Arbitrary Justice - Chindamo and a Dorset Granny

Convicted criminals can also appeal to remain in the UK by claiming that deportation would breach their right to a family life. This includes if they only lived in their country of origin for a short time and if their family, such as a spouse or children, is based in the UK. Sometimes a court may decide they cannot be repatriated for these reasons even if they pose a risk to the public.
The Daily Telegraph, on the Human Rights Act.

This is the reason that the Murderer of Headmaster Philip Lawrence, Learco Chindamo, has remained in this country. He was released on parole and has now been arrested again for a serious criminal offense.

Labour blamed European Union Law. Speaking in 2007, the then Home Secretary, Jack Straw said:
It is very probable that most of this issue arises not from the Human Rights Act but from European Union law.
"We are very vigorously appealing this. This was not our expectation that this man would be open to live in this country upon his release." Did Straw or his colleagues do anything about it? No, they did not.

Documents now released by the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal said Chindamo's right to remain in the UK was "compelling" under the terms of a 2004 EU directive.

So, let us get this one straight shall we? A convicted murderer cannot be sent back to his country of origin, in this case Italy, because it breaches his human rights. This would be a cruel twist of the knife. But it goes further than that.

A Dorset grandmother, Joan Wakely, faces expulsion from this country, after being a law abiding resident for 65 years, because apparently she is a Canadian citizen.

This is what officialdom has to say:

Long residence in the UK is not, on its own, a sufficient qualification to remain here indefinitely. 

Well, that's just fine and hunky dory then.Mrs Wakely has been here for 65 years, apparently as a law-abiding citizen, and the authorities are threatening to deport her.

You know what is right and wrong. You know how scandalous this arbitrary dispensing of justice is, so how come the machinery of government does not?

What we have here is a scumbag, whose tenuous claim to human rights, takes precedence over someone who, to all intents and purposes is British and ordinary. This is a travesty of justice, dispensed by those whose job it is to be the guardians of justice. In the case of Chindamo, his persistent use of legal loopholes, courtesy of the EU, to stay in this country, despite his being an utter cunt, is beyond belief.

It is time that this lacklustre Coalition took some difficult decisions. We are living in a Dystopia, predicated on political correctness and existential nihilism that believes in nothing and has no sense of what it evidently right and what is evidently wrong.


Rebel Saint said...

And whist we're on this case and the dispensing of justice (or should it be dispensing with justice?), I read that the murdering scumbag was sentenced to be detained indefinitely but was released after 12 years. Er ... when did words seize to have their plain meaning?

Richard said...

"Detained indefinitely" means "detained until you've said sorry and promised not to do it again". The length of "indeterminate" sentence depands on how full the gaols are getting these days.

WW, excellent post, and a good spot to bring these two stories together. It's scarcely believable.