The principle that EU nationals are to be treated in most resepcts just like citizens of the 'host' country, and can only be deported back to their home country if they are a manifest threat to public security, safety etc. is 30 years old. I am going to buck the trend on this page, I'm afraid, and opine that Philip Lawrence's killer, notwithstading the horror of his crime 13 years ago, must now be treated fairly and due regard had to his present status. This includes the progress he has made towards reform and rehabilitation while, as well as the fact that he has spent most of his life here (including time before he went to prison), speaks no Italian and is now to most intents and purposes, British in all but name. He must, in short be treated like anyone else who has committed crimes of similar magnitude, and has paid the penalty dealt them. Fortunately or unfortunately, Justice is blind.

JR Formosa, London, UK

Chindamo has a life sentence and if he really is the threat that the Home Office maintains then he should not be released from prison.
Deportation is quite another matter and EU law seems to be quite simple - an EU citizen can effectively live anywhere in the EU and you can't pick and choose between EU citizens that you want in this country and those that you don't want here.
This is simply a consequence of being in the EU and don't imagine that this sort of case will ever be handled differently - none of the major political parties in this country, whatever they may say, will ever be able to do anything to change this.
Human rights law is just a red herring in this case.

John, Exeter, England

Yet again failed by the Judiciary.

Judges: Outside the Law. They conform to their arcane Legalese, never daring to push beyond the conscriptions of service. They cannot and dare not go beyond them. That is their profession. If they did so that would destroy them.

The Public: Subject to the Law. We must consent and trust in the Law and adhere to it. But in turn we distrust and hate the imoveablity of the Judiciary. We hate and utterly despise these people who's professional course has drifted far from basic common sense and further away from the wishes of the people. This is simply not fair and the term Ivory Towers expresses it most simply. Leave your books. Listen.

Your Profession then, is in essence legal accountancy. And guarding your own. You think of yourselves as quite noble yet everybody hates you (apart from Guardian Readers). You are rich beyond avarice. too.

Judge.. If i saw you stabbed in street.. I'd leave you.. And I hate myself for saying that.

Adey Blackwell, Haringdy, UK

So we have a person who is a risk to the public but "is not likely to re-offend". What kind of meaningless psycho-babble is that?
If the man is a risk then either he does not get out of jail or we send him back where he came from.
Maybe the government and the courts forgotten who they were appointed to defend? MP's and judges live (very well) at our expense, incuding their pension benefits and perks. Protect the hand that feeds you first and then worry about the rest! A government that cannot maintain safety on the streets needs to get out of office now.

KR, Stockport,

As one newspaper put it, total anarchy rules UK ok. When will the politicians, lawmakers, dogooders, liberals of all shades realise that what a common man needs is a sense of security when he or she walks down the road. Lawyers, judges and beaurocrats , labour politicians, have adulterated the ethnic content of this country. We all feel lost amongst the streets that appear to be a jungle of all races. Families, schools, society - their authority diminished by media culture.. Give us back our own common sense.

Victor, London, United Kingdom

Chindamo's monstrous behaviour was created by our gang culture in significant part. It would be convenient to export that problem but in Italy he would probably be unsupervised and more isolated and that isolation could make him dangerous again to fellow human beings. Released on parole in this country Chindamo would be subject to recall and would receive supervision. There would be a chance that he would get work and have an opportunity to pay back to society for the damage he has done. In the same way that monstrous behaviour is created by many factors there are other factors that clearly can lead to reformation over time. If our approach is to rely on prison and exportation of problems then we're in for a pretty bad future.

David Parsons, Cambridgeshire, UK

Yet again common sense seems to fail those that run this country. This man is clearly unsuitable to fit into society and the state has a duty to incarcerate him until he poses no threat to anyone if released.
Frankly I would not be suprised if a contract were not put out for him if released.
We seem to have a ridiculously soft attitude to serious crime in this country, particularly when serious assault/ murder is at hand. Look at the Bulger case- only the murderer's rights seem to excite politicians. The victim's rights are of paramount importance.

