there astounded they were considered the brightest and best..)

Thank fuck. Cardiff obvs do not take the safety of women and other vulnerable adults seriously.

1. What is a vulnerable adult?

The term ‘vulnerable adult’ has been amended as it was felt to be inappropriate to label an adult as vulnerable solely due to their circumstances, age or disability. In general terms, an adult (a person aged 18 or over) is classed as vulnerable when they are receiving one of the following services: • Health care; • Relevant personal care; • Social care work; • Assistance in relation to general household matters by reason of age, illness or disability; • Relevant assistance in the conduct of their own affairs; or • Conveying (due to age, illness or disability in prescribed circumstances)

From the DBS. He'd also need to be undertaking regulated activity, so meeting them alone etc

Just to clarify, he didn’t actually strangle his victim, ie kill her, but put his hands round her throat. She was certainly in fear of death. This should have automatically ruled him out from any ‘safeguarding’ role, in my opinion.

I can't believe this

Well, someone's going to die before they admit "mistakes were made"

Who allowed this

That’s ridiculous! He shouldn’t be allowed to live in halls at all, let alone in a position of trust where he has access to vulnerable students. What idiot thought this was ok?

Wtf

Universities love to do things which signal their social justice credentials. Mixed-sex changing rooms, shared bedrooms allocated by declared gender, violent criminals in student halls, etc. Female students are just collateral damage for their virtue-signalling.

It’s a role he has as a student at the University.

The article says he put his hands on a woman’s throat and injured her eye and neck when he assaulted her causing ABH (actual bodily harm). For which he got a 9 month sentence.

So while he shouldn’t be in this role, and should not be living in student halls of residence, he should still be allowed to be a student at the University.

Strangulation is now a separate criminal offence. Probably wasn't when this man was convicted.
Not sure whether there are any sentencing guidelines yet.
www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/non-fatal-strangulation-or-non-fatal-suffocation#:~:text=Section%2070%20Domestic%20Abuse%20Act,2022%20and%20are%20not%20retrospective.

How has he passed DBS checks with that history? I’d wonder if he has given false information. There is absolutely no way he should be anywhere near.

What? This is disgraceful.

They could have picked absolutely anybody off the street at random - and they would almost certainly have been more suitable (less unsuitable) for this role than him.

Did somebody originally make a disgustingly sick joke ("Hey, guys, you know who we should get to be a safety support officer!!!!") that was duly followed up by somebody very uninformed and slow on the uptake who took it at face value?

I suppose, in the spirit of 'when somebody shows you who they are, believe them', this would strongly suggest that Cardiff University not only don't care about the safety of potentially vulnerable people (well, of anybody, really) but that they actually think the concept of keeping people safe is all a big joke.

Violent man with conviction for strangling a women given 24 hour access to women, and given a role that encourages them to contact him any time, seems legit, NOT.