Can anyone help me understand what this means?

[itsgettingweird]

I’ve been reading that the man responsible for throwing the child into the crocodile enclosure has been placed on conditional bail as they aren’t considered fit enough for questioning.

What are the conditions likely to be? Are they monitored? Is it released to a secure hospital?

Otherwise it seems strange to me someone too unwell to be questioned but unwell enough to throw a 3yo to a crocodile is deemed well enough to be allowed to roam the streets again?

So what do you want to do with all these people? I mean in my town alone there is around 1000 people who need to be accompanied by carers to go out in the community. What do you honestly want to happen to them all? And absolutely none of them have committed a terrible crime... until they do.
But of course most of them never do. The worst crime any learning disabled person that I have worked with (100s) has committed is expose himself in a pair of women's knickers at the local cenotaph. Unsurprisingly he wasn't charged.

Be watched like a hawk, and never be around children where they are in touching distance. Even one of these incidences is never acceptable, cannot believe some people are suggesting we just need to accept the odd incidence for the greater good. Imagine saying this to the boy’s parents.

Im including all of the adults who were with the young man and the wee boy and if that makes me the lowest of the low then so be it.

No. It’s very easy based on life experience to have a very good idea of how this happened.

Thankyou. Thats very informative and reassuring.

Is almost like the wild animals should be in the wild, but we fucked them up so now show them to people in zoos.

Humans are the ones who need walls around them.

I don’t know what you’re talking about (and yes, I followed the link.)

I have read that the offender has learning difficulties and was there with a carer. Presumably they’ve been bailed to the institution where they live and are cared for.

The child is the victim. Don't dilute that.

Every aspect of the case will need to be examined in due course. Firstly the suspect and what is known about him and his previous conduct. Had he ever shown any violent / dangerous behaviour previously and were the conditions of the visit suitable based on what was known. The crocodile house will need to be examined to ensure it hasn’t failed health and safety standards in some way. The parents behaviour will also need to examined and consideration to whether their care fell below the level of what is acceptable (given they were in a crocodile house.). So all of that. It’s not a quick process.

It’s a very unusual crime and I’m sure there were some phone calls going in to the Chiefs on whatever police area this is. Police generally don’t like having to bail for serious matters so there will have been a lot of discussion about it but ultimately the rules are very strict about detention and what they can do.

It’s not diluting anything to say the parents of a toddler watching their child be thrown into a crocodile pit, and deal with their now critically injured child, are very much also the victims in this.

So you’d accept your child or a member of your family being gravely assaulted or killed, and think “these things happen, am really pleased the person who pushed my child in front of the train was having their day out, long may it continue!”

🤨
There are some cracking examples of wild speculation on this thread but this tops them all.
It sounds like you have a strong imagination. I hope you are able to tell the difference between imagination and what actually happened.

What does ‘don’t speculate?’ mean to you?

It’s not a choice between wanting every person with learning disabilities to be locked up and just “ accepting “ everyone walking around with no supervision. It’s a spectrum. Disabilities are a complex area and you can’t just write a rule that’s going to work for everyone. If I were the parent I’d be furious if this person had previously hurt someone but we don’t know that yet. That is the part of the speculation that’s not helpful.

What an odd response?!

I haven't speculated I was asking a simple question about what conditional bail was .

FWIW I have learned more about this case since.

No they're not 'secure facilities ' they're care homes that can work with a DOLs. Which is what i said, also upthread. ' look up DOLs' you say? How many DOLs applications have you made in your career? I've made plenty, I don't need to look it up!

I didn't say he was living in a "secure facility"! I said it was likely, given he was out with 2 carers, that he lives in a secure care home. Of course they exist. With specified numbers of carers to patients, securely locked front doors so the residents can't get out etc. If you do DOLS work then you obviously must be aware of this.

Well how far do we go? People who witnessed it, the paramedics and doctors and nurses dealing with it, the grandparents getting told?

The child is the victim.

A nurse is the exact same thing as a parent witnessing their very young child almost get murdered 🤦‍♀️

I'm sure there will be a MAPPA meeting arranged as quickly as possible. This is a multi agency meeting where decisions will be made about the level of care needed. It could include the care home, the police, local authority who might be paying for his care and anyone else considered relevant to making decisions. So I'm sure there will be a lot of thought going into it.

https://metro.co.uk/2026/06/20/suspects-carers-on-phones-boy-3-thrown-crocodile-pit-28852851/

How do you know what they witnessed? How do you compare witnessing something with being attacked by a crocodile. It has to be all about the adults doesn't it. The child is the victim.

You’re right the parents who accompanied their toddler on an air ambulance, in critical condition, thinking they may not make it and being told someone was arrested for attempted murder haven’t suffered in the slightest.
They are making it all about themselves for having the nerve to suffer.

Did you read the article before you linked it?

You said: It sounds like the carers, and the parents, were all on their bloody phones.

No mention of the parents being on their phones so that's a nice bit of imagination.

Then the article says:
The carers of a man suspected of throwing a child inside a crocodile enclosure were ‘on their phone’ earlier in the day, according to a report.

A mum, in her 20s, said: ‘I don’t know if it was definitely him but I saw one bloke of a bigger build, he had two carers with him and they weren’t paying him much attention.

‘If it was him, his carers were maybe ten metres behind him and not paying much attention.

So the report from an onlooker isn't even sure it's the same person, and doesn't mention the parents.

Can you see what I mean about imagination?

They are suffering but they aren't the victim. How about thinking of the innocent child in that helicopter. Accompanying sums it up.