James, London,

The law is the law, i feel for the Lawrences, for their lose and continuous heart break but we cannot pick and choose when it comes to the application of EU law which was voluntarily signed by the UK government in to UK law

Gabriel, Dublin,

Of course there is a very good argument for a return to the death penalty for cold-blooded killers like Chindamo, and one that is only made stronger by this country's timid sentencing structure, when life doesn't mean life, and dangerous unremorseful criminals are routinely released after only ten years.

The simple answer to the debate over Chindamo's right to stay in Britain, is simply to avert the argument and the public anger by ensuring justice is carried out for once, and keeping him locked up for another thirty or forty years!

When will our government and our criminal justice system stop listening only to self-serving lawyers, and politically correct unrepresentative pressure groups, and actually begin to listen to the voice of the law-abiding majority, and the victims of crime? Life should mean just that, and criminals given sentences of five, ten or twenty years, should have to serve them in full, not automatically only half of what they are given.

Will Richards, droitwich,

As usual, we are slow to see common sense.
1 - keep him in for his full sentence
2 - We should set about repealing this charter for criminals as soon as possible, and restore our own bill of rights.

Dav!d, Colchester,

For once David Cameroon makes sense!! i still think either Life (99 years) or death penalty.

Adam Webb, MK, UK

"Yes nice one, Peter (Philippines) execute a 15 year old boy with an appalling background... just about as civilised as the awful crime he committed. Pat Harvey, Bingley, UK"

Wrong Pat, the crime he committed was against an innocent man. To execute Chindamo would be to rid society of a murderer - quite different. I couldn't care less if he was 15 - just as he couldn't care less who he stuck a knife into. The Liberalism you seem determined to inflict upon our society is an utter and absolute failure.

Paul Williams, Egham, UK

When Chindamo stuck the knife into Phillip Lawrence he lost all rights to protection from the Human Rights Act. Until lawers and the government change the act to read that, the yobs will continue to rule the streets. The Police are incapable of controlling the yob element as when incidents are reported to the Police, the Police make the statement, that unless the Police see the incident they will have to let them go. What does this say about our government's will to get tough with crime. A whitewash!

JohnE, Fareham, Hants

If the Home Secretary is right that he represents a continuing risk this will not be changed by deporting him. Does the Home Secretary not care if this man kills people so long as he does it elsewhere and only kills people who are not British?

Would she support Italy releasing a Briton that they considered to be dangerous and sending him or her to the UK?

Is this really a sensible way for civilized countries to deal with violent offenders?

If the man is really a danger he should remain in jail. The law provides perfectly adequate means for achieving this if necessary.

Steve, Stevenage, UK

A good case for extraordinary rendition. Call in our cousins at the CIA.

oldasiahand, Guildford, UK

First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest sympathies to the family of Philip Lawrence at what must be a horrendously difficult time.

If it is true, as has been reported, that Chindamo has shown little remorse for his actions, or that he still poses a risk to the public, then he should NOT be given parole. That much is obvious.

However, the fact is that the Human Rights Act is in place to safehold the human rights of everybody, including criminals. Human rights are, by their nature, universal and if we were to begin removing them from those we deem unworthy, we would be on a very slippery slope.

Were a similar case to arise in which the killer, an EU citizen, HAD shown remorse, HAD been rehabilitated and was NOT a threat to the public, then which right does the state have to insist on deportation?

Stewart, let's not forget that the Chinese government executes more people than the rest of the world combined, and its human rights record is, frankly, despicable.

