Jeffrey Gafoor can be considered for release by the Parole Board as early as February 2016. Had the Cardiff Three not had their convictions quashed in December 1992 they would only just have become eligible for parole recently, but they would have had significant difficulties that Gafoor does not and would not have faced. They did not plead guilty and they did not show remorse – they could not because they did not commit the crime they were convicted of. At that time they could not have been paroled as they would have been considered a continuing risk to the public due to their failure to address their offending behaviour and show remorse. And suppose they decided to lie and express remorse; they would then be asked to detail what happened – something they could not do as to this day they do not know.

They would continue to be considered a risk, unsafe to parole, while the truly guilty Gafoor gets credit for pleading guilty fifteen years too late. He gets credit despite allowing men he knew to be innocent to face two trials. He gets credit despite allowing three of them to be wrongfully convicted. He gets credit despite allowing five innocent men to serve a total of sixteen years of hard prison time for a crime he knew for certain that they were innocent of. He gets credit despite failing to assist in their appeal, despite knowing that the Cardiff Three were innocent. He gets credit despite allowing them to endure a relentless and unjustifiable whispering campaign that ruined the lives of the Cardiff Five and their families. He apologised to both Lynette White's family and the Cardiff Three when he pleaded guilty, but he did so through his lead counsel John Charles Rees QC, which is too little too late. He had several opportunities over fifteen years to take responsibility for his crime. He declined to do so. He deserves no credit at all for taking responsibility when he had no option but to do so.

Had it not been for advances in forensic science and investigators who were determined to solve this terrible murder Gafoor would never have come forward. Why then does he get any credit for an early guilty plea? As far as the court processes are concerned it may have been comparatively early, but as far as justice is concerned it is fifteen years too late and he deserves not only no credit, but contempt too.

Gafoor also received credit for assisting the police with their ongoing investigation into what went wrong with the original investigation. While he did not single out the Cardiff Five for wrongful arrest and prosecution, he alone held the information that could have cleared them, but he kept silent. He is at least partially responsible for necessitating the investigation that he assisted police with, so why does he receive or deserve credit for it?

When Gafoor finally appears before the Parole Board, he will be able to say that he pleaded guilty early in the court process. He can say that he assisted the inquiry into what went wrong in the original investigation. He can show that he has shown remorse – he at least has a lot to be remorseful over – and he can show that he is unlikely to be a risk to the public as apart from an assault on a colleague in 1992 he had no other convictions in the eleven years before he was brought to justice. In other words, there is a real possibility that Gafoor will be granted freedom on his first appearance before the Parole Board. If that happens the real murderer of Lynette White will have served less time in prison for that appalling crime than five innocent men that he allowed to stand trial for his crime. Where is the justice in that?

by Satish Sekar © Satish Sekar (December 26th 2008)