The Conflict Resolution Training Blog » Personal Safety

Don’t be a fool…personal safety tips

PBrereton — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 08:00:30 +0000

The news is full of stories about attacks on people here’s just a few…

…a chef attacked one of his staff in a rage after renowned food critic AA Gill reported that his meal was ‘disgusting’ (which later turned out to be a joke).

…disgraced labour MP Elliot Morley was beaten up in prison as fellow inmates stole his £3,000 Rolex watch

…Wayne Rooney prostitute Helen Wood was beaten up in a pub after taught from other drinkers who recognised her from the scandal.

All of these attacks have one thing in common of course…the victims just didn’t see it coming. Obviously that is the advantage any assailant has on his/her victim which is why we should always consider our personal safety as a matter of routine…it should be as normal a thought as remembering to brush your teeth every morning. Now, don’t get me wrong…I’m not saying live your life in fear or always look over your shoulder it’s just about safety…you check your car don’t you? The tyres? The oil? That you’ve put the handbrake on? That it’s not in gear before you start the engine? So apply the same principles….

….what do I have on my person (watch, money etc) do I need it all with me where I am going? Why, I have to ask did MP Elliot Morley have a £3,000 Rolex with him in prison?

….if you a well known figure in an area where you might attract unwanted attention, have you considered how you will get home? Prostitute Helen Wood would have been better placed to apply the ‘flight’ aspect of her adrenalin rush when other drinkers got abusive rather than ‘fight’. Choosing to confront a situation of conflict is not the safest option. If you have an escape route for goodness sake use it. Run.

For the poor employee who got pushed down the stairs by his irate chef I have two tips and this stands for any situation of conflict that you may find yourself in. First of all my assumption would be that the poor employee who was pushed down the stairs must have turned his back on his boss. So his boss had the advantage of surprise and impact – your two worst enemies….so tip number one….

Never turn your back on someone who is being aggressive towards you.

Our natural reaction when someone goes to attack us is to flinch away. My advice is to use this natural response to your advantage and convert your flinch into a forward movement and ideally a pivot to move out of the way. This is what I teach on my personal defence readiness courses and it does take some practice to apply. So tip number two is…

2. Convert your flinch into a forward pivot movement to get you out of the way.

Both these techniques work really well in situations when you find yourself in a conflict situation and keep you ready to protect yourself. But don’t be a hero, when the opportunity arises and it’s safe to do so, get the hell out of there.

Possibly Related Posts:

Can you attack your burglar?

Darren Good — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 08:00:12 +0000

It might seem a daft question…can you attack your burglar, particularly if they are attacking or threatening to attack you…but up until recently the answer would have been no, or at least not without fear of prosecution irrespective of the threat you may have been under.

Earlier this year the Justice Secretary pledged that an Act of Parliament would be used to clarify the legal situation around the use of reasonable force against intruders. This is on the back of recent high profile cases such as Minr Hussain who chased and beat a man who had held his family at knife point in his home. I’ll be watching developments on this closely over the forth coming months and posting my thoughts in my blog.

All of this prompts me to give my own home security a bit of a review. I spend so much of my time and energy focusing on my first passion of personal safety and conflict management that I forget that protecting my home is another aspect of that. So here’s my top tips for reviewing your home safety:

Install or get your alarm serviced/upgraded. Depending on the level of security (or your budget) you want or need you can get get everything from basic alarms fitted to cctv systems installed.Home security systems actively monitor the doors and windows of a house. Once the system is engaged, any tampering with external exits will trigger the alarm. These devices can be configured to multiple external systems including lights and sirens.
Install security doors and deadbolt locks. These are relatively are simple to install and provide good home protection. Most criminals look for homes without locks as these homes are typically easier to enter. A house that includes a strong steal door with deadbolts deters most criminals. These homes require additional time to invade, which adds unnecessary risk for the thief.
Get a dog. Not to everyone’s liking but they can act as effective deterrents.
You could consider a home evacuation plan. This plan can be executed by family members during a home invasion. Home invasion is a scary ordeal but proper escape planning can help. This protection tactic is best used in hostage situations. These techniques are typically used by families of people such as diplomats, senior executives, and celebrities. That all said, even the most humble of us could do with familiarising ourselves with potential escape routes in the event of a fire, for example.