Rory, London,

The only rights infringed in this whole affair have been those of Mr Lawrence and his family. Civilised society is increasingly damaged by the rights industry misguidedly handing the streets over to violent thugs, prioritising their rights over those of the innocent, vulnerable and defenceless. They are not politically correct and they're not liberal - they're collaborating with the worst anti-social elements in the country and they need to be challenged. Only wide popular protest will re-establish sane priorities and stop the elevation of thugs' and murderers' interests over those of the rest of us.

cath, london,

And people wonder why the BNP is gaining strength, there can be no bigger incentive to vote for them than the lawmakers looking after the rights of scum like this.

joe mbawi, Horsham, UK

Its time for the Human Rights Act to go - it has been an unmitigated disaster both in a strict legal sense and in the broader message it conveys of life with obligation or responsibility.

H, London,

Since EU law seems to dictate that we can never deport any foreigner because of their so-called human rights I would suggest that it is yet another reason for leaving this corrupt and venal club!

Barbara Edmonds, Salisbury, England

Would anyone who supports keeping this man in the UK care to have him as their neighbour? I doubt it. We pander to them in the name of human rights, and forget about the poor victim. What happened to his rights? What about his family? This is truly sick.

This man continues to pose a threat to society. Either let him rot in prison or deport him. We do not need him and his like bringing terror to this country.

Richard, Surrey, UK

When a murderer is executed in Texas (contrary to the European Union's silly protests!), we don't have all these complications about whether the murderer will be deported or not, and there are no appeals ad infinitum.

We call it closure.

Murderers and the European Union don't like it, but a majority of Texans do, and we just don't give a damn about murderers and the European Union.

Look what the European Union has done for Madeleine!

Tommy, Honaker, VA

This person was sentenced to LIFE imprisonment. He may well be ELIGABLE for parole in January but parole is a process whereby his suitability for release is adjudged and is not his by Right.

From the published data, he is clearly not suitable for parole and thus he should remain in the care of the prison service until he is, if ever (unless we can unload / dump him on someone else!).

He is an EU citizen and it is no more appropriate to expel him from England to Italy than it would be to do so from England to Cornwall or Wales. I wouldn't have thought that the Italians were over keen to have him either.

Brian Vallance, LEFKIMMI, Greece

I think that anyone who is a visitor to this Country should be deported immediately they commit any crime of a serious nature. The fact that Chindamo has lived here since he was 5 is relevant but the deciding factor should be what other circumstances are. I hate it when I watch Crimewatch and see lots of crimes committed by foreigners who should not be in this Country and their feet should not even touch the tarmac, they should be deported instantly they are released.
This Government has let far too many illegal immigrants in and the Country no longer has the same feel that it had 20 or 30 years ago. Unfortunately the children of today who are brought up on diet of junk TV like Big Brother (and why are BBC now churning out so much crap ?) and YouTube etc do not know any different as they did not experience the beauty of living in this Country so long ago. Unless someone does something soon we will not recognise the place anymore.

Patrick, Brighton, UK

I am sorry , but if there is any doubt whatsoever of this person reoffending , HE MUST NOT BE LET OUT.
Why is there even debate about it ?

We have whimps running the country who have got themselves into a truly big mess, who insult us all with their complete lack of logic & common sense.

All the hand wringing about the law & blaming the EU, shows how the Labour louts couldn't, didn't, see something like this coming when they signed up to the EU human rights bill, which is rapidly become a NOOSE around our necks.

So where is our opt out here ,? why do we have to live with this straight jacket which has done so much damage to Britain.?

Maggie Millington, Brittany , France

Having spent the last two hours reading the judgment of the Immigration Tribunal, the various articles of the relevant EU legislation and Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights, I am at a loss to understand how this myth of the Human Rights Act being to blame that Learco Chindamo could not be deported to Italy has arisen. The judment was based only on EU law ("The Citizens' Directive"). It was in fact the solicitor, representing the Home Office, who used Article 8 of the Human Rights Act to argue that Chindamo should be deported. His argument was supported by case law originating from the European Court of Human Rights which heard an appeal by a Turkish citizen. He was to be deported from the Netherlands to Turkey. The appellant lost his case and had to leave the Netherlands; the opposite of the Chindamo case. So why did the Government (and the media) give out misleading information? Is it incompetence or was it just convenient?

