THREE former members of staff at a Forest care home have been jailed for 18 months for the "abusive humiliation" of a deaf man with learning disabilities.

Laura Paul, 29, Sean Watkins and Daniel Gower mistreated the 54-year-old while they were on holiday in Bideford, North Devon.

Paul, of Meadow Walk, Solomons Tump, Huntley, Watkins, of Ridgewalk, Ruardean Hill and Gower, of Wellington Parade, Gloucester, admitted ill treating the man while in the position of care workers between September 27 2018 and October 2 2018.

Their cruel actions against the man, called Michael, included putting limpets on his bare back, scaring him with other sea creatures and barricading him in his room, Gloucester Crown Court was told.

Jailing the trio, Judge Ian Lawrie QC told them: "Your departure from the expected standards of humanity, kindness, help and support could not be greater."

The victim, named as Michael, was a resident at Brook Lodge in Longhope and was well-known to the defendants.

The judge said: ""The ill-treatment was committed on a number of occasions over a seven-day period represented a sequence of offending behaviour that included attaching clothes pegs to Michael, scaring him with sea creatures, photographing and recording Michael when he was distressed and when his trousers had fallen down and when there were signs that he had been incontinent.

"These all occurred in public whilst visiting a beach and collectively it amounted to degrading and distressing behaviour - as is self-evident from the assorted videos.

"All three of the you were trained and competent in safeguarding practices and procedures. You all had extensive knowledge of Michael and routinely provided day to day care for him.

“This meant you were very familiar with his behavioural difficulties and the personalised support guideline document. Accordingly you would know how to deal with him whatever the circumstances.

“Michael was not a stranger to you as you had worked with him and would have been alert to his vulnerability.

“Even three years ago the defendants were of an age that, whatever their life experiences, they would know their behaviour was abusive, degrading to personal dignity and harmful and contrary to their role of care and support.

“You don’t need training to be told or alerted when conduct is an affront to humanity and compassion in the execution of your duties.

“The Brook Lodge manager said that when Michael was to be taken away on holiday she had complete faith in all of you who had been selected to accompany Michael, and knew that Michael was really looking forward to going away for a break.

“Clearly a misplaced faith by senior management in light of your subsequent behaviour. This means in reality there were two breaches of trust by all of you, a breach of trust of those that employed you in caring for Michael and who were entitled to expect that you would exhibit compassion and care whist he was in you charge. Secondly a breach of trust in your care for Michael’s emotional and psychological well-being and in particular his personal dignity whilst he was on one of his rare breaks.

“The distress caused to Michael is vividly self-evident from the video clips, which show a heartless and cavalier disregard for his care and well being.

“Your behaviour clearly had an impact on Michael because a staff member noticed small changes in his behaviour when he got back to the lodge and as time went these changes became more noticeable and his episodes of aggressive behaviour became more regular.

“Michael was subsequently moved and although he has happily settled into his new home the move no doubt represented an upsetting time for one so emotionally and psychologically vulnerable.

“There are no guidelines in place for this offence.

“It is so serious that only an immediate custodial sentence can be justified and the least possible sentence I can impose having regard to the seriousness of the offence is one of 18 months in prison for each of you.”

Jayne Case, Michael’s social worker for 10 years said that he was generally a happy person, but was now displaying signs of sadness and anxiety. He told her the three defendants had been ‘bad people’ and he did not want to talk about what had taken place.

Ms Case said she found the video very distressing and concluded that it was very degrading for him.

Ms Case said she couldn’t watch the videos without crying at the humiliation he suffered.

Both men, who were dismissed in November 2018, admitted to the care home’s management that they had been drinking alcohol and had put the clothes pegs on Michael’s back as a joke.

Paul declined to attend any meetings with the management and she resigned from her position in November 2018. She told police in interview that they were ‘only having a laugh.’

She blamed the other two for being behind the pranks. She stated that she had to intervene when she felt things were getting out of hand.

Paul blamed Michael’s behaviour during the trip and admitted taking a picture of him suffering from incontinence.

Watkins admitted in his police interview that he had placed 10 pegs on Michael’s clothing. He also conceded that he made Michael wear a bucket on his head ‘for a bit of fun.’

He stated they rearranged his furniture in Michael’s room but denied barricading him in.

Mr Nelson concluded: “This is a course of conduct of multiple incidents of gratuitous degradation and sadistic behaviour in which they deliberately showed disregard for the welfare of the victim. They had a professional responsibility to protect him. On any decent humane level their actions were appalling.”

Judge Lawrie interjected: “This is about as bad as it gets in terms of ill treatment and humiliation. The three of them were given a specific function in giving Michael a holiday.

“This was psychologically and harmful to Michael. I suspect what we have been told about is only the tip of the iceberg.”

Sarah Jenkins, for Watkins, said: “The videos were humiliating and degrading. Michael wasn’t assaulted during the holiday, but it is accepted he suffered emotionally.

“On reflection, this short stay in Devon quickly became a toxic environment. They have since come to realise their behaviour was not acceptable.

“Watkins was only 19 at the time and had only been in the role for less than six months. This was on the job training. He wasn’t effectively equipped for this role. This episode has effectively ruined his career as a carer.

“He was also showing a lack of maturity and suffering from a lack of experience in the work place.

“Watkins is now working in a different career and has proved he can work in a different field without any issues.”

Charley Pattison for Paul said: “She was cleared of any wrongdoing following an internal investigation into the incident at the care home.

“Paul was the oldest of the three and she had only been in the job a few months more than Watkins and Gower. She herself was still gaining experience with on the job training.

“Her view was that this long weekend away had gone badly and that her own mental health was no longer in a position of being able to care for others.

“Paul fully accepts this was deplorable behaviour, something that she deeply regrets. In the cold light of day she accepts she made poor judgements in a professional situation and she should have known better.

“Paul has shown remorse and has written to Michael expressing her regrets.”

Lloyd Jenkins, for Gower, said: “There is no question that the behaviour of all three defendants was insensitive and inappropriate. There has been no attempt to minimise the gravity of the situation. It was a short-lived episode during a holiday.

“Gower has not re-offended since this incident. He has struggled to get his life back on track, having lost his job. He suffers from anxiety and has lost his self esteem.”

The judge said the basis of Paul’s guilty plea “exhibited a reluctance on her part to recognise and confront her undignified and humiliating treatment of the victim and thereby raises a question over her true sense of remorse.”