The SAPS has to fork out damages to the family of a man they arrested on suspicion of being drunk but who was actually in diabetic shock and subsequently died.
His wife and children won their civil action suit after proving he died wrongfully while in the hands of the Northern Cape police, who are now obliged to pay them for loss of support and “the reasonable costs of his funeral”, reports News24.
Susan van der Westhuizen and her daughters Chantè and Denise had lodged an action for loss of support arising from the death of Van der Westhuizen’s husband and the girls’ father, who is not named in the court papers and is referred to only as “the deceased”.
The SAPS told Northern Cape High Court Judge Lawrence Lever it was not responsible for the death, which happened more than 10 years ago.
The man had been arrested on 14 February 2014 by local police for being drunk in public after he was found lying next to his car in Springbok.
But the family alleged that at the time, he was actually in a diabetic shock. They argued further that he had suffered several bruises and injuries at the time of the arrest, although the police claimed to have no knowledge of this.
He had been taken into custody by Constables Klaase and Stanfliet, who failed to take any steps to establish his medical condition at the time, or to seek medical treatment for him.
The family said the father was put into a holding cell. At 11pm, several hours after the 7pm shift change, W/O Clarke went to check on him and spotted frothy vomit coming from his mouth. She called for an ambulance and he was taken to the local hospital, where he was admitted allegedly wearing only khaki shorts, no shirt and no shoes.
He died shortly afterwards: the post-mortem report revealed he had sustained multiple blunt traumas to his face and body, multiple fractured ribs, numerous haemorrhages to internal organs, and that his blood glucose was severely low.
The SAPS denied any knowledge of these injuries, saying they had not happened while the man had been in detention, and while he was in the custody of Klaase, Stanfliet and Clarke.
The family, however, blamed his death on the “direct result of the intentional conduct, omissions and negligence of the named members as well as other police of the Springbok police station”. They also accused the SAPS of negligence in failing to get medical treatment for him immediately after his arrest.
Susan van der Westhuizen told the court her husband had been diagnosed as a diabetic and was on medication. At the time of his death, he was doing consulting work for a company that provided him with a vehicle.
When she visited Springbok police station, Klaase had handed over her husband’s personal effects and taken her to his car, where she found her husband’s diabetic medication strewn about. Another witness also confirmed having seen the bright yellow pills in the car.
Klaase and Stanfliet agreed he had told them he was diabetic.
Several medical experts who testified about the listed cause of death said it differed from the post-mortem report. They said several factors – “a cascade of events” – had ultimately led to the fatal heart attack.
The SAPS said the officers who had arrested the man had taken him to the police station where he told them he was diabetic. When he was finally taken to hospital in the early hours, he had been unconscious and in “a hypoglycaemic condition” and therefore already critically ill.
It was accepted that his chances of survival would have been higher had he received treatment quicker, but the officers concerned said they were acting within the course and scope of their employment at the time and no negligence had been proven.
The court heard he had not been locked in the cells at the back of the police station but rather in the community service centre area, where he could be more easily monitored.
Clarke said she kept a check on him when she was on duty but had no way of knowing whether he was unconscious or just sleeping, as she had no medical training. Therefore, the police could not be found to be negligent.
However, the court contradicted her, pointing out that she did in fact have experience with the disease, as her own mother was a diabetic. She therefore knew that the illness was treated with pills, so the court found her evidence unsatisfactory.
Lever found that the family had established the elements required to establish a delictual claim for loss of support, and the SAPS was liable for these damages. He ordered that the family be compensated for their loss.
TimesLIVE article – Police liable for damages after diabetic death in detention (Restricted access)
See more from MedicalBrief archives: