|
Archived Transcript for 23 November 2001: Pages
1 to 50
1
1 Friday, 23rd November 2001
2 (9.30 am)
3 THE CHAIRMAN: Morning ladies and gentlemen. Mr Garnham.
4 MR GARNHAM: Before we resume the evidence this morning,
5 sir, two procedural matters. First of all, we had
6 a successful meeting yesterday evening with counsel for
7 the interested parties, the result of which is that the
8 draft timetable we had devised for the rest of the
9 Inquiry was amended. The effect of that is firstly to
10 allow rather more time for the witnesses that we have
11 over the next few weeks.
12 That seems to us prudent, particularly in the light
13 of the new information and documentation that the
14 Inquiry has been getting of late, and it will enable us
15 to look at that material with those witnesses properly.
16 It will also have the consequence of meaning that we
17 take the majority of the remaining police witnesses in
18 the New Year together with the witnesses speaking to
19 lessons learned. It seems to us that the new version of
20 the timetable will provide a sensible framework for the
21 remainder of Phase 1. We will have that typed up and
22 circulated as soon as we can.
23 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Could I also thank the
24 interested parties who have assisted with that. I am
25 very grateful.
2
1 MR GARNHAM: The second procedural matter is this. One of
2 our functions as Counsel to this Inquiry is to consider
3 how best to present the available evidence to you and
4 your assessors. One of the more difficult questions in
5 that regard has been how best to adduce the evidence of
6 Kouao and Manning. In view of the importance of that
7 question and the range of competing considerations that
8 are applicable to it, we thought it sensible to invite
9 interested parties to indicate their views on the matter
10 before deciding how we should proceed.
11 On 9th November Mr Fitzgerald, Solicitor to the
12 Inquiry, wrote to all the interested parties indicating
13 the possibility of setting up a video link for the
14 purposes of taking evidence from Kouao and Manning and
15 indicating that that was currently being explored by the
16 Inquiry. He invited final representations on that
17 subject by no later than 5 pm last Friday.
18 Three interested parties, Haringey, the Climbie
19 family and one of the police officers made
20 representations to us. They all differed as to the
21 manner in which this evidence should be adduced but they
22 were unanimous in the view that the Inquiry, if it is to
23 meet its stated objectives of pursuing these matters
24 vigorously and thoroughly, must attempt to obtain the
25 oral evidence of both Kouao and Manning in one form or
3
1 another. That is a view we share.
2 Whilst it is clear that the evidence of both of
3 these witnesses will have to be approached with some
4 care, they may nonetheless be able to provide evidence
5 of assistance in a number of respects concerning factual
6 matters largely, which you may feel have not yet
7 definitively been resolved by the evidence we have
8 heard. My first proposal therefore is that you should
9 hear oral evidence from both Kouao and Manning.
10 The next matter that arises is the manner in which
11 that evidence should be adduced. As I have indicated,
12 sir, no clear consensus has emerged from the
13 representations made by interested parties. It has been
14 necessary therefore for us to balance a number of
15 competing considerations. The primary consideration it
16 seems to us has to be that the evidence should be
17 presented to you in the most effective and reliable
18 manner. It is plainly the case, however, that the
19 attendance of either of these witnesses in London for
20 the purpose of giving evidence before this Inquiry will
21 be a cause of considerable inconvenience and expense to
22 the Prison Service and create significant security
23 difficulties for us in this building.
24 With those considerations in mind my proposals to
25 you, sir, are as follows: With respect to Manning,
4
1 first of all, his evidence we think should be taken via
2 a video link with a convenient and secure location in or
3 near his prison. As with those witnesses who have given
4 evidence by video link already, the Inquiry can adjourn
5 to Skipton House across the road where the necessary
6 facilities are available. There is unfortunately
7 insufficient room in that video conferencing suite to
8 enable the entire legal teams of all interested parties
9 to attend but I have made enquiries sir and have been
10 told that there is sufficient room to accommodate one
11 representative from each interested party to be in that
12 room whilst Manning is giving evidence. That will
13 enable them to suggest questions to us to be put to
14 Manning as has been done with other witnesses. A video
15 of his evidence can then be played in this room at
16 a later date for the benefit of those who have been
17 unable to be present at the time.
18 In relation to Kouao, a different approach should in
19 our submission be adopted. We have received
20 representations from two of the interested parties in
21 support of the argument that she should give her
22 evidence to this Inquiry live and in person. The first
23 is that it will enable you and your assessors to form
24 a view as to her demeanour and plausibility and that may
25 be relevant in the light of evidence given by witnesses
5
1 already as to their perceptions of Kouao.
2 The second is that Kouao may feel rather more
3 reluctant to refuse to cooperate with this Inquiry and
4 to answer our questions if such a refusal is to be made
5 from the chair in front of you rather than from the
6 relative comfort of a room in a prison.
7 Sir, in my submission both of those points have some
8 merit and they have led us to the view that it would be
9 preferable for Kouao to give her evidence to you live
10 and in person rather than via a video link. It is of
11 course possible that were this course to be adopted she
12 will nonetheless refuse to cooperate and decline to
13 answer any of the questions we put to her.
14 One attempt made by this Inquiry to secure her
15 cooperation so far has failed. Some months ago a list
16 of questions was sent to Kouao via her solicitor
17 inviting her to supply a written response. We offered
18 to send members of our team to her prison to assist her
19 in doing so. We were told that she would not answer any
20 of the questions, having received legal advice that to
21 do so may prejudice her prospects of successfully
22 appealing the conviction of January. Whether there
23 would be any point then in going to the trouble and
24 expense of bringing Kouao down to London to give
25 evidence were she simply to decline to do so once here
6
1 is a matter that may have to be considered.
2 The course we propose to adopt, therefore, is to
3 write to her representatives indicating that we propose
4 issuing a summons requiring her to attend the Inquiry
5 for the purpose of answering questions, pursuant to your
6 powers under Section 250 of the Local Government Act.
7 The letter will request confirmation that she is
8 prepared to answer questions or in the alternative
9 a detailed statement of her ground for refusing to do
10 so. If she adopts the latter course we will then be in
11 a position to consider the merits of any argument she
12 might wish to advance and decide then whether a summons
13 should in fact be issued.
14 If you were to decide, sir, that it was appropriate
15 to issue a summons and if Kouao then attends but refuses
16 to answer questions, we would need to decide whether to
17 lay an information before magistrates, allege a breach
18 of Section 250 or whether to refer the matter to the
19 Attorney General for consideration of what further
20 action he might think appropriate.
21 You could certainly, sir, be confident in either of
22 those events that we had done all that we reasonably
23 could to secure evidence from Kouao.
24 Sir, that then is the course of action I propose.
25 It is in summary firstly to arrange a video link at
7
1 a convenient time for the purpose of taking Manning's
2 evidence and secondly to write to Kouao's
3 representatives in the terms I have described indicating
4 that their client will be required to come to London and
5 give evidence to this Inquiry in person.