Helga Hanson, Ostrach, Germany

He should have been given 100 years without parole as he killed someone deliberately. The judicial system here is a farce, isn't everyone on the same side?

Mike, Burley-in-Wharfedale, England

The Human Rights Act is good legislation. Its direct incorporation into domestic law has the positive result that those whose rights are infringed by public bodies do not have to go to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg to get a remedy. They can litigate here in the UK, which has to be better for any memebr of your family or friends who feel aggrieved.
I didn't read the full judgement in yesterday's Times, but authoritative legal opinion says the Governemnt would have failed in any event on not having shown at that juncture that the prisoner posed a sufficient threat on his release. The Home Secretary has said today he does pose such a threat, so the Government may be able to advance a better case.
The Opposition won't achieve anything different in a "Bill of Rights" that provisions in the current Act cannot not cure.

Gillian Travers, Harrow, UK

Are we really pandering to the political correctness of the EU as Stewart from Shanghai states, or is Britian just interpreting the EU laws differently from other EU countries. Other EU countries have harsher sentencing than Brtain for the same crimes. I live most of the time in Spain and am seriously considering staying here all the time as this is where I feel safest.

Patricia James, Petersfield, Hampshire

Instead of propounding 'Human Rights' all the time we need the emphasis to be on 'Human Obligation' - don't we?
We should make the punishment fit the crime and if someone leaps 'beyond the pale' as in Philip Lawrence's hideous murder then we ought to ensure that the perpetrator knows he is going through a lengthy incarceration and will be subject to an A.S.B.O. preventing him from returning to the scene of the crime or its environs. If that A.S.B.O. means deportation, so be it. If his family care about him and he for them then they will have to sort out his rehabilitation from when he finally gets back to Britain. If he has fallen unto theabyss then he should most definitely have to climb back up again carrying his burden. No one is denying him that opportunity.

Michael H.Pester, Worcester, United Kingdom

The arguments here seem to be somewhat confused. The ECHR have ruled that Chindamo should remain in Britain because ; “Chindamo is clearly British, having lived here since he was 6 years old. He speaks no Italian, appears to have no connections with Italy other than the accident of citizenship”.

There seem to be little basis for arguing that he should be deported, other than this is what some stupid, publicity seeking minister promised Mrs Lawrence. This is a British problem, and as such we have no grounds to expect the Italians to clear up the mess.

What does need to be resolved is why are we even considering the release of someone who poses a “continuing risk to the public”. Even if he poses no risk, the required period of public retribution still has a long way to run. Justice has not yet been served. Chindamo should remain in prison for a long time yet.

Chris Long, Thirsk, North Yorkshire

If he is a major threat to public safety he does not get parole and so stays in jail and so there is no point in deporting him anywhere.

If he is no threat he can not be deported.

The "secret" papers try to allow the Government to have their cake and eat it by saying he is not a threat to anyone, there is no risk to him reoffending so should be released with the exception that as he will be followed around by paparazzi and tabloid journalists, he may over-react and reoffend so he should be deported as presumably all Italian journalists are polite and well behaved!

Dan, Oxford, UK

China's a bit of a curious example to raise when it comes to Law and Order.
Sure it's very safe, but is that at the cost of executing many, many people each year?
Is that what we'd like the UK to be like?
According to other posters it seems it might be.
As a side point, why are ex-pats more exercised to post their opinions on blogs/comments pages?

Being a member of the EU had no impact on Mr Lawrence's murder, it may simply affect which country his killer lives in on release.

Mark, Newcastle,

This man committed an awful crime. He was given a life sentence, which he served. Whilst I can empathise with the widow of Philip Lawrence, it is the sentencing policy that should be reviewed. Maybe 'life' sentences should be increased in certain circumstances.

What do the Home Office mean in saying Chindamo 'over reacted to certain situations', they are not specific. The Home Office say 'he might suffer a backlash' on release. If they really cared they would uphold his release as he is entitled to the protection of European Law, like anyone else, to which Britain is a signatory. The Government cant have it both ways.

