MANY people felt drug addict Rory Jones had escaped lightly when he evaded a manslaughter charge, even though the pensioner whose handbag he stole died.

The Crown Prosecution Service had to drop the serious charge because of fears that it wouldn't stick on two key points.

They'd have had to prove that Mary Tudge's death was caused by him taking her unattended bag. And the court would need convincing that, in taking it, he was taking an obvious risk in causing her physical harm.

At the time, we suggested that it was hard to believe that her death was coincidental.

Yesterday, Mr Justice Morland acknowledged that fact when he sentenced Jones to a four-month drug treatment and testing order and told him that the distress he caused Mrs Tudge "certainly played a part in her tragic death".

Last month, we also offered the opinion that, if any good might come from the tragedy, it should be that Jones turned his life around.

Judge Morland went further in telling the court he had a "degree of confidence" that Jones would do so. He hoped Mrs Tudge's family would understand the sentence.

Unsurprisingly, they didn't, and - while, in the long-run, Jones completing his transformation might justify the judge's faith - we find ourselves agreeing with them.

Like thousands of readers, our thoughts are with the Tudge family today, not Jones.

There ought to be an offence which sits between manslaughter and theft and recognises the outcome of such a crime. Their trauma only reinforces that belief.