Little wonder the figures for knife crime are worsening when the LibDems insist on stabbing their leader in the back every 18 months or so.
I found tonight's BBC News more than a little bizarre - no personal appearence by Ming or even a written statement, just an unctuous little speech from party President Simon Hughes (a real "pass the sickbag" moment that John Junor himself would have relished).
So what did for Ming? Was it his age? His leadership style? Neither, in my opinion - at 65, Ming was certainly not too old. Certain LibDem briefers are whispering to the press that he would have been 69 at the time of the next General Election - well, yes, and they knew that when they elected him. Reports I read about LibDem internal workings suggested that they were getting their act together after the drift of Kennedy's leadership.
In fact, Ming had to go because as a party LibDems seem to be almost genetically incapable of showing loyalty in the face of adversity. All of the nonsense about Ming's age could have been brushed aside if senior members of both warring factions at the head of the party had made it clear they were behind him. Instead, you had the incredible sight of Nick Clegg openly speculating about standing for leader at the LibDem conference recently. Neither the Labour nor Tory memberships would have stood for such naked opportunism from an apparent high-flyer within their ranks.
Before he became leader, Ming was a hugely respected figure not only in the Commons, but across the country too. It takes a certain kind of malign genuis, possessed only by the LibDems I think, to turn that gift to dross.