
Prisoner attacks officer with boiling water at high-security jail
The two separate attacks took place at HMP Whitemoor in Cambridgeshire this week, which houses some of the UK's most dangerous criminals.
One officer suffered a fractured jaw and bleeding on the brain after he was assaulted by a prisoner in a workshop, while another was burned when an inmate threw a kettle of boiling water at him when he entered a cell.
Last month, convicted murderer John Mansfield was killed by another inmate at the same prison. That attack is alleged to have taken place in HMP Whitemoor's close supervision centre, where prisoners are supposed to be closely monitored.
There have already been demands for tougher restrictions on kettles in cells for dangerous offenders after the Southport killer Axel Rudakubana allegedly threw boiling water over an officer at HMP Belmarsh on May 8.
The attacks at HMP Whitemoor came just weeks after Hashem Abedi, the brother of the Manchester Arena bomber, threw hot cooking oil over three officers. He then stabbed them with two makeshift knives fashioned from baking trays in the kitchen of a separation unit at the high security Frankland jail in county Durham.
The Prison Officers' Association (POA) has called for all terrorists and violent prisoners who assault officers to be held in US-style 'supermax' units or separate jail where they are only allowed out of their cells for one hour a day while handcuffed and supervised by three officers.
Jonathan Hall, KC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, is assessing ways of segregating dangerous offenders including Islamist terrorists after the attack by Abedi, who is serving life for his part in the murder of 22 people in the Manchester Arena bomb.
Mr Hall has said he will look at the 'human consequences' of segregating prisoners in such a way that it reduces the risk of violence to 'near zero.'
'Supermax' wing for high risk
One option would be to create a 'bespoke' supermax regime such as that found at ADX Florence in Colorado, which holds prisoners who are such a risk that they cannot be housed even in maximum security prisons.
The inmates are confined for the most part of the day in single cells with facilities made of poured, reinforced concrete to deter self-harm, and are under 24-hour supervision carried out with high staff to inmate ratios.
Mark Fairhurst, chair of the POA, said: 'We need a supermax wing or unit somewhere on the prison estate where we put terrorists and extremely violent prisoners in complete lockdown. It would be for people who are intent on causing serious harm.
'We cannot go on like this. There is going to be a murder of an officer on duty. Things need to change. The problem is the violent people we are now locking up don't care. They don't fear consequences. If they are already facing a life sentence, they are not worried by a couple more years in jail.
'We need lockdown jails where people who commit crimes like that are locked down 23 hours a day. Why not lock them down if they are going to be violent to staff?'
Record high jail assaults
Some 10,605 assaults on staff in male and female jails were recorded in 2024, a record high up from 9,204 in 2023 and nearly three times the 3,640 in 2014.
Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood has already ordered a rapid review into whether prison officers should be issued with stab vests to protect them, and a trial to train and equip selected jail staff with Tasers.
Access to kitchen facilities in separation centres have been suspended after Abedi's attack.
A prison service spokesman said: 'Police are investigating two unacceptable attacks on members of staff at HMP Whitemoor.
'We will not tolerate assaults on hardworking prison officers and will always push for the strongest punishments against perpetrato
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
How people in Epping reacted to closure of migrant hotel
Locals in Epping have welcomed an injunction to block asylum seekers from being housed at a nearby hotel, but raised concerns the decision would only 'kick the can down the road'. Epping Forest District Council was granted a temporary High Court injunction on Tuesday blocking asylum seekers from being housed at the Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex. Several protests and counter-protests have been held in the town since Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, a then-resident at the hotel, was charged with trying to kiss a teenage girl, which he denies. Following the decision on Tuesday, a crowd of about a dozen people gathered outside the hotel brandishing flags, shouting 'We've won' and popping sparkling wine, while passing traffic honked their horns at them. A few police cars were parked nearby with officers standing outside the hotel, which is fenced in. Other residents gave a mixed reaction to the injunction, with some saying they were glad to 'see it gone'. But others cited concerns about where the asylum seekers currently housed inside the hotel would be moved to in light of the court's decision. Callum Barker, 21, a construction worker who lives next to the hotel, was handing out leaflets at the protest including the names of three men staying at the Bell Hotel who are alleged to have committed criminal offences. He said he was in favour of the injunction. Mr Barker told the PA news agency: 'Our community's in danger and we don't want these people here. 'I'm ecstatic; I haven't stopped smiling. For five years, this hotel's blighted us. Everyone's had their complaints and reservations about it and I'm really glad to see it gone. 'I think nationally there will be more protests; I hope so. We want people to get out into their communities, get rid of these hotels. 'It's not right they're here on taxpayers' dime while British people struggle. 'They get three meals a day and a roof over their head while kids go hungry in school and have to rely on free dinners and I think it's terrible. The asylum system is broken.' In the town centre, Charlotte, 33, a solicitor living in Epping, said: 'I think it's kicking the can down the road because where are they going to go? 