Prisoner votes: killer John Hirst celebrates with ‘champagne and a spliff’
The UK government says it will comply with the ECHR judgment – but the decision, judging by twitter and media responses, is not popular.
John Hirst celebrated with a video last night. The irony is that his *crowing* in the video may irritate some and trivialise and demean the issue.
I suspect that the Prime Minister will have to consider more engagement with Hirst….given this tweet from @jailhouselawyer (John Hirst) tonight. ?
You may find the podcast I did with Carl Gardner of some interest.
And.. while we are on the subject of unpleasant behaviour – although this is serious if proven…
The Guardian reports tonight…..
Mark Saunders officer ‘planted song titles’ in evidence
• Firearms officer used song titles in inquest evidence
• Marksman may have fired shot that killed Mark Saunders
• Songs included Enough is Enough and Point of No Return
A Metropolitan police firearms officer who may have fired the shot that killed barrister Mark Saunders has been removed from firearms duty after allegedly inserting song titles into his oral evidence at the dead man’s inquest.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission said it is investigating the unnamed officer, who gave evidence as Alpha Zulu 8 or AZ8, after it emerged that he had been reprimanded by his superior shortly after giving evidence on 27 September.
Saunders was shot dead by firearms officers in May 2008, following a five-hour armed standoff at his flat in Chelsea, west London. Last month a jury at Westminster crown court ruled that the barrister, who was an alcoholic and armed with a 12-bore shotgun during the siege, had been killed lawfully.
The inquest heard that AZ8, who was stationed on an adjoining conservatory rooftop was one of two officers who may have fired the fatal shot.
An examination of the transcript shows that evidence given by AZ8 contained a number of phrases which are also the titles of songs, including Enough is Enough by Donna Summer, Point of No Return by Buzzcocks, Line of Fire by Journey, Quiet Moments by Chris de Burgh, Kicking Myself by As Tall As Lions and Fuck My Old Boots by the Membranes.
Sources close to the Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, said he was “furious” that anyone could show such “insensitivity and lack of judgment” during the high-profile hearing.
Presumably Max Clifford didn’t talk him through that one. I think a blog post on a par with the guest post he did for here would have been absolutely ideal. Getting half cut on YouTube on the other hand is less so. The problem all this time has been the perception that prisoners are less human than the rest of us and so deserve fewer rights.
So what? The law’s the law whether you like Hirst or not.
Certainly, but he’s a figurehead in prisoners’ rights reform. The more people like him the better his cause goes.
The law’s the law whether you like Hirst or not but it was unpopular and controversial enough to begin with.
James C / Stephen
The law is the law. Politics and public opinion can change law.
I was more than happy to give John Hirst a guest post here. The issue is important and compliance with the judgment is unavoidable.
There are, however, many who do not agree with the judgment (which is fine, but unprofitable in terms of change, ultimately) or the concept – an entirely different matter as you know.
I don’t actually have a problem with prisoners getting the vote. I suspect, as with the population generally, than less than 50% will exercise their right.
I do, however, think there are far more important civil liberties issues for the Coalition Government to deal with – and, I hope they do.
With John Hirst you aren’t dealing with somebody that is exactly sensitive to the feelings of others (at least if the Guardian article and this little video is anything to go by). It’s clear that he has largely defined himself by his relationship with authority and is single minded.
There are more important issues, but I’m personally a bit concerned exactly where the boundary line between democracy and judicial judgement. From an HR point of view, I think the votes for prisoners issue is a marginal one most appropriate for local democratic decisions. The ECHR decisons should surely be more about the absolutes – there is a clear possibility of “mission creep” as I rather suspect interpretation might be going beyond what the original signatories expected.
Of course it would be extremely difficult to change the scope now given the number of countries that would have to agree to modification. I can’t see it happening.
One wonders if there are any more such controversial issues on the way. I rather suspect there might be.
Steve – There may well be other issues in other fields to come.
As for Hirst – game over. The government complies. He can no longer define himself by reference to this issue.
It will pass into history. The papers may well rage for a few days – but most people will understand the legal basis for government compliance – and the positives of human rights observance far outweigh this issue which Hirst has trivialised with his video performance.
So if this songs in a court case is true, then shouldnt the officer involved firstly be facing the inside of a jail cell for a month for contempt of court, and secondly be out of a job instantly, as his evidence is no longer trustworthy?
On the songs issues, then I’m holding judgement. It could be coincidence – after all, songs deal in cliches and it’s my limited experience of police statements, that they deal in them too. So maybe it’s a coincidence.
I think there would have to be evidence that this was either beyond coincidence (and it would be an interesting game for a statistician), or there would have to be evidence that song titles had been inserted as some sort of game.
I think we need to wait and see what appears. I would say no more at this stage.
Steve – agree… hence my caveat *if proven*.
