Jump to content

Bradford on Avon boater 'will set fire to boat armed with garden fork'


booke23

Featured Posts

24 minutes ago, roland elsdon said:

You cant section people for being strange eccentric different or a pain to everyone else.

His view of the world is highly entitled not mentally unwell. 
By suggesting he needs forced detention under the act you are doing a great dis service to the unfortunate few, who have to loose their freedom and liberty to have care forced on them.

 

Anti social associal possibly different defo,  but thats allowed. Its the courts job to deal with damage to society like that.

 

I'm not saying, section him. I'm saying, we (we all on the forum, given the limited facts) can't judge from afar if he needs medical help or not, so it should be done by someone in a professional capacity. That may be the police, or paramedics, or GP.

 

Also.....depression.....it is basically, a dangerous untreatable disease, it is possible to control its symptoms with drugs but most people who suffer from depression will not make a full recovery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, magnetman said:

 

The CRT need to Get rid of the boats and lose him. Nobody wants this type on the cut.

 

Claiming you are going to kill yourself is the lowest form of insult. 

 

Just do it. Clear the scum. 

 

 

 

Well well, you show your true colours once again.

 

You cannot in anyway based on what you have read on here know whether he is mentally unwell or not or indeed a suicide risk or not.

 

It is true that its very common that people who do commit suicide do not issue any warning signs what so ever. Our family member that hung himself certainly didnt.

 

Its also true that sometimes people who do threaten it and/or attempt it actually do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love it when a plan comes together.

 

Do you think this bloke, who is not particularly quiet and has turned up in the media before has not been noticed by the MH services? 

 

I know the system is screwed but surely there is some basic observation of people going on. 

He's basically an attention seeker probably hooked on social media. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Do you think this bloke, who is not particularly quiet and has turned up in the media before has not been noticed by the MH services?

...

He's basically an attention seeker probably hooked on social media. 

 

Enough about Nick, what's your thoughts on George? ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, magnetman said:

I love it when a plan comes together.

 

Do you think this bloke, who is not particularly quiet and has turned up in the media before has not been noticed by the MH services? 

 

I know the system is screwed but surely there is some basic observation of people going on. 

He's basically an attention seeker probably hooked on social media. 

 

Fill your boots matey...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway. 

 

Do we think the men in white coats have come to get him? They certainly should do if he is threatening to burn up.  Maybe it has even been put on facebook. That would be pretty shocking!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Anyway. 

 

Do we think the men in white coats have come to get him? They certainly should do if he is threatening to burn up.  Maybe it has even been put on facebook. That would be pretty shocking!

Funny enough I have nor seen him mentioned there for some weeks, maybe I should post it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cheshire cat said:

I'm wondering where he is going to be carted off to. And then there is the question of "At what cost?" Probably significantly more than it is currently costing the taxpayer for him to be bankside

He won't be carted off, there's nowhere to cart him to. He'll sleep rough for a bit interspersed with a few arrests and jail time, then back on the street till he dies. Or he'll cobble together another boat to live on. He's done ok so far. He's one of many, why should he be singled out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Orwellian said:

The man clearly needs support but that should be by health and/or social services which his 'supporters' should be finding for him rather than using him in their fight against CRT. Deeply cynical and frankly repugnant.

 

Clearly to us, he needs 'support' but no-one is obliged to accept 'support' they don't want. 

 

It seems clear that George rejects any attempt to help him get a license or he'd have one by now. So his 'supporters' can only be 'supporting' him to benefit their own agenda. So you're right and I greenied your post. 

 

 

 

 

  • Happy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

He won't be carted off, there's nowhere to cart him to. He'll sleep rough for a bit interspersed with a few arrests and jail time, then back on the street till he dies. Or he'll cobble together another boat to live on. He's done ok so far. He's one of many, why should he be singled out?

 

If his boats are ever removed then I would think there will be a fundraising thing to buy him another boat, or somebody will rent him a boat unofficially, and he will continue his battles with CRT (and society). He's been doing this for a long time so I doubt he will change

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dmr said:

 

If his boats are ever removed then I would think there will be a fundraising thing to buy him another boat, or somebody will rent him a boat unofficially, and he will continue his battles with CRT (and society). He's been doing this for a long time so I doubt he will change

 

I think you're right there. NBTA like having a Patsy which whom to beat CRT.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted about a month ago (which nobody seemed to see or at least comment on) linking an article about a restraining order which meant keeping away from C&RT staff. I wondered at the time if that meant as long as he remained on his "boat" staff wouldn't be able to approach him. Obviously, most people would usually have to leave their boat at some point, but who knows.

6 minutes ago, Ianws said:

I posted about a month ago (which nobody seemed to see or at least comment on) linking an article about a restraining order which meant keeping away from C&RT staff. I wondered at the time if that meant as long as he remained on his "boat" staff wouldn't be able to approach him. Obviously, most people would usually have to leave their boat at some point, but who knows.

January Post 

Apologies if this has already been posted. 
 


