story. they put him 0n amongst 0thers, saw him as a success story. they put him on their leaflets and gave him a computer. i think people saw the advantage of having him as someone they had involved in their programme. they just lost sight of the danger to the public, their employees and anyone else associated with the programme. at the inquest into saskia s death, learning together said it was the responsibility of the prison and probation service to ss khan s risk and they had relied on those agencies expertise. do you think they can continue to lead this organisation? they can continue to lead this organisation? they can continue to lead this oruanisation? , , ., ., , organisation? they should not be leadin: an organisation? they should not be leading an organisation organisation? they should not be leading an organisation that i organisation? they should not be leading an organisation that got i leading an organisation that got something badly and tragically wrong. from a famil
khan became one of their students in prison. amy and ruth, amongst others, saw him as a success story. they put him on their leaflets, they gave him a computer. i think people saw the advantage of having him as somebody they had involved in their programme. they just lost sight of the danger to the public, their employees and anyone else associated with the programme. at the inquest into saskia s death, learning together said it was the responsibility of the prison and probation service to assess khan s risk and they d relied on those agencies expertise. do you think ruth armstrong and amy ludlow can continue to lead this organisation? they shouldn t be leading an organisation that got something badly and tragically wrong. from a family point of view, we d be very distressed, upset and, frankly, insulted if they did. amy ludlow and ruth armstrong received several awards
amy ludlow and ruth armstrong are the directors of the cambridge university learning together programme, which teaches prisoners and university students side by side, and which held the event at fishmongers hall. i m going to explain to you how- i got introduced to learn together. khan became one of their students in prison. amy and ruth, amongst others, saw him as a success story. they put him on their leaflets. they gave him a computer. i think people saw the advantage of having him as somebody they had involved in their programme, showing some capability to deal with even the highest category of offender. theyjust lost sight of the danger to the public, their employees and anyone else associated with the programme. at the inquest into saskia s death, learning together said it was the responsibility of the prison and probation service to assess khan s risk,
from a family point of view, we d be very distressed, upset and, frankly, insulted if they did. amy ludlow and ruth armstrong received several awards for their work, which was also praised by the prisons inspectorate praised by the prison s inspectorate but the organisation is now suspended whilst cambridge university carries out a review. in a statement, cambridge university said. i ve lived for 20 years longer than saskia did and i view what she achieved in her short life
i think people saw the advantage of having him as somebody they had involved in their programme, showing some capability to deal with even the highest category of offender. theyjust lost sight of the danger to the public, their employees and anyone else associated with the programme. at the inquest into saskia s death, learning together said it was the responsibility of the prison and probation service to assess khan s risk, and they d relied on those agencies expertise. something that was put to amy ludlow if, after everything that s happened, learning together would rule out working with categories of prisoner, terrorist offenders. and her answer was no, because there s no research evidence to support that. yeah, and we heard a number of times there s no research evidence for this and no research evidence for that. i suggest that the main evidence we have now is that it wasn t a wise idea. the arrogance in thinking that academics necessarily can,