Is there anyone who is not relieved that Ian Huntley is dead? There is nothing to say in defence of the Soham murderer, whose crimes were grievous and heinous. Yet modish liberals hoped to keep him alive for many years to come.
Such people fought to get rid of the death penalty. In my experience, they scorn people such as me, who think that it is right and just to execute some murderers.
To them, I am cruel and barbaric for even thinking this.
Yet who is barbaric now? Without going into the details of Huntley’s recent death, it was neither just nor civilised nor lawful. Yet it was brought about by the policies of smug liberal reformers who think they are nice.
Then there are the people who rejoice at the way prisoners such as Huntley must live in fear.
One Left-wing columnist, Brian Reade, wrote in 2000 about what he wanted to happen to the killer of an eight-year-old girl I shan’t name, who was abducted and murdered by a man I also shan’t name in case it gives anyone ideas.
Mr Reade said the death penalty was ‘civilised society stooping to the level of the depraved’.
This ‘civilised’ Leftist said hanging was ‘too good’ for the little girl’s killer, who at the time had not been caught.
Is there anyone who is not relieved that Ian Huntley is dead? There is nothing to say in defence of the Soham murderer, whose crimes were grievous and heinous
He argued: ‘A life spent dodging razor blades in his food, needing an armed guard whenever he takes a shower, fearing every night if he will get his throat slashed tomorrow is more fitting punishment.’
Mr Reade has got his wish. Since the girl’s murderer was sent to jail for a minimum of 40 years, he has been slashed or stabbed several times by other prisoners. It is hard to imagine that this will ever stop.
Yet it is happening in prisons run on our behalf, in the name of His Majesty the King.
It is plain silly to think that it can be prevented under current conditions. I think it will get worse.
To me this is a ghastly failure. Justice is not vengeance. We have justice precisely so that people do not take revenge, and so that authority is respected, by those who obey the law and by those who think of breaking it.
Any serious justice system should keep the power to execute and use it against people such as Huntley. And with that – before you try to tell me – we’d have to go back
to strong independent juries of mature adults, and unanimous verdicts, as keen to acquit the innocent as they are to convict the guilty.
The pleasure in drama that’s black and white
Jessica Reynolds in Barbara Taylor Bradford’s fabled bestseller A Woman Of Substance
Sometimes we all need to enjoy something with no subtlety at all, like a theme park or a cheeseburger, or Barbara Taylor Bradford’s fabled bestseller A Woman Of Substance.
In the new TV adaptation, there is not a single nuance. The aristocrats are bad and cynical; the poor and honest people are poor and honest. They are all beautiful.
I am not sure if I can stick it out to the last bucket, but there is some pleasure in being reminded of an era when good old-fashioned class hatred and snobbery were our biggest social problem.
I must be one of the last people alive who travelled on the old Oxford to Cambridge railway, one of the few east-west lines in our whole system. Even the horrible Dr Beeching did not want to shut it. But Labour Premier Harold Wilson mysteriously did so, in 1968.
Very quickly, people began to realise this was a grave mistake. Only the road lobby were pleased. But it takes long ages to restore a vandalised railway.
Nearly 60 years later, only a part of the line has been rebuilt. So you can get from Oxford to Milton Keynes. Only you can’t. Almost 500 days after the new line was declared ready for use, it is still not open.
A spanking new station at Winslow has yet to welcome a single passenger. Security for the empty facility is costing a fortune.
As far as I can discover, this madness is caused by the Transport Department which (gripped by an ancient obsession on this issue) wants to have no guards on the new trains. The unions say this is the last moment to make such a change. They point to the recent events at Huntingdon where a passenger went berserk on a train.
Whoever is right, it is crazy to have 50 miles of fine new track, on a key route, costing billions, not being used.
Open it now.
Hereditary peers were better than supine MPs
There’s a strong case for abolishing so-called ‘elected’ MPs. There is no case at all for abolishing hereditary peers. Yet the 2024 Labour manifesto falsely claimed that hereditaries were ‘indefensible’.
As so often in modern politics, what almost everyone believes is the opposite of the truth. MPs are picked for safe seats by secret party cabals, from lists of loyal hacks. They are chosen to obey their party chiefs, especially while that party is in government. Official bullies, known as whips, ensure they are obedient, and punish them severely if they are not.
Do you ever wonder why individual MPs are suddenly engulfed in scandal, and deselected? Now you know.
They owe their salaries and their futures to ruthless party bosses. They are completely unsuited to their main task – of holding the Government to account. They are Government serfs. They even heckle to order.
Hereditary peers, by contrast, may well owe their titles to Henry VIII or Charles II. But Henry and Charles are very, very dead, and can exercise no influence on them. Such peers could – and did – laugh at party whips. As a result, they could think, act and speak without fear or favour.
That is why the ‘democratic’ Commons has abolished the hereditary peers’ right to sit in Parliament. And it is why there has been so little real opposition to this nasty measure.
Obvious when you think about it. But who thinks these days?
Certainly not ‘elected’ MPs.