     
 


   https://www.wiltshiretimes.co.uk/news/23269734.bradford-avon-canal-boater-hit-restraining-order/
 


     
 


    George Ward, 62, who lives on the Kennet & Avon Canal at Smelly Bridge near Bradford on Avon, was given the order on January 19.
 


    It followed action taken by the Crown Prosecution Service and the Canal & River Trust charity that looks after the UK’s canals and inland waterways network.
 


    The Canal & River Trust had accused him of using threatening and abusive behaviour towards two of its employees.
 


     
 


    More details in the full article. 
 
https://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?/topic/117364-bradford-on-avon-canal-boater-hit-with-restraining-order/&do=findComment&comment=2888012

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone is in a place the public have access and in immediate need of assessment by mental health services - i.e. on the cut (but not inside his boat) then the police should intervene under s136 of the Mental Health Act.  If he's that well known in the area, the fact they haven't yet suggests that, whilst he may be someone with personal difficulties, he is not significantly mentally ill.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Laurie Booth said:

I would buy him a caravan and put it in a nice secluded spot with support from social services etc...

 

But he doesn't want that, he clearly wants to be on a boat on a river or canal, and he probably has rejected all offers of support from social services.

 

As others have said if he is actually mentally ill he would have been sectioned, the authorities can offer help and support but they can't make him accept it.

 

The only people who have any legal authority to do anything are CRT who could remove his boats as they are unlicensed. The fact that they have taken so long implies to me that they are aware that this is a complex situation and that he may well end up rough sleeping in even worse conditions if he loses the boats, or will some how acquire another boat and start the whole process again.

 

There are no quick or easy solutions to this problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Barneyp said:

But he doesn't want that, he clearly wants to be on a boat on a river or canal, and he probably has rejected all offers of support from social services.

 

As others have said if he is actually mentally ill he would have been sectioned, the authorities can offer help and support but they can't make him accept it.

 

The only people who have any legal authority to do anything are CRT who could remove his boats as they are unlicensed. The fact that they have taken so long implies to me that they are aware that this is a complex situation and that he may well end up rough sleeping in even worse conditions if he loses the boats, or will some how acquire another boat and start the whole process again.

 

There are no quick or easy solutions to this problem.

The vast majority of people who are mentally ill are not sectioned.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe better to say "known to mental health services as a potential risk". 

 

It seems to me the bloke is a bit of a crazy and has an attitude problem but is probably not under the doctor. 

 

We don't know but there are a few people about who have issues around thinking they have more rights than other people. 

 

If the boats are unlicensed and/or an obstruction or hazard they need to be got rid of. Yesterday. 

 

You can't have someone causing this sort of problem on a public towpath. It is not acceptable. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Machpoint005 said:

 

Not sure whether it's a threat or a statement of intent (could be either, or both) but yes, you are correct.

 

We have also lost a family member to suicide.

 

 

 

Yes, 'threat' is probably not a good word choice, as it implies its being done to somehow cause harm, upset and create trouble for others and is 'manipulative' rather than indicate the intent just to kill ones self.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here he is 6 years ago (at around the 19 minute mark) (I seem to remember that it was shortly after when he received £7k+ crowd funding)

 

Following recent media coverage of CRT’s punitive policy towards boat dwellers without home moorings, especially the features about families on the K&A who are being threatened with the loss of their home because their children go to school, a boater has contacted us with these comments. Steve Haigh writes :

 

I have read a lot of comments on social media that consist of the usual misunderstood misplaced stuff about continuous cruisers: “why don’t they just get a house / why don’t they just follow the rules like everybody else” etc. Reading these largely negative comments made me feel the need to expand on a thought I’ve had since the screening of “Off The Cut”. and the question and answer session afterwards.

In the discussion after the film quite a lot was said about community and what a great place the K&A is for life on a boat. I agree, but I think it is a mistake to emphasise this element of continuous cruising because it misleads others into thinking what we do is simply a life-style choice and something that we can therefore simply choose not to do.

There is an increase in liveaboard boaters without a home mooring in a lot of areas, not just in London or on the K&A and most of the people that continuously cruise, do so because they have little other choice, in that they can’t afford a house and can’t even afford to rent a room in a house or a permanent mooring. For many boaters, living on a boat is the next thing above homelessness, no matter how optimistically we choose to look at it. And as we know, it is not a simple life: it involves a lot of hardship that others do not understand. Getting water, fuel, shopping and other essential services; getting kids to school; keeping the fire lit; getting on and off the boat; moving the boat; keeping the boat running, is no small feat and most people who can afford houses or residential moorings would not like to do it.

The hardships we endure and the fact that most continuous cruisers have no other choice is OUR STRENGTH and it should be emphasised above all else. It means that CRT actually PERSECUTE and OPPRESS us. Please let’s not let our optimism and resilience get in the way of the facts.

 

 

 

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mike Tee said:

And I'd guess that the vast majority of people who are mentally ill don't need to be sectioned.

 

Of course they dont, you are correct. Unfortunately people sometimes automatically conjour up images of people who have a mental illness rampaging around causing harm to others and need to be  'locked up'.

 

(Some people are of course sectioned for their own safety too).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.