Why I believe keeping Ronald Biggs in prison is wrong

By Gary Elsby

The decision by Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, to ignore the recommendation to release Ronald Biggs from his 30 year prison sentence on ‘compassionate grounds’ in my view is wholly wrong.

Ronald Biggs is 79 years old, unable to walk, talk or feed himself and has suffered two strokes and three brain haemorrhages and to date has served 10 years of his sentence.

The grounds for which Jack Straw has refused his release from custody is down to Mr. Biggs being ‘wholly unrepentant’ regarding his role in one of the biggest financial crimes of the last Century. Mr Straw also points out that Mr. Biggs “outrageously courted the press during his 35 years on the run which showed no respect for British justice”.

The British Justice system is based on the punishment and rehabilitation – attributes supposedly held in equal regard – and it is said that a Country can be judged by the way it treats its criminals within the prison system.

When a prisoner is considered unable to feed themselves, we have to wonder whether they should be considered as being able to commit further crimes and in the case of Ronald Biggs we can be assured that that ability is absolutely nil.

Many prisoners, having served out their time in a correct and acceptable manner, do not have to give this assurance to the public at large and some do go on to be involved in further crimes but the rehabilitation of offenders is something that this Country can pride itself on with the vast majority of prisoners going on to lead a crime free and worthwhile lives.

But the compassion of the Nation State as a whole belongs to Society as a whole and is embedded in every community in the land. Therefore, for this Country to deny the right of the Nation State to express our compassion to an aged prisoner who is unable to reoffend is a crime in itself upon our collective social community.

Ronald Biggs may have had contempt for the authorities in his misspent youth and he may be wholly unrepentant of his part in a train robbery but now it is all in his mind as his own body keeps him prisoner.

How can Great Britain express a desire for foreign Nation States to uphold the world order of fairness and restraint and use this Country as the role model, when we use punitive and unnecessary measures to persecute a dying man by disallowing his final days to the care of his family?

Jack Straw may be speaking for the ‘justice system’ of Great Britain but that does not mean he speaks for Great Britain herself or for the compassion of the people of Great Britain – the sole owner of compassion is society itself.

Jack Straw should do the decent thing and reverse this decision on compassionate grounds as it serves the British interest in no way whatsoever.