Class Mates Call Attention To Friend In Difficulties At Thame Pool – Inquest Day Four
THE Inquest Jury looking into the facts that lead to the death of a young swimmer at Thame’s Jubilee Pool almost three years ago, saw video interviews with his classmates today.
Although the children’s accounts of what happened on that day, July 12, 2004, were inconsistant, and can only be legally considered as ‘heresay’ because they were taken between 2-4 weeks after the incident, several themes ran through their accounts.
Child A, who was to follow Nathan in the relay race after he had dropped a ‘sinker’, described how Nathan looked pale that morning, and that he did not seem to be concentrating but talking to someone, and had to be told when it was his turn to go.
He described the moment when he realised something was wrong and Nathan had gone under the water, apparently to drop a ‘sinker’.
“We waited for about half a minute, but when Nathan did not come back up, someone told one of the teachers,” he said.
Child B also remembered Nathan looking pale, and related how, after he did not re-appear from under the water, she bent her head into the water to look for him and saw him under the water “curled up and looking very small.”
She said that she told Child A to go and call a lifeguard.
She described Nathan as not being a very good swimmer and usually ‘a bit of a joker’ but that he was quiet on that day.
Later in the interview, Child B recollected how, back at school later that day, after she had heard that Nathan was being treated in hospital, she heard the news of his death on Fox FM.
Child C spoke about hearing an alarm going off in the pool area from where he was in the Leisure Centre’s Cafe area.
Child D described how she was swimming in the lane next to Nathan, in another team, from where she saw him go under the water and as she got closer, saw him “splayed out like a starfish,” about a foot from her leg.
“I thought he was going to grab my leg,” she said, “so I swam away.”
She described seeing a lifeguard as “just standing there.”
This particular child also described Nathan as “pale and quiet.”
Child E described Nathan as being happy on that day and cheering everyone on. “He went under,” she said, and we waited for a bit – we thought he had forgotten that he had the hoop (sinker).”
“(Child B)… then told us that someone was on the bottom. She alerted the lifeguard (swimming instructor) who then ran round.”
When questioned further about what she saw, this witness said: “It looked like he was going to get the hoop, rather than drop it.”
Child F, who was the first in Nathan’s team to go in the relay race, said that he thought Nathan did not realise that he had to drop the hoop (sinker.) He described how Nathan carried the sinker over his arm as he swam.
When asked about the positions of the adults at the pool side that morning, this witness said that he could remember one lifeguard sitting in the chair, and possibly another somewhere else. He recalled seeing swimming teacher, Mrs Allen standing by another group of children to his right (group 3 of 5 strung out along the side of the pool).
The final video interview showed Child G describing how she shouted, “What are you doing?” at Nathan.
“We thought he didn’t understand that he had to DROP the hoop,” she said. “He didn’t understand (before the race) what he had to do and I had to explain to him what to do,” she added.
This witness too, recalled one lifeguard sitting in the seat and another walking around.
Apparently, as well as the reliability of the Stokenchurch School children’s evidence being reduced because of the time lapse between the incident and their interviews, their accounts can only be considered as ‘heresay’ because of the considerable amount of discussion that went on among themselves and their community during the days between, and their ages (11 years).
One witness however, who is now 15 years-old, will be giving evidence in person on Monday afternoon, following a site visit by the Jury in the morning to Thame pool.
Photo: Thame Swimming pool (Library picture)