Possibly Related Posts:

Get out of that. Wrist releases….

Darren Good — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 12:20:22 +0000

A friend of mine was telling me about an article he’d read on a solicitor’s website about a care-worker who had won damages as a result of her claim for personal injury when a patient she was dealing with grabbed her by the wrist . The prosecutors position was that the employer was negligent for not making sufficient assessment of the risks to health and safety of their employee. A settlement to the tune of £220,00 compensation was agreed.

My friend brought this to my attention not because he’s a health and safety fanatic and knows of my work and personal interest in this area but to ask advice. He too had been grabbed by the wrist by a patient (he’s a care-worker) and while there was nothing serious to report about it, the patient being very frail he wondered what was the best way to release a grip such as this and ensure no harm to either himself or the patient.

So this week I thought I’d share with you my top tips for releasing yourself safely from a grip such as this.

Single Handed Parallel Grip.

If the agressor grabs you with the thumb on the inside of the wrist. Thumb – Inside- Turn In. Pull your hand back towards your own body to break contact with their palm. Push your elbow forwards towards the aggressor’s forearm. Step back to re-create the personal safety buffer zone.

I can’t go without a least a comment on the health and safety side of things that this example highlights. Employers put themselves, their employees and their clients/patients at risk if they do not ensure appropriate and regular physical intervention, personal safety skills and conflict management training . When deciding on a course please ensure it covers the legal side of things such as Health and Safety legislation and that your supplier has the appropriate accreditation such as edexcel the UKs largest awarding body for qualifications and The Institute of conflict management.

Possibly Related Posts:

Restraint techniques that could kill

Darren Good — Wed, 03 Aug 2011 08:12:33 +0000

It’s likely that many of the readers of my blog will know the dangers of using restraint techniques already. Most experts in the field would argue that used properly the restraint of an individual is safe for both the detainee and the person applying the restraint. That is the point after all. I have always been of the view that physical restraint whenever it is used always carries dangers for all parties and recent published research suggest the same. A study published in Medicine, Science and the Law (a forensic medicine publication) concluded that forcing a detainee to bend over while seated can lead to death because the hold reduces lung capacity significantly.

There is a picture of the hold if you click here. This is a hold you find being used potentially in mental health situations or private security organisations. So for example it may be used on an aircraft.

The BBC ran a story last week connecting this research the death of Jimmy Mubenga, 46, who died not long after being restrained on his deportation flight out of Heathrow last year. Post-mortem examinations were inconclusive and three security guards employed by the escorting security organisation have been arrested and put on bail.

As I understand it the research involved forty volunteers who were put in a seated position and lent forward so their faces were close to their lap. They were then held in that position. The research suggested that it was the position rather than any force applied that was the main problem as the position restricted lung capacity and air flow. This would be worsened if your detainee was over-weight. The researchers expressed concerns that detainees in this hold may struggle to breathe but that their struggling could be misinterpreted by the enforcer who may push them lower into the forward position, making breathing even more difficult. I’m sure you get the picture. It’s a terrible image and highlights the challenges of security personnel ever more.

If you are in the security profession either as a security officer or as the CEO please take note. There are many good courses out there which will keep you and the general public safe and well. Invest your time and money wisely…you should look for a course that will cover these key elements:

ü Differentiates between holding, escorting and restraining and non-harmful seated restraint techniques and how to apply them.

ü Demonstrates and explains how to gradually de-escalate and relax a restraint to allow the subject being restrained to regain self-control.

ü Explores the risks associated with alcohol and drugs, knives and other forms of edged weapons in relation to the use of physical restraint.

ü Investigates the difference between non-harmful methods of control and more restrictive methods of control and when the use of such methods would be considered appropriate.

ü Explores all legal aspects of physical restraint and particularly that as it relates to Reasonable Force and Health and Safety.

ü Provides you with the physical skills required to handle potentially violent situations.

ü Provides you with the physical skills to safely control others whilst being compliant with legislation.

Possibly Related Posts:

Company Directors charged under Corporate Manslaughter Act

Darren Good — Tue, 26 Jul 2011 22:24:25 +0000

I’ve been reading a few blogs recently about Lion Steel Ltd.who are the second company to be charged under the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 since its implementation. This is a real wake up call for Company Directors to sit up and take notice of staff safety as they will be held to account.

