Sophie Lancaster memory should not be disrespected in this wayOctober 15 2015
8 July 2014
The CWU Youth National committee were shocked to read the newsthis weekend that Danny Hulme, jailed for grievous bodily harm with intent in connection with the attack of Sophie Lancaster and her boyfriend, Robert Maltby, is to have his parole license amended so he could visit Rossendale, the home of Robert, much earlier – despite a 10 year restriction being originally enforced.
Young members who attended the National Youth Education Event in Blackpool in November will recall the jaw dropping presentation given by Sophie’s Mother, Syliva Lancaster, highlighting the brutal attack which resulted in the death of Sophie – all because she dressed differently to her attackers. Sophie begged the gang to stop attacking her boyfriend Robert Maltby, when they turned on her and kicked and stamped her to death.
I think it is an insult to the memory of Sophie that one of her attackers is to have their parole restrictions upon release relaxed. Although Mr Hulme admitted attacking Sophie’s boyfriend, I think it’s an absolute disgrace that a reduction in the restrictions is to be considered and leaves the question of other members of the ‘gang’ submitting similar requests, who are currently serving life sentences for murder.
I think the parole board need to understand that although Mr Hulme didn’t deal the deciding blow to Sophie, the attack was a joint enterprise of hate, and all involved are in my eyes, equally culpable in the death of Sophie and the severe injuries inflicted to her boyfriend Robert Maltby. Joint Enterprise charges are rightly notorious, but I think this is one instance where such an approach was correct.
A motion was carried unanimously at CWU Youth conference and to CWU General Conference to raise the awareness of prejudice against alternative subcultures. As part of our commitment to the organisation,
In addition to a local MP’s, the CWU Youth National Committee will be writing to Chris Grayling (Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice) to impress upon him the need for the parole board to reconsider their stance in this matter.