Nottingham stabbing inquiry

The sons of Ian Coates, the caretaker who was stabbed are the first of the families to speak to the inquiry. The treatment they received from the Police makes very upsetting reading.

eazybee

On Tuesday I saw Mrs. Webber, mother of Barnaby, cry for the first time. She said they had fought for the hearing to discover what had happened to cause the three murders Valdocane committed.

They learned that following an early psychotic attack, against a doctor's advice , Valdocane was not sectioned because "research evidence ..shows the over representation of young black males in detention." The first deadly error. There followed a pattern of various treatments, attacks, arrests , treatment refused, periods of sectioning always ending in him being released only to make increasingly violent attacks. Long term injections because he was scared of needles, then ignoring appointments and medication. . While at university a concerted attempt to support Valdocane complete his degree and avoid him being 'stigmatised.'
He broke down the door of a girl's room who was so terrified she jumped from a window seriously injuring her back; when arrested he attempted to 'go for her' again. Treated and released yet again while clearly a very dangerous man; he should have been sectioned permanently.
Two builders attacked and the police searching for him.
Finally the brutal murders of the two students and the caretaker.

To paraphrase Mrs. Webber; everything is about care for the perpetrator; nothing to protect victims.

It’s shocking isn’t it?

Thank you, Maremia.
(I'm not sure if you were on GN in the summer of 2023 when the murders took place. I explained then, under a different name, my connection with one of the victims over several years. I do not wish to restate this now, as a poster, not on this thread, ridiculed me for being over emotional at the time! Yes, really!)

I do have an interest in this case and the facts surrounding it. I want justice for all 3 victims, but one is particularly important to me.

The inquiry isn't finished yet, but the problem is, as I read it, that the report they are considering, (carried out by Theemis Consulting), fails - because it was meant to be more detailed, and then fails even more because it does not name the psychiatrist that failed in their duty to treat Valdo Calocane.
That's the bottom line.

Thank you Tuliptree and MartavTarus for the 'arrest' information.
So many failures, and the innocent suffered.

MartavTaurus

So there's no hope of justice for the innocent victims in this case, nor does it look likely in the future.

We have to blame the release of a known to be violent man, who did not take his medication, and the useless psychiatrist who failed to consider public safety in Nottingham. He/she should be held accountable.

But the inquiry hasn't finished yet has it? Do we know who will ultimately be held accountable?

So there's no hope of justice for the innocent victims in this case, nor does it look likely in the future.

We have to blame the release of a known to be violent man, who did not take his medication, and the useless psychiatrist who failed to consider public safety in Nottingham. He/she should be held accountable.

I agree with that history, he should have been held on the last sectioning.

But we really need to recognise that 4 sections in and of itself is not a "deal breaker", many psychotic patients in their 40's and 50's have been sectioned far more. its the "revolving door" situation:

beds are so short in supply that people are released as soon as they have responded to the drugs, there is not the capacity to keep them in for longer to settle properly, or resolve suicidal thoughts or for that matter violent ones, as thoughts do not of themselves result in follow ups.

We return again and again to the capacity to supervise people in the community, until this can be improved there will also be continuing incidents including our very high rates of suicide amongst young men.

MartavTaurus

^Most are not violent: Roughly 90% of individuals with psychosis are never violent^

Well I'm sorry but he was. An arrest warrant had been issued for Calocane after he failed to attend a hearing at court, where he was accused of assaulting an emergency worker.

He had also to assaulted two colleagues at a factory, in Leicestershire I think.

He had a history of violence.

He was sectioned 4 times.
Alarm bells were ringing loud and clear well before these murders; he should not have been released. He was not followed up for months.
A dereliction of duty by those responsible for him.

Care in the community was another initiative introduced by Margaret Thatcher's government. It was a cost-cutting exercise and can put the general public at risk.

.

He was sectioned 4 times.
4 times a psychiatrist failed to change his treatment.
4 times a psychiatrist failed to use depot injectable medication
4 times they failed to put provisions in the community to make sure he took his medication.

eazybee

On Tuesday I saw Mrs. Webber, mother of Barnaby, cry for the first time. She said they had fought for the hearing to discover what had happened to cause the three murders Valdocane committed.

They learned that following an early psychotic attack, against a doctor's advice , Valdocane was not sectioned because "research evidence ..shows the over representation of young black males in detention." The first deadly error. There followed a pattern of various treatments, attacks, arrests , treatment refused, periods of sectioning always ending in him being released only to make increasingly violent attacks. Long term injections because he was scared of needles, then ignoring appointments and medication. . While at university a concerted attempt to support Valdocane complete his degree and avoid him being 'stigmatised.'
He broke down the door of a girl's room who was so terrified she jumped from a window seriously injuring her back; when arrested he attempted to 'go for her' again. Treated and released yet again while clearly a very dangerous man; he should have been sectioned permanently.
Two builders attacked and the police searching for him.
Finally the brutal murders of the two students and the caretaker.

To paraphrase Mrs. Webber; everything is about care for the perpetrator; nothing to protect victims.

This makes very worrying reading. So many red flags. This poor mother and everyone connected to the victims must be enduring a nightmare which had he been sectioned would never had happened.