The Greater Manchester Police have charged the storage manufacturing company with corporate manslaughter as a result of the death of an employee when he fell through a fragile plastic roof panel on an industrial estate. I have also read that the company is charged under section 2 and 33 of the Health and Safety Work Acts 1974 (HSWA) for failing to ensure the safety at work of its employees.

So it is that the three directors are each accused of manslaughter by gross negligence under section 37 of the HSWA for failing to ensure the safety at work of their employees.

Notwithstanding the terrible tragedy of the dealth of a man I am pleased to see that the Corporate Manslaughter Act is being used and has not just been a paper exercise. I believe employers should look upon this act as an opportunity to really look at the personal safety of their employees. Equally employees should use this Act as a way to ensure they are getting everything they are entitled to receive to enable them to their jobs safely and effectively. This will include the environment they work in, the equipment used and the quality and frequency of the training they receive.

This applies to all types of workplace, not just where there are obvious risks such as in manufacturing or building services but also where personal safety could be an issue due to staff members interactions with the general public. The NHS for example, often reports violence from patients towards their staff, and this not always from the mentally unstable. So here we have a caring profession….not somewhere you would automatically think of as an environment in need of personal safety for its staff…that in reality needs to and in many cases does, provide personal safety training for it’s staff.

The first hearing for Lion Steel Ltd. Will take place on 2^nd August.

Possibly Related Posts:

Doorstaff arrested on suspicion of murder

Darren Good — Wed, 20 Jul 2011 12:37:46 +0000

I want to share with you a tragic and ongoing situation that raises a number of interesting points for me around physical intervention strategies when dealing with conflict. The situation concerns four door security men from a nightspot in Southend who have recently been arrested on supicion of the murder of Reece Lamude. Mr Lamude, 37, was rushed to hospital following an altercation with the four door supervisors but hospital staff were uable to save him and he died early that morning. The post-mortum examination revealed that Mr Lamude had sustained neck injuries, possibly as a result of the incident.

This case is of interest to me because it raises…and not for the first time…the issue of the use of reasonable force when dealing with conflict situations. It is as ever a highly sensitive area and without acurate eye witness accounts or cctv footage it may be impossible to unpick what happened on that night. The four securaity guards in question are not the only ones who should be called to question here as their employers also have a part to play. Did their employers ensure that they had recieved all the required and appropriate training?

For those of you that don’t know all door supervisors should hold an SIA licence.That gives them a basic knowledge to permit them to be legally employed as a security guard. But it’s a bit like getting your drivers licence. You don’t get your licence and then start racing formula one cars and so it is the case with security guards of busy nightspots.

Employers of such venues should know that additonal physical intervention and conflict management training is more than likely necessary if their venue is likely to attract situations of violence and aggression. Failure on their part to supply this is a breach, by them, of the Health and Safety Act. So they too have a part to play.

Now none of this helps the tragedy of Reece Lamude’s situation and the courts will decide the outcome of that later in the year. But I would like to hope that cases like this raise the importance to employers to provide appropriate training to their staff and also for employees to demand appropriate training if they believe they are at risk. It will all go along way to making it safer for us all whether we are an employee or a member of the public like Reece.

Possibly Related Posts:

Practical approaches to protecting yourself

Darren Good — Tue, 12 Jul 2011 12:36:35 +0000

The News of the World scandal has dominated the press this week and served to warn us just how difficult personal privacy is and yet it’s something we all take as a personal right. We all do as much as we can to protect ourselves and our children from unwanted interventions ….we set up spam filters and firewalls on our PCs for example. Those of you with kids will no doubt have set limitations on what they can and can’t do on their computers/iphones but I wonder how many of us remember to also remind them of the basics of personal safety?

This thought struck me as I was sat in a parents meeting at school this week. The Head spoke at length about the dangers of the internet, reminded us about the legal age of Facebook (13 by the way) and shared with us the school rules on internet usage. All great stuff don’t get me wrong but what about the..dare I say it..old fashioned stuff…they used to call it ‘stanger danger’ but I call it protecting youself…in otherwords self-defence.

