Just because someone expresses something differently does not make them truly revolting

I must say that I was flattered when I scanned The Times Online, Comment Central, Friday's comment from the papers in...The Daily Fix, and clicked on Dominic Lawson: (The Independent)- If we respect the law, then we must also respect Learco Chindamo's right to be free, only to find my name and blog user name in the first line. "John Hirst, the self-styled "jailhouse lawyer" who successfully took the Government to the European Court of Human Rights on the issue of prisoners' votes, has little time for Frances Lawrence. In the wake of her attack on the decision of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal not to deport her husband's soon-to-be released killer, Learco Chindamo, Mr Hirst writes: "If Frances Lawrence still wishes to wallow in self-pity after 12 years, that's her problem."

"There's more where that came from. Hirst describes as "an irrational whine" her broadcast complaint that she was "unutterably depressed that the Human Rights Act has failed to encompass the rights of my family to live a safe and happy life". Truly revolting as Mr Hirst's lack of sympathy is, he is right that Frances Lawrence's outburst against the Human Rights Act was irrational".

It is not that I have little time for Frances Lawrence. She hasn't asked me for any of my time. I have little time for anyone who is displaying self-pity, including myself. Whenever I catch myself slipping into self-pity mode, I tell myself to snap out of it because it serves no good purpose. Therefore, it makes me cringe when I hear and see it in others.

What jumped out at me from Dominic Lawson's otherwise excellent piece was this quote: "Truly revolting as Mr Hirst's lack of sympathy is...". It is not that I lack sympathy for Frances Lawrence, losing a husband to the killer Learco Chindamo, that is deserving of anyone's sympathy, including mine. Having said that, it does not follow that I should block my senses and refrain from comment when I hear her coming out with something that gets my goat up. And that was the irrationality of her statements.

It is not nice for someone to be told that they are truly revolting, especially if that is not true. Dominic Lawson is trying to create the impression that I am an unfeeling person and that is not the case. At least, Dominic Lawson then goes on to say that what I say is right. However, I recall my personal officer in Hull Prison Special Unit, the late Trevor Drewery, once saying: "John is right 99.99% of the time, it's the way that he says it which is wrong". There may well be some truth in that.

Dominic Lawson points out that Frances Lawrence had attacked "the decision of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal not to deport her husband's soon-to-be released killer, Learco Chindamo". Experience has taught me that if you are to attack such a decision, then it has to be done in a rational manner. Similarly, if you are speaking to the media you need to come across as cool, calm and collected to get your message across. Getting emotional defeats the objective. The Tribunal decided the merits of the case dispassionately. By being emotional, it feeds the gutter press, and this is read by politicians who then knee-jerk an emotional response, and speak sound bites without thinking it through properly what they are saying. It has the effect of becoming infectious. I cannot be fairly criticised for not wanting to become embroiled up in all of that.

It wasn't just that Frances Lawrence attacked the tribunal decision, she also attacked Learco Chindamo and the Human Rights Act 1998. She was lashing out all over the place. Like a bear with a sore paw. It's time that injury was treated and given a chance to heal. If Dominic Lawson wants to know what sympathy is, that's a dose of it. You can feel for someone without agreeing with what they are saying. Dominic Lawson is wrong when he states: "if anyone could be said to have a reason for becoming "irrational", Frances Lawrence is that person". I would have used the word cause, because reason and irrational are opposites. Someone who is applying reason is not irrational, and someone who is irrational is not applying reason. The solution here is to apply logic and not illogic to the situation.