You couldn’t make it up. A judge in the UK shortened the sentence of Jamaican drug dealer Vincent Miller, who had previously been deported twice and stole identities to return and evade capture for ten years, to prevent him being deported (again) on the grounds that sending him home would be ‘devastating’ for his three children.
A 12 month sentence would have meant automatic deportation, so judge Farook Ahmed reduced the sentence to 11 months.
Miller arrived in Britain at Christmas in 2000 and was given permission to stay for only four days. He failed to return home and was subsequently arrested and deported in February 2001.
However, he returned at Easter under a stolen identity and lasted two years before being deported again for supplying class A drugs.
From abroad he successfully applied for a new passport in the name of Joseph Roche, who had no idea his identity had been stolen, and this identity theft allowed him to obtain a driving licence and start work as a barber.
As a result of his fraud, his wife and their three children, aged two, four and six, were able to claim UK citizenship.
An argument put forward is that the family, and children, are legally resident in the UK and his deportation would be ‘devastating’ for the children. However, if the citizenship of his family was obtained as the result of a crime, namely stealing someone else’s identity, then surely the better, or more logical option would be to deport the entire family.
He could then continue to deal his drugs in his home country, if he so desired, with his family around him.
And isn’t the judge in question actually perverting the course of justice by his actions, tailoring sentences to circumvent the law?
This is not, of course, the first case where criminals have been allowed to stay in the country based upon ‘family’ considerations, in some cases the ‘family’ not being a wife or children but a ‘girlfriend’.
The question is, if the criminal (obviously) has no consideration for his ‘family’ when engaging in illegal activity, why should the Court have any consideration when pronouncing sentence?