A tipping point for disability hate crime?

On 10th May 2009, parts of Michael Gilbert’s dismembered body were found by men walking dogs by a lake near Luton. His head was found in February this year in the same lake. Michael was just 26 when he was killed. He had been abused, tortured, filmed for entertainment and stolen from by members of the Watt family—who were known to police and other agencies—for around ten years. He considered them to be his family.

Today a jury in Luton brought in guilty verdicts against six people connected to the Watt family, who were found to have committed familial homicide or murder against Michael Gilbert, a disabled man.

They had held him captive for many years, said the prosecutor; they had robbed him, assaulted him, shot him, stabbed him and filmed their assaults for entertainment—even creating a gameshow about his torture.

Michael tried to get away several times. Each time family members tracked him down, using his national insurance number, and brought him back. He and the few friends he had did raise concerns, a number of times, over eight years, about his wellbeing. But few official inquiries were made and the alarm was never raised.



Just a few days before his murder, he was brought to the jobcentre to sign on and cash his giro cheque. The benefits worker, shocked at his appearance, asked him if he needed medical assistance. Michael, intimidated by the only family that seemed to want him (he was largely estranged from his natural family), refused help. A few days later, he died. The family then dismembered him, wrapped his remains in bin bags and threw him in a lake.

I was in court and heard some of the testimony and the judge's summing up. I saw Michael's mother, grey with grief, hear the catalogue of abuse that Michael had suffered. Other family members were also there. They were shocked by what had happened to him.

Of the 100 or so cases of disability hate crime I have looked at in my investigations for a number of newspapers and charities over the last three years, this is one of the worst. Many other cases have similar hallmarks: the victims were robbed, assaulted, even tortured over long periods of time by people they considered to be friends or family. But this one is particularly horrifying. As was said in the courtroom, one of the reasons that Michael put up with the abuse was that he considered this dysfunctional family to be his own. The family he said he loved murdered him.

Michael came into contact with the Watt family when he was 15 and was put in a children’s home. The family then took him in, and took his benefits money for his keep. He was only given a bag of tobacco each week from his own money. Why a young man, who was acknowledged by police and other agencies to be “vulnerable,” was released to the “care” of a family known to the police, needs further investigation, as do many other facets of this case. Luton Council, under whose “care” Michael was, has announced a serious case review.

For my part, as an investigative journalist who has campaigned for more awareness of crimes against disabled people, I hope that Michael has not died in vain. I hope that Michael’s case is the tipping point. I hope that politicians (only the Liberal Democrats have mentioned disability hate crime during the election) speak out and condemn such crimes. I hope that this is the beginning of the end for people who think that disabled people are “fair game” for torture, robbery and murder.