So your average 13 year old knows how to detect a suspicious Facebook friend request but can they defend themselves from a variety of grabs? Navigating their way around youtube, twitter and myspace is second nature but how quickly can they work out the quickest possible escape route if confronted?

Can you see my point? Here are my quick personal safety tips that are equally applicable to children and adults.

Be aware. Particulary when you are close to home. Research suggests that we ‘let our guard down’ when we are in familiar territory.
Look for incongruencies. E.g someone asking for the time if they have a watch on. Someone asking directions but not looking at you when you tell them. Trust your instincts…if something doesn’t seem quite right walk away.
Look for escape routes. If a car is following you and you are on foot then turn around forcing it to do a difficult (and conspicious) u-turn.
Be careful of short-cuts. Are they obscured from view? Can someone easily hide along the route? Never go alone or better still take the longer route home.
Carry a personal alarm. Just pop one in your pocket. It’s worth spending a little extra to get one that’s at least 136db.

Possibly Related Posts:

Everyday conflict management

Darren Good — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 13:41:40 +0000

I was doing a fun run with my 14 year old son at the weekend and it reminded me how ever present the potential for conflict is. It started with the usual heated debate with my wife as we were rushing out the door of ‘where are the car keys’ …quickly diffused by son number two reminding us that we were walking.
Potential conflict removed I was soon rewarding myself for making the effort to leave early in order to walk to as I saw the massive queue to get parked. My , dare I admit it, slightly smug mood was quickly distracted by the sound of a car horn being furious beeping and a man jumping out of his car to hurl abuse at the car behind him. I say car, not person because I don’t actually think he was seeking to get into a one-on-one argument he just responded to the ‘trigger’ of the car horn and it clearly was the last straw for him that morning. There were two adults in the front of the car…a ..shall we say quite large gentleman driving and I’m guessing his mum or Grandmother to the two red-faced kids in the back seats who, as you can imagine, just wanted the ground to swallow them up with embarrassment. Whether she knew what she was doing or not I’ll never know but as the man got out of his car to face his aggressor this senior lady nimbly positioned herself between the two and smiling at the abuse hurling man said “lovely day for it” clearly not expecting this response the abuse man was left to agree it was.
What a fantastic open question, completely at odds with the situation and friendly in intention.
I don’t know what happened after that because, as my wife reminded me, it’s rude to stare but as I heard no more shouting and the cars moved slowly on I can assume all was resolved.
So…..as I was saying I was reminded of the ever present potential for conflict. Intentionally or otherwise the woman in question diffused an aggressive situation by positive body language and an open and unexpected question that by its very nature united them. It was a lovely day for “it” and “it” was the fun run with the kids. She established common ground and a shared purpose. She positioned herself alongside the ‘aggressor’ and showed she was willing to listen. Essentially she demonstrated a number of key communication skills to manage conflict situations that I summarise in my acronym P.O.L.I.T.E. where ‘P’ is for position, ‘O’ observation, ‘L’ listen, ‘I’ intuition, ‘T’ talk and ‘E’ emotional state. I’d even go as far as to say it was almost text book perfect.

Possibly Related Posts:

Attack rituals – We need to trust our instincts if we are to avoid being attacked

Darren Good — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 15:06:29 +0000

All killers go through an attack ritual before they start their attack – I have talked at length about these types of rituals before on the blog. In my previous post I talked about the three types of rituals but in this post I want to highlight how important it is to trust your own intuition as it could save your life.

The Yorkshire Ripper caused terror in the 1970s across the Yorkshire region sadly attacking numerous women and killing several. Many of his attacks in Bradford occurred in the Lumb Lane area of the city and this was quickly associated with the killings in West Yorkshire.

The TV programme Band of Gold which was shown between 1995-7 highlighted this part of Bradford again, and showed it as a seedy red light district. The local residents from the area decided they had simply had enough of this bad reputation and they decided to make a stand. They teamed up by getting together and protested by joining hands and forcing the prostitutes and the pimps out of their neighbourhood. This pushed the red light district to the Thorton Road part of the city which is next to the University of Bradford and it has been there every since.

