I AGREE with Lorraine (Mailbag February 1 “Anger at ‘axe man’ case”). There are issues regarding the jailing of the now media-made infamous David Bleazard.
It has to be asked if the incident had not concerned HRH but a celebrity or unpopular politician would it have even gone to court?
Obviously, given the nature of the event there were public safety issues and the predicament placed upon the police in how they would have been forced to respond should a serious incident have occurred.
However, was this real justification for the book being thrown so heavily? It would seem the law is relative in the respect that it offers more protection to people in authority and status more than it does Mr Ordinary.
If I and another Mr Ordinary were to be involved in an altercation in the street how more or less likely are we to end up in court than if it were to involve a policeman, security guard or someone else in a uniform or authority?
On re-reading the Examiner coverage I was interested to note that the trial had only gone ahead after an unnamed police inspector pressured the Crown Prosecution Service, who had sensibly tried to drop the matter.
In my view this could have made it a political show trial and shows the CPS are not as impartial as they were meant to be when established. Arguably there was pressure from “above” to get a result and example made. Clearly if they are out to get you they inevitably do.
So was this a case of rough justice or a lesson to those of us who would go out with an axe to grind?