6 One final matter, sir. It may be that the
7 attendance of Kouao at this building will cause the sort
8 of security difficulties that I mentioned at the
9 beginning of this observation. We will seek the views
10 of the Prison Service about that. At this stage I would
11 do no more than invite you to consider a suggestion made
12 by one of the interested parties. That is that on the
13 day Kouao is called this Inquiry might be adjourned to
14 a conveniently located Crown Court where the necessary
15 facilities for securing a prisoner such as Kouao would
16 be more easily available. If the Prison Service favour
17 such a course and it proves possible to obtain the
18 necessary facilities for the suitable Crown Court, it
19 seems to us, sir, that that may be a course that has
20 some merit but we will advise you about it further when
21 that occurs.
22 THE CHAIRMAN: Mr Garnham, I am very grateful indeed to you
23 and indeed to other interested parties that have
24 contributed to the thinking on this matter. As you
25 know, at the preliminary hearing I made it plain that
8
1 I wanted this Inquiry to be not only transparent and
2 thorough but as comprehensive as possible and that
3 I attach importance to getting evidence from Kouao and
4 Manning if that is possible and clearly I recognise that
5 there may be obstacles to be overcome in that so I am
6 very grateful to you for what you have decided and I am
7 very content with your suggestions, and in particular
8 your last comment about the importance of security.
9 MR GARNHAM: Thank you sir. May we resume and can I ask
10 Miss Arthurworrey to return to the witness seat.
11 MISS LISA ARTHURWORREY (continued)
12 MR GARNHAM: Good morning Miss Arthurworrey. You will
13 remember that you are still on oath.
14 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Yes.
15 MR GARNHAM: During the course of yesterday you said that we
16 might have sight of your diary and I forgot to ask you
17 at the end of the day. Do you still have it?
18 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I gave it to my lawyers yesterday
19 afternoon.
20 MR GARNHAM: I am told they have it. I will ask if somebody
21 from the Secretariat could get that from them during the
22 course of the morning. Thank you very much. Also
23 during the course of your evidence yesterday you
24 referred to using a notebook during this year. Do you
25 remember telling us that?
9
1 MISS ARTHURWORREY: (Nods).
2 MR GARNHAM: Do you also have that notebook?
3 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I have tried to find that notebook
4 whilst I was preparing my statement and I cannot find
5 it. We use several notebooks.
6 MR GARNHAM: I see. You keep it at home or in the office?
7 MISS ARTHURWORREY: It was kept -- because I moved from the
8 INA Team to the Long Term Team and I think in that move
9 notebooks went missing. Sorry.
10 MR GARNHAM: Before we pick up where we were yesterday there
11 are three preliminary points arising out of what you
12 said yesterday I would like to ask you about if I may.
13 Can I come back to the question as to when your notes
14 were written up? Those are the notes that we have in
15 volume 6 at page 62 and perhaps you can have sight of
16 that. Page 62 is in fact in the middle of the notes but
17 you know the notes I am referring to?
18 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Yes.
19 MR GARNHAM: Is it possible that these notes were all
20 written up in one go rather than being written up on
21 a daily basis?
22 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I know that my interviews on the
23 5th August and the interview with Victoria on 6th August
24 and the home visit that I undertook on 16th August, it
25 is quite possible that those three interviews were
10
1 written up at the same time, some time after the
2 16th August.
3 MR GARNHAM: Because you have told us how busy your day can
4 be, and I can imagine there would not always be time to
5 write up your notes during the course of a busy day.
6 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
7 MR GARNHAM: The reason I am particularly interested in this
8 is this. You said yesterday that Dr Rossiter had said
9 to you that the marks on Victoria's body were due to
10 scratching or an infection due to scratching. Do you
11 remember that?
12 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I do.
13 MR GARNHAM: It is Day 26, page 143, line 1 for the note
14 sir. Dr Rossiter said, and again for the note Day 20,
15 265, 2, that she could not concur with what is said in
16 your notes at the top of page 262. "Not concur" were
17 her words. She did not have a clear recollection of the
18 matter but she said that if you had asked her about this
19 she would have said, and that is how she put it, she
20 would have said that Victoria was itching but there that
21 there were other marks as well. She said she would have
22 said that scratching did not account for the large
23 number of marks she had seen.
24 Now, she acknowledges that she does not have a clear
25 recollection of this and she is commenting about what
11
1 she thinks she would have said. Will you turn to
2 page 290 in that volume, please. That is the letter we
3 looked at yesterday from Dr Dempster, 290. She writes
4 in the second paragraph:
5 "She has however been assessed by the consultant
6 Dr Schwartz and it has been decided that her scratch
7 marks are all due to scabies."
8 My question is this. Do you think it possible that
9 in writing up your notes later on you have attributed to
10 Dr Rossiter what in fact you learned had been said by
11 Dr Schwartz?
12 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I am very clear that on 3rd August when
13 I spoke to Dr Rossiter I took a note of that
14 conversation at that time. The conversation that I had
15 with Dr Rossiter was not written up after, that note was
16 written on 3rd August, before the letter arrived.
17 MR GARNHAM: Do you mean by that that you wrote the letter,
18 the notes we find at 262, in that form as you spoke, or
19 did you write them down somewhere else and then
20 transpose them?
21 MISS ARTHURWORREY: At the time when I spoke to Dr Rossiter
22 she was speaking rather quickly and I was taking a note
23 at the same time in my notebook. But then I transferred
24 the notes from my notebook on to the contact sheet.
25 MR GARNHAM: When did you do that transfer?
12
1 MISS ARTHURWORREY: On the same day, because I do know that
2 when Karen Jones came to see me before we interviewed
3 Kouao on 5th August I showed her that conversation which
4 was written on the contact sheet.
5 MR GARNHAM: Thank you. The second preliminary matter
6 I want to ask you concerns the NMH records. I do not
7 recall whether I asked you this yesterday and I should
8 have done. I asked you whether you sat down and read
9 the whole of the CMH notes and you were very frank about
10 that. Did you ever sit down and read from cover to
11 cover all the NMH notes?
12 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I believe I did, yes.
13 MR GARNHAM: Did you see amongst them the critical incident
14 log?
15 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Definitely not.
16 MR GARNHAM: So that the notes you received did not include
17 the critical incident log?
18 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Definitely not.
19 MR GARNHAM: Third preliminary point. Will you go to 06.238
20 please. You remember this is the fax sent to you by
21 Isobel Quinn?
22 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
23 MR GARNHAM: I think I showed you a different version of
24 this. We have more than one in the bundle. You can
25 probably anticipate the question I am going to ask you.
13
1 There is some handwriting on the top of that version
2 which looks to me as if it is your handwriting, is it?
3 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
4 MR GARNHAM: When did you write that?
5 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I really do not know.
6 MR GARNHAM: During the summer of 1999 or in the last few
7 weeks?
8 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I have no recollection.
9 MR GARNHAM: What you have written is, "Neglect issues
10 observed by the nursing staff." Is that right?
