AIBU to think a man accused of throwing a child into a crocodile enclosure should not get bail?

[YourKeenOliveNewt]

Aibu to think the man who threw an unknown 3 year old into a crocodile enclosure shouldn't be out on bail?

If anyone could provide any insight into the reasoning behind why was granted bail I would be very interested to hear it.

AIBU: He's a danger to society
AINBU: Innocent until proven guilty

The needs of a person with profound learning disabilities could not be met in prison. You would not put a 2 year old in prison.If this individual is operating at the cognitive level of a 2 year old ,but has the strength to pick up a toddler and throw them, you can bet that after an incident like this they will be cared for securely in a place which can meet their needs, and that their care will be thoroughly reviewed and risk assessments put in place to prevent anything like this happening again. Unlike toddlers, adults with learning disabilities will never 'grow up' out of this behaviour. They are not legally responsible for their decisions as others are and they can't be ''rehabilitated' as individuals in prison are (supposed to be) . Neither can they be punished. The agency/ gov org responsible for their care however is a different matter. They will be investigated and probably face criminal charges because that is where the risk assessment and culpability lies. Sometimes it is due to issues on the the ground ie not enough staff, not enough staff training or neglegent staff. Sometimes it is a systemic and procedural failing higher up the organization or a mixture of both.

No it doesn’t. In your imagined scenario, a violent angry person grabbed up a child and flung them deliberately into a crocodile enclosure. That might be the truth, but we don’t know that, it is equally as possible that his perception was that he calmly picked up an obstruction and dropped it into a space.

We don’t know, and that’s why we can’t make declarative statements about locking up a violent offender and punishing them.

Do you think the child and their family experienced whatever motivation was in his head or think someone tried to kill them?

What?

May I suggest you Google mens rea and educate yourself a little?

I work in a local authority day centre for people with LD, autism, dementia etc.

We risk assess for every outing and make decisions about whether someone should go out on the day if there is any concern. We won't hesitate to come back or send for help if deemed necessary.

We are not allowed to use agency staff and we know our people inside out.

We have still occasionally had incidents we couldn't have possibly avoided. Thankfully not serious.

I am sometimes on the phone to the Duty officer asking for advice or reporting concerns while my colleagues are keeping a close eye.

I am not comparing this to the event in question, as we don't have 2 to 1s and most of our people don't have profound and complex needs.

However there is always an element of unpredictability even with well trained, experienced staff and thorough forward planning.

Did you get hurt tying yourself in such knots?

Surely the vulnerable one here is the small child that was thrown into the crocodile pit, not the perpetrator who did it?

This 💯

And it should be eye opening that it’s coming from someone who has worked in the system.

That was my first question too: if the man is so severely disabled that he doesn’t understand that throwing a toddler into a crocodile pit is wrong, what exactly was it hoped that he’d he gain from going to this place? Surely there are more apropiate activities for him in his care environment, where him or others would not be in potential danger.

Sorry, I may not be reading this correctly. Are you saying that anybody with Down syndrome should not be able to visit a family-friendly venue?

They are both vulnerable in very different ways and need people looking after them at all times.

You realise you're on mumsnet not in court? My point is I don't care why he did it and I doubt the victim does either.

This makes me really sad. My mum used to work with people with severely limited intellectual capacity, including those with Down's Syndrome. While it's absolutely right to say that thorough risk assessments and a high degree of training and careful 'handling' are required, are you really suggesting that we just lock them away from the world like the Victorians did? Mum's group enjoyed many days out to similar places without serious incident and most of her charges were gentle. If one had a particular history/ risk then of course alternative arrangements were made. But to say that they're all the same and none of them deserve to experience a day out at the zoo is pretty extreme.

I also live nearby and was at the farm/ zoo on Sunday with my daughter. I'm horrified by what happened and hope the little boy recovers.

You haven’t got a clue, have you?

Yes, that's exactly how I read it.

That is how I read it too.

This☝️ lock the f….ker up securely. Again why should the public be put at risk.

Our public services have a very cavalier attitude to protecting the British public in general.

As is evidenced by all the undocumented males that are being allowed into our country who disproportionately cause us harm.

There is a big difference between taking a vulnerable adult, needing two carers, to a cafe in a park, and taking him into a crocodile enclosure where there are young children.

Of all the day trips, why choose this one?

Thankfully, somebody reported that and it was deleted. Just awful.

Again I find this odd, likely it’s just a day trip to the zoo as he likes animals. Clearly no one thought this would happen and it will have taken seconds to do.

yes it calls into question if people with severe learning disabilities should be permitted at zoos as it is likely humanly impossible never to be distracted, all it takes is a noise behind them they turn and he does it.

but people with disabilities have to have quality of life. This is obviously a very rare and unexpected event. That no one could foresee. As it wouldn’t even cross your mind it could happen.

Broadmoor

Wow you should be ashamed of yourself.

Life isn’t black and white, right and wrong, clear cut in every way.

It is entirely possible for both the child and the man to be vulnerable in this scenario. Absolutely no one is arguing that this wasn’t a horrific situation that must have been traumatising and terrifying for the child, his family and everyone else present. No-one is saying that the child deserved it and from what I’ve seen only a couple of ignorant people have suggested that it was the parents fault for not supervising their child well enough.

What we cannot say is that the man deliberately, with intent, purpose and understanding of the consequences took an action that caused harm to this child. We cannot say that because we do not know that.

That would be most murderers so we’d have to lock most men away?

I used to work in a care home for adults with autism and severe learning disabilities. Almost all of them would be on 2:1 care out in the community, even if they had no violent tendencies, because lots of things are necessarily a 2 person job. If you're supporting a large grown man with little concept of what is happening with changing or toileting (and is likely to try and sit back down on you while you're wiping his bum) then you need two people. If said person has so little sense of danger that they'll walk out into a busy road, then you really need two of you to properly restrain him.
If the day out involves driving anywhere, then you'll need one person driving while the other person is in the back with the resident- because they have multiple seizures a day and someone needs to always be on hand with the midazolam, or because they need somebody CONSTANTLY signing in makaton to reassure them what's happening else they'll start screaming.

Obviously, some people are violent. Usually towards themselves or to the carers trying to intervene rather than to members of the public, but it obviously can happen. We had residents who'd been in institutional care for over 30 years, each with a filing cabinet of notes from professionals, lists of any minor incident which had happened over the years, daily notes from their caretakers describing everything they'd done that day- and they could still suddenly act in a way which wouldn't be indicated by any of this reporting.

I appreciate that most people on this thread won't have worked with adults with learning disabilities, but it still takes a embarrassing lack of imagination to not think that there could be a reason for 2:1 care other than "this man has history of violent incidents against children, is an obvious and predictable danger to the public". It's a thread full of people going "Yeah, I know nothing about this, but I reckon..."