Murdered teacher's widow threatened

Former Member

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7163949.stm

It is being reported that Frances Lawrence (widow of Headteacher Phillip Lawrence, who was stabbed to death by Learco Chindamo in 1995) has been threatened by two men who told her "not to talk about Learco again to anyone - or people might get angry".

Her home was later burgled, though the thieves only stole things relating to the murder, documents and letters.

What I am at an absolute loss to comprehend, is how this young man will shortley be released after having been assessed as a 'low' threat of reoffending. He still has people willing to go through this on his behalf; to threaten the widow of the man he killed, yet he is a 'low risk'.

When they wanted to deport Learco, I was on the side that said we had accepted him as one of our citizens (he was here for nine years previous to the murder) so we would have to deal with him.

But after reading this I just don't know; and my instinct is at first to protect the victim (the widow) and then worry about Learco.

Just wondered what others think?

Former Member

throw that murdering little cunt out of the country as soon as possible, we have to many of our own problems

Former Member

but presumably there wasn't any evidence to say that Learco Chindamo put them up to it. otherwise he would be serving longer inside for witness intimidation and burglary. it might seem obvious but without actually proving it its difficult establish that he is a 'high risk' to society and shouldn't be released.

Former Member

otter wrote: »

but presumably there wasn't any evidence to say that Learco Chindamo put them up to it. otherwise he would be serving longer inside for witness intimidation and burglary. it might seem obvious but without actually proving it its difficult establish that he is a 'high risk' to society and shouldn't be released.

After over 10 years in prison, unless you're a crime lord it's unlikely people will go round and make threats without being persuaded to first.

Former Member

Question of the week - will the Parole Board show that they have teeth, and refuse to let him go? Or will they prove themselves to be a bunch of soppy liberals by putting a criminal's rights over the victims?

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote: »

Question of the week - will the Parole Board show that they have teeth, and refuse to let him go? Or will they prove themselves to be a bunch of soppy liberals by putting a criminal's rights over the victims?

They know he's responsible, we know he's responsible, but without evidence they will just release him.

Former Member

Whowhere wrote: »

They know he's responsible, we know he's responsible, but without evidence they will just release him.

Surely it's up to them? They don't *have* to let him go?

Former Member

Whowhere wrote: »

They know he's responsible, we know he's responsible, but without evidence they will just release him.

In other words, they WILL prove themselves to be a bunch of soppy liberals by releasing a potentially very dangerous man on the streets. If anyone ends up injured or dead because this man's back on the streets, the Parole Board will have blood on their hands.

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote: »

they WILL prove themselves to be a bunch of soppy liberals

but that has nothing to do with it. it doesn't matter what people believe it only matters what can be proven. at the end of the day they need evidence. thats the way the law works. end of.