11 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
12 MR GARNHAM: That rather reinforces, does it not, the point
13 I was putting to you yesterday that you saw this fax
14 from Quinn as being directed simply to the neglect
15 issues and the need to obtain a report on them raised in
16 the strategy meeting?
17 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct, yes.
18 MR GARNHAM: Thank you very much. Can I return to where we
19 had got to yesterday afternoon, and we had reached your
20 evidence relating to the visit on 16th August. That day
21 you made your first visit to Manning's flat.
22 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct, yes.
23 MR GARNHAM: The notes are 06.156. You had better have that
24 in front of you please. You are now visiting Manning's
25 flat. Where have the fears about scabies gone?
14
1 MISS ARTHURWORREY: At the time I made this visit there was
2 no fears about scabies.
3 MR GARNHAM: Because?
4 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Because Kouao had informed
5 Constable Jones and myself on the 5th August that
6 Victoria had contracted scabies from the bed and
7 breakfast and before I made that visit I had received
8 the correspondence from Central Middlesex Hospital which
9 also said that they had moved out of their bed and
10 breakfast accommodation and made reference to scabies
11 and scratches.
12 MR GARNHAM: That visit could have happened at any time then
13 between 5th August and the 16th when in fact it
14 occurred, is that right?
15 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
16 MR GARNHAM: You say in your statement about this that you
17 now realise that you were completely "set up" during
18 this visit. You mean by that I assume that you feel you
19 were deliberately misled?
20 MISS ARTHURWORREY: (Nods).
21 MR GARNHAM: And that Victoria's behaviour that day was the
22 result of instruction or coaching by Kouao and Manning?
23 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Yes.
24 MR GARNHAM: You described the meeting and the thoughts you
25 had about it in paragraphs 140 to 155 of your statement.
15
1 Do you remember I asked you yesterday whether you were
2 familiar with the concept of respectful uncertainty?
3 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I do, yes.
4 MR GARNHAM: My having given you my attempt at a definition
5 of that yesterday, do you think you displayed respectful
6 uncertainty during the course of this visit? Shall
7 I put it another way?
8 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Please.
9 MR GARNHAM: Respectful simply means that you continued
10 being polite and I have no reason to doubt you were
11 that. The uncertainty means however that you retain
12 a sense of inquisitiveness, that you do not simply
13 accept what you are being told, that you look to try and
14 confirm it. Now, do you think you displayed those
15 qualities?
16 MISS ARTHURWORREY: In terms of the concerns that I received
17 from the North Middlesex Hospital around the neglect
18 issues, I think I did try to test those when I was at
19 267 Somerset Gardens.
20 MR GARNHAM: Because you would agree, would you not, that it
21 is your job to satisfy yourself about the relevant
22 matters, not simply to make assumptions about them?
23 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
24 MR GARNHAM: The only concern from the hospital that I can
25 see from your statement as being raised was Victoria's
16
1 bed wetting.
2 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
3 MR GARNHAM: Did you ever check up whether Kouao had taken
4 Victoria to the health centre next door about that or
5 any other medical problem?
6 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I first raised the suggestion that Kouao
7 take Victoria to the medical centre on that visit
8 because I did not discuss the bed wetting specifically
9 during the office visit on 5th August. I addressed that
10 issue at the home visit on 16th August.
11 MR GARNHAM: I am sorry, I may have misphrased the question.
12 Did you ever check that that had been done, your having
13 raised it?
14 MISS ARTHURWORREY: No, I did not. I should have checked
15 that at my home visit on 28th October but I did not.
16 MR GARNHAM: Because it is significant not just to discover
17 whether or not Victoria is having medical treatment in
18 that regard but also to check whether Kouao is behaving
19 like a decent mother would?
20 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct, yes.
21 MR GARNHAM: And so your failure to check meant you did not
22 know about either of those two things?
23 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct, yes.
24 MR GARNHAM: You were told about Manning having a fiancee?
25 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Yes.
17
1 MR GARNHAM: Ever check that?
2 MISS ARTHURWORREY: No, I did not.
3 MR GARNHAM: Try and trace her or speak to her to confirm
4 any of this?
5 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Unfortunately I did not.
6 MR GARNHAM: And you should have done?
7 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I should have done.
8 MR GARNHAM: During the course of this meeting who did you
9 regard as your client?
10 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Victoria.
11 MR GARNHAM: Not Kouao?
12 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Definitely not.
13 MR GARNHAM: Do you agree that it would be possible to
14 complete a care plan for Victoria without accommodation
15 being resolved?
16 MISS ARTHURWORREY: No, because the accommodation I felt was
17 the key issue. We needed to resolve the accommodation
18 issue before a care plan could be formulated. That was
19 my view at the time.
20 MR GARNHAM: But could the arrangements for obtaining
21 accommodation not be part of the plan? I believe it was
22 part.
23 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I believe it was part of the plan and
24 that is why I felt that I needed to follow up the
25 application that Kouao had made.
18
1 MR GARNHAM: I am not suggesting otherwise but I am
2 suggesting that you could complete a plan that included
3 as one of its provisions sorting out accommodation and
4 that you did not have to see sorting out accommodation
5 as a pre-condition to finishing the care plan.
6 MISS ARTHURWORREY: At the time I think it was a care plan
7 could not be sorted until the accommodation situation
8 was resolved.
9 MR GARNHAM: I do not understand why that should be so. Why
10 can you not work out? I mean, just say for example it
11 took six months, a year, two years to sort out
12 accommodation. The care plan's completion does not have
13 to sit and wait for that, does it?
14 MISS ARTHURWORREY: But that is why I did not want the
15 accommodation issue to take six months, two years. It
16 needed to be sorted out urgently, which is why
17 I contacted the Housing Department.
18 MR GARNHAM: Absolutely. I understand that. But
19 nonetheless, because it is possible, even though it is
20 not wanted, you do not need to make that a pre-condition
21 to the completion of the care plan, do you?
22 MISS ARTHURWORREY: At the time that was my thinking.
23 MR GARNHAM: During that visit of the 16th, what did you
24 learn about Victoria? She is your client.
25 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I did not speak to Victoria
19
1 unfortunately during that visit and I deeply regret not
2 doing so. However, when I arrived at 267 Somerset
3 Gardens I knocked on the door, Victoria opened the door
4 and I was so struck by her presentation. The last time
5 I had seen Victoria at the North Middlesex Hospital she
6 presented as a shy, withdrawn child. When I saw her on
7 the 16th August she was as the nurses have described
8 like a ray of sunshine. She greeted me. She said,
9 "Hello Lisa". She had quite a high-pitched voice. She
10 was dressed in a red tartan skirt, a red jumper, she had
11 red socks on, black shoes. She seemed happy and the one
12 thing that I did notice was that her face was heavily
13 moisturised with cocoa butter and as I have said in my
14 statement, I thought that Kouao was applying cocoa
15 butter to help reduce the scarring from the scalds and
16 the scabies.