'Personally, I have lived here for four years and I've never had an issue, never noticed any problems with any asylum seekers living in the hotel a mile away. 'With the injunction today, I don't know what the long-term solution is going to be because they have to be housed somewhere so what's the alternative? 'I don't partake in (the protests). I think people are allowed to have a right of free speech but what annoys me about them is I'm on community groups on Facebook and it seems if you're not speaking about it you're presumed to be completely for it when I think a lot of people are in the middle. 'There are extremists at these protests every week.' Michael Barnes, 61, a former carpenter from Epping, said he was happy about the High Court's decision. He said: 'The question is, where does it go from here? I don't love them on my doorstep but, in fairness, they've got to live somewhere. 'I don't think it's all of them, it's just the minority of them that get up to no good.' Gary Crump, 63, a self-employed lift consultant living just outside of Epping, said: 'I was quite pleased it's actually happened. 'I don't think they should be housed in the hotels like they are. 'We haven't got the infrastructure here. The doctors' surgery is filled up in the mornings with people from there with translators. Everything is pushing the limits. We're an island. We're full. 'I've got no reason to be against people coming into the UK but I do think that the reasons given are not true in a lot of cases.' Ryan Martin, 39, who runs a natural health business, said: 'It's a good thing. When people spend a lot of money to live in this area, they want to feel safe. 'Them shutting it down probably happened because of the noise that was made about it and the reaction they saw from people because there was a strong reaction. 'It was taking a while to happen but people finally got up to protest against them being here.'


Telegraph
14 minutes ago
- Telegraph
What High Court hotel ruling means for migrants across Britain
On Tuesday, Epping Forest district council was granted a temporary injunction to stop migrants from being housed in the Bell Hotel. All migrants must now leave the hotel by 4pm on September 12. But the ruling could have a wider impact on migrant hotels across the country. Q: Will all migrant hotels in Britain now close? A: No – the interim injunction only applies to the Bell Hotel in Epping. Other hotels with contracts to house asylum seekers will be able to continue to do so. However, Epping Forest district council's victory could prompt other local authorities to submit similar legal applications. Q: Why are so many migrants being housed in hotels? A: In recent years, there has been an increase in the use of 'contingency' asylum accommodation because of the limited availability of private dwellings and hostels. In most cases, this consists of hotel rooms, procured through government contracts for the use of asylum seekers. A backlog of asylum cases and rising numbers of Channel migrant crossings have contributed to large numbers of asylum seekers being housed in hotel accommodation over the past five years. Q: What is Yvette Cooper's statutory duty to asylum seekers on accommodation? A: The Home Secretary is required to provide accommodation and subsistence support to all destitute asylum seekers whilst their claims are being decided. These legal obligations are set out under the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. Support under section 95 of the Act is provided for people waiting for a decision on their asylum claim or appeal. Section 98 support is provided while a person's eligibility for section 95 asylum support is being considered. Q: What will the Government do next? A: Lawyers representing Ms Cooper made a last-minute legal application to intervene in the case ahead of the judgment. However, Mr Justice Eyre rejected the application. Angela Eagle, the border security minister, said the Government would 'carefully consider this judgment', adding: 'As this matter remains subject to ongoing legal proceedings it would be inappropriate to comment further at this stage.' However, lawyers for the Home Office confirmed that they would seek to appeal against the injunction. Q: How many migrants are in the Bell Hotel? A: The Bell Hotel has 80 rooms and can currently accommodate up to 138 asylum seekers. Following a hearing on Friday, Mr Justice Eyre ordered Somani Hotels Ltd to stop housing any new migrant residents while the judgment was pending. Q: What crimes are alleged to have been committed by Bell Hotel migrants? A: Three residents are currently facing criminal charges. Hadush Gerbeslaisie Kebatu, 41, was arrested after allegedly sexually assaulting a schoolgirl on July 7, days after arriving in Britain. The Ethiopian denied all wrongdoing when he was charged and appeared at Chelmsford magistrates' court on July 17. Kebatu's arrest prompted a series of protests at the hotel. However, Mr Justice Eyre's judgment on the hotel also referenced the arrest of two other residents. Last month, Rawand Abdulrih, 36, was charged with arson with intent to endanger life over an incident that took place at the hotel on April 5. Abdulrih was also charged with the same offence in relation to a separate fire at the Phoenix Hotel, another migrant hotel nearby, on March 28. Mohammed Sharwarq, 32, another resident of the Bell Hotel, is accused of kissing a man on the neck on July 25. In court last week, he denied a charge of sexually assaulting a man aged over 16 by touching him in a sexual way without consent. Q: What legal argument did the council use to secure the interim injunction? A: Epping Forest district council largely hung its argument on planning laws and the fact that Somani Hotels had not obtained permission to change the use of the hotel to an accommodation for asylum seekers. Q: Is it a permanent injunction? A: It is an interim injunction, which means it is not permanent but granted temporarily ahead of a full hearing, which is set to take place in the autumn. Lawyers for the hotel firm and the Home Secretary confirmed in court that they intended to appeal against the injunction. If appeals are submitted quickly, the Court of Appeal may decide to grant the residents a further stay before they are evicted.