The difference is that he is labelled as 'an Asylum Seeker', and
the government is running scared of 'public opinion' and is trying to do what it sees as expedient, rather than what is morally right. Justice was done when Chindamo was sentenced to life. He is entitled to be released, having served his sentence.

Richard McCance, nottingham, england

Clearly many people are ignorant of the difference between the European Convention on Human rights and the UK's membership of the EU. Leaving the EU would not affect our obligations under the Convention.

Aziraphale, London,

The Ruling by judge D.K.Allen grants this killer: the right of free movement; the right of respect for his private life; the right to protection from media scrutiny; the right not be expelled; the right to family life and the right of permanent residence. Judge Allen even, ludicrously, opined that it was 'not sensible' to exclude his 10th year in Britain as helping him qualify for permanent residence 'simply because' he was in gaol for murdering a British citizen. So there we are - the highest legal arbiters in the land 'sensibly' grant residency and a host of other rights to incomers who murder us on our streets. Completely absurd. So many people in the legal & rights industry now are simply collaborating with murderous thugs against the rest of us.

cath, london,

Chindamo may be a waste of space but he was 15 years old at the time and could not have been hanged anyway.

Michael Francis, Hillingdon, UK

He should have been given Italian lessons while he has been in jail.

Christine in Hayes, Hayes, Middlesex, England

I'm confused. How do we reconcile the Home Office asserting that this criminal is " unlikely ...[to] reoffend" with their view that there is a "significant risk that his previous disregard for authority and the law might resurface" and thus that he would present a "continuing risk to the public".
If the first is true, he is no different from any other murderer released on licence: perhaps not a nice person, certainly upsetting to his victim's family - but does that justify the HO's special attention? If the latter, why is he being considered for parole? The Home Secretary cannot hold to both positions: not unless he's mugwumping. Oh I forgot, he's a politician.

James Toal, Wemyss Bay, Scotland

I agree with the sentiments of CA of Manchester and furthermore, there is clearly some inconsistency in the information being provided by the various agencies as to the threat posed by this convicted murderer.

It also doesn't help when there is seemingly an attempt to keep secret the rationale behind the findings of the tribunal!

One final thought is that it must be assumed that his legal costs are being funded through legal aid and they won't be insignificant.

Decent people have a right to be outraged by cases such as this

Duncan Carter, Preston, UK

Keep murderers locked up for good (if we can't hang them).

Get out of Europe.

Stop electing Labour politicians (New or Old) that have no clue how to carry out their grand ideals.

Brian, Southampton, UK

Mr. Leskin, as a lawyer, ought to know that the facts turning on themselves can constitute a point of law. Or doesn't he?

Karm Arger, Kent,

Let the punishment fit the crime...

John Rellie, Bicester, UK

He cannot be allowed to go free in the UK

Shane, London, UK

As I understood the Radio 4 report this morning, Chindamo is being considered for parole and that the reason the government will fail in its attempt to deport him is that if he is suitable for parole ie not considered a danger to the public it will be difficult to argue that for purposes of deportation he is a danger. Put in these terms it seems obvious.

Bob, London,

Para 88 of the judgment states:

".. it is unlikely that the appellant will reoffend...The point is made that he has been assessed and that he is subject to the highest level of multi-agency public protection arrangements ...that assessment was not made on account of the appellant being a threat to the public but because of the likelihood of media scrutiny and/or public interest."

In other words, if he's not hounded by the media or public, and left to get on with his life, he's not a danger.

Both the Parole Board and the Deputy Governor of Ford Prison are very impressed with him. Presumably they know him. He committed this offence when he was just 15. Can we not give him a second chance? Should we hound him for the rest of his life, even though he has served his sentence?

I lost my father when I was 6. I feel sorry for the family of Philip Lawrence. This young man ought to be given a chance to make amends for what he did.

