NEVER judge a book by its cover is a pretty good rubric, especially if you live on a desert island with a dozen washed-up volumes — you’ve got the time to leaf through each one and decide on its merits. As is Martin Luther King Jr’s dictum about judging people by the content of their character.
But whether we’re talking books or people, in real life we need to make quick judgments, and anyway, we can afford the odd mistake. Paperbacks don’t break the bank, and can be put aside if the first few pages don’t please. When a friendship fails to bloom, nobody needs to return the call.
But for those in the business of assessing terror suspects the cost of a bad choice could be monumental; and those costs are usually paid by people who have no part in judging who is to be trusted and who is not. Last summer, three little girls paid a price for someone else’s failure to discriminate between the merely dotty and the truly dangerous.
Another 23 children and their teacher will bear the physical and emotional scars of that savage attack for the rest of their lives. That is why the inquiry into the massacre at Southport is so important. It needs to do its work thoroughly and quickly. The Chancellor was right to tell me that “no stone should be left unturned”.
But the inquiry must not allow itself to be deflected into ass-covering cul-de-sacs. Not even the killer’s defence team is making the case that he was mentally ill. The attempt to lay blame at the door of online suppliers of knives is a distraction; every kitchen in Britain could have supplied the murder weapons.