The Independent
43 minutes ago
- The Independent
Government ‘does not have a plan' to accommodate asylum seekers
The Government does not have a plan to accommodate asylum seekers and did not listen to concerns that they should not be housed at the Bell Hotel, the leader of Epping Forest District Council has said. Chris Whitbread, who also leads the Conservative group at the Essex authority, said that failures to improve the system for processing asylum applications were also causing distress 'up and down the country'. His comments came after the council was granted a temporary injunction on Tuesday blocking asylum seekers from being housed at the hotel, which has been at the centre of a series of protests and counter-protests in recent weeks. The interim injunction granted by Mr Justice Eyre means the hotel's owner, Somani Hotels Limited, must stop housing asylum seekers at the site by September 12, but the company could seek to challenge the ruling at the Court of Appeal. Speaking to the PA news agency after the judgment, Mr Whitbread said the injunction marked an 'opportunity for my community to start to return to normal'. A hearing on Friday was told by barristers representing Somani Hotels that the venue previously housed asylum seekers from May 2020 to March 2021, and from October 2022 to April 2024, and that the council 'never instigated any formal enforcement proceedings against this use'. Asylum seekers were then placed in the Bell Hotel again from April 2025. When asked on Tuesday why the council did not previously take legal action, Mr Whitbread said: 'It goes back to 2020 when we were in the pandemic originally, and at that time, it was used for young families, women and children, which is completely different to having it used for single males. 'Obviously, we have always raised our concerns with the Home Office, whether it be the previous government or this government, we raised our concerns. 'This government decided to start using the hotel again without consultation and purely by instruction; they didn't listen to our concerns. 'Five schools are in close proximity, a residential care home, lots of residential homes nearby, they didn't listen to us at all, that is the fundamental difference.' When asked what message he believed this sent from the Government, he said: 'If I am honest with you, I don't think they have actually got a plan. I think that is my real concern. 'We talk about one in, one out, well, that is a gimmick. If you talk about smashing the gangs, that was a gimmick. 'What we really need to see is a government with a serious plan to deal with this problem, and that obviously comes down to processing, where they stay while they are being processed, and actually speeding up the system. 'We are not seeing that at the moment, and that is causing a lot of distress to people up and down the country.' The hotel became the focal point of a series of protests after an asylum seeker housed at the site was charged with sexually assaulting a teenage girl. Mr Whitbread said that while later protests had been 'more peaceful, more bearable but still disruptive' to the community, he had 'never seen anything like what we have seen in recent times'. He said: 'I think what we have done as a council and what my brilliant team of council officers have done is actually take forward what the desire of residents is, to see the Bell closed, but do it in a sensible and proper way, and that is what we're doing.' Mr Whitbread also said that there had been 'no conversations' about the next steps for removing those currently housed at the hotel. Reacting to the judgment, border security minister Dame Angela Eagle said: 'This government inherited a broken asylum system, at the peak there were over 400 hotels open. 'We will continue working with local authorities and communities to address legitimate concerns. Our work continues to close all asylum hotels by the end of this Parliament. 'We will carefully consider this judgment. As this matter remains subject to ongoing legal proceedings it would be inappropriate to comment further at this stage.'