|
Tuesday, December 14th, 1999
WHAT IS
THE FEMININE FOR ASS?
THE
HIT MEN
WHAT IS THE FEMININE FOR
ASS?
Justice Takes A Step Back Into The Wicked Past
Just when the evidence purported to show that senior
members of the judiciary had, in the main, left behind the
ostrich image of thrusting their heads in the sand, Her
Honour Judge Anne Goddard QC at the Old Bailey stepped back
into the past and destroyed the respected improvements made
by her colleagues.
On Friday the 10th of December Judge Goddard sentenced
21-years-old Charlie Rumbol of South London to seven years
imprisonment for the alleged manslaughter of love rival,
Robert Radford whose family live in South London. I do not
know the full facts of the case and am only able to comment
on the evidence of which I am aware.
Sadly Robert died after receiving one punch. By any
stretch of the imagination this cannot be anything other
than a terrible accident.
Charlie Rumbol is a very promising boxer with
championship title potential. Her Honour Judge Goddard QC
made an implied reference probably taken from the book of
'Old WivesTales' in that that the punch by boxer Charlie,
that was accepted by the jury as the cause of the death of
Robert, was a special lethal weapon. Therefore, Her Honour
decided this required severe punishment.
Her Honour Judge Goddard QC said when sentencing Charlie,
"You are a professional boxer. Your fist was your weapon and
Robert Radford died. His parents have suffered unspeakable
grief. This did not happen in the heat of the moment and you
have not shown any remorse by acknowledging your guilt."
How wrong is it possible for an Old Bailey Judge to be? I
learnt the answer to this question when Judge Frederick
Lawton QC allowed fictional events to be presented as fact
in the
in the infamous media labelled 'Torture Trial' at the Old
Bailey which saw Charlie Richardson sentenced to 25 years
and I received ten years. Judge Lawton's outrageous
behaviour was not due to naivete because he was away far
from being naïve. He had personal and career reasons
for his outrageous behaviour.
Fortunately, these motives played no part in the
misjudgment of Her Honour Judge Goddard QC. The main cause
of her failure to deliver acceptable justice would appear to
be artless ignorance.
Her implied view that boxers have instilled in them in
the boxing gymnasium some special magical ingredient that
gifts them with superhuman punching power is absolute
rubbish. Punching power is something a person has or does
not have. It cannot be manufactured.
The most knowledgeable boxing coaches in history have
never been able to make a non-puncher become a KO specialist
and never will be able to do so. The very best a good coach
may be able to do is to maximise the punch of a boxer by
coaching the boxer to throw punches from positions that
ensure the best effect is achieved. For instance if you
throw a punch with your feet in flight and not anchored to
the floor the power is seriously decimated. If you hit an
opponent with an open leather glove the effect is minimal
but it may cause cuts.
However, this is commonsense and not special boxing
knowledge. That which boxers are taught is to throw
combination punches and his boxing coach would have taught
this to Charlie Rumbol.
If a Formula One motor driver killed a person with a
moving car would the killing deserve extra punishment due to
his more scientific driving ability? The answer in the
positive is not necessarily true. So why should a boxer be
misjudged to have special punching power in his fist that is
greater than that of any other male person and be given
additional punishment by a Judge, who should know better, in
a criminal court?
In my experience a boxer is not always the winner in a
street fight.
Charlie Rumbol pleaded not guilty and strenuously denied
the charge but if the jury was right and he was the person
who hit Robert Radford then it is reasonable to presume he
was an angry young man. Anger does not allow rational
thinking and any good advice that may have been given by the
punch thrower by a boxing coach probably played little or no
part when he threw the fateful punch.
The crucial factor is that the person who hit young
Robert Radford threw just ONE PUNCH.
Had he been intent on causing serious injury to Robert
then he would have thrown combination punches and, as is
usual in street fights, he would have probably used his feet
or a weapon.
