I WISH there were a type of Luminol which worked on moral bloodstains as well as physical ones.

As you probably know, Luminol is a substance used by forensic experts to highlight any bloodstains at crime scenes and on suspects’ clothing, even if efforts have been made to wash the stuff away.

I wish there were a moral variety so we could apply it photographs of certain Very Important People or mist it on to TV screens when such people appeared in news broadcasts to make pronouncements.

It might even be pumped through air conditioning ducts whenever the Very Important People gave press conferences and told us how much they cared about our welfare.

These odd musings of mine were prompted by something that happened in Swindon the other day - in a courtroom, to be precise.

A creature with a record of domestic abuse smashed a door in to get at his partner.

He then beat her so badly that he lost consciousness.

During the attack, he grabbed her by the arm, threw her against a wall, dragged her by the hair and smashed her skull against a television stand.

Then, as she lay unconscious and utterly helpless, he stamped on her face.

The woman’s jaw was broken in two places and she also suffered a broken neck vertebra.

She was left unable to smile without pain, and her injuries were so severe that her children failed to recognise her.

The attacker later texted her, informing her that she deserved what he had done.

And his punishment - assuming that a foul insult to all victims of domestic violence can rightfully be described as a punishment?

All things being equal, he can expect to be free in well under five years.

This is what got be thinking about moral Luminol.

As I’ve pointed out before, whenever something like this happens there might be only one attacker in the physical sense but there is morally a long queue of them.

It includes every judge in past cases who has failed to set a precedent by applying a maximum sentence, whether through crass ignorance of domestic abuse issues or a cowardly unwillingness to risk having some buffoon from the Court of Appeal say something nasty about them.

It includes everybody who ever sat around a table to discuss sentencing policy, and decided that the wellbeing of terrifyingly dangerous people was effectively more important than that of victims and potential victims.

It includes everybody who has the power to make changes which might deter at least some abusers and potentially save lives, but who fails to exercise that power, even though they like nothing better than to get up on their hind legs and sanctimoniously proclaim their commitment to fighting evil and protecting the innocent.

All of those people took part in the attack the court heard of last week.

They queued to smash the victim’s skull against a television stand.

They took turns in beating her until she lost consciousness.

They waited patiently for their turn to stamp on her face and they sent the text message saying the attack was her fault.

With moral Luminol, we’d be able to see the huge bloodstains on their expensive suits whenever they appeared in public.

We’d be able to see the spatters of blood on their shiny, well-scrubbed faces when they smiled for the cameras.

We’d be able to see the blood crusted beneath their perfectly-manicured fingernails when they tried to shake our hands.

Above all, we’d be able to see the truth - that these people are drenched in the stuff.