The Paul Clarke affair — the guy who handed in a shotgun he’d found to the police and ended up being found guilty of possessing a firearm - continues to provoke strong feelings. People are unclear about whether or not he will have to serve the minimum of 5 years or whether, in fact, it’s possible that this case will count as an ‘exceptional circumstance’ enough for some other outcome.

In other words, until he’s actually been given 5 years, it may be wise to wait and see.

But, really, there’s another aspect of this story that’s been bothering me far more than the case itself. It’s been the reaction to it.

For example, I shared Paul’s tale with my work colleagues and was met with disbelief. These things, I’m told, don’t happen. There must be something dodgy about the guy, and the police must have had a pretty good reason to want to arrest him and charge him.

Oh, to have such faith in our criminal justice system!

I’m coming to the conclusion that when people hear about this sort of injustice – whether it’s terror suspects being locked up without charge or access to legal representation or some fool falls victim to a faceless, arbitrary and inhuman bureaucracy – they react by blaming the victim.

Blaming the victim is psychologically comforting. It means that the horrible thing only happened because of something the victim has done wrong, that such things wouldn’t happen to normal, decent people. The logic becomes circular when, lacking any evidence or information one way or another, people like to believe that when something bad happens to someone, that’s proof that they’re probably not normal or decent.

And this, it seems, is how you boil a frog. Even when the state sticks black bags over people’s heads and carries them away never to be seen again, most people prefer to believe it’ll never happen to them.