The presumptions of which we are aware of Judge Goddard
QC are seriously flawed because to plead not guilty does not
in itself indicate lack of remorse and all the indications
point to the conduct of the person responsible for the death
of Robert Radford as being reaction behaviour by an angry
young man
Robert was not beaten up. He was hit with just ONE
punch and then tragic conditions took over and very sadly
the young man died. In these circumstances how is it
possible to view it as just a seven years sentence that will
seriously affect, and may even destroy, the chosen
professional career of Charlie Rumbol, and for which he has
a God given talent?
It is an irresponsible and a bad judgement for which
Judge Anne Goddard QC should reflect upon and be ashamed. No
doubt in the past she has, and in the near future will do so
again, pass a far less severe sentence on a mugger who
deliberately beats up an old person that will probably ruin
and shorten the life of this elderly person.
Of course there has to be sympathy for the Radford family
because the loss of their son is a tragedy. In no way do I
wish to intrude on their grief, however, with the utmost
respect, I would implore them to dig deep and face up to the
fact that ruining the life of another young man will not
bring back their beloved son. Nor should it be considered a
consolation for their very sad loss to see Charlie Rumbol
unjustly punished.
It may take special people to forgive the person
responsible for this tragic accident and I am sure it will
not be easy but when the anger has subsided I hope the
Radford family will reconsider the circumstances and be
those special people.
Had it been Robert Radford that had thrown the ill-fated
punch then I would have written exactly the same
condemnation of the sentence and, if necessary, made the
same appeal to the Rumbol family. Happenings occur to people
in their lifetime that cause terrible loss and emotional
devastation, which defy balanced explanation. Very
unfortunately the tragedy that befell Robert Radford is an
instance of this human ravage.
Presumably Charlie Rumbol will appeal. There is no doubt
that the Appeal Court is made up of wiser heads than that of
Judge Anne Goddard QC. For the sake of everyone involved in
this dreadful tragedy I hope their wisdom prevails and they
put to right this draconian punishment.
'THE HIT MEN'
Ross Benson is a former high profile gossip columnist and
society columnist, and I would be the first to admit that I
am, gladly, no match for him in these areas.
However, when Mr. Benson elects to write about gangland
and its characters he is playing on my home ground.
As a gossip and society columnist, and eventually a
commentator on world affairs, I enjoyed Mr. Benson's
columns. He wrote well and his comments were often amusing
and sometimes interesting. However, his attempt at writing
factually on gangland entitled 'The Hit Men' (Daily Mail,
10th December) is laughable - if it were not the cause of
deep distress to the innocent relatives of those who are the
victims of so many repeated fabrications on gangland.
I am able to state categorically that every part of
the 'Hit Men' that deals with Albert Dimes is fiction and of
a poor quality. Albert Dimes was one of life's gentlemen. He
probably selflessly helped more people down on their luck or
with personal problems than any other individual person
known to many others and I. His generosity is
legend.
There is absolutely no truth in the statement by Mr
Benson that Albert attacked Jack Spot with a razor. The
facts are a reverse of that statement. It was Jack Spot
armed with a knife that attacked the unarmed Albert in Frith
Street, Soho. Such was the character of Albert Dimes that
despite being stabbed three times and losing a great deal of
blood, he had a trial of strength with his attacker and
forced Spot to release the knife. Spot was a heavily built
and powerful man but he never had the character fibre of
Albert Dimes.
There is ample evidence of these facts in the Old Bailey
trial transcripts that resulted in the prosecution midway
through the trial throwing in their hand against Albert and
the case was thrown out.
The main business of Albert was that of a bookmaker and
he was a fearless layer of the odds.
To suggest that Albert was a protection racketeer is as
accurate as suggesting that the good people who freely give
their time to support the Royal Society for the Protection
of Birds are also gangsters.
Members of the reputable Tolaini family who owned the
Latin Quarter restaurant/nightclub are alive and well. Ask
them if they ever had a protection demand from Albert Dimes?
Or for that matter any other? Tony Zomparelli the man
alleged by Mr. Benson as being the top enforcer for Albert
carried out mundane jobs of work for me. To suggest he was a
gangland top enforcer is nonsense.
