On Wednesday 28 March 2018, the High Court handed down its landmark judgment in the case of John Worboys, upholding the challenge by two of his victims to the Parole Board’s decision to release him. The judgment runs to over fifty pages and does not make for easy reading, so here’s my breakdown of this unusual and complex case for iNews.
Reblogged this on | truthaholics and commented:
“On Wednesday 28 March 2018, the High Court handed down its landmark judgment in the case of John Worboys, upholding the challenge by two of his victims to the Parole Board’s decision to release him. The judgment runs to over fifty pages and does not make for easy reading, so here’s my breakdown of this unusual and complex case for iNews.”
You comment “the distinguishing feature is that all those other cases involved the Parole Board making erroneous determinations on release that adversely affected prisoners, who, one infers, are of significantly less worth to the Justice Secretary than adversely affected victims”. Isn’t it also the case that erroneous decisions to release dangerous prisoners might adversely affect the general public, entitling the Justice Secretary to weigh its interests alongside those of prisoner and victims when considering redress? While acknowledging the point that legal tests for parole and open custody differ, the seemingly lackadaisical approach taken by the Board to the question of Worboys’ reformation produced an error of potential impact beyond the known victims, sufficiently egregious to warrant an enforced resignation.