|
Confusion between Tribunals and Managers Newspapers yesterday showed confusion between MHRTs and Manager's meetings - re discharge prior to further serial killings: Last night questions were being asked as to how he could have been released. The divorcee had been diagnosed with depression, and had been in psychiatric hospitals several times before January 2002, when he was held under the Mental Health Act, deemed a danger to himself and others. The decision to let him out was taken by a mental health tribunal, comprising three people, including a doctor and a lawyer. It is thought this may have happened despite reports from a senior psychiatrist, social workers and nursing staff, who believed Hardy was a serious risk to the public, especially women. The chief executive of Camden and Islington mental health and social care trust last night defended his staff. "He was transferred following a crime of criminal damage to property including other non-violent offences," Erville Millar said. "He remained in our care. His condition improved and he was well enough for our Mental Health Act manager to discharge him but he was not discharged from the hospital." The decision was made by independent lay managers , after Hardy appealed against the sectioning. "He continued to remain in hospital under a detention order and continued in contact with the services right up to his arrest. But at no time did he declare his crimes. Therefore we could only deal with what we knew in terms of our contact with him." |