These articles of hypocritical, handwringing dross have been appearing all week. Here’s one of ‘em and here’s another. I wouldn’t read them, frankly; it will only encourage them. They all make the point that while it might be pushing it a bit to club someone over the head with a cricket bat, leniency should have been applied as Munir had watched his family be tied up and forced to crawl from room to room and threatened with death, so was probably feeling upset.
None of the pieces – none of them – make the patently obvious, general, point that the reason this grotesque injustice occurred is because our judiciary has become hideously unbalanced in favour of the criminal, and his rights. In other words it has lost its sense of right and wrong, its sense of justice. And, of course, the reason they don’t make this point is that they have been the cheerleaders for this very exchange of power. These are the monkeys who whine about prison not working and how we need to employ alternatives (such as that supervision order on Munir’s assailant); that prison should not be about retribution but rehabilitation (it should of course be about both) and that crime is a function of poverty, not individual wickedness.
I doubt that there is a single person in Britain who agrees with Hussain’s sentence – but then, in general, they don’t agree with the ideology which led to this miscarriage of justice. The ideology is the crucial point. Hussain’s sentencing is not an exception to the rule, merely an extreme example of the rule.
I suspect most of the writers are Labour voters, or have been habituated to voting Labour in the past. Me too. And it is the imposition of these effete values on the party which has helped to alienate Labour from its core working class constituency over the last twenty years.