Blaze Victim Sues Police For Thwarting Art Rescue

[Oldbillplod]

A retired army captain who claims police caged him in the back of a van to stop him dashing back into his burning manor house to save paintings and antiques yesterday won the right to have the case heard by a jury.

Edmund Carlisle, 84, alleges that police falsely imprisoned him as he tried to get back into his 16th century home to rescue heirlooms and treasures he and his wife had collected over a lifetime.

The police attempted to have Capt Carlisle's case struck out but a judge decided that the civil case ought to be heard by a jury. After the civil hearing at the high court in Cardiff, Capt Carlisle described the police's actions as a "monstrous breach of my rights". He said: "I am standing up for all of our civil liberties. I was lucky enough to survive the war - many of my friends didn't. They did not make that sacrifice for this country to descend into a police state. I had the right to try to save my property and the police wilfully obstructed me."
The fire at Capt Carlisle's house in Llanigon, near Hay-on-Wye, Powys, began in a boiler room in November 2002. Capt Carlisle dialled 999 and as the blaze began to spread, the former soldier and his wife, Rosemary, 82, went into the drawing and dining rooms and began to move out their most precious valuables, including a collection of Victorian oil paintings. When police arrived they ordered the couple out. Capt Carlisle says he told the officers: "Don't be bloody stupid."

He claims there was no smoke in the rooms and three sturdy oak doors between them and the fire.

Capt Carlisle, who served in India during the second world war, claims he was dragged out. He struggled but was overpowered and thrown into a small cage in the back of a police van. His wife was locked in the back of a police car. The captain is furious that police did not obey his orders or allow him to direct firefighters when they arrived. He claims the fire took 90 minutes to get across the six-bedroomed grade II-listed house, in which time their most valuable possessions could have been saved. The notion that the police action saved his life he dismisses as "rubbish".

Capt Carlisle's barrister, Michael Arnheim, said eight police officers swarmed onto his client's property "making a nuisance of themselves" rather than helping. The house, worth more than £500,000, was destroyed and almost £150,000 of possessions lost. Capt Carlisle, who has been living in a farmworker's cottage on his 300-acre estate, claims he was under-insured and is hoping for a large amount of compensation if he wins the case.

Judge Crispin Masterman ruled that the issue of Capt Carlisle's alleged wrongful arrest should be tried by a jury. He said: "The claim for damages in respect of the allegations of wrongful arrest, false imprisonment and negligent prevention of rescue of the contents of the house remains and should be tried. It is agreed that the facts are for a jury to decide."

The trial between Capt Carlisle and Dyfed-Powys police will be held at Merthyr Tydfil crown court later this year.

However, the judge struck out Capt Carlisle's accusations that Dyfed-Powys police trespassed on his property and failed to notify the Hay fire service about the blaze immediately. He also said the two parties should pay their own costs for the preliminary hearing.

A spokeswoman for Dyfed-Powys police said: "The result of the hearing is only one stage of the process of dealing with the civil claim. The chief constable continues to defend these proceedings and the allegations made against the officers in this case."

[phantasm]

I could articulate that someone who wanted to run into a fire was an EDP (emotionally disturbed person). I would then have handcuffed this person as such for his own protection and my own, and then sent him to the psych hospital for mental evaluation, stating that he was diliusional and unable to care for self. That's just one scenario or articulation. Our main function is to protect life above all other things. We can't let a citizien run into a burning house to save property.

[madsnax]

It sounds to me as if the guy wasn't thinking clearly. He would risk his life for possessions? Sounds like he needed to be ED'd... I'm sure him watching his house/possessions burning caused some major emotional trauma, and as we all know - people don't always act rationally when someone like that is going on.

[Super Six 5]

Here's my favorite part:

The captain is furious that police did not obey his orders or allow him to direct firefighters when they arrived.

