A paranoid schizophrenic who killed three elderly men but was acquitted of murder by reason of insanity is embroiled in a compensation fight.
Former scaffolder Alexander Lewis-Ranwell, from Croyde, Devon, battered Anthony Payne, 80, with a hammer, and bludgeoned 84-year-old twins Dick and Roger Carter with a shovel, in Exeter, Devon, in February 2019.
He was cleared of murder after a trial at Exeter Crown Court in November 2019.
Lewis-Ranwell, who was 28 at the time of the Exeter Crown Court trial, has sued G4S Health Services (UK), Devon & Cornwall Police, Devon Partnership NHS Trust and Devon County Council alleging that all four were “negligent” in their treatment of him.
G4S, the trust and the council asked a High Court judge to strike out “common law” claims made against them – but Mr Justice Garnham refused their applications.
Lawyers representing the three organisations on Tuesday challenged Mr Justice Garnham’s decision at a Court of Appeal hearing in London.
Appeal judges Dame Victoria Sharp, Lord Justice Underhill, and Lady Justice Andrews are scheduled to consider legal arguments over two days.
Mrs Justice May, the judge who oversaw Lewis-Ranwell’s trial at Exeter Crown Court, had made a hospital order.
She said Lewis-Ranwell would be cared for in hospital with a “restriction order” and would not be “allowed into the community” until “the agencies” were “absolutely content” that it was “safe for him to be released”.
Lawyers told appeal judges that Lewis-Ranwell had been ordered to be detained at Broadmoor Hospital, in Crowthorne Berkshire, under the terms of mental health legislation.
Barrister Andrew Warnock KC, who is leading the council’s legal team, told appeal judges that Lewis-Ranwell had brought proceedings “at common law” and under human rights legislation.
He said Lewis-Ranwell alleged that the four organisations were liable to compensate him for the “consequences of the killing” on the grounds that they had been “negligent in their treatment of him”.
Mr Warnock said G4S, the trust and the council had made applications to strike out the common law claims.
He told appeal judges, in a written argument, that the litigation raised an issue of “wider public importance” and added: “It raises an important question of whether those who have killed others but are not guilty by reason of insanity may sue mental health authorities for the consequences of the killings by reason of deficiencies in the care they received.”