17 MR GARNHAM: It is right, is it not, from your experience
18 that children who are the victims of abuse can often be
19 remarkably resilient?
20 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I have certainly learned that from my
21 experience in this case.
22 MR GARNHAM: And despite the fact that they are living with
23 an abusing carer they can go on displaying affection
24 towards them?
25 MISS ARTHURWORREY: But at the time I did not know that
20
1 I was dealing with child killers. I thought Kouao was
2 a respectful adult who was child focused. She had come
3 to this country to try and make a better life for her
4 and Victoria.
5 MR GARNHAM: I understand that, but my point is that should
6 you not from your training have had in mind the fact
7 that sometimes children can go on showing affection to
8 adults who are abusing them?
9 MISS ARTHURWORREY: My training did show me that. However,
10 because of the information that I received from the
11 North Middlesex Hospital I did not think that I was
12 dealing with Kouao, and I can say that once I saw the
13 letter from the Central Middlesex Hospital that made me
14 more trusting of Kouao and I really did not think that
15 she would harm Victoria in any way.
16 MR GARNHAM: Did you see whether Victoria had toys and books
17 about the home?
18 MISS ARTHURWORREY: When I completed that visit on
19 16th August there were toys scattered on the floor and
20 Victoria was sat playing with a doll.
21 MR GARNHAM: Did you check up things like what she did
22 during the day?
23 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Regrettably I did not.
24 MR GARNHAM: Did you check up whether she had been
25 registered with a dentist or a doctor?
21
1 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I knew that she was not registered with
2 a GP and that is when I raised the health centre.
3 MR GARNHAM: Dentist?
4 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I did not mention the dentist, no.
5 MR GARNHAM: The impression I was left with reading this
6 part of your statement was that you saw Victoria still
7 as quite a lonely child. Is that fair? Did you see her
8 as a lonely child?
9 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I do not think that thought passed
10 through my mind at that time.
11 MR GARNHAM: The question of Victoria's appetite was raised,
12 but you looked to the wrong person to address that, did
13 you not? You looked to see whether Kouao on the day you
14 visited appeared to be preparing food.
15 MISS ARTHURWORREY: And I also raised with Kouao the
16 hospital's concerns regarding Victoria eating I think it
17 was eight bowls of cereal one morning and Kouao's
18 response to me was, "Victoria had a large appetite
19 anyway".
20 MR GARNHAM: Should you not have asked that question of
21 Victoria?
22 MISS ARTHURWORREY: With the benefit of hindsight, yes,
23 I should have done.
24 MR GARNHAM: You see, I need to suggest to you,
25 Miss Arthurworrey, that you showed no real
22
1 inquisitiveness during the course of that visit.
2 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I am a social worker and I work with the
3 facts as they are presented to me. As I have said to
4 you, I was more trusting of Kouao when I went on that
5 visit. I am not a detective. I had no reason not to
6 question what I saw and what I was being told at that
7 point.
8 MR GARNHAM: The explanation for example about the delay in
9 getting to hospital and the clothing she was wearing.
10 You do not need to be a detective to realise that does
11 not quite add up, do you?
12 MISS ARTHURWORREY: At the time it sounded plausible.
13 MR GARNHAM: You accepted the explanation about why Kouao
14 had not brought in any clothing or treats for Victoria,
15 did you not?
16 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I did, yes.
17 MR GARNHAM: But even the poorest of parents with a child in
18 hospital would be expected to bring in something, if it
19 is only a favourite toy or an outfit the child likes or
20 a bar of chocolate. This woman was bringing in nothing.
21 MISS ARTHURWORREY: When I raised that with Kouao she
22 informed me that finances were tight and she could not
23 afford to buy treats for Victoria. I raised the fact
24 that she had brought no clothes into the hospital.
25 Kouao's response to that was that the hospital had given
23
1 Victoria clothes and they had entered this country with
2 very few belongings and Victoria did not have a lot in
3 the way of clothes and she had been grateful that the
4 hospital had given Victoria some clothes and therefore
5 did not see the need. I was also aware, because I did
6 raise her lack of visiting, and Kouao informed me that
7 she had been busy trying to find alternative
8 accommodation.
9 MR GARNHAM: Most seven-year old children have something
10 they are particularly attached to, do they not:
11 a battered up teddy bear, a piece of blanket, an old
12 sock? I am starting to give evidence. I must be
13 careful. But that is common, is it not, children do
14 attach themselves to the most peculiar objects?
15 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct, yes.
16 MR GARNHAM: But there was not even a sign of that, was
17 there, being brought in for Victoria in hospital?
18 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I was told that Kouao had not brought in
19 any treats and she gave me the response that she gave
20 me.
21 MR GARNHAM: You attempted to address the question of
22 master/servant relationship between Kouao and Victoria
23 and you say that you saw that as an example of the sense
24 of formality that can exist in Afro-Caribbean families.
25 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I would need to take you back one step.
24
1 When Dr Rossiter mentioned the master/servant
2 relationship, the example she gave me was that Victoria
3 ran to her mother's side as if being called to
4 attention.
5 MR GARNHAM: Yes, and you saw that as an instance of the
6 sort of formality that can exist in Afro-Caribbean
7 families?
8 MISS ARTHURWORREY: When I went to the home visit on
9 16th August I was basically looking to see if there was
10 anything oppressive in the way that Kouao interacted
11 with Victoria and I saw nothing.
12 MR GARNHAM: Yes, but I am interested in what you say about
13 your seeing this in the context of normal Afro-Caribbean
14 relations. Victoria had been nursed on the ward by
15 a number of Afro-Caribbean nurses. Did you ever raise
16 this question with them and see what they thought of it?
17 MISS ARTHURWORREY: No, I did not.
18 MR GARNHAM: I mean, in fact I think it is the case that the
19 nurse who raised this concern, Nurse Pereira, was of
20 Afro-Caribbean origin. Might she not have been somebody
21 to talk to about this?
22 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I had no idea of the ethnic origin of
23 any of the nurses at the North Middlesex.
24 MR GARNHAM: But you could have enquired because they having
25 observed this might have been in a position to comment.
25
1 MISS ARTHURWORREY: All I can say is that when I visited
2 Victoria at 267 Somerset Gardens she was quiet.
3 I thought that she was respectful to the fact that the
4 adults were having a conversation and she needed to be
5 quiet whilst the adults spoke. I then concluded that
6 this type of relationship was one that can be seen in
7 many Afro-Caribbean families because respect and
8 obedience are very important features on the
9 Afro-Caribbean family script. I would like to say that
10 I came to that conclusion after I had noted that there
11 was no concerns between the interactions of Victoria and
12 Kouao and not before.
13 MR GARNHAM: Do you think it is sensible though to equate
14 the experience of an English speaking Afro-Caribbean
15 person living in England with those of a French speaking
16 African girl who until the year before had been living
17 in the Ivory Coast?