It is a fairly common game – but not, I would have hoped, in a serious criminal trial or, as here, an inquest into a tragic death.
actors sometimes do it in the theatre at the end of a long run – i always thought it was short-changing the audience. it’s just an allegation right now so maybe we should all hold fire.
and maybe john hirst deserves his celebration. there are many people who pursue less savoury ends and don’t get the same stick. the theory is that he has done his time. quite why people still feel they have the right to think they are better than him i’m not sure (oh they do – just see the comments on that post!). plenty of people need to get of their high horses and take a look in the mirror.
we need to have a bit of humility if we are all to keep existing.
SW – Re Hirst: it may have something to do with the killing of a defenceless woman. If Hirst had been a Bank Robber or Bernie Madoff – probably a different reaction?
@simply wondered
“quite why people still feel they have the right to think they are better than him i’m not sure”
I’m almost speechless at that one. The crime he committed was horrendous, he has not expressed any remorse and his view that having served his time he is now on the same moral level as others as he’s paid his due to society is insulting (read the Guardian interview if you doubt that).
Now there have been cases of criminals that have committed grave crimes who have proven through their later conduct that they are rehabilitated, they have given something back to society and have some understanding over what they did. John Hirst is not one of those.
If you are placing him on some sort of moral equivalence with those who don’t commit the horrendous crime that he did and just live quiet, responsible lives, then that strikes me as a view which surely cannot be justified.
It may be that John Hirst deserves some understanding for what was a very difficult childhood, and whatever personality issues he has, but to take it further is ridiculous. I’m simply shocked and appalled.
Police shooting the wrong chap on the underground.
Sharpshooters dropping song references into legal proceedings.
Prisoners voting on the political rudder for an essentially law-abiding electorate.
HMS Astute being undone by old charts.
Cargo planes shipping bombs around the globe going undetected except for a tip-off.
Is it 1970?
Getting to 2010 must have cost an astronomical amount, but for what?
Polleetickle : I do wonder sometimes… I was in Knightsbridge and saw Harrods Bomb go off… and took a Swedish girlfriend to Imperial War Museum – and showed her plaque above door which stated that British Armed Forces were not involved in warfare somewhere in the world in only one year in 20th century!
Change?
The tasteless YouTube spectacle simply reinforces my belief that this has little to do with the Human Rights of prisoners and is more of a crusade by Hirst.
He seems to revel in the notoriety he has gained as a result of his legal challenge and his taunting of Cameon with regards to a white flag of surrender gives an insight into his motives.
John Hirst may well have secured prisoners the vote, but in doing so has revealed a deeply unpleasant man who will I suspect become a social pariah.
His gloating has outraged many people, including the Editors of the Tabloids. I suspect his every move will be scrutinised by them…
Steelrain – you did flag that up in an earlier post of mine and you are almost certainly right.
It is good that TV/Media are giving him oxygen…. I would use the metaphor rope to hang himself with… but that would be inelegant… so i won’t.
The fact that he is abusive – and was to me after I let him post – doesn’t trouble me at all. I find the lack of remorse deeply troubling – is this a factor of Asperger? i don’t know enough about the condition.
It is an important issue – and I understand the anger. the anti-europe harrumphing of politicians is of less concern. That is what politicians who are anti-Europe do.
the important principle is (a) What human Rights do we want to have in all our lives and (b) Important to comply with courts designed to over see law.
I don’t enjoy the smoking ban. I now smoke outside because the law says I must. I observe the law on this not because I am supine but because I believe in our democracy!
Our democracy decrees that the rights of non-smokers are higher in public places… fair enough.
I can lobby peacefully to change the law…. a deliberately facile metaphor, of course… but the principle of protest and our right to form the laws of our country is paramount – but once we do, it is only right that we comply with judgments of the courts which supervise our laws….
The danger with this publicity on prisoners votes is that it will put people off the many good things in our Human Rights Law and The European convention (which Britain played a significant part in designing after the WWII)
Not keen on chucking babies out with bath water…. keen on rational, considered, debate…..
Hirst is unlikely ever to be in step with public opinion. I no longer have to follow his tweets or thoughts. I said I would give him a platform. i did so.
I won’t be following what he has to say on this or other matters in future.
I have unfollowed – not because I am a snob or having a hissy fit – I have unfollowed simply because I do not care to hang out with those who are not tolerant of our wider society.
Andrew Neil gave John Hirst a very hard time on the BBC
http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2010/11/axe-killer-hirst-gets-creamed-by-andrew.html
But here’s a strange and bizarre coincidence. Not the first John Hirst he’s hammered on TV.
So which one did he give the hardest time?
As I have said before the general reaction to Hirst is ludicrous. The law was not brought in for his personal benefit and does not affect his position at all, since he is not a prisoner.
As for Cameron, perhaps he should tell us whether he thinks Lord Archer should be entitled to vote.
UK is also giving gun licences to people with a proven criminal history – and a suspected propensity for violance and exploitation.
Soft on crime, soft on criminals.