Major Issues Bulletin 30 - EDP English Democratic Party.

MAJOR ISSUES BULLETIN

Has the “Woolf” lost his Teeth?

For some time now is has been apparent to most people that the Law is an Ass in the way it portrays itself in ignoring the victim and making the life of the perpetrator of crime as comfortable as possible and certainly there is no pretence that in the majority of cases Justice has been done in the process.

The following article in Today’s Daily Mail –September 21^st 2004. by a retired High Court Judge – Sir Michael Davies, QC, who was appointed a High Court Judge in 1973 after a distinguished career as a barrister-he retired in 1997, has at least given us hope that we are not alone in our demands that ‘Right be Done’.

* *

[Lord Chief Justice] Woolf’s

Making

A mockery of murder being the gravest crime

The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Woolf is an immensely distinguished judge and a man of complete integrity. He believes entirely in what he says and does.

Yet in my view, and I suspect that of many judges past and present would agree, he is profoundly misguided in his latest approach to sentencing policy.

Yesterday the Sentencing Guidelines Council, which he chairs, announced new recommendations which could see those pleading guilty to murder serving only ten years-or even less-in prison.

These guidelines, to be issued to all courts and judges, will be welcomed wholeheartedly by criminals and do-gooders from the liberal elite. But I suspect great swathes of the public will be outraged.

His lordship’s intentions may be understandable-to reduce pressure on our courts and save the time and expense of a lengthy trial for those willing to admit their guilt. Witnesses are excused the trouble and sometimes the distress of giving evidence and an admission of guilt is at least some indication of regret and remorse.

These may be mitigating circumstances in many cases- and judges have been reflecting it in their sentencing for years. But murder is different. As Shakespeare put it in Hamlet, murder is ‘Foul and most unnatural’.

As such, it requires - and has received -special consideration in the courts.

Historically, of course, it merited capital punishment. The death penalty for murder went in 1965 but importantly, Parliament replaced it with life imprisonment.

This marked the unique gravity of the crime and there remains a strong feeling, which I share, that murders must be severely punished, and SEEN to be severely punished.

Indeed many opinion polls have confirmed that a majority of the public would welcome the return of the death penalty for the worst murders.

As a barrister and High Court judge, I, too, was in favour of the death penalty, to be remitted in cases where there were real mitigating circumstances or the smallest doubt as to the rightness of the conviction. But Parliament will have none of it.

Instead, we have Lord Woolf’s new guidelines, which, however well intentioned, make a mockery of the notion that murder is the gravest crime and merits the harshest punishment available.

Lord Woolf appears to want the starting point for all murders to be the same, 15 years, but recommends that this should then be reduced by mitigating circumstances, such as if the culprit has handed himself over to the police.

It is not clear what further remission might be granted, but it has been said that effective sentences of six or seven years would be commonplace.

This is totally unacceptable and in no way reflect the will of the people or the needs of society.

More dangerously it will send entirely the wrong message to potential killers for whom a six or seven year spell in prison will seem a far from daunting prospect as they weigh up their despicable plans.

I have prosecuted, defended or tried several hundreds of men and women charged with murder and they were infinitely varied characteristics. Some were inadequate, indeed pathetic; others were beyond doubt evil and vicious.

I remember one man who was carrying on an adulterous affair and decided to get rid of his wife so that he could marry the other women. He systematically plied his wife with arsenic over many months causing her intense agony. She died in great pain.

Then a bright pathologist was suspicious. Tests of the dead woman’s hair revealed traces of arsenic. The defence was that this was a case of suicide, a false allegation which greatly distressed the couple’s teenage children. The jury convicted and the prisoner rightly served many years in prison.

The case is instructive because in all likelihood, it would not have fitted into Lord Woolf’s categories of more serious murders, who merit more than the proposed statutory sentence of 15 years in jail. The man was not a mass murderer, nor necessarily a danger to society. But he was truly wicked. To release him after a comparatively short duration would have been a travesty of justice.

Why then does Lord Woolf believe that killers deserve greater leniency?

The answer I suspect, is that he has been swayed by what he discovered when he conducted a judicial inquiry into serious disturbances at Strangeways Prison in Manchester.

He discovered how unpleasant conditions in prison really are and in spite of the efforts of successive Inspectors of Prisons and others, this state of affairs continues in many establishments.

I believe, and I emphasise that this is no more than my personal assessment, that these experiences have had a profound effect on Lord Woolf’s attitude towards imprisonment.

YET NO – no judge sends a defendant to prison unless he or she is convinced that there is no alternative – and always for what the judge decides is the shortest possible term consistent with all the circumstances. Now Lord Woolf appears to want artificially to reduce that term.

As we all know, the prison system is overcrowded and under pressure. But that is not a good reason for reducing the time in custody by the most serious offenders. Other solutions must be found.

When the Sentencing Council was set up, Lord Woolf was reported as saying that it would not ‘pander to public clamour’ or ‘bow to pressure from Parliament’.

If by that is meant that sentencing policy must not be dictated by mob rule, or off-the-cuff quips by MP’s seeking to impress their constituents, then it is for the common good.

But that does not make it permissible for sentencing guidelines to ignore responsible public opinion or carefully and seriously framed statements by Ministers of the Crown.

There is a real risk that this is just what Lord Woolf’s Council is intent on doing.

Judges have the task of sentencing, yes; but our courts are governed on matters of principle by Parliament and, constitutionally, judges must not defy the legislature.

However all this turns out, one thing at least is surely non-negotiable. The taking of a life is an irreparable crime. There can be no restitution and sentences must always reflect this.

* * *

[Fonts altered-bolding used- comment in brackets]

Q&A: The Lisbon Treaty-2008

Leaders of the European Union's 27 member states meet in Portugal this week to sign what will now become known as the Lisbon Treaty.

*

The abolition of Britain
by The Reform Treaty
- Second Reading-Passed by majority of 138

*

Veteran parliamentarian TONY BENN speaks of the absolute necessity of a

REFERENDUM

HEAR HIM ON

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=o0I-ZdvQz1o

13th October,2007

So You Want Out Of The EU

THEN WHY NOT SIGN THE

RENUNCIATION of EU CITIZENSHIP

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Optout

Details from petition creator

With the signing of the Maastricht Treaty the people of Britain were given

DUAL CITIZENSHIP

-both

EUROPEAN and BRITISH

The extra tier of citizenship was thrust upon the people without their consent -and in many cases knowledge.

The PEOPLE of GREAT BRITAIN should be allowed the option of opting out of the EUROPEAN CITIZENSHIP if they so wish. The GOVERNMENT will then be able to provide those who have opted out with

BRITISH DOCUMENTATION

-only such as British (not EU) passports, driving licences and other national documents.

EU laws will also NOT APPLY to those who

HAVE OPTED OUT OF EUROPEAN CITIZENSHIP

[PETITION OPEN UNTIL OCTOBER 08]