18 MISS ARTHURWORREY: All I can say is that this should have
19 been an issue that was discussed in supervision, and had
20 I been receiving regular consistent supervision which
21 offered the opportunity to reflect, this should have
22 been an issue that should have been discussed in
23 supervision.
24 MR GARNHAM: Because you would agree, would you not, that
25 not all black families are the same, just as all white
26
1 families are not the same?
2 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I totally agree, yes.
3 MR GARNHAM: Did you know anything about which part of the
4 Ivory Coast Victoria's family came from?
5 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I do not believe -- I do not even think
6 that I knew that Victoria was from the Ivory Coast at
7 that point.
8 MR GARNHAM: What her family's tribal background was?
9 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Unfortunately I did not make those
10 investigations, no.
11 MR GARNHAM: And whether people from that sort of different
12 background behaved differently in relation to their
13 attitude to children?
14 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I did not make those enquiries, no.
15 MR GARNHAM: You should not have been making assumptions at
16 all, should you?
17 MISS ARTHURWORREY: It was not an assumption. It was
18 a conclusion that I came to after I had observed no
19 concerns with the interactions between Kouao and
20 Victoria. With the benefit of hindsight perhaps
21 I should not have put that on Victoria's -- recorded
22 that in the assessment. That should have been something
23 that was discussed in supervision and perhaps that
24 statement should have been made on the supervision notes
25 as opposed to Victoria's assessment.
27
1 MR GARNHAM: You see, I have to suggest to you that there
2 was a veneer of respectability about this family that
3 completely put you off the scent.
4 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I think that is correct, yes.
5 MR GARNHAM: Would your approach have been different if the
6 family had presented as being poor, unemployed, chaotic
7 home life, white?
8 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Again, we have to remember the
9 information that I was given by the North Middlesex
10 Hospital before that home visit. I did not consider
11 that I was dealing with a case of possible child abuse.
12 I thought I was dealing with a family struggling to find
13 their feet in a new country.
14 MR GARNHAM: But you told me yesterday that you were keeping
15 your mind open to the possibility of abuse.
16 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I was keeping my mind open to the
17 possibility of abuse but I was reassured by what I saw
18 in the home.
19 MR GARNHAM: The generalisation that you made about
20 Afro-Caribbean families was a totally inadequate way of
21 assessing the quality of the relationship between Kouao
22 and Victoria, was it not?
23 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I totally agree with that and as I have
24 said that is something that should have been discussed
25 in supervision.
28
1 MR GARNHAM: But even for you as the allocated social
2 worker, the signs that had been reported to you were
3 signs of a frightened child, were they not?
4 MISS ARTHURWORREY: No, they were not.
5 MR GARNHAM: Signs of anxious attachment?
6 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Anxious attachment in terms of Victoria
7 seeking attention and praise from the nursing staff.
8 I was never told that Victoria appeared to be frightened
9 of Kouao. The example that Dr Rossiter gave me was that
10 Victoria ran to her mother's side as if being called to
11 attention.
12 MR GARNHAM: Frightened of Manning?
13 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Yes, I was told that Victoria appeared
14 to be frightened of Manning but again when I went to
15 that home visit Victoria appeared happy, she appeared
16 comfortable and Manning was also present.
17 MR GARNHAM: A child who had been, it was suggested as
18 a possibility, emotionally abused and neglected by Kouao
19 and Manning. That was the child you were visiting that
20 day, was it not?
21 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Again, I would have to take you back to
22 the information that I had received from the North
23 Middlesex Hospital and Dr Rossiter did say that she felt
24 that Victoria was subject to emotional abuse but the
25 examples that she gave me are the examples that I have
29
1 just spoken about.
2 MR GARNHAM: As you conducted this assessment did you make
3 use of the Haringey pro formas that we looked at
4 yesterday to guide you through the assessment?
5 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Those pro formas were usually used
6 during the initial assessment. Thereafter, any
7 assessments that were made were made on the SS5's, which
8 is this document here.
9 MR GARNHAM: So the answer to my question is no you were not
10 using a pro forma for this purpose?
11 MISS ARTHURWORREY: No, I was not.
12 MR GARNHAM: Did you see it as part of your function that
13 day to try and get a feel of what a day in the life of
14 Victoria Climbie was like?
15 MISS ARTHURWORREY: At the time regretfully I did not but as
16 I mentioned yesterday, had I noticed in the Central
17 Middlesex fax that it was not actually Kouao who took
18 Victoria to the Central Middlesex Hospital, it was the
19 child minder, if I had known that information before
20 that visit I would have raised that discrepancy and that
21 would have led to discussions with Victoria about what
22 she did during the day.
23 MR GARNHAM: But should you not be doing that on an
24 assessment of this sort with a child anyway? Is that
25 not the way to get to the heart of the thing, to find
30
1 out how this little girl spends her day?
2 MISS ARTHURWORREY: As I said to you I did not suspect that
3 Victoria was being abused at that point.
4 MR GARNHAM: But even if you thought there was a risk of
5 neglect, even if you thought you were making an
6 assessment just on that question, on the emotional abuse
7 question, was this not the sort of vital stuff you
8 needed?
9 MISS ARTHURWORREY: A social worker cannot assess emotional
10 abuse in one visit. My understanding of neglect is the
11 persistent failure to meet a child's basic needs.
12 MR GARNHAM: I agree you might have needed to go back and
13 see her again but on this occasion this is part of the
14 assessment and should you not have been looking to get
15 a feel of what a day in her life was like?
16 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I wish I had but I did not.
17 MR GARNHAM: And you should have done?
18 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Perhaps, yes.
19 MR GARNHAM: After this meeting you drew up a care plan and
20 we have that in volume 6 at page 97. Is that right?
21 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
22 MR GARNHAM: When was it written?
23 MISS ARTHURWORREY: This care plan was written, I cannot
24 remember the exact date but it was probably written
25 after I had got information that the housing application
31
1 had not been successful.
2 MR GARNHAM: Which was September?
3 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I believe so.
4 MR GARNHAM: It appears to show on its front cover that it
5 is to commence on 16th August.
6 MISS ARTHURWORREY: But that is the day the care plan was
7 supposed to have commenced.
8 MR GARNHAM: But it is plain from what is in the care plan
9 that you had regard to the housing application outcome,
10 page 99, is it not? I think you agree that. So why was
11 it not written until then? Why could it not have been
12 written on the day it was supposed to commence,
13 16th August?
14 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Again, that was to do with my workload
15 and there was a general situation in that team, in that
16 care plans could not be formulated at the time.
17 MR GARNHAM: Do we get any indication in the plan as to when
18 you drafted it?
19 MISS ARTHURWORREY: No.
20 MR GARNHAM: Is not it normal to date them?
21 MISS ARTHURWORREY: It should be, yes.
22 MR GARNHAM: You say you did not because that was the normal
23 procedure.
