Afortnight ago, it was understandable that the media, almost with one voice, denounced the judges for not allowing Learco Chindamo, the murderer of schoolmaster Philip Lawrence, to be deported to Italy.
The decision the judges reached must have been horribly distressing for Mrs Lawrence. The heart of the public - which the media reflected - was in the right place in taking up the cudgels on her behalf.
Nevertheless, in a calmer mood, surely it should be clear that the judges were right. There is no way justice can be determined according to the emotions of the victim.
Some victims obviously inspire more compassion than others; and Frances Lawrence was one of them. But this is a chancy business, depending very much on the whims of the tabloid press. After all, Chindamo has undoubtedly served
|
|
  |
|
|
|
his sentence and there is no suggestion that he is likely to re-offend. Nor has anyone suggested that he has been given unfair preferential treatment.
So deporting him to Italy, a country which he was taken away from aged four and in which he has no proper family - would be tantamount to giving him a second sentence for the same offence, amounting to a life of exile in what for him is, in practice, a foreign country.
Who would benefit? Not Mrs Lawrence, who is the last person to want vengeance. For her to end up branded in that way would be the ultimate injustice. True, some legal systems enshrine the right of victims. One of them is Sharia law which rules that executions can only be commuted if the victim's family agree.
What a shocking thought that British law might be taking a hint from that disreputable source. 
FIRST POSTED SEPTEMBER 5, 2007
|
Worsthorne: have you read the EU Treaty?
