Report comment

It is only a furore because no one has turned around and said it is quite right and proper that these discussions are in camera and the decision private.

We quite rightly keep jury discussions sub rosa and I can see there being no proper basis for discussions of the parole board being any different: to suggest otherwise is just whipping up what will generally be a hysterical mob.

We removed the decision as to the tarrif for lifers / decisions to release mandatory lifers from the Home Secretary decades ago (at least two?) and to suggest that there should be public scrutiny of this quasi judicial function on the basis 'that justice should be seen to be done' is both ignorant (as justice was done when the sentence was passed) and dangerous as it allows for a danagerous degree of bias in the system.

Compare how the public would react to the decision to release a rapist of a 13 year old after 6 months custody.

Now run the same thought experiment but where the prisoner is a well known and highly respected film director beloved by those on the left of politics.

A very poor show by Nick Hawkins and the politicians seeking to make mischief.