Linda's comments on current cases.

Linda’s Comments
These are my personal comments on crimes in the news. You may agree or disagree, but please do so politely! I will answer polite correspondence if time permits.
James Hanratty 20/7/00 The Punishment for Paedophiles 1/8/00 Tony Martin 15/8/00 Informers' Evidence 1/5/01
	James Hanratty. 20/7/00 There can be little doubt that the results of the DNA tests in the A6 murder case have brought to an abrupt end any hope of clearing the name of James Hanratty who was hanged on 4^th April 1962. New technology has shown that he was indeed the murderer, and moreover has cleared the name of Peter Alphon, who, for those who believed Hanratty to be innocent, was the prime suspect. (For those who are in any doubt it would be as well to state here that if a DNA sample deteriorates or become corrupted the result is not a false positive, but inconclusive.) I have read the books on the case with great interest, especially Paul Foot’s classic "Who Killed Hanratty?" and have to say that I have always felt that the case made for his innocence deserved to be looked at in some depth. The crime, which appeared to be random and motiveless seemed to be out of character for Hanratty, who previously had been at worst, a petty crook. Alphon, who had confessed numerous times, only to retract his confessions, was a convincing suspect. All speculation is now at an end. I have great sympathy for the Hanratty family. Their determination and perseverance are greatly to be admired. James senior campaigned tirelessly, unshaken in his belief in his son’s innocence until his death in 1971 when James’ brother Michael continued the battle. Quite recently the case was referred to the Court of Appeal, and success seemed to be in sight. Michael has refused to accept the DNA findings. Comments attributed to him in the newspapers are that he believes the samples to have been contaminated, and that the findings are not a problem for his campaign. I feel that in time he will find that the Courts take them much more seriously. In the rush of feeling for the Hanrattys let us not lose sight of the real victims, Michael Gregsten, the murdered man and his family, and Valerie Storie, raped and left for dead, who has spent the last 38 years in a wheelchair, her spine broken by a bullet. There is a lesson to be learnt by all campaigners who seek DNA tests. You should be prepared for the possibility that the result may destroy everything you have always believed in, and you must accept the result, whichever way it goes.
	The Punishment for Paedophiles. 1/8/00 In the aftermath of the appalling murder of little Sandra Payne it is natural that there should be a public demand for the return of the death penalty. As a parent, I know that if I was in the position of the Payne family my instinct would be to want to snuff out the life of the murderer. In general terms, however I am opposed to the death penalty for two reasons. First of all, we have not eliminated the possibility of making a mistake and executing an innocent person. The second reason is that a living murderer can be studied, and help us understand how such things happen. Such studies have in the past informed the hunt for killers and saved lives. So what is to be done with paedophiles? I believe that such a killer has forfeited the right ever to be in human society. Life imprisonment should mean just that. This kind of killer suffers from a mental abnormality which no amount of time in prison will remove. The lives of our children are too precious to risk by giving paedophiles lesser sentences and then releasing them, even with voluntary medication designed to prevent a recurrence. It is a chilling thought that there are currently in our prisons paedophiles who have killed, who have an expectation of eventual release.
	Tony Martin 15/8/00 Soon, the courts will be hearing the appeal of Tony Martin, the farmer convicted of murder after shooting a teenage burglar. We all have the right to protect ourselves and our property, but the question is, was reasonable force used in this case? Martin claimed to have discharged his shotgun in the dark from the top of the staircase. The forensic evidence told another story. The burglars were shot downstairs, as they fled, from close range. The murdered boy was hit in the back, close enough to receive the full force of the shot. No warning shots were fired. The jury obviously concluded that Martin had overstepped the mark of what was reasonable. It will be interesting to see if the appeal courts come to the same conclusion.
	Informers' Evidence 1/5/01 I don't wish to make any comments about specific cases, but the recent overturning of the conviction of Michael Stone does lead me to make some general observations. I feel that convictions brought about where the only evidence against the accused is conversations reported by informers must be regarded as unsafe. If the contents of such conversations consist of little more than "He told me he did it" I do not see how anyone can be reasonably convicted on this, especially if the informer has much to gain personally from making the statement. Obviously there are some statements which include facts which can then be checked and verified, and there are crimes where such statements only form part of the case and are backed up by forensic and other evidence. Some crimes are so terrible that one desperately wants to see someone convicted of it, so much so that the public can lose sight of the requirement that the person convicted is the right one. There is a temptation to skate over details, and forget that the case is not as good as one might like. What matters, however, over and above all of this, is the principle of justice, which must be done, whatever it takes.