Beggars belief

Sponsored Links
Surely in this instance , local knowledge comes into play. The firemen probably knew the boating lake was only 3ft deep, as would the police. No matter which way it's reported, it's a real shame he was left for that amount of time. Later reports have the police and emergency serviced "Defending " the decision to leave the poor chap in the water. In all human decency, there can't be a defence. Human compassion doesn't even come into it these days.
Read the reports about the London Bombings and the aftermath. You'll see there too that some people were prepared to go in and help people off the carriages , but were stopped by others. Some made the decision themselves to help out as soon as they could and later got reprimanded for it.
What is this world coming to?
 
Fact:
It was a three foot deep boating lake. :rolleyes:

Fact:

How would anyone know that.

That is not a fact, that is a question.

How to measure the depth of water.

Get stick, walk to-wards targey, test depth in front of you. Schoolboy knowledge. :rolleyes:

Or quite simply swim, preferably breast stroke in a gentle manner as you get close, if you can swim, so as not to cause too many waves/ripples as you approach.

Immi, I read your other post after I posted so edited in the part about not being angry.

Had an incident in work today, I wasn't involved but saw the reaction of others. Bloke had trapped his hand between to heavy plates of steel, while the supervisor started to weigh up how to get a sling around the steel to lift it 2 other blokes simply got a steel pole and inserted it between them while a 3rd fella gently slid his hand out. Afterwards the 'mickey taking' started. What if the pole had slipped and hurt someone? What if the pole had slipped and trapped the 'rescuer'? What if.... etc.
This last bit was done in humour but no doubt when they have the investigation tomorrow these questions will get asked. By the way, the victims injuries appear to be just bad bruising and nothing serious.
 
Sponsored Links
We're all getting worked up over the same thing here.... he was recovered withing 26 minutes.... he was probably already dead... risk assessment meant no other people had a serious loss! Or were injured.

He also had a history of this sort of thing apparently, so could've done the same thing in the bath without endangering our rescue services?
 
We're all getting worked up over the same thing here.... he was recovered withing 26 minutes.... he was probably already dead... risk assessment meant no other people had a serious loss! Or were injured.

He also had a history of this sort of thing apparently, so could've done the same thing in the bath without endangering our rescue services?

Every one of us perform risk assessments every day of our lives, and just because their is a risk, it does not nor should not stop us from taking them.

You say this chap had a history of this sort of thing, I assume you mean blacking out not being found face down in a pond.

Not one single person among the rescuers would have known this piece of information so it could not have been factored into the RA.

You then say he was probably already dead. That is the whole point, he could probably have still been alive when they arrived and that should have been the main consideration.

Why do you insist on defending the indefensible?
 
We pay them well to do their work, they must be held accountable when they fail...

Emergency services were told yesterday they should be prepared to ‘risk their lives’ to protect the public.

At the inquest on victims of the Cumbrian gun massacre, coroner David Roberts said it was disturbing that paramedics were prevented from reaching the injured because of red tape which cost vital minutes.

And a senior police officer said the response had been severely hampered by slavish adherence to health and safety regulations.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top