DANIEL Wall was no angel, as his mother Rosie would be the first to acknowledge.

He had a string of convictions, mostly, says Mrs Wall, for motoring offences and petty crime. He was a heroin user and, it was said in court, a dealer - a claim strenuously denied by his mum.

But Daniel was also a caring son who did his parents' garden and helped out at the pensioners' Christmas party. In other words, he was a human being who, for all his faults, plainly did not deserve the fate that befell him.

Daniel was brutally murdered by fellow heroin addict John Marshall. It was a terrible way for a family to lose a son and a brother.

The court case exposed York's hidden drugs underworld. Although Daniel was the victim of a terrible crime he emerged as a "drug-dealing, smack-headed gangster" in Mrs Wall's words.

Now that analysis appears to have been officially endorsed. The Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority has turned down Mrs Wall's request for an award because of Daniel's criminal record.

The authority has to be careful about the way it distributes taxpayers' money. But this decision is very harsh. It brands Daniel Wall's life as worthless.

The verdict both adds to his family's anguish and penalises them financially: Mrs Wall had to borrow money to ensure her son was given a decent funeral.

This heartless judgment confirms the need for reform of a criminal injuries compensation scheme which even the lawyers describe as "inflexible and unfair".

Updated: 09:19 Monday, October 31, 2005