The Metropolitan Police have admitted they made a mistake in arresting and detaining a homeless pensioner, saying the decision to remove him from his home where he spent eight months in a tent was “inhumane”.
A letter from the Metropolitan Museum of Art said it would pay compensation and apologize to Anthony Sinclair, 70, who was found sleeping outside a central London hospital.
He was taken into police custody on November 10, days after Suela Braveman caused controversy by describing the crackdown on homeless people living in tents as a “lifestyle choice.”
The Metropolitan District acknowledged the human rights violations, but said it had also received complaints of homeless people defecating in the area and threatening people.
Mr Sinclair refused to leave the tent even after officers gave him 90 minutes to comply with orders to disperse. The incident resulted in him being handcuffed before being placed in solitary confinement, but the charges have now been dropped.
Mr Sinclair said: “The treatment I and others suffered at the hands of police officers was inhumane.
“I was arrested for refusing to leave the place where I had lived for eight months and was detained for six hours while my tent and other belongings were taken and destroyed.
“I am glad that the police have acknowledged that this was wrong and I hope that no one will be treated the way I was treated in the future.”
Lawyers instructed by the Metropolitan Commissioner sent a letter on Tuesday to settle the case.
Police officers used their powers to order dispersal under section 34 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014. What the Metropolitan Transportation Authority did wrong was to use its powers to forcibly remove someone from where they lived.
A letter from the Metropolitan Museum's lawyers, seen by the Guardian, said: “The Commissioner accepts that this decision was unlawful, particularly in relation to the instruction for the client to leave the place where he had lived for some time.
“The Commissioner does not agree with your suggestion that that power…can never be exercised in relation to homeless people camping in an area…However, in your client’s case, it is important to note that the power to dispersal and directions for dispersal are appropriate. It is accepted that this was not the policy,” and that any use of powers should have due regard to whether people are being asked to leave the place where they live. ”
The letter said University College Hospital, near where Ms Sinclair lived in London, had been experiencing “issues of anti-social behavior associated with people living in tents for several months…” It was written.
Sinclair and other homeless people chose the location because the concrete overhang provided shelter, the building's ventilation vents provided some warmth from hot air escaping from the hospital, and because it was crowded and crowded. I felt it was relatively safe because there were surveillance cameras installed.
A letter from the Met's lawyers said: “The Director acknowledges that both decisions were unlawful and is willing to discuss appropriate compensation with you. The Director also apologizes to your client. I intend to,” he continued.
Mr. Sinclair remained ill in bed and was supported by the civil rights organization Liberty. “People living on the streets are increasingly subjected to unfair and degrading treatment by police, putting them at risk of harm,” said Lana Adamou, the group's lawyer.
“This government criminalizes poverty and homelessness, and police use it as a short-term solution to remove people from communities, rather than providing support or addressing the root causes of the problem. They are abusing the powers given to them, such as disbanding orders.”
By the Met's standards, the decision to apologize, admit wrongdoing and offer to settle the lawsuit was relatively quick. Liberty's invoice was sent on Dec. 19, and the Met acknowledged it was a mistake within a month.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art has long been accused of prolonging litigation, wasting public money and exacerbating the suffering of those wronged.
Adamou said: “Police acknowledge that officers should not have treated our client or others affected this way, and that our client's rights were violated.'' I am pleased and welcome the minister's apology.” This would send a clear message that dispersal orders should not be used in this way against people living on the streets. ”
“This was not an isolated incident of power being used unlawfully to disperse people and destroy property,” said Elodie Berlan of the homeless charity Streets Kitchen. is something we witness on a regular basis.
“Being homeless is not a crime. The fact that homelessness exists is what it should be.”
The Metropolitan Museum of Art's letter states that officers will receive new training on their powers.
Cllr Andy Carter, Camden's police chief, said: “We acknowledge that this exercise of power and authority was unlawful.
“We do not want to underestimate the impact this incident has had on this man and we plan to meet with him to apologize in person and listen to his side of the story.
“My officers will be participating in further legal training on the use of dispersal powers to ensure this never happens again and to use this tactic responsibly.”
