Scots mum set on fire by ex-partner 'should have been warned of risk by police'

The death of a woman who was set alight by her former partner could have been avoided if she had been warned of the risk he posed, a sheriff has ruled.

Kevin Marks (also known as Kevin Faulds) set fire to Ann Drummond on a country road near Bathgate, leaving her so severely burned she died in hospital.

The 52-year-old stood over the businesswoman, 47, and laughed as she rolled around the ground in a bid to extinguish the flames engulfing her body.

More than 80 per cent of her body was injured by burns with doctors concluding her injuries were so severe that she couldn’t survive.

Mr Marks had been deemed not to be a risk to others in the days before the incident.

Meanwhile Ms Drummond, from Livingston, had been so concerned by Marks’ poor mental health that she had gone to meet him at court after he had been released on bail on other charges.

She was attacked and killed just hours later.

A Fatal Accident Inquiry heard that Mr Marks had had contact with Police Scotland and NHS Lothian in the lead up the assault on June 25, 2019 but medics didn’t consider him to be a danger to others or “psychotic”.

It heard that Ms Drummond and Mr Marks had been in a relationship for over two years which had ended a week before her death.

Mr Marks, who was been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia after the attack, had previously made a threat against Drummond and had a history of domestic offending.

The inquiry found that Ms Drummond’s death could have been avoided if Police Scotland had shared concerns over the mental state of Mr Marks with NHS staff as well as a threat he had made against Ms Drummond days before and his previous history of domestic incidents.

Sheriff Peter Hammond said there should have been a “thorough and effective risk assessment” for the safety of Ms Drummond and warning her of the potential danger posed by Mr Marks.

He described the sharing of information by police as “inadequate”.

However, he made no recommendations as Police Scotland stated that there had been changes to working practices since the incident in 2019.

The force said it was “unreasonable and unrealistic” to expect the police officers to have articulated any particular concern for Kevin Marks’ physical or mental health.

They said that the passing of information to NHS staff could not have resulted in her death being avoided.

In his judgement, Sheriff Hammond said: “I have concluded that the effective sharing of potentially relevant information held by the police, within the police service itself and with NHS staff, about the mental health of Mr Marks, based on recent contacts with him, might have led to the detection of his psychosis and the taking of protective steps.

“As such, that was a precaution which could reasonably have been taken, which might realistically have resulted in the death of Ms Drummond being avoided.”

He added: “With hindsight, the police did have information with a potential bearing on the detection of Mr Mark’s psychotic state and the assessment of the risk that he posed to Ms Drummond, but this was not communicated to those who needed to know.

“Had this information been passed on to front line police officers and to NHS staff, then individually or cumulatively, that might have helped to inform the clinicians’ mental health assessments and influenced the eventual outcome.

“It might also have informed the police approach to risk assessment in relation to Ms Drummond.”

He stated that Mr Marks showed signs of “psychotic delusions meriting serious concern and further expert
investigation” during contact with police.

Sheriff Hammond added: “Had the police passed on to NHS staff the information that Mr Marks was
making these statements, it seems unlikely that he would have been repeatedly assessed as fit for court/release.”

“Of course it is not known what Ms Drummond would have done had she been warned of Mr Marks’ threat. She may have ignored any warning and continued to meet up with Mr Marks.

“Nevertheless, she would have been given the opportunity to consider her safety and be alert to the risks.

“For these reasons, I have concluded that carrying out a thorough risk assessment for the safety of Ms Drummond and warning her of the potential danger posed by Mr Marks was a precaution which could reasonably have been taken which might realistically have resulted in the death being avoided.”