Jan, Leeds, UK

It is not the Human Rights Act as such that is the problem but the way it is used....by those who frequently abuse the human rights of others and then use it in favour of their argument. If one listens carefully to the arguments of Chindamo's lawyer than it is appartent that he is making a humanistic argument not a technical one. The rule - it appears - is that a non-british citizen can be deported after a serious crime.
If the EU regulation, assuring us free movement between EU countries does not put restrictions on criminals (the alternative argumetn why he cannot be deported) than there is a loophole that needs to be dealt with now since this cannot be in the interest of any EU country. Nevermind the human rights of any criminal - they still do not have more human rights than any law abiding citizen. Or do they?

Susan, Edinburgh,

Im no tub thumping "hang em all" red neck but i do agree with some of the other comments.
I have lived in HK for nearly a year and compared to the UK- this is such a safe place. Practically zero violent crime and the streets are safe to walk at any time day or night.

Part of this is the cultural differences and society but given that HK still maintains a legal framework largely based on that of the UK- it is a shame that the results seem to be so different.

I think early parole and a generally softer approach in the UK is certainly a major factor for this.

I dont think anyone in the UK thinks violent killers should be let out early for any reason.
In this instance- it is compounded because it is seen as an insult to the memory of a brave and decent man who was the victim in the original case. RIP Phillip Lawrence.

ed burns, hong kong, hk

I agree that, as a nation, we constantly supplicate before the European beast of Brussels. For over 30 years we have tried to make it work and failed. Other member states flout European law at the drop of a hat whilst we spending billions of tax payers money being the first to implement those laws.
Being part of Europe has destroyed our industry, agricultural, and standing in the world as well as compromising our national security and credibility.
If the Government didn't waste so much money on Europe and fighting cases like this, it might be better placed to invest more in getting more police officers on the streets and this murderous scumbag might then never had had an opportunity to offend in the first place.
Whilst our illustrious leaders argue the point, why doesn't someone just throw the key away; just like they threw the key away to our country in 1972.

MT, Nottingham,

The problem in this case is that Mrs Lawerence was misled from the beginning of the case. She should not have been informed that Chindamo would be deported as any European lawyer would have been able to tell her that the process is not quite that simple and that any deportation would have had to be proportionate. When taking into consideration Chandamo's lack of conections with Italy it was always likely that a tribunal would consider a deportation order being considered disproportionate.

In addition I would like to point out to Stewart that living in Shanghai which is hardly representative of China as a whole.
I used to live in Guangzhou in the south and crime in that city is a big problem there. My wife was recently knocked down by two men on a motorbike trying to steal her handbag. So China is really no different to anywhere else in the world.

Tim, London,

I cannot believe this criminal is going to be allowed to stay in the UK after he serves his sentence - this seems completely mental!!! I grew up 5mins away from St Georges school and was horrified when this happened when I was 17years old. This would be a travesty if he can remain considering his threat to society.

W Man, Brighton/ London, UK

The idea of jail is rehabilitation. There is no mention in this article of the man's present attitudes. That he is to be released does suggest that he is now contrite. As usual there is insufficient information in this article to be able to make a clear and rational opinion.

richard, bangkok,

As I understand it Chindamo has been through primary and secondary school in Britain and possibly has little understanding of his birth country; how much more likely is he to reoffend in a country which he has no experience in and possibly dosn't speak the language? Or do we not care about Italian people?
He probably shouldn't be reconsidered for early parole but that is a seperate issue from deporting him. Our culture contributed - along with his own behaviour - to his present situation, we need to deal with it. I think this is part of the current stalemate we have in the way we deal with people in the prison system.

Emily D, Colchester, UK

Brian Gilbert, Hampton........spot on.

Let's get out of this mad house organisation.

Labour wants more of it

Phil, Preston,

What about the human rights of the public ?
Chindamo is a proven killer, what use is he to society ?

Chindamo may have had a poor upbringing - his father is also in prision for murder - but that should not be an excuse to inflict his problems on society. Who is going to employ this guy ?

