Remorseless killer, 53, behind bars for bludgeoning man to dying with a frying pan moans about ‘inhumane’ remedy throughout Covid as he launches £10k authorized battle

A remorseless killer who was jailed for murdering a ‘kind vulnerable old man’ in his home is suing the government claiming it was ‘inhumane’ to lock him up in a cell by himself during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Stephen Kidd was jailed in 2009 for his part in the brutal murder of 60-year-old Darren Presley, who was attacked with knives and a frying pan, covered in paint and stamped on at a flat in Blackpool a year earlier.

The killer, who continues to profess his innocence, was released on licence this year but is now suing for up to £10,000 damages, claiming his ‘solitary confinement’ during Covid was a breach of his human rights.

Kidd, now 53 and disabled after suffering a stroke in prison, complains that he was routinely allowed out of his cell for only 20 minutes a day and that for extended periods of days he was not allowed out at all.

Claiming that the time under lockdown was a breach of the prohibition on ‘inhuman treatment’ and that his ‘solitary confinement’ amounted to a breach of his right to a private life, he is now suing for up to £10,000 compensation.

However, the Ministry of Justice is fighting the claim and last week took the case to Mayor’s and City County Court in London in a bid to have his case thrown out.

Kidd was jailed for life with accomplice Lea Mason in 2009 for the murder of Mr Presley, who was described by police at the time as a ‘vulnerable, kind old man.’

Preston Crown Court heard Mr Presley was set upon, stamped on repeatedly, attacked with knives and a frying pan, and covered in paint at his Blackpool flat in January 2008.

Kidd, released on life licence earlier this year and back in the north west, continues to claim he is innocent of the crime.

Before his release, Kidd served the latter part of his jail term at HMP Berwyn, a Category B and C prison in Wrexham, north Wales.

His barrister, Jack Holborn, told the judge, Recorder Barnet, that his damages claim relates to the early months of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, but in particular April to June that year.

‘The claimant says there were extended periods of time when he was either not allowed out of his cell for more than 20 minutes a day, or not at all,’ he said.

The incarceration had a particularly bad impact on Kidd, claimed the barrister, because he is now disabled and a wheelchair user, who needs a carer’s help for everyday tasks.

‘He was accommodated in a single cell,’ he told the judge.

‘As a result, if he was not let out of his cell he did not have any contact with other prisoners, or assistance from his appointed carer with certain daily living tasks.

‘The extended periods of time without being unlocked amount to what would generally be defined as “solitary confinement” – being substantially in excess of the 22 hours or more per day used as a definition for the expression.

‘Whilst the claimant accepts that the pandemic would have caused significant pressure upon prison staffing and his regime would inevitably change, no explanation is given as to why such lengthy periods without either association or time out of cell were required.’

He said the solitary confinement had led to ‘increased symptoms of pre-existing PTSD,’ adding that he had suffered ‘additional anxiety, flashbacks and nightmares’ during the period.

Mr Holborn claims that the treatment was in breach of Kidd’s rights under Article 3, which guarantees protection from ‘inhuman and degrading treatment,’ and Article 8, which guarantees ‘respect for private life,’ of the European Convention on Human Rights.

He also alleges breaches of the Equality Act 2010, given Kidd’s disability, and said the MoJ is unable to justify the treatment.

‘It is no answer that others within the general population may have suffered similar isolation due to Covid restrictions,’ he told the judge.

‘The defendant plainly intended to confine the claimant above and beyond any restrictions in law or guidance and the claimant’s position is that it did so to an unreasonable degree; his treatment was no accident.’

The case reached court on a MoJ application to have the claim struck out because it is bound to fail.

MoJ barrister Saara Idelbi told the judge the sprawling prison at the time housed 1,800 prisoners in cells with toilets and showers, which made them ‘self-contained living spaces.’

‘The treatment or conditions in HMP Berwyn did not generate more humiliation, distress or other suffering than is inherent in a prison sentence or in a pandemic,’ she said.

‘The increased restriction in HMP Berwyn correlated with the increase in restrictions on the community at large, taking into account the confined environment of a prison.’

Arguing that Kidd’s claims should be struck out, she said his treatment did not amount to breaches of his human rights, given the ‘high degree of uncertainty’ at the time about virus transmission.

‘Authorities had the obligation to implement measures aimed at avoiding infection, limiting the spread once it reached the prison, and providing adequate medical care in the case of contamination,’ she said.

‘Preventative measures had to be proportionate to the risk, but the consideration of which should not pose an excessive burden on the authorities in view of the practical demands of imprisonment.

‘The conditions at the time…was a global emergency of unprecedented scale.. The approach to combating the threat posed cannot be viewed with hindsight.

‘The defendant avers that it is clear that the restrictions imposed at HMP Berwyn were a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

‘The restrictions corresponded with a real need, namely to stop the spread of infection. The measures reflected legal restrictions.

‘The measures were proportionate with a view to protecting the prison population and prison staff when considering the uncertainty and threat of the trajectory of the pandemic.’

Kidd’s barrister labelled the MoJ strikeout application ‘hopeless’.

After a day in court, Recorder Barnet reserved his decision on the MoJ application until a later date. If it succeeds, then Kidd’s claim will end before going to a full trial.