Huntley jackpot will be short lived

A COURT found him guilty of killing Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman and quite rightly he has been thrown behind bars for a long time, but there has been a public outcry after it was revealed that murderer Ian Huntley is pursuing a compensation claim against the Prison Service after his throat was slashed in a makeshift knife attack.

You’re almost compelled to be against this claim because of what Huntley has done and the Daily Fail certainly sings to its lynch mob with evocative tirades that might as well demand Huntley’s public execution in every sentence. The general gist is, of course, that because Huntley killed children he should be fair game for anyone to make attempts to kill him and should receive no protection from law.

Unfortunately (or fortunately) the law does offer some guarantees of protection to Mr Huntley to prevent him being thrown to the lions, and if neglect is found then he should receive the compensation that anyone else would be entitled to in the same situation.

The fact that he’s a child killer is not an argument in this case. A judge gave him his punishment for that. He’s now a person in prison that was almost murdered because, he alleges, the Prison Service did not protect him relative to his own notoriety.

Yes, soldiers wounded in battle get peanuts. Yes, female police officers that get called sexist names get over half a million pounds. Both are scandalous. But we’re in a blame culture dominated by ludicrous compensation claims and Huntley is not only taking advantage of that like millions of other people do every year but he probably has a stronger case than most people that phone up Injury Lawyers 4 u.

Some people have said that Huntley should be denied legal aid to bring this to court and that it is morally wrong for him to embark on his pointless crusade. Maybe it is. But our society was not formed off the back of a knee jerk reaction from a Daily Fail extremist, it was formed as an inclusive system of laws that protect everyone, including people in prison regardless of what they have done. Tinpot dictators might chop and change laws to suit their daily whim, but last time I looked England was not run by one.

There is the age-old argument that if we had capital punishment then Huntley wouldn’t be able to sue. True enough, but you have to be realistic: the Lisbon Treaty that Labour signed us up to forbids the death penalty.

Linking this claim to the murders that Huntley committed is a failure of common sense. Of course what he did was horrific, but why should he, as someone from the Victims of Crime Trust said, drop the case if he felt remorse for what he had done? Is it the notion that he is seeking to profit from being a kiddie killer? This is a very short-sighted view.

That my country’s government would pay compensation to a child killer isn’t something I am proud of, but in this case if what Huntley alleges is found to be true then certainly the Prison Service deserves the humiliation for allowing it to happen. And quite honestly I think it is right for Huntley to receive some compensation as well.

The coup de grâce will be, of course, that as soon as he has any money the Wells and Chapman families will sue it all off him.