On Tuesday I saw Mrs. Webber, mother of Barnaby, cry for the first time. She said they had fought for the hearing to discover what had happened to cause the three murders Valdocane committed.

They learned that following an early psychotic attack, against a doctor's advice , Valdocane was not sectioned because "research evidence ..shows the over representation of young black males in detention." The first deadly error. There followed a pattern of various treatments, attacks, arrests , treatment refused, periods of sectioning always ending in him being released only to make increasingly violent attacks. Long term injections because he was scared of needles, then ignoring appointments and medication. . While at university a concerted attempt to support Valdocane complete his degree and avoid him being 'stigmatised.'
He broke down the door of a girl's room who was so terrified she jumped from a window seriously injuring her back; when arrested he attempted to 'go for her' again. Treated and released yet again while clearly a very dangerous man; he should have been sectioned permanently.
Two builders attacked and the police searching for him.
Finally the brutal murders of the two students and the caretaker.

To paraphrase Mrs. Webber; everything is about care for the perpetrator; nothing to protect victims.

MartavTaurus

Well, then there should be statutory powers to compel witnesses to appear to account for their failures. Ultimately they were responsible for discharging a violent man into the community to do harm. They knew he was evil, they knew he didn't take his medication. I'm no doctor, but I know that discharging someone in that state - 4 times I believe - is not going to protect the community from an attack, so why should the psychiatrist be protected from attack then?

"Evil"? Paranoid schizophrenia is an illness not moral depravity

You may be confusing psychosis with psychopathy.

Category A - 14 days
Category B - 21 days
Category C - 28 days
Nottinghamshire Police failed to execute a warrant for 9 months.
Another fail.

Maremia

Just asking for information. When an arrest warrant is issued, how quickly is it acted upon?

I suppose common sense would say it would depend on the priority it was given after a risk assessment. What’s included in the risk assessment must be things like danger to others, danger to self, flight risk etc.

Just asking for information. When an arrest warrant is issued, how quickly is it acted upon?

petra, I wish that money would go into more resources and mental health care workers.

Most are not violent: Roughly 90% of individuals with psychosis are never violent

Well I'm sorry but he was. An arrest warrant had been issued for Calocane after he failed to attend a hearing at court, where he was accused of assaulting an emergency worker.

He had also to assaulted two colleagues at a factory, in Leicestershire I think.

Grantanow

Failures indeed but I do wonder whether public inquiries really achieve much.

Money for solicitors, lawyers, barristers 🤷‍♀️

It's actually quite common to be sectioned and discharged a number of times, and is most definitely not an indicator of violence in and of itself. this goes fro both people who have psychotic episodes and thoase with repeat sections for depression (as in danger of suicide?)

Because of this assumption, and a post upthread being frightened of "someone behaving oddly in the street", I'm giving you the stats. Note: this is an AI quote, but I have checked out the articles where the information is derived from as can you.

"Most are not violent: Roughly 90% of individuals with psychosis are never violent, and they are far more often a danger to themselves (through suicide) than to others.

Victimization is more common: People with severe mental illness are nearly three times more likely to be victims of crime compared to the general population.

Small, specific risk: While most are not violent, the risk of violence in people with untreated, severe psychotic disorders (particularly paranoid schizophrenia) is higher than in the general population, often due to persecutory delusions where they fear for their lives.

Substance misuse is the key factor: Almost all of the increased risk of violence associated with psychosis can be attributed to comorbid substance abuse rather than the psychosis itself.
Context of delusions: In rare cases of homicide committed by someone experiencing psychosis, it often stems from intense, delusional, or paranoid beliefs rather than premeditated, stereotypical "killer" behavior.

www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=people+behaving+in+a+strange+psychotic+way+are+not+killers&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

Well, then there should be statutory powers to compel witnesses to appear to account for their failures. Ultimately they were responsible for discharging a violent man into the community to do harm. They knew he was evil, they knew he didn't take his medication. I'm no doctor, but I know that discharging someone in that state - 4 times I believe - is not going to protect the community from an attack, so why should the psychiatrist be protected from attack then?

Well, of course it depends on the situation.

Sometimes, there is a really clear point of accountability. And then it matters, and it matters as to what their mistakes specifically were so's to learn and to remove those not capable.

But what I am trying to say is that this seems to me to be of a complex decision that in this case went wrong, inevitably they cannot get it right all the time: and again, had they more resources monitoring would have been better.

People seem to be unaware that the psychiatrist's name may have been withheld not because they did wrong, but in order to protect them from attack.
You want to add that to the equation?

I say that, because when an individual is clearly culpable, they are named.

Oreo

It’s not always about money and resources but quite often about poor decisions.

And decisions are made by individuals.
If individuals are not held to account, systems will fail to change in our country.

It’s not always about money and resources but quite often about poor decisions.

Wyllow3

In this case, the only useful outcome would be to underline how appalling the shortage of care and oversight is available in MH, make a big issue of it, rather than pointing any fingers specifically, imo.
Because when you just do the latter, you fail to address the real problem, the system itself, the lack of adequate supervision and workforce problems.

I don’t agree as you certainly can point fingers in many cases.