Campaigners plan to challenge any decision to release Lynette White’s killer

Martin Shipton

Campaigners are considering mounting a High Court challenge if the Parole Board decides that the notorious murderer Jeffrey Gafoor should be released.

In 1988 Gafoor stabbed Lynette White, a 20 year-old sex worker, around 60 times to death in her flat in the Butetown district of Cardiff.

Five black men were arrested for the crime, and three of them were subsequently convicted of murder and jailed for life. Later their convictions were quashed by the Court of Appeal.

Eventually, following advances in DNA technology, Gafoor, a white security guard, was convicted of the murder in 2003. He was also jailed for life, and the sentencing judge said he should serve a minimum of 13 years in prison.

The case is seen as one of the worst miscarriages of justice in British legal history.

Private

For the sixth time, Gafoor has now applied to the Parole Board to be released. A hearing of the board to discuss Gafoor’s potential release took place in private on Thursday October 3, despite applications that it should be held in public. A decision is likely to be announced within two weeks.

Satish Sekar, an investigative journalist who has written three books on the case and who urged the police to undertake the DNA tests that resulted in Gafoor’s conviction, said: “The hearing should have been open to the public as that is the only way that openness and transparency can be guaranteed. The process applied by the Parole Board in this case has left much to be desired as victims of Gafoor’s crime and conduct have been excluded again.

“The Cardiff Five [those wrongly accused of the murder] and their families are victims. The former Chief Constable of South Wales Police, Sir Anthony Burden, and the judge who imposed the tariff – in my opinion an inadequate one – acknowledge this by a written apology to the Cardiff Five and Lynette’s family, and in the judge’s case by calling Gafoor’s action in allowing men he knew to be innocent of a crime he knew he had committed to be jailed, the most serious aggravating factor.

“It is over 20 years since Burden’s apology and almost 19 since Mr Justice Royce said those things. In that time no effort has been made to trace all the victims of Gafoor’s crime and conduct. Despite me informing the Parole Board that there were victims who had not had their say, I am expected to contact these victims and explain their rights to them. This is not acceptable. They should have been traced and contacted by Victim Support.

Victims

He added: “I am very disappointed that Judge Rook [of the Parole Board] reached the decision to hold the hearing in private, misrepresenting my view in the process and seemingly denying that the Cardiff Five are victims of Gafoor. If they and their families are not victims in this case, then the word has no meaning.

“I asked the Parole Board to reconsider before considering Judicial Review. They did not have the courtesy to even acknowledge my email, let alone respond to it.

“As this hearing has been held in private, we have no assurance that Gafoor’s very recent diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) will be addressed in the context of what effect it has on whether the public is likely to be safe if he is released. How is his ASD being addressed?

“Are they considering the fact that evidence emerged in the 2011 trial [of police officers accused of ‘fitting up’ the Cardiff Five – the trial collapsed after documents went missing] that he expected reward for helping the police in their investigation of the grave injustice suffered by the Cardiff Five?

“How is the public expected to understand the process and this exceptional case when over 1,000 pages of evidence and the evidence heard by the Parole Board Panel occurs in secret?

“If the Panel concludes that it is safe to release him, it is likely that decision will be challenged either by the Secretary of State for Justice, Shabana Mahmood, or by Judicial Review. Initially we shall ask Ms Mahmood to intervene and use her powers to halt Gafoor’s release.

“A hearing in public would have enabled us all to understand both the process and this exceptional case. It is disappointing to put it mildly that yet again the public and many victims have been excluded. Actions speak far louder than words.”

‘Upsetting’

A relative of Lynette White who doesn’t wish to be identified told Nation.Cymru: “Being labelled as a ‘victim’ is deeply uncomfortable and upsetting. For over 35 years, I have been regarded as such due to the crime committed against a member of my family by Jeffrey Gafoor. The aftermath of his sickening, abhorrent act irreparably shattered my family in ways that can never be mended.

“I understand and respect that there are procedures, rules, and regulations governing how criminals are dealt with. However, in the case of Lynette White, I cannot comprehend nor appreciate the treatment of the remaining victims throughout this process. Official apologies and acknowledgments of grief and loss feel hollow – mere words without substance. While actions are said to speak louder than words, in this case the actions have been a series of incredulous mistakes, repeated over and over, mistakes that should never have occurred.

“Now, once again, Jeffery Gafoor is being considered for parole, and the process has been conducted privately. This should not be the case. As a ‘victim’, along with others, we have followed all the procedures required by the system, yet we are still excluded from hearing Gafoor’s plea for freedom, for various reasons, one of which was ‘time constraint’, even though this was out of our – the applicant’s/victim’s – control.

“The system appears one-sided, seemingly favouring the criminal over the victim. In today’s society, particularly in light of this case – one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in British history – it is only reasonable to expect that the surviving victims would be treated with the utmost respect, and that the system would be transparent, allowing all to see the process clearly.

“While the average person may not need to be versed in law or the criminal justice system, it would be immensely helpful for anyone caught in such circumstances through no fault of their own to understand the process. This clarity would help victims to move forward, knowing that every possible measure was taken to support them. However, this has not been the case.”

The Parole Board has taken the view that there was no need to hold the hearing in public. Gafoor’s lawyer argued that his client would find that stressful.