A chilling revelation emerges: the man who would later commit a horrific triple murder had previously sought out the nation's intelligence agency, asking to be apprehended. This unprecedented detail surfaced during a public inquiry into the tragic events that shook Nottingham in June 2023, where Valdo Calocane's actions leading up to the attacks are being scrutinized. The inquiry is piecing together a disturbing timeline, and some of the information presented raises profound questions about how such a tragedy could unfold.
The harrowing experience of a previous victim comes to light. Just three years before the fatal attacks, in May 2020, a then 22-year-old woman endured a terrifying ordeal. As Calocane broke into her flat, she desperately tried to escape, ultimately falling from a window and sustaining a fractured spine. This incident, which required surgery, was recounted by the woman who revealed a police officer informed her that Calocane could not be prosecuted at the time due to his mental health. But here's where it gets controversial: at this point, Calocane had not yet received a formal diagnosis for his mental health issues, though he was later diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia in July 2020. The same officer reportedly told the woman that had she not escaped, Calocane "could have killed" her. Her words paint a vivid picture of her terror: "I didn't know what to do... I was by myself. I was alone. I felt like someone was going to hurt me... I was scared, I was very scared."
A pivotal moment at MI5 headquarters. The inquiry is also focusing on Calocane's visit to the MI5 headquarters at Thames House in London on May 31, 2021. He approached the building, asking to be arrested. Metropolitan Police officers, including PC Foster, responded. Bodyworn camera footage showed Calocane expressing a desire to speak with someone but refusing to disclose the subject matter to the officers. He was reportedly told to keep his hands out of his pockets and, when informed he couldn't speak to anyone, stated his plan was to "go home." And this is the part most people miss: Calocane had booked an Uber for his journey home. Why didn't police ask why Calocane wanted to be arrested? This question was posed by Sophie Cartwright KC, representing the survivors, to PC Foster. Foster explained his approach was to "build a rapport" and remain "calm and relaxed" to encourage Calocane to share further information. He stated that Calocane did not exhibit any "unusual" behavior, appearing "calm, compliant and coherent." However, Cartwright KC pressed, asking if it wasn't "essential that somebody had to ask VC the question: 'Why have you come to Thames House asking to be arrested?'" Foster maintained he was content with Calocane's demeanor and response.
An intelligence report was indeed shared. The inquiry confirmed that an intelligence report from the May 31, 2021 incident was sent to Nottinghamshire Police. This report, emailed by the Met Police on June 1, 2021, described Calocane as "calm and compliant" before he was permitted to leave. PC Foster also indicated that visits of a similar nature, where individuals wish to pass information to intelligence services, are "not infrequent," occurring both outside Thames House and other sensitive locations. Calocane reportedly mentioned it was his "first time" visiting such a venue and confirmed he had been arrested previously.
The inquiry's scope. The seventh day of these nine-week hearings is hearing testimony from a Metropolitan Police officer who responded to the MI5 calls, followed by an officer involved in managing threats to public figures and protected sites. Additionally, one of Calocane's former roommates, involved in two incidents with him in 2021, is expected to provide evidence. This ongoing inquiry, in its second week, is examining the series of attacks that resulted in the deaths of Barnaby Webber, Grace O'Malley-Kumar, and Ian Coates, and serious injuries to Wayne Birkett, Sharon Miller, and Marcin Gawronski.
Considering these revelations, how should law enforcement and intelligence agencies balance the need for information gathering with the imperative to address immediate threats? Is it possible that a more direct line of questioning at Thames House could have altered the tragic course of events? We invite you to share your thoughts in the comments below.
