Jeffrey Gafoor is not the only British killer to allow innocent people to suffer for his crime, but he was the first to be brought to justice. It is fairly obvious that he will not be the last. Developments in forensic science, especially in DNA testing systems meant that it was likely that at least some miscarriages of justice could now be resolved. Gafoor is as despicable a criminal as one could have the misfortune to come across. Not only was he capable of a vicious murder, but he was content to allow innocent men and their families to suffer for his crime.

No appeal to his sense of decency could have persuaded him to own up to his crime earlier, but self-preservation may have succeeded. The murder of Lynette White could not have been detected correctly in 1988. Forensic science had to catch up. It has now and other crimes that have been unsolved or resulted in wrongful convictions can now be resolved correctly.

We believe that the tariff imposed on Gafoor is not only an insult to the memory of Lynette White and ordeal of the Cardiff Five, but a positive invitation to people of his ilk to take their chances by refusing to come forward. Gafoor murdered a young woman in an atrocious fashion and he was treated more leniently than the innocent men he allowed to be convicted for his crime. What kind of message does that send out? Why would any real murderer own up to their crimes even if innocent people suffer if they can expect to be treated more leniently than the innocent if ever they are caught. Consequently, Gafoor's case sets a dreadful precedent.

*****

It is understandable that prior to his conviction law-makers had not considered the possibility that a miscarriage of justice could be resolved in this fashion, but it has happened now and must be dealt with. It ought to be a criminal offence to knowingly allow an innocent person to suffer wrongful arrest. Mechanisms to correct miscarriages of justice after they have occurred is not enough, if they could be prevented and a simple change in the law may achieve that end.

We were so disgusted by the Gafoor case that we proposed reform of the tariff system.1 The Law Commission did not think that reform was necessary as Mr Justice Royce took the fact that Gafoor allowed innocent men to go to prison for a crime he knew he had committed into account in determining the appropriate tariff. Presumably, it must believe that the most brutal murder of its type and allowing innocent men to serve sixteen years for a crime he committed only outweighs a guilty plea and assisting the police investigation into what went wrong by one year. And the Ministry of Justice points out that there are already mechanisms to correct miscarriages of justice. Exactly what measures are in place to prevent them occurring in the first place?

This was an entirely preventable miscarriage of justice. Lives have been wrecked and Gafoor bears responsibility for much of that. The fact that he failed to come forward when it could have made a difference shows that people of his ilk must be induced to do so. The opinions of the Law Commission and Ministry of Justice do nothing but encourage the Gafoors of the world to take their chances that they will evade capture and conviction. After all the consequences of not coming forward are virtually non-existent, which means that not only will preventable miscarriages of justice continue to occur, but the beneficiaries of those crimes against justice will continue to be the real perpetrators. Can there be a greater affront to justice than this?