As far as I’m concerned the man is a hero . Why are the BBC making such a fuss about his previous conviction for murder ? It really has no relevance in this case .

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51010708

Can you find a news outlet that would describe what he did without mentioning he was out on licence for a murder?

I thought it was a positive “look murderers can do good things, not bring back the person they slaughtered of course but not much we can do about that now” piece

Given the work of the victims, and the nature of the event they were running, it is very much relevant I’d have thought

“Given the work of the victims, and the nature of the event they were running, it is very much relevant I’d have thought”

this

Yes I OK with it.
Although I thought they might have pointed out that,AFAIK, he didn’t actually commit the murder – it was the other guy he was with but he also got convicted as he was there and therefore an ‘accomplice’ or something.

Given the work of the victims, and the nature of the event they were running, it is very much relevant I’d have though

100% agree

Id also add that the family of those he was convicted of murdering would be feeling very wronged if it wasnt mentioned

The online version of the Times does the same. He is (and always will be) a convicted murderer. The fact that he is also a hero for his actions does not stop that. We may disagree about how the media portray him, but that is a personal decision.

As far as I’m concerned the man is a hero .

I wonder if you’d feel the same if it was your relative he’d murdered.

..Different murderer involved but…

What Mashr and Dash said.

I always wondered what the family of Lesley Grantham’s victim felt about his subsequent career.

As far as I’m concerned the man is a hero .

I wonder if you’d feel the same if it was your relative he’d murdered.

..Different murderer involved but…

I suspect the delay in naming him is probably to do with the issues brought up in that report. i.e. liaison officers making sure the victims families had been informed first.

Hypothetically I’d probably still feel conflicted, but better than I would if I thought he was un-rehabilitated, unrepentant and unlikely to change. By the sounds of it he’s hit rock bottom and turned around. Just a shame it happened the way it did.

Mashr, Dash, Drac etc +1

As far as I’m concerned the man is a hero

“Hero” is a bit of a loaded term, bandied about a bit freely these days. He’s a Man who when faced with a serious situation took brave and selfless action.

But He is still a convicted (and apparently reformed) murderer, it’s a fact, reported by the BBC, the crime he took part in before wasn’t a pleasant one (a group killing of a guy with a hammer, because he thought his missus was cheating with him).
It is noted that He has demonstrated remorse and contrition for his past crime, and seems to be well along the path towards being a reformed character, but I doubt that will ever be sufficient for the relatives of his previous victim.

I think it illustrates perhaps that while much of the press and people viewing stories like this enjoy an easily framed, black and white “Heroes” and “Villains” type story, real life is more nuanced, and nobody is perfect…
The incident on London bridge took place at an event that was all about rehabilitation and tackling the aftermath of far less than “Heroic” behaviour, Steve Gallant is a better man today than he was in the past, he helped to save lives, but he did take one once and can never take that back.

I don’t think the BBC are showing “poor form”, they’ve reported some facts (as is their mandate) why exactly do you think they shouldn’t be reporting this OP?

It’s an amazing story really – terrorists, murderers, police killings, narwhal tusks, stabbings… none of these have ever featured in my 50 odd years on this planet and yet, a mere 60 miles from where I live… And all relevant to the story IMO.

I wonder if you’d feel the same if it was your relative he’d murdered.

I wonder if you’d feel the same if he had saved your life .

I wonder if you’d feel the same if he had saved your life .

So you’re saying his previous crime is just cancelled out by his later actions?

I wonder if you’d feel the same if he had saved your life .

I would (Still) have no issue with the BBC article if it was my life he had saved.

It’s a good illustration of why most systems separate the victims from the judicial process to a greater or lesser extent. I know we have impact statements etc but it’s better than some countries where the guilty party can pay compensation to the victims in return for a more lenient sentence even for serious offences.

It’s why I feel a bit uneasy whenever they report “………’s …… year long campaign for justice” stories. In a lot of cases (LFB at Grenfell, SYP at Hillsbrough), someone ends up feeling they have/ haven’t got justice because there was/wasn’t a scapegoat.

“Hero” is a bit of a loaded term, bandied about a bit freely these days. He’s a Man who when faced with a serious situation took brave and selfless action.

From the story he ran into the room after things kicked off.

Anyway, its pretty bloody obvious why they’re making a big thing about him being a convicted murderer: For the story.

“Hero” is a bit of a loaded term

It’s a bit like VC winners. We expect them to be really nice, but when you read about them in detail the reality is they are often very driven agressive people who really like fighting, that’s why they really get stuck into a war. They’re often not popular and often cause all sorts of trouble in ‘normal’ life where fighting isn’t a skill that’s in demand. (I include aviation: I can think of one VC winner who’s men hated him, and one who was described by one of his men as a ‘murderer’ – in the sense that he enjoyed the killing as opposed to the downing of the other aircraft.)

I suspect it’s entirely possible this guy is the sort of person who can’t resist a scuffle. 15 years ago the scuffle was a bad scuffle, this time it was a good scuffle. I suspect the instincts that drove him might have been identical. Anyway, he’s seems to have learned his lesson and turned his life around and hopefully he’ll live a full life when he’s released.

When they say ‘don’t meet your heros’ they aren’t kidding, the qualities that make you a hero in almost any field, don’t always make you likable or even good. (I’m sure there are plenty of exceptions to that.)

the crime he took part in before wasn’t a pleasant one (a group killing of a guy with a hammer, because he thought his missus was cheating with assaulted by him).

FTFY

Link to appeal report

FTFY

Danke.

I suspect it’s entirely possible this guy is the sort of person who can’t resist a scuffle.

Obviously a spot on analysis;

“I can never bring that life back, and it is right that I was handed a severe penalty for my actions.
“Once I’d accepted my punishment, I decided to seek help.
“When you go to prison, you lose control of your life. Your own future relies on the decisions of others.
“Bettering yourself becomes one of the few things you can do while reducing the existing burden on society.”
Since going to prison, Gallant, who will be eligible for parole in 2022 subject to approval, has “vowed never to turn to violence again”.
He has since learned to read and write, is studying for a business studies degree and was taking part in the Learning Together rehabilitation project, which was hosting the event at which Khan struck.

If you’re unhappy with a conviction following a former convict, it’s our culture – see sex offenders – prison sentence alone is seen as insufficient for any con.