Chindamo life is ruined, but what about that of Philip Lawrence ? What about the friends and relatives of Philip Lawrence, do they not come into the minds of the "Asylum and Immigration Tribunal" or is that out of scope. Perhaps Chindamo should go and live with the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal members.

I feel more and more that the rights of the majority are being
undermined for majorites.

roger, Bristol,

It is time the UK decided that the rights of its citizens to walk the streets in safety overode the the rights of proven violent offenders .This country has always been formost in its pursuit of justice and human rights as it should have been, but when we reach a situation where tribunals can overide the sensible requests of both the government and public opinion it is time we changed our own laws .The memory of a fine man like Philip Lawrence is insulted by this ridiculous ruling .We need a government who will stand up for our rights rather than give in to an ALICE IN WONDERLAND set of legislation .Please give us back the country that i grew up in where the vast majority of us believed in our judicial system . What has happened to us when a prison governor can castigate the newspapers for highlighting our fears ,perhaps she would like to take this man into her own house and risk the rule of the knife -I think not

phil, manchester, uk

The liberals have so warped and corrupted our criminal and immigration system as to make it a laughing stock.

What the liberals in government and the lawyers and activist judges are incapable of seeing is that a tipping point will be reached. The british public that has the collective forebearance of a Saint will realise that the goverment, the once revered police force and the judiciary no longer protect the interests of the law abiding majority.

The reason society is civilised is because over the centuries we gave up our right to eye for an eye and vigilante justice in exchange for the stability and protection of the state and law, if that belief goes then individuals feeling let down by the law will take matters into their own hands.

The fact that more criminals that have been let off due to liberal interpretations have not been lynched is more a testament to British moderation than to the correctness of the law.

The pot is however i feel about to boil over.

Paul Phillips, London,

I find it terribly disturbing that so many people are quick to bring up the death penalty. If the law were to work whereby the punishment exactly fits the crime then we would be raping rapists, stealing from muggers and beating up football hooligans. It is funny that the people who are so appalled by his crime are willing to allow the government to execute him on their behalf. Blood for blood is that what this country wants itself reduced to.

Matthew , Kingston Upon Thames, UK

It is high time we got out of the EU. It is obvious that under this loony labour government we have given up almost all control over what we do in our own country. What a bunch of misguided fools this government our turning out to be in ten years they have completely ruined this country and now we have a scot running things.
For Christ sake Cameron get your finger out and get rid of this bunch of loonies and put this country right!

d case, newquay,

How in hell is he going to live a normal life on release with such a memorable name?-he will have to be protected at our expense like the Jamie Bulger killers & Ian Huntley's accomplice (sorry!- entirely innocent girlfriend). Someone will "take a pop" at him if he is ever let out -(if theres any justice) -and the police will then arrest them and they will probably get a longer sentence than he has served.God help us all .

Mike Brown, Bath, UK

Britain is too soft on criminals. We put the criminals rights before those of the victim and this government and human rights activists hide behind laws when it suits them and cry foul when it doesn't.
We should rule ourselves and do what is best for us as a nation, not do what the EU thinks is best for us.
No other country is so soft and compliant when it comes to what the EU wants.

Nick, London,

Stewart, what price do the people of China have to pay for your feelings of security?

I feel perfectly safe living in a large British city and that is without the need to execute and incarcerate huge swathes of the population.

Peter, newcastle upon tyne, uk

In my opinion, considering rising levels of violent crime and prison over crowding, it’s about time that the reintroduction of capital punishment should be very seriously considered. I know there will be arguments about the fact that it doesn’t necessarily act as a deterrent but at the very least it would mean that the tax payer isn’t saddled with the expense of keeping people like this in prison. It would also negate any uproar at the early release of dangerous prisoners.