More recently the self-proclaimed “Crossbow Cannibal” Stephen Griffiths was a student at the University of Bradford and he had a house just off Thornton Road which means he has been walking these streets every single day for many years. One prostitute was reported as saying she saw him every single day. Why is this important I hear you ask? Because all of the victims of the latest murders in Bradford were likely to have known Mr Griffiths personally because they saw him every day. They knew him, or at the very least, they will of known of him.

A scary fact is more than half (60%) of women are attacked by men they already know – not a complete stranger.

In my opinion the guy that attacked these ladies probably lived amongst them.

Good personal safety is being aware of people you know as well as the complete strangers.

Attack Rituals

If we look at attack rituals, an attacker is almost always likely to have his blood full of adrenaline. The murderer, or attacker, attacks people for a reason and usually it’s because they get a buzz out of it.

So if you see someone you know and they are behaving just slightly differently this can often be a key clue because it’s not congruent. Now I am not saying that everyone who acts a little differently is going to attack you but it should ring some alarm bells in your head.

If someone is going to attack they are either going to use the ambush technique, or they are going to use the talking distance attack, because it has to take place at talking distance. The attacker needs to get close, so they can either run and ambush or they come and talk to you nicely but they won’t be acting like they normally do.

If I was to guess I would say that these terrible series of Bradford murders were probably talking distance attacks and the girls probably recognised their attacker and felt pretty comfortable in his company. In fact, one newspaper article I read said the accused, Stephen Griffiths, was acting in a very different way on the day of the final murder – in other words he looked a bit shifty!

There are three elements to look out for:

Body language
Tonality
Words

If the other person seems excited or nervous, or both, there will be a incongruency between their body language, tone and words. In other words they may be saying one thing but their body language and tonality would be saying another because of this extra excitement.

Psychopaths like to kill people because there is a feeling of being important and more in control – they enjoy this kind of domination. They don’t understand empathy and often they simply do it to get a chemical reaction in their blood.

So if your proposed attacker wants to get close, he will try and talk to you and he will have increased levels of adrenaline. This is why some people appear “shifty” as there body language is saying something completely different to their words.

I know this advice may sound simple and it is but it could save your life. I would recommend you trust your instincts even with people you know.

[tweetmeme only_single="false"]

Possibly Related Posts:

Why I believe the G20 officer got away with it!

Darren Good — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 08:45:23 +0000

I heard this story on the news the other day and to be honest it’s not that surprising this police officer was cleared of the charges. Even if it may be viewed by an outsider as being over zealous or aggressive. When you examine the law closely you then begin to understand why he was acquitted.

G20 Police Assault on Woman

If you watch the video clip which I have included in this post, you can see the background to the event. In other words what was going on before this particular event actually took place. In the video you can see members of the public being aggressive and surging towards the police. They are moving towards the police aggressively and the police are clearly vastly outnumbered, which could cause them to fear for their lives.

Then Miss Fisher approaches Sgt Smellie in an aggressive manor and he uses what we call clearance strike to push her back and out of his way. You can see he uses the back of his hand – he didn’t use his fist or his baton.

After the strike, she then moves towards him again, in possible retaliation and she seems to have items in both hands. From the video you can’t tell what she has in her hands. They could be anything.

So Sgt Smellie honestly believed he was under attack and consequently under Section 3 of the Criminal Law Act was fully entitled to use reasonable force to protect himself. You can see on the video he drops his body level so he can strike Miss Fisher’s legs, rather than a strike at head height, which could have caused severe head injuries. Because he takes this approach he is demonstrating a measured response which shows he is trying to use reasonable force.

He only uses two strikes, he bends his knees and strikes twice. They are not life threatening blows but you have to remember he also didn’t know if she had a weapon or not. She had already been warned both verbally and with the clearance strike. It is my understanding that the CPS weren’t even interested in the clearance strike, they were only interested in the use of the baton, but the judge decided it was reasonable force and threw it out.

The IPCC still might sanction the police officer in some way. However, the police officer could theoretically sue the police for removing his human rights, Article Two is the human’s right to life. He could say you have taken away my right to defend myself.

The circumstances of the case were extremely public and I believe the Government had to be seen to be doing something but the judge just threw it out. It shouldn’t have gone to court in the first place. The problem is many people simply don’t know how these laws work and they cause confusion.

Possibly Related Posts: