Bryan was sent to a secure hospital after admitting beating 20-year-old shop assistant Nisha Sheth to death with a hammer as she worked in her family's clothes shop in Chelsea, south-west London, in 1993.
But he was freed in 2001 after applying to a health review tribunal.
Like, hello ? BNFL release a smoke alarm's worth of rads into the Irish Sea and the Left is in favour of bringing back public execution, but the beardey-weirdies release a cannibal onto our streets and suddenly we're in for a rousing chorus of 'That's Life!'. Where's their corporate manslaughter now ?
History is full of tragedies which happen when a series of unrelated and unlikely happenings all come together at once. This isn't one of them. At every stage in this fiasco a common theme emerges: Liberalism.
Take, for example, the whole question of the mental health tribunal system. Let's not call the experts useless. On the contrary, in creating a mythology, a mix of Liberal posturing and Voodoo science, that proved to be of no use whatsoever in, uh, actually making predictions (pretty much the point of real science) the experts were positively harmful. If you randomly picked a guy off the number 32 bus he wouldn't have done as badly as the supposed experts. It takes a peculiar mix of bad science and bad politics to reach the point where releasing a proven killer seems like a good idea.
But that's the thing: the self-same people who get to decide if Mr S O Ciopath is cured are the ones whose careers depend on pushing the idea that all a whackjob really needs is the cerebral equivalent of an oil change and suddenly he's Joe Normal (but Conservatives are still nuts)! It's like staffing the National Institute for Clinical Excellence with homeopaths - what do you think they're going to say ? Yet, what is Liberalism if not exactly this kind of deference to unaccountable, soi dissant experts combined with contempt for Joe Public ?
Or consider the initial sentence. Here we have a bloke guilty of a senseless murder yet first the Liberals declare him insane, meaning he doesn't go to prison, then they declare him sane, meaning he's out on the streets after only eight years. Whatever the Left had to do to get a dangerous predator off the hook, they did it. This is what happens when your highest moral aim is non-judgementalism - you can't spot absolute evil even when it's looking you in the gouged-out eye.
Most characteristic of all though, is the Liberals Gold Star ability to learn from their mistakes:
The prosecution accepted not guilty pleas to murder charges because of the weight of psychiatric evidence.Haven't we heard that somewhere before ?
Still, it's not all bad news:
He went on to kill Richard Loudwell, 59, at Broadmoor special hospita ….who had admitted the manslaughter of 89-year-old Joan Smyth at her home in Rainham, Kent, in December 2002.Now that's rehabilitation. I recommend group therapy with Ian Huntley.
In the comments Steve points to this post, which examines the Left's position on crime from an Objectivist persepective. I, myself, prefer the Gramscian (or anti-Gramscian ?) perspective, but it does raise interesting points and, again, recognises the central fact that Liberals are so bad at fighting crime in large part because they don't actually see it as crime.