Angry dad burned adoption worker
A YOUNG father threw a kettle of boiling water over a social worker, causing him horrific burns, after becoming upset at his daughter being put up for adoption.
Steven Bould was due to make arrangements for saying his final goodbye to the baby girl when he attacked John Orlowski during a family contact visit in Leek.
-

Steven Bould
Mr Orlowski suffered 20 per cent burns to his upper body, scalp, face and arms, and needed to spend time in a specialist burns unit.
Bould, aged 22, of Queens Drive, Leek, was yesterday sentenced to a total of 33 months in prison by a judge at Stoke-on-Trent Crown Court.
He had pleaded guilty to causing grievous bodily harm to the social worker on September 16, 2010, and a separate offence of attempted arson on his ex-partner's car while it was parked in St Edward Street, Leek, on May 29, 2010.
But as Bould has spent so long on remand, he was eligible for immediate release.
Prosecutor Heather Chamberlin said the "extremely unpleasant" attack on Mr Orlowski happened after he had arrived a few minutes late with the baby.
Bould left the room to go to the toilet and his sister put on the kettle to make tea. While Bould was out, Mr Orlowski broached the subject of arranging the final contact visit.
Mr Orlowski then heard the kettle click again. Suddenly, he became aware of somebody standing over him.
Miss Chamberlin said: "He described simply feeling heat and Bould shouting at him, 'Come on'.
"He got to his feet and made his way to the door. He pushed Bould out of the way and raised the alarm."
Mr Orlowski was rushed to hospital in immense pain. The court heard he has since made a remarkable physical recovery and returned to work with Staffordshire County Council, yet he is still haunted by the psychological effects of the attack.
Bould was arrested in Leek later that day, although he was unable to be interviewed because of his mental state.
The court was told how he had suffered a debilitating stroke as a teenager after being attacked by a gang of youths.
Jason Holt, mitigating, said: "He is all but mute, save for a few words and words that are said in heightened emotion."
Bould had become involved with another stroke victim and they had a child together before splitting up.
Social services became concerned and the baby was made the subject of a child protection order.
"Any issue of neglect was not intentional.
"It was the by-product of their disabilities," said Mr Holt.
Sentencing Bould yesterday, Judge Robert Trevor-Jones said: "Mr Orlowski was serving the public in his role as a social worker and helping you in the contact you were having with your daughter.
"The prospect of your daughter being placed for adoption, and the likelihood you wouldn't see her again, would have been very emotional. But what you did was to use a weapon, the kettle full of boiling water to douse Mr Orlowski."







39 Comments
View all
by stoke_girl
Wednesday, January 18 2012, 11:03AM
“He should think of why his child was taken away from him in the first place, instead he attacks an innnocent man.
In my opinion he could of got a steaper sentance for the crime that he has commited.
Does he really think hes going to get his child back now?”
by strandedhere
Tuesday, January 17 2012, 12:11PM
“Of course some social workers lie in court to get children removed from families.You'd be on much stronger ground if you said "No wonder they lie,if it means saving them little kiddies".
The first statement-that they sometimes lie-is one that can be tested for example by comparing their statements in court and internal SS memos accessed via Data Protection law,so is easy enough to prove.Impossible to prove in public because
(1)All hearings-despite recent legislation-are in effect held in camera "for the sake of the kiddies".
(2)Childrens' services in Stoke,and elsewhere don't follow universal complaints procedures against staff "for the sake of the kiddies".
As for the argument that staff lie in court "to protect the kiddies".you'd have to believe:
(1)That the SS aren't as prone to grievences against their 'clients' and aren't subject to normal human emotions,
(2)That the old quota system,and the need to protect their jobs are of no concern to staff,
(3)That they won't target the weakest targets,rather that the most dangerous parents;that is that it would really be the situation of the child-the degree of need/vulnerability-which is uppermost,rather than the safety of the social worker,
(4)That their absolute power-no complaints system,a 96% certainty that the judge will consider them,as he's meant to,experts and grant their request to remove children from local families-will not be subject to abuse.
