'Security risks' hold back Stone report

A high-profile report into the care given to Michael Stone, the paranoid schizophrenic jailed for hammering Lin and Megan Russell to death in 1996, is being withheld, The Independent on Sunday has learnt.

Mental health campaigners say the report – the result of a three-year inquiry – would give a vital insight into the inadequacies of mental health services and provide answers on what reforms are needed.

But Kent police have advised the inquiry panel that naming individuals responsible for treating Stone, now 42, would put their lives at risk. Stone's solicitors are understood to be preparing a fresh appeal on the grounds that he could never have received a fair trial.

He was given three life sentences in 1998 after being found guilty of the murder of Lin Russell, her daughter, Megan, and the attempted murder of Megan's sister, Josie, in Chillenden, Kent. He had a history of violent mental disorder and addiction.

There was a huge public outcry over the murders which exposed the failings of care in the community. The Stone case formed the basis for sweeping mental health reforms designed to protect the public from people with severe mental disorders.

But the proposals, announced in the new Mental Health Bill, have provoked widespread criticism from psychiatrists, mental health charities and patients.

They say the reforms will stigmatise the mentally ill and will infringe their human rights, especially plans to lock up severely disordered people before they have committed a crime. The reforms would not prevent further killings, say professionals, because mentally ill people would be reluctant to seek treatment if they thought they might be jailed.

A source close to the inquiry said the draft report reveals that Stone did get the care he needed and that psychiatrists and health professionals are "90 per cent" exonerated. The source added: "He was not turned away from care and had a full programme of care.

"The tone of the whole report is that the Michael Stone case is a failure of the criminal justice system. He would not have benefited from changes in the mental health laws."

Kent police denied that they had suppressed the report but said there were potential security risks. "The only input we have had is in the potential risks to those involved," a spokesman said. "We believe there are serious security risks.

"Feelings run very high from a number of parties involved. If people are mentioned they could be at risk of violence."

In a statement, officials from Kent health authority and from the probation service said they had received a draft report from Robert Francis QC, the inquiry head, but were now considering the advice from police.

The statement said: "The commissioning agencies are considering the police advice in conjunction with their legal advisers and the report's authors. The agencies will make a further announcement about publication when these discussions have been completed."

Mental health campaigners said the Government should have waited for the findings of the Stone inquiry before drawing up new mental health laws.

"How can you give the answers through new laws when you don't even know the questions?" said Dr Tony Zigmond from the Royal College of Psychiatrists. "We will not know [the questions] until this report is finally made public."

Derek Hayward, Stone's solicitor, confirmed that his client "had not given up" his fight to clear his name. "We are looking into the fact that he could never have received a fair trial and are considering taking this up with the Court of Appeal under human rights laws," he said.