If Albert had need of a top enforcer, which he did not,
then he would not have chosen Tony Zomparelli. Tony was
likeable and genuine and it is best to leave it at that. The
reason that he stabbed to death David Knight had nothing
whatsoever to do with any protection racket.
Regretfully I have to remind Mr. Benson that to call an
Italian an 'Eyetie' is akin to calling a black person a
nigger. The only difference is that most Italians on the
surface appear less concerned about the subject.
Alfie Gerrard never at any time worked for Charlie or
Eddie Richardson.
Albert Dimes married a lovely and very respectable woman
and their children do them credit. He moved his family to a
very good area in the London suburbs where his wife still
resides. It is these innocent people who have to suffer from
the distortions and lies.
When one of the richest men in the world asked Albert to
visit him at his home for the purpose of seeking counsel
from Albert. Albert took with him as a visiting present a
collection of opera records featuring the great tenor Enrico
Caruso. The records were encased in a beautiful walnut wood
box. It was a rare collector's item of quality but then
Albert was always a man of quality. The fabulously rich man
could not conceal his admiration for the class of a man who
would think of such a high standard gift.
You may ask why would a man who could afford the finest
of professional advice seek the counsel of Albert. The
reason is because Albert was a man of vast practical
experience and a
confidence with Albert was truly sealed. Even one of the
world's richest men could not buy such loyalty.
No doubt the FBI agents who, who according to Ross
Benson, named Albert as the Mafia liaison man are the same
agents who told us that Lee Oswald alone-assassinated
President Kennedy and Earl Ray was solely to blame for the
murder of Martin Luther King. You have to remember that I
was in Brixton prison with Earl Ray.
There is no doubt that Albert was the confidante of
people from all walks of life. He judged people as he found
them. Their material assets or reputations meant nothing to
this very special man. His only prerequisite was that you
had to be genuine and he was a shrewd judge of
character.
For many, many years he implored me to go into legitimate
business and eventually I did. With his unstinting help the
venture was very successful until unforeseen circumstances
took over and sinister Establishment figures took advantage
of these circumstances and forced the venture out of
business.
Through Albert I met lawyers who acted for Presidents of
the United States, a top CIA agent,
leading international union officials, MP's, captains of
industry, icons from the sporting world, stars of film and
other entertainment categories, outstanding authors,
journalists, publishers, great artists, the list is almost
endless. These people were all pleased to call Albert Dimes
their friend.
I have encountered a number of misfortunes during my
lifetime but they all pale into insignificance when compared
to the privilege that I enjoyed through the friendship of
Albert Dimes. They broke the mould when that man died.
His family requested a private funeral and details were
kept private. Despite this hundreds of people from all parts
of the world, including those mentioned above that were
available, were in attendance. Unfortunately, I was in
prison and could not be present but I am reliably advised
that many powerful 'Hard Men' unashamedly had tears
streaming down their faces as they watched the cortege pass
by them.
This could only happen at the passing of a man of rare
quality.
I am delighted that after rejecting a number of film
scripts based on my life some of which came from top film
producers and movie companies, I was beginning to despair
that I would read a script that I could endorse. It is well
known that British cinema has a poor record for producing
films based on the gangster culture.
Then a longstanding friend of mine who really knows the
inside story presented a script that is based on my life.
This original screenplay has the working title of 'The Good
Life'. It is an exceptional movie text that I am delighted
to endorse. It is very, very good and will make a powerful
movie.
Many of the myths associated with gangland are dealt
with by facts in the script. The script will prove an
eye-opener for people like Mr. Benson and when the movie is
made I will invite him to see it as my guest.
In the meantime I suggest that the 'fountain of
knowledge' from where Mr. Benson gleaned the information to
write 'Hit Men' is thoroughly cleaned because it is heavily
polluted and does him no credit. If he paid any money for
the fictional data then he should get his money back.
Ross Benson is too good a journalist to write trash and I
hope he returns to the subjects he knows well.
 back
|