Not only did he want to save his art, he wanted to supervise and instruct firefighters on how to battle this blaze. :D

[greenbean]

Here's my favorite part:



Not only did he want to save his art, he wanted to supervise and instruct firefighters on how to battle this blaze. :D

Well we got to take it for what it is !!! That man has seen more and done more then we will probably ever know ! Yes although I am not a leo I also believe that the police's job is to protect him from his emotions and the fire (if u get my point ) .... I'm not for his decision nor am I against it. I try to put myself in his postion I would be mad at the cercomstances but I dont think I would ever sue or take anyone to court ! Im not sure what or how I would do it . Or even if I would do anything! :confused:

[TattoodDucky]

Well we got to take it for what it is !!! That man has seen more and done more then we will probably ever know ! Yes although I am not a leo I also believe that the police's job is to protect him from his emotions and the fire (if u get my point ) .... I'm not for his decision nor am I against it. I try to put myself in his postion I would be mad at the cercomstances but I dont think I would ever sue or take anyone to court ! Im not sure what or how I would do it . Or even if I would do anything! :confused:

The guy's also 84 years old and has no experience with the equipment that the firefighters would be using, or the techniques that they employ. No, he should not have been able to direct them.

Beides, he later stated that his house, worth more than £500,000, and almost £150,000 of possessions on his 300 acre estate was under insured. Sounds like it's his own damn fault that he lost it with no compensation. You have valuable stuff, you insure it. Simple as that. If someone had robbed him, would he be suing the police for not finding the guy?

[oscarmitre]

Ooops. He could well win this case and it could get very ugly in terms of total damages. I can't think of a common law authority for the police in this case to detain someone against their will and unless there is a specific legislative duty I think they could be pushing uphill.

I don't think the poor old coppers in this one are in good shape at all. I mean I can't see them saying, "but we wanted to save his arse not his arts" as being a reasonable defence.

[JakeLock]

Beides, he later stated that his house, worth more than £500,000, and almost £150,000 of possessions on his 300 acre estate was under insured. Sounds like it's his own damn fault that he lost it with no compensation. You have valuable stuff, you insure it. Simple as that. If someone had robbed him, would he be suing the police for not finding the guy?

Exactly. I have lots of antiques in my house and you can be sure I have everyone of them appraised and insured... costs more but it'll be better in the long run if something happens...

[ChesCopPodz]

Classic example of damned if you do, damned if you don't. If they'd have let his dumb arse go back in and get killed, they'd be getting sued too.

[Valor55]

Ooops. He could well win this case and it could get very ugly in terms of total damages. I can't think of a common law authority for the police in this case to detain someone against their will and unless there is a specific legislative duty I think they could be pushing uphill.

I don't think the poor old coppers in this one are in good shape at all. I mean I can't see them saying, "but we wanted to save his arse not his arts" as being a reasonable defence.

They can't stop someone from committing suicide?

[Valor55]

The captain is furious that police did not obey his orders or allow him to direct firefighters when they arrived.

He's just mad because being a retired Captain in the armed forces means he can't tell everyone else how to do their jobs anymore. :rolleyes:

Cantankerous old coot.

[shugs]

Lawsuits. The new get rich quick scheme.

[greenbean]

The guy's also 84 years old and has no experience with the equipment that the firefighters would be using, or the techniques that they employ. No, he should not have been able to direct them.

Beides, he later stated that his house, worth more than £500,000, and almost £150,000 of possessions on his 300 acre estate was under insured. Sounds like it's his own damn fault that he lost it with no compensation. You have valuable stuff, you insure it. Simple as that. If someone had robbed him, would he be suing the police for not finding the guy?

I'm not agreeing with the guy ! I just dont think he was mentaly stable. but at the same time none of us were there to know the actual facts .Were the police wrong ? ( doubt it ) but again I wasnt there soo you never know ! He should have had his stuff properly insured (I agree to that 110% ) . Do i think sueing will make it better NO but to each his own I guess! it's almost sad that the world revolves around money but it does and that is that !

[Oldbillplod]

He will never get a successful prosecution out of this, he is wasting his time.

[codered]

To serve and protect? I agree with Bill....what should the police have done? Stand by, while this gentle soul(rather Old gentleman) enters and retraces his artifacts?

Let the court observe whom is active in preservation of LIFE. If THEN, the court determines that an individual shall enter a dangerous setting to retrieve artifacts, then ...so be it, a new precedent should be set, all fire and LE personnel should stand aside while anyone can enter and recieve their fair BURN.

just my .02