Depends on what you think of human nature,I suppose.
I know what I think!”
by LewisL
Tuesday, January 17 2012, 9:10AM
“VonnieLorna - what a load of rubbish! You may have had some "deelings" with social work but that does not make you an expert. Are you suggesting that social workers lie in court to get children removed from their parents for no good reason? Now who is being judgmental?! Social workers have an incredicbly difficult job and none would want to remove a child from its natural family unless it was absolutely necessary.”
by VonnieLorna
Monday, January 16 2012, 7:27PM
“Judge not lest ye be judged!! Having had deelings with some criminal elements in social work, ie child predators, and with the numerous accounts of wrong doing by social workers, example perjury in court to remove children from good families and with this mans frailties I can see how this came about It wont be the last sadly as more and more wake up to the reality that the UK Gov and its departments are deliberately breaking up families as part of an ongoing social enginnering agend designed at ruining decent society, we are ruled by mad men with sinister agendas and this is one example of the hell that comes from this tyranny and treason at the highest levels. How sad we have come to this. Its easy to judge individuals but until we stand in their shoes we have no right to do so.”
by angelsnhevan
Monday, January 16 2012, 9:20AM
“Wow............just WOW.
"He looks sad and lonely" eh? am i missing something here. That picture does not portray him to be sad and lonely. He almost looks happy with what he did.
Anyway at the end of the day if neither parent was capable of bringing the little girl up then what else were social services meant to do here? God forbid he ever turned that kind of anger towards the baby. He may well be a good person but holy **** his temper is horrid.
Some of you want to thank your lucky stars this story isnt about something he did to the baby.”
by Stevo996
Monday, January 16 2012, 2:23AM
“He deserves to be hung - low life S8#t house scum .. !!!!”
by Thisisme
Sunday, January 15 2012, 8:47PM
“It is very sad that the child had to be taken into care, but with a father who has such a way of dealing with negative things in his life, we might find that a future newspaper might be telling us about the tragedy of a scalded baby. The child may at least now have the chance of a more stable life than her biological father might be able to provide, sad though it is to say.”
by Iffyminty
Sunday, January 15 2012, 7:45PM
“There is absolutely no reason to attack someone like that. I've been angry with many people in my life and never resorted to that kind of mindless act and neither has anyone else commenting on this I would guess.
You say we are all judging him from what we have read. No we are judging him for what he has done. I dont care if he was the nicest person, disabled, both parents have died or anything as that one act of mindless violent thugery has shown his true colours. Everyone has a choice in all their actions and he chose to ruin someones life.
It's stroke by the way.”
by sann1234
Sunday, January 15 2012, 4:15PM
“hello iffyminty can u read the paper proplery he had his daughter taken off his because he had a stoke at the age of 16 and it was due too his disabilites the baby was taken. yes i do beileve he did av the babys interest at heart it obviously broke his heart that much and was unable too sit down and talk too sum 1 because he has limted speech because of his stoke!!!!and needed too take his anger out on sum 1 u sort of people who are up ur own **** wudnt no wat its like for sum 1 like this young had a stoke wen he was very young and goin threw hell!! u just all sit there judging people cause nuufin gos wrong in ur life ur all that perfect pppfft dnt judge people wen u dnt no the half of it u olny no bits wat the paper has put in u havnt got a clue!!!”
by Iffyminty
Sunday, January 15 2012, 3:27PM
“sanni1234...He threw boiling hot water over someones head. Why not try it sometime and then say he must have been a bit angry so its alright. Have you ever spilt some hot water on yourself? Imagine that over your head and face.
This poor guy was doing his job and trying to protect a child but no the scumbag decides to do this. Where in this has he has his daughters interests at heart? You get children taken off you for a reason...because they are potentially at risk from their parents or guardians and this just goes to prove it was the right decision.”