24 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Well, no, I just did not have time. As
25 I said, I conducted that home visit on 16th August, the
32
1 morning of 16th August and that was actually my Duty
2 week. Therefore, after that visit, I would have
3 returned to my Duty commitments and would not have
4 looked at my allocated cases.
5 MR GARNHAM: Page 111 when you are ready. Page 06.111.
6 First line:
7 "When will this plan commence?"
8 MISS ARTHURWORREY: But the plan was due do commence on
9 16th August because I knew that I had to contact the
10 Housing Department to speed up that application, so that
11 is when that plan commenced.
12 MR GARNHAM: But it is written in the future tense. It
13 makes it look as if you had written this plan by no
14 later than 16th August, does it not?
15 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is misleading and I apologise but
16 I did not write the plan on the 16th but it was due to
17 commence in my mind from the 16th because that home
18 visit to 267 Somerset Gardens had not given me cause for
19 any further child protection concerns.
20 MR GARNHAM: As a result of that I think you crossed out the
21 sections of the plan relating to child protection.
22 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
23 MR GARNHAM: But there was still no conclusive evidence, was
24 there, that all the child protection concerns had been
25 resolved?
33
1 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I had updated my manager. Following the
2 interviews with Kouao and Victoria, I informed my
3 manager that the home visit had not raised any further
4 child protection concerns. I was not advised to do
5 anything else from my manager.
6 MR GARNHAM: When did you become aware of the referral to
7 the Moira Close Family Centre?
8 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I was not aware until after Victoria's
9 death.
10 MR GARNHAM: Was there any discussion between you and
11 Barry Almedia about that prospect of a referral to that
12 centre?
13 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I had no idea that Barry Almedia was
14 making that referral. There was no discussion, no.
15 MR GARNHAM: Was there any discussion with him about the
16 tasks that needed to be done in respect of Victoria,
17 what steps needed to be taken for her?
18 MISS ARTHURWORREY: The only time I had a discussion with
19 Barry Almedia with regard to Victoria's case was when
20 Constable Jones phoned me to say, to inform me about the
21 health and safety issues with regard to the visit that
22 was scheduled for 4th August. I spoke to Barry Almedia
23 in the absence of my team manager. I needed advice.
24 MR GARNHAM: So you did not ask him to deal with any tasks
25 in respect of Victoria?
34
1 MISS ARTHURWORREY: No, I did not.
2 MR GARNHAM: Can I ask you a little about the way the Family
3 Centre is used in Haringey? Who usually refers families
4 to the centre?
5 MISS ARTHURWORREY: My experience of the Moira Close --
6 I have only used the Moira Close Family Centre on
7 a couple of times and that was to arrange contact
8 sessions.
9 MR GARNHAM: Do you know whether there were rules or
10 practices in place about how a social worker would make
11 a reference to that centre?
12 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I am not aware, no.
13 MR GARNHAM: Do you know whether it could be done by
14 a social worker or whether it could only be done by the
15 case manager?
16 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I would have thought that if a social
17 worker wanted to use the Moira Close Family Centre they
18 would make the referral.
19 MR GARNHAM: And that would not need necessarily to go
20 through the manager first?
21 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Definitely not.
22 MR GARNHAM: If a manager makes a referral on a case of that
23 sort, and I appreciate it did not happen in this case
24 you say, but if he or she made such a referral, how
25 would follow-up be arranged? Would it be arranged
35
1 through the manager or through the social worker?
2 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Follow-up should be arranged through the
3 social worker.
4 MR GARNHAM: Thank you. Can I turn next to your contact
5 with Haringey's Housing Department. 25th August you
6 spoke to Yvonne White about Kouao's housing.
7 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
8 MR GARNHAM: Told her the usual delays in Haringey.
9 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Yes.
10 MR GARNHAM: You then wrote to Mr Kakouratos.
11 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct, yes.
12 MR GARNHAM: And the letter is at 6.057 but I do not think
13 we need look at it for the moment. You were looking for
14 a rather more rapid response than would happen in the
15 ordinary course.
16 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct, yes.
17 MR GARNHAM: 9th September you chase the matter up.
18 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I did.
19 MR GARNHAM: Told that the likely conclusion would be that
20 Kouao would be told her application had failed.
21 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct, yes.
22 MR GARNHAM: Is it at that stage that you prepare this plan
23 that we have looked at?
24 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I think it is important to say that when
25 I went on the home visit on 16th August when Kouao had
36
1 informed me that she had made an application for
2 housing, I did think it would be unsuccessful because
3 she did appear to have made herself intentionally
4 homeless by leaving the property in France. Therefore
5 at that meeting on 16th August we did discuss
6 contingency plans in case the application was
7 unsuccessful and I said to Kouao that she would need to
8 be thinking about perhaps finding a job -- well, she did
9 tell me that she wanted to find a job, but I said if the
10 housing application was unsuccessful then she would need
11 to perhaps think about renting in the private sector.
12 MR GARNHAM: My question though was a rather narrower one.
13 Was it your conversation when you chased up the housing
14 application that prompted you to complete the care
15 report?
16 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I think I would have completed the care
17 report as soon as I had time. I do not remember when.
18 MR GARNHAM: But it was dependent on getting some sort of
19 indication from the Housing Department?
20 MISS ARTHURWORREY: It was.
21 MR GARNHAM: You telephoned the Housing Department again on
22 18th October and you were told what both you and they
23 had anticipated had in fact occurred and the application
24 had been rejected.
25 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct, yes.
37
1 MR GARNHAM: Can I ask you about your supervision next and
2 there are two I want to ask you about at this stage,
3 firstly the supervision on 20th September. That was
4 a supervision with Carole Baptiste.
5 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is right, yes.
6 MR GARNHAM: And we have the notes at 260 in volume 6. Is
7 that right?
8 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
9 MR GARNHAM: Is that it?
10 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That unfortunately is it.
11 MR GARNHAM: Half a page, eight lines.
12 MISS ARTHURWORREY: What you see is what I got.
13 MR GARNHAM: That was your first supervision since
14 early August?
15 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
16 MR GARNHAM: We have the note there just of the reference to
17 Anna, as she is called, Victoria. But presumably you
18 covered a number of cases during the course of that
19 supervision?
20 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I did.
21 MR GARNHAM: How long did it last, the supervision in total?
22 MISS ARTHURWORREY: The supervision session?
23 MR GARNHAM: Yes.
24 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I really do not recollect.
25 MR GARNHAM: How long did you spend on Victoria's case?
38
1 MISS ARTHURWORREY: About 5/10 minutes.
2 MR GARNHAM: Did Carole Baptiste read the file to your
3 knowledge?
4 MISS ARTHURWORREY: To my knowledge, no.
5 MR GARNHAM: Did she first of all have access to the
6 strategy meeting minutes?
7 MISS ARTHURWORREY: When I went into supervision on the
8 20th, I always take my files and as I am discussing my
9 cases I have the files open.
10 MR GARNHAM: And your strategy meeting minutes would have
11 been in there?
