Philip Lawrence/Learco Chindamo: What a waste of life all around

I believe that the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal ruling, in favour of not deporting Learco Chindamo to Italy when he is released from custody, was right on the merits. Although Learco Chindamo was born in Italy he came to Britain at the age of five. When he was 15 years old, he stabbed to death Philip Lawrence, a school headmaster, outside the school gates. Apparently, Philip Lawrence intervened in a gang fight outside his school. As the incident was outside of the school boundary, perhaps the wisest course was for him to have phoned the police. In any event, the case drew a lot of media attention and emotions run high and politicians knee-jerk to headlines and introduced legislation giving the police more powers.

I note that those emotions are still running high as witnessed by the comments of Frances Lawrence, Philip Lawrence's widow, in the Daily Telegraph. As the newspaper points out, she is bitter about the decision to let Learco Chindamo stay in Britain when he has served his time for the crime and is released from jail. "Frances Lawrence said she was 'unutterably depressed' that the human rights of her family had taken second place to those of her husband's murderer". Depression is a mental state. In this instance it is brought about by her ignorance of the law. The Human Rights Act 1998 is not about balancing the human rights of one citizen against the human rights of another. This is where the gutter press and knee-jerking politicians like David Davis don't help matters by spluttering ignorant comments, which are then taken by ignorant people like Frances Lawrence as gospel as they clutch at straws seeking revenge or justice more tempered in their favour. The HRA 1998 was designed to give human rights to citizens against public authorities. If Frances Lawrence still wishes to wallow in self pity after 12 years, that's her problem. It is unfair upon Learco Chindamo to demand more from him once the tariff for retribution and deterrence has expired.

It is unjust that "The Home Office has been fighting a legal battle to deport him when he completes his prison sentence, possibly next year". This is unacceptable Executive interference by knee-jerking politicians responding to gutter press headlines and seeking headlines which favour the government. It is time that politicians in government woke up to the fact that they represent the electorate and not owners and editors and journalists of the gutter press. "But the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal ruled today that such a move would breach Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This guarantees the right to a 'family life', and since Chindamo's ties are in the UK and he speaks only English, the tribunal ruled that repatriating him to Italy would be unjust". This decision was not clouded by emotions.

However, the Daily Telegraph is guilty of emotive writing. "But Mrs Lawrence, 59, who was left to bring up four children on her own, was 'devastated and demoralised' by the ruling. There is the attempt to balance Learco Chindamo human rights under the HRA 1998 to a family life, by showing that Frances Lawrence's family life has been affected by Learco Chindamo's killing her husband. This is the case, but it is irrelevant to the issue decided under English law. As already stated, this is not about human rights v human rights. Frances Lawrence is a innocent victim who has suffered as a result of Learco Chindamo's killing her husband. That does not make it right that Learco Chindamo should become a victim of a public authority's abuse of power just to make her feel better. She has an unreasonable expectation of what justice is about. It didn't help matters when John Reid was Home Secretary and knee-jerked on about re-balancing human rights in favour of the victims. This was just an attempt to rob Peter to pay Paul.

This whole passage from Frances Lawrence is an irrational whine: "I am unutterably depressed that the Human Rights Act has failed to encompass the rights of my family to live a safe and happy life," she said. She and her family do have rights under the HRA 1998, but not against , and the HRA 1998 did not come into force until October 2000, 5 years after the killing of her husband.

"I am deeply concerned for everything I have worked for, including the setting up of the Philip Lawrence Awards (which honour young people's efforts in tackling social issues.)

She added: "I feel as if I can't fight any more - I feel I can't survive this.

"I feel that I have always been a staunch advocate of the Human Rights Act but there is a missing term in it. It must encompass some responsibility". It does upon public authorities not to breach citizens human rights. It is not a personal Act for Frances Lawrence private benefit.

"This isn't just about me and my family. I am not solely thinking of me. I may be a mother but I am a human being as well". Yes, it is just about you and your family. Yes, you are just thinking about yourself. Yes, you are a mother and a human being as well. What's your point?

This makes the mind boggle: "The decision to deny Chindamo's deportation provoked frustration from the Home Office". So, its personal then? Minister's who get personal over something like this should not be a Minister. The office requires rational decision making. Leave the throwing of the dummy out of the pram to babies. A Home Office spokesman said: "We are disappointed that the courts have not upheld our decision to pursue deportation in this case. We believe that foreign prisoners who have committed serious crimes should face automatic deportation from the UK at the end of their sentence." A blanket policy which admits no exceptions is unlawful. Surely, the Home Office lawyers would know about this?

Bring in the quotes from more knee-jerkers: Alan Gordon, vice-chairman of the Police Federation of England and Wales said it was a "ludicrous decision". Why?

He added: "The fact that he may be paroled and back on our the streets as early as next year is in itself disgusting". Why? "What about the human rights of Philip Lawrence, robbed of his life by a thoughtless knife attack or the human rights of Mr Lawrence's wife and children, deprived of a loving husband and father". Dead people don't have human rights. How do the human rights of the remainder of the Lawerence family come into this? And you're Vice-Chairman of the Police Federation of England and Wales? Couldn't they find someone with half a brain to represent them? Are you also Vice-Chairman of the knee-jerk society?

Where would we be without the prize dickhead who is rolled out like a parrot on a perch to parrot his quote? David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said: "It is a stark demonstration of the clumsy incompetence of this Government's human rights legislation that we are unable to send a proven killer back to his own country, especially when that country is in Europe". The only flaw I have found in the HRA 1998 is that the court's do not have the power to strike down legislation incompatible with the HRA 1998. Learco Chindamo may have been born in Italy but he has spent 22 of his 27 years in Britain. This fact alone gives him more entitlement to stay than not. In a statement, he said he hoped the decision would not "cause grief" to Mrs Lawrence or to the rest of his family and went on to express his deepest sympathy. She's not listening to you Learco Chindamo, she hates your fucking guts.

He was an idiot to lead a gang of 12 to go to sort out a boy of 13 who had fought one of their friends. A bit like taking an elephant gun to swat a fly. Philip Lawrence's interference put Learco Chindamo in the position where he felt he would have to act to save face in front of the gang. He will be on life licence until he dies and subject to recall to prison if he breaches any of his licence conditions. I should hope that one of those licence conditions prohibits him from becoming a gang member. I don't have a face to lose in front of others, being a lone wolf. But, I have seen too many fights in prison over saving face. Here a headmaster lost his life, his wife lost a husband and their children lost a father. Learco Chindamo has lost 13 years of freedom when he should have been growing up outside and not in prison. What a waste of life all around.

UPDATE: The Daily Telegraph calls this an analysis. I call it a flawed analysis.

UPDATE UPDATE: I watched Frances Lawrence on Breakfast News on BBC1 this morning. She came across as a pathetic figure. She stated that she was upset because Learco Chindamo could use the HRA 1998 to argue his case where as she could not. Therefore the HRA 1998 was weak. She said victims should have a voice. However, she had her say whereas the BBC did not give Learco Chindamo or a representative a voice to counter her arguments. She was led to believe Learco Chindamo would be deported, therefore he should be deported. However, her anger should be directed at those who have misled her, because the expectation she had was not legitimate. We cannot have irrational people dictating who can and who cannot live in this country. I can understand her hurt, but it is time that she got over it and moved on. The media are being irresponsible playing her along with their fake sense of outrage. Justice has been done. That Frances Lawrence wants to go on hurting herself mentally is her problem. It is a private grief and not something that should be encouraged to be expressed in public.