Another victory for justice...

Two months ago, I posted a blog about some young thugs who killed a husband and father in front of his son.

Yesterday, the convictions were overturned and the vermin freed. The court said that it could not be sure that the boys were responsible for pensioner Ernest Norton's death even they threw stones at him because he had heart problems.

Surely, his health problems were exacerbated by having stones thrown at him, being jeered and spat at? Who exacerbated those problems? The thugs throwing the stones. Therefore, they were responsible. Their convictions should stand.

Who would bet against those boys not ending up back in prison in the future?

Thugs murder a good man

Five boys, some as young as 12, were given custodial sentences today for stoning to death pensioner Ernest Norton as he played cricket with his son, James.

Amazingly, some were as young as 10 when they began pelting Mr Norton with stones and pieces of wood. He died of a heart attack after being struck twice on the head and face with stones, one rock the size of half a brick shattered his cheekbone. He died in front of his son.

The judge Warwick McKinnon described it as "a vicious, unprovoked attack". He told them: "Your behaviour was utterly disgraceful and criminally irresponsible. No sentence I can pass can restore the human life so needlessly taken by this mindless display of violence."

All the boys, who were found guilty of manslaughter in August, were given two years' detention. They are now appealing against their conviction.

Of course they are and some sappy social worker will say that they behaved in this appalling way because they were deprived. And no doubt in the borstal they will have access to the internet, computer games, television and pool tables.

Detective Chief Inspector Clive Heys said the case was a tragedy for Norton's family and for the boys themselves. "They will have a stain on their characters for the rest of their life," he said.

Who gives a toss about the boys? They had a choice in their actions. Mr Norton did not. He leaves a widow and a son and daughter.

The thugs will be out in probably a year or less. Does DCI Heys really believe it is a tragedy for them? Why is he even giving them a moment's thought? They are where they belong - behind bars.

They are not responsible for Mr Norton's manslaughter - they murdered him and should not be allowed out until they are very old men.

Criminal stupidity

I have several books on true crime on my shelves and a few are devoted to stupid criminals. This case takes some beating.

Stewart Monk, 28, of Ackerley Court, Ashford, Kent, who worked as an on-board trolley steward for Rail Gourmet on trains between Kent and London, admitted making 11 false bomb threats concerning Charing Cross and Ashford International stations.

A stupid thing to do at the best of times but Monk made nine of the threats from his own mobile phone.

He was sent to prison for two and a half years - presumably six months for his threats and two years for being terminally stupid.

The truth about Madeleine McCann that no one dare speak

The elephant in the room in the McCann case is that, sadly, Madeleine is almost certainly dead and probably died a day or two after she was kidnapped.

The police know this, the press this and the McCanns must also know this.

The couple are both doctors, middle-class, educated and presumably not naive yet there are news reports today that they are annoyed that the police did not tell them that they (the police) think their daughter is no longer alive.

Although, obviously, they want to cling to a hope - however forlorn, that Madeline is alive, they must realise that that is not the case.

Essex Murders

Just got the proof cover of my new book today and I think it looks fantastic, don't you?

New book

My new book - Essex Murders - is now listed on Amazon. It features around twenty gruesome homicides committed in God's own county from the seventeenth century up to the 1960s.

If you like true crime, it's one for your library.

We have lost a sense of proportion 2

To return to my earlier post, I'd like to make two points.

Would Clive Goodman and Glenn Mulcaire be languishing in a jail cell this morning had they tapped only the phones of celebrities and not those close to the royal family?

And shouldn't Helen Asprey, personal secretary to Princes William and Harry, Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton, the princes' private secretary, and Paddy Harverson, Prince Charles's communications secretary - the three members of staff whose phones were tapped - be sacked for gross stupidity?

After Squidgygate and Camillagate, all members of the royal staff must know that mobiles are not secure, so why would they be daft enough to leave sensitive information on voice mails?

We have lost a sense of proportion

Today we learned that at Exeter Crown Court, paedophile 46-year-old Keith Morris, from Newton Abbot, Devon, escaped jail after pleading guilty to three offences of causing a person under 16 to engage in sexual activity without consent and one of sexual activity with a child under 16.

Judge Graham Cottle released Morris, facing a maximum of 14 years in jail, on bail pending a pre-sentence report because of prison overcrowding. "If this case had been here last week it would have been over by now and he would be in Exeter Prison," Judge Cottle told the court.

Also today, journalist Clive Goodman was sentenced to four months in prison after pleading guilty to intercepting phone messages. On 29 November 2005 Goodman pleaded guilty to conspiracy to intercept communications without lawful authority, under the Criminal Law Act 1977.

The charges related to three members of the royal household (Helen Asprey, the personal secretary to Princes William and Harry, Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton, the princes' private secretary, and Paddy Harverson, Prince Charles's communications secretary), but the investigation found that targets also included David Blunkett, then home secretary, the minister David Miliband, the footballer Sol Campbell, and The Sun editor Rebekah Wade.

Home Secretary John Reid has recently told judges to jail only the most dangerous and serial offenders to ease prison overcrowding. Or possibly, Mr Reid reiterated sentencing guidelines.

I would not seek to defend Clive Goodman's actions which have cost him his reputation, his livelihood and, today, his liberty as well his boss, Andy Coulson, his job as well.

However, will the public interest be served by jailing a tabloid hack and letting a paedophile walk free?

Money money money

Following the murders of five prostitutes in Ipswich and the arrest of two men, the press have been interviewing some of the murdered women's colleagues.

I wonder if any of them have put their prices up and are now advertising themselves in the local newspaper/paper shop window with the legend "as seen on TV".

Cash for honours - the row rumbles on

Well, well, so Inspector Knacker of the Yard finally paid a visit to No 10 for "a chat" lasting two hours with Tony Blair over the "cash for honours" scandal.

And what a day to choose. Lord Stephens presented his report into the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. Meanwhile, in Suffolk police are investigating the murders of five prostitutes, found naked apart from their jewellery. If ever there was a day to bury bad news, this was it.

The PM's official spokesman denied that there was a link and some lickspittle Labour MP went on television to claim that "people cannot choose when they are interviewed by the police". Maybe "people" can't but the Prime Minister certainly can. Imagine the uproar if Knacker had turned up unannounced and Mr Blair was otherwise engaged. "Sorry, the PM can't see you today - he is off to Washington."

Mr Blair explained, "The particular issues concerned were not for honours given by me as a prime minister for public service. On the contrary, they were nominated by me as a party leader for party service. That's the basic distinction that lies at the heart of this."

Hang on a second. Many of the donors were not Labour supporters so there is no way that they would have been working Labour peers. Many had given money to the Tories. And why were the donations kept secret? Does Mr Blair really expect us to believe him?

No 10 is a formidable spinning machine. They knew exactly what was going on and how much news coverage could be expected.

Now they are saying that it is all over and the police won't be interviewing Mr Blair again. Hmm, maybe, maybe not.