12 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Absolutely, yes.
13 MR GARNHAM: Did Baptiste read them?
14 MISS ARTHURWORREY: She did not ask for them, no.
15 MR GARNHAM: Did you give them to her to read?
16 MISS ARTHURWORREY: No, I did not.
17 MR GARNHAM: Is that because normally you do not put papers
18 in front of her, normally she asks or because you did
19 not think to do so?
20 MISS ARTHURWORREY: She does not normally ask is my
21 experience.
22 MR GARNHAM: Would it not have been sensible then to put
23 them in front of her and say, "You need to read this
24 file"?
25 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I did not think to do that at the time.
39
1 MR GARNHAM: She agreed that this was a case for family
2 support.
3 MISS ARTHURWORREY: She remembered the fax that was received
4 to the department on 12th August. She remembered that
5 discussion and she remembered Victoria's case.
6 MR GARNHAM: Which according to you she had skimmed through.
7 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
8 MR GARNHAM: And on the basis of that skim and this
9 five minute or ten minute conversation she agreed with
10 you that this was a family support case?
11 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
12 MR GARNHAM: But then that is what you would have expected
13 of Ms Baptiste, was it, in the light of what you told us
14 yesterday; she always agreed?
15 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That was standard practice in Haringey.
16 MR GARNHAM: And it would have come as a surprise to you
17 then if she had made any useful contribution to this
18 other than agreeing with what you proposed?
19 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Carole Baptiste could be helpful in some
20 cases.
21 MR GARNHAM: You agreed with me yesterday, looking at the
22 documents from the Monaghan report, that it was her
23 practice to agree with whatever suggestions you put in
24 front of her.
25 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That was generally Carole Baptiste's
40
1 practice but there were occasions when she could be
2 useful, she could be more helpful.
3 MR GARNHAM: Was this one of those?
4 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Not this case, no.
5 MR GARNHAM: Can I ask you about your involvement with
6 Petra Kitchman? What is a child protection adviser?
7 MISS ARTHURWORREY: A child protection adviser is somebody
8 who advise on child protection issues.
9 MR GARNHAM: Does she have any casework responsibilities?
10 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I do not know.
11 MR GARNHAM: Where is she based physically in comparison
12 with where you were based?
13 MISS ARTHURWORREY: The child protection advisers were based
14 at our Hornsey office.
15 MR GARNHAM: You will have to help me with the geography.
16 How far is that from your office?
17 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Well, we are based in Tottenham. Our
18 Hornsey office is based in Crouch End. It is about half
19 an hour's drive I would say.
20 MR GARNHAM: How often had you used one of the -- there was
21 more than one child protection adviser?
22 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
23 MR GARNHAM: How many were there?
24 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I believe there were two that were due
25 to cover North Tottenham, Dawn Cardis and
41
1 Petra Kitchman.
2 MR GARNHAM: How often had you used a child protection
3 adviser?
4 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Not very often.
5 MR GARNHAM: 20 times? Once?
6 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I would say about three or four times.
7 I only used child protection advisers following the
8 advice from my team manager.
9 MR GARNHAM: Did you need the permission of a manager to use
10 them or could you do it off your own bat?
11 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I had never used a child protection
12 adviser in that way. I would only use a child
13 protection adviser after my manager had advised me to
14 have a consultation.
15 MR GARNHAM: But could you, if you had wanted, could you
16 have just gone straight to a child protection adviser on
17 a case or is there some rule that said you can only use
18 these advisers if you go through a manager?
19 MISS ARTHURWORREY: There was no specific rule. If I was
20 working on Duty we could just go and talk to the child
21 protection advisers.
22 MR GARNHAM: Because the reason I am asking is you told us
23 yesterday about your concern about lack of management,
24 lack of supervision and I wonder therefore why in those
25 circumstances you do not make regular use of in-house
42
1 experts?
2 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Because it does not promote consistency.
3 I need to get directions from my manager so that I can
4 work in a logical way.
5 MR GARNHAM: But if you are not getting those directions as
6 you say you were not, why not take advantage of the
7 alternative facility that is available?
8 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Because it does not promote consistency.
9 My manager is responsible for my cases. I take my
10 directions from my manager.
11 MR GARNHAM: According to your first statement, you say on
12 either the 1st or 7th October you spoke to Kitchman.
13 You now have remembered that it was the first I think.
14 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I do. I know it definitely was not the
15 7th.
16 MR GARNHAM: Because?
17 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Because I had a case conference on that
18 day and when Petra Kitchman came to see me I was busy
19 preparing for it.
20 MR GARNHAM: Do you know Petra Kitchman well or did you know
21 her well?
22 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Not really, no.
23 MR GARNHAM: But you knew her enough to recognise and say
24 hello, did you?
25 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I did, yes.
43
1 MR GARNHAM: You say that you were then involved in your
2 first set of care proceedings. Did you feel that you
3 were preoccupied with those, and I do not say that out
4 of a sense of criticism.
5 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I was very occupied with those, yes.
6 MR GARNHAM: Did you see this conversation you had with
7 Miss Kitchman as a formal consultation or an informal
8 chat?
9 MISS ARTHURWORREY: It was definitely not a formal
10 consultation. It was just a brief chat.
11 MR GARNHAM: What was the impression you were left with when
12 Petra Kitchman had finished talking to you?
13 MISS ARTHURWORREY: The impression that I was left with was
14 that Dr Rossiter had expressed concern and my
15 understanding was that Dr Rossiter wanted to know what
16 had happened to Victoria's case and, as I said yesterday
17 when Petra came to see me, I realised then that I had
18 not updated Dr Rossiter with regard to the initial
19 Section 47 investigation. Because I was so busy, that
20 is why I gave Petra Kitchman Victoria's case file and
21 that is why I pointed out in particular the
22 correspondence from the Central Middlesex Hospital
23 because I felt that that was a crucial link and I knew
24 that I had not read it, read the fax from page to page,
25 but Dr Rossiter needed to see those notes because she
44
1 had been ambivalent around the old markings on
2 Victoria's body.
3 MR GARNHAM: So you expected Kitchman to do the updating of
4 Rossiter that you realised you had forgotten to do?
5 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I did.
6 MR GARNHAM: Did you say that expressly or was that just
7 expectation?
8 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That was expectation.
9 MR GARNHAM: Why not say expressly, since you realised you
10 had made a slip?
11 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is why I gave her the file and
12 I gave her an update and I gave her the file.
13 I expected her to sit down and read the file and respond
14 back to Dr Rossiter.
15 MR GARNHAM: She, Kitchman, says that she showed you
16 a letter from Dr Rossiter and the discharge summary.
17 I am going to ask you about that bit by bit. First of
18 all, could we have volume 37 please, page 80. Did she
19 show you that letter?
20 MISS ARTHURWORREY: This is the letter that Petra Kitchman
21 showed me, yes.
