Robert Howard case - Valuable lessons to be learned

THOUGH an extreme case by any measure, that of serial offender Robert Howard, convicted of murder and rape, holds valuable lessons for all those agencies involved directly, or indirectly, in the criminal justice system.

Of particular interest to those in this country who want mandatory sentencing introduced, and those worried that the punishment should be seen to fit the crime, Howard is a textbook study.

Because of the prevailing laws which prevented previous convictions from being released, some of his evil deeds may have gone unpunished by juries. His life of criminality was largely unknown until a ban on reporting was lifted this week after outstanding sex charges against Howard were dropped at Belfast Crown Court.

As far back as 1974 in a Cork court he pleaded guilty to rape and was sentenced to 10 years, and even then the judge described him as an “explosive psychopath”.

His words were to be borne out with chilling effect.

Since then, any convictions against him were recorded in the British jurisdiction, but he was also noticed on police radar both here and in the North.

In 1995, Howard was convicted of having unlawful sex with a minor, despite the l6-year-old girl alleging he had repeatedly raped her while a noose was tied round her neck during a two-day ordeal in his Tyrone flat.

To any reasonable person, the three-year suspended sentence he was given for that crime was totally inadequate and, indeed, it freed him to kill a 14-year-old girl by strangling her with a rope.

The 61-year-old was convicted and given a life sentence in 2003 for that murder, but by then it was too late for too many victims.

The gardaí and the British police suspect Howard may be linked to the disappearance of up to six women, including two high-profile cases here.

The family of one missing girl, of whose murder Howard was cleared by a Belfast court in June, wants the law changed so previous convictions may be disclosed.

Had those convictions been disclosed, the jury may, or may not, have convicted him of Arlene Arkinson’s murder. But it is academic now.

Whether such information should be made available is something that could be considered more than academic in an extraordinary case such as Robert Howard.

Because it was not, he was freed by suspended sentence to commit a murder.

This criminal raises another aspect of the criminal justice system which needs to be reviewed here and that is the level and amount of rehabilitation treatment available to sex offenders in prison.

Apparently, a review has been carried out about aspects of the system but, unfortunately, its findings remain secret as the Department of Justice has not seen fit to publish its report.

It involves an evaluation of the treatment programmes for sexual offenders in prisons such as Arbour Hill and its contents would, obviously, be very helpful for the professionals in the field.

In any case, convicted offenders enter the programme voluntarily and every encouragement should be given them to do so, which cannot be helped by the closing of the Curragh Prison last year which operated such a programme.