Simon, Southampton,

Can someone wxpalin to me what the point is of a british Passport?

what advantage does it have over another EU country - the only thing I can think of is that you dont get called up to fight with a foreign passport and you probably wont get any congestion charges.

george Enock, tunbridge wells, kent

Shouldn't this article be titled "Secret papers disclose threat <I>to</I> killer". The document generally says that he is making good progress and has been a model prisoner and the problems that are suggested in this article are problems he will face rather than ones he will cause. He did something wrong, and is being punished for it. He is only now becoming eligible for parole, he is not necessarily going to get it, and then he is released in licence. With regards to whether he should be sent to Italy - the legal case has no foundation at all and the moral case is shaky to say the least - he was raised in Britain. Britain created him, why should we ask the Italians to deal with the problem. He should be released when the parole board deem him ready and allowed to live the rest of his life in Britain. He will live with what he has done for the rest of his life and that will be his ultimate punishment. To the Editor of The Times - Stop scaremongering. please.

Andrew, Lausanne, Switzerland

why is he even being considered for early release? this surely makes a nonsense of putting him in prison in the first place. get this law rubbish sorted. life should mean life like it used to. and bring back the death penalty. you take a life, you pay for it.

sandra roffey, bognor regis, england

If this person is released and re offends there will be a statement from government saying "we must learn from this"
Authorities say that everytime the system fails but in reality never learn.
Why does government, who make our laws, have to fight through the courts when the laws they have made are interpreted in a way they did not consider.

In essense poor law making from our elected representatives

m wilkinson, telford, uk

When are we going to have a government that makes it clear to all newcomers that if they break our law in a way that leads to imprisonment, then they will be deported. We are not interested in their human rights when they have deprived another person of their human rights, and that includes from mugging, rape through to murder.

The obvious solution to this one is that he remains in prison for life, which is exactly what he was sentenced to..........and if people think this would cause him suffering, then perhaps we should return to capital punishment so he will not suffer any more.

Roz V enner, St Neots,

Yes nice one, Peter (Philippines) execute a 15 year old boy with an appalling background... just about as civilised as the awful crime he committed

Pat Harvey, Bingley, UK

Bearing in mind the profiund Europhobia in the UK it is only to be expected that anything with the word 'European' in the title comes under attack. The ECHR (nothing to do with the EU) is attacked as it provides santuary for undesirable Musim preachers but both France and Germany manage to deport the same, why not the UK? The EU law allows for deportation of dangerous people.
Either this 'secret paper' is pure spin and no threat exists (quite possible) or its not the law its the British judiciary that applies it (equally possible).
Perhaps the British really aren't very good at managing their society.

eddie reader, birmingham, uk

He is serving life - why does life not mean life? Why is release even being discussed. If he is dangerous he should not even be eligible to be considered for early release.

CA, Manchester, UK

I am an expat who lives in Shanghai and have done for a year or so. I used to be proud to be British and I love the United Kingdom and all that it offers. However I watch aghast as the UK struggles to deal with common sense issues. Out here in China one understands what the law is and what the consequenses are if you break it.
I walk the streets of Shanghai without any fear at all, my spouse too at any time of the night or day. There is little personal safety issue or threat to one. Britain was once the bastion of safety in our lives. This has all been lost to the people in authority who are weak to protect the public in favour of the criminals. We pander to the political correctness of the EU and fail to maintain our identity, that which made us different and proud.
When this man is released and reoffends, maims or kills someone else all those spouting the political correctness of today will be looking about them saying "It was their fault", "I did all I could"
Not so! It's yours!

Stewart, Shanghai, China

A professor of Human Rights from Kings College London has suggested that the European law is superior to that of existing UK law. In 1945, with the possible exception of neutral Sweden & Switzerland (the other neutrals, Norway with the Quisling government and Spain & Portugal fascist dictatorships) human rights did not exist outside the UK. Since the UK is stuck with this European law perhaps the solution is not to release Chindamo when he comes up for parole.

Alan Webster, Geneva, Switzerland

The UK leaving the EU would solve the problem...and others.

Brian Gilbert, HAMPTON, Middx

a good case for bringing back the death penalty

Peter, Baguio, Philippines