22 MR GARNHAM: Did she ask you for your views on it?
23 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Petra Kitchman had this letter in her
24 hand. She had a discussion about the second paragraph
25 where Dr Rossiter mentions the fact that she never
45
1 managed to speak to a social worker face to face. What
2 Petra said to me was that do not worry about that,
3 because that is nothing to do with social services
4 procedures. That is more to do with the hospital
5 procedures.
6 MR GARNHAM: The next paragraph.
7 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I remember reading the next paragraph
8 and I remember saying to Petra Kitchman, "What does
9 Dr Rossiter mean if she has got concerns, she would also
10 let the little girl go home?", and Petra's response to
11 me was, "I do not know and I do not know why Dr Rossiter
12 is contacting me with this case anyway".
13 MR GARNHAM: "I have enormous concerns about this child who
14 is now lost to follow-up somewhere in Haringey."
15 "Enormous concerns." This is not hidden away in
16 a long letter, this is what appears to be typical
17 Rossiter punchy style. The point jumps out at you, does
18 it not, "enormous concerns"?
19 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Again, my understanding when I met with
20 Petra was that Dr Rossiter's concern was the fact that
21 she had lost contact with this child because I had not
22 updated her.
23 MR GARNHAM: Turn back to 052 in that volume. This is the
24 discharge summary. 37.052. Are you there?
25 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Yes.
46
1 MR GARNHAM: Did you see that?
2 MISS ARTHURWORREY: The first time I saw this discharge
3 summary was on Monday 28th February when North Middlesex
4 Hospital faxed this discharge summary to Angella Mairs.
5 Before that time I had never seen this discharge
6 summary.
7 MR GARNHAM: It is said that Kitchman worked through it with
8 you.
9 MISS ARTHURWORREY: All I can say is that if Petra Kitchman
10 had shown me this discharge summary I would have run to
11 my manager because it would have meant that the first
12 Section 47 investigation that I had completed was
13 completely flawed because this discharge summary was
14 giving me new, different, concerning information.
15 MR GARNHAM: This would have indicated to you, would it not,
16 that there were serious concerns, worries about whether
17 this child had been physically abused?
18 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Absolutely, yes, and if I had seen that
19 discharge summary, steps to refocus Victoria's case
20 would have been made.
21 MR GARNHAM: Forgive me sir, I have lost the reply that
22 I want to show this witness.
23 If we go to page 82 in volume 37, this is the letter
24 that Petra Kitchman wrote to Dr Rossiter in response to
25 the letter of 2nd September.
47
1 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct, yes.
2 MR GARNHAM: You have seen this before today?
3 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I have, yes.
4 MR GARNHAM: Did you see it at the time it was written?
5 MISS ARTHURWORREY: No, I did not.
6 MR GARNHAM: It reads as if what I put to you a few moments
7 ago is right, namely that she, Kitchman, and you worked
8 through it together. That is how it reads, does it not?
9 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is how it reads but there are
10 a number of problems with this letter and I was quite
11 baffled when I saw the letter. The second paragraph was
12 a bit baffling because Petra is --
13 MR GARNHAM: Let me stop you, I have made a mistake in the
14 way I have put this because this letter is a response to
15 the letter of 2nd September, and I have not asked you
16 about that first, so I apologise. Will you go back one
17 page first, please. So that we have the sequence,
18 37.080 is the 13th August 1999 letter which you did see?
19 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I did.
20 MR GARNHAM: 37.081 is the letter of 2nd September. Did you
21 see that?
22 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I did not see this letter.
23 Petra Kitchman did not show me this letter.
24 MR GARNHAM: 37.082 is the reply to that second letter. Is
25 that right?
48
1 MISS ARTHURWORREY: At the time I did not know that it was
2 a reply to the letter of 2nd September because I did not
3 know anything about the letter of 2nd September.
4 MR GARNHAM: Nonetheless, the point I was putting to you is
5 right, is it not, that the 19th October reads as if you
6 were taken through the discharge summary?
7 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Petra does say that in her letter, yes.
8 MR GARNHAM: The letter that we are now looking at,
9 19th October, you did not see that before it was posted?
10 MISS ARTHURWORREY: No, I did not.
11 MR GARNHAM: You did not see it in draft?
12 MISS ARTHURWORREY: No, I did not.
13 MR GARNHAM: Were the contents of it discussed with you
14 before it was sent?
15 MISS ARTHURWORREY: No, they were not.
16 MR GARNHAM: Do you know why there was a delay between the
17 2nd September when the letter from Rossiter was received
18 and the 19th October when the reply went out?
19 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I have no idea.
20 MR GARNHAM: Do you know why there was a delay between the
21 2nd September when the letter was sent and the
22 1st October when you discussed it with Kitchman?
23 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I have no idea.
24 MR GARNHAM: When you had that discussion with Kitchman on
25 1st October, did you ask how long Kitchman had had the
49
1 discharge summary?
2 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I did not know that a discharge summary
3 had been prepared for Victoria at that time.
4 MR GARNHAM: Did you know how long she had had the letter
5 that prompted the concern? You must have done, you saw
6 it had the date of 13th August on it.
7 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I did not specifically remember taking
8 a note of the date at the time. I was very busy.
9 MR GARNHAM: You were not conscious of the fact that there
10 was a six or seven week delay between that letter and
11 your discussion with Kitchman?
12 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Not at the time, no.
13 MR GARNHAM: You say in paragraph 170 that you first saw the
14 letter of the 19th October, which we have at 82, in the
15 week commencing 15th November.
16 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I do, yes.
17 MR GARNHAM: If we go to page 262, we see the cover note
18 enclosing a copy of that letter.
19 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Which page?
20 MR GARNHAM: 262 in volume 36. That is the cover note
21 I think:
22 "Dear Lisa, I enclose a copy of the letter to
23 Dr Rossiter re Anna from Petra".
24 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That was actually written on
25 a compliment slip, yes?
50
1 MR GARNHAM: Over the page is another version of the letter
2 of 19th October but this one with a date stamp on it.
3 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct.
4 MR GARNHAM: Indicating it seems that it was received at
5 NTDO on 2nd November.
6 MISS ARTHURWORREY: That is correct, yes.
7 MR GARNHAM: You must have been furious when you saw that
8 letter, because Kitchman was representing in it that she
9 had worked through with you all of Dr Rossiter's
10 concerns.
11 MISS ARTHURWORREY: I realised when I saw the letter on
12 15th November that there were a number of inaccuracies
13 in this letter which I should have taken up with Petra
14 at the time but which I overlooked in doing because
15 I did not appreciate at the time that it was important
16 to correct the inaccuracies in Petra's letter which
17 dated back to what I thought were old events.
18 MR GARNHAM: It is more than that, is it not, because it is
19 plain from the letter that you now had sight of in that
20 second week of November that there had been a discharge
21 summary which you had not seen?
22 MISS ARTHURWORREY: Again, I did not make that connection at
23 the time.
24 MR GARNHAM: That is why I suggest you must have been cross
25 because it is not just a matter of you needing to
|
