• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Should Peter Sutcliffe be released?

richardm said:
They have to be a little bit careful about what they say, because knowing where he was lifted and what he was doing at the time could lead to him being identified. It's not necessarily anything particularly serious; the terms of his parole are very strict.
Click to expand...

Indeed; from what I caught on the news this morning, it need not have been anything criminal at all, it could simply have been that he was somewhere he shouldn't have been according to the terms of his licence.
 
Rolfe said:
I think 30 years in pokey is probably a reasonable sentence for the crimes as such.
Click to expand...

What the ****???

Remind me how many women did he murder (or attempt to)?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thirteen murders, seven other attempts.

Might be interesting to explore different perceptions about what is a reasonable sentence for such crimes.

My own concern is the suspicion that the mental illness might not be genuine, that although he's served 30 years he's still not a particularly old man by today's terms, and he seems to be fit and well. Thus, concerns about re-offending.

Rolfe.
 
Rolfe said:
Thirteen murders, seven other attempts.

Might be interesting to explore different perceptions about what is a reasonable sentence for such crimes.

My own concern is the suspicion that the mental illness might not be genuine, that although he's served 30 years he's still not a particularly old man by today's terms, and he seems to be fit and well. Thus, concerns about re-offending.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

Personally I think the question/concern should be: "Is 30 years even close to sufficient for 13 murders and seven attempts".
 
Rolfe said:
My own concern is the suspicion that the mental illness might not be genuine
Click to expand...

I must admit that in my view I'm not sure it really matters. Either he's genuinely severely mentally ill, in which case he's probably unsafe to ever release, or he's pretending to be mentally ill to try to excuse his behaviour, in which case he's probably unsafe to ever release. Knocking off thirteen women over a five year period is hardly a minor aberration.

Disclaimer: I used to live in Bradford, which possibly skews my opinions.
 
Well, if the claim of mental illness is true, the same professionals say it's treatable and he has responded to treatment and he's "virtually" cured.

I've never had any contact with him, and perhaps his evil looks are against him, but my instinct is a huge "please err on the side of caution" on that one.

Rolfe.
 
Professor Yaffle said:
To be honest, I really don't see how I could comment on any individual case. I've never met the person concerned
Click to expand...

It's my understanding he killed at least 13 people, presumably by "ripping", i.e. slicing their bellies open from cootch to sternum.
 
I thought Pete Sutcliffe was one of the original Beatles....

That was Stu Sutcliffe. :biggrin:
Click to expand...

Are you sure? If I missed out by that much on being a gaziollionaire member of the world's greatest-ever rock band, you'd bet I'd feel like killing people at random, too...
 
Beerina said:
It's my understanding he killed at least 13 people, presumably by "ripping", i.e. slicing their bellies open from cootch to sternum.
Click to expand...

I know the details of the crime thank you very much. My comment wasn't really about that.

If someone asked me if a man who strangled one man to death, and killed another one who died of skull fractures, I might well have a knee jerk response that he should never be released. However, then I might learn a lot more about this man and how he has changed over the years he has been prison through his column in a national newspaper and come to a completely different conclusion. I believe one of the main aims of prison should be rehabilitation and where there is the occasional success story in this regard, I think it should be rewarded. So I am reluctant to give my opinion based solely on the details of the crime the person committed.

For reference, the above case is James Monaghan/Erwin James:

http://www.erwinjames.co.uk/biog.html
 
Rolfe said:
Well, if the claim of mental illness is true, the same professionals say it's treatable and he has responded to treatment and he's "virtually" cured.
Click to expand...

Has anyone on earth ever been cured of a mental illness so severe that the person has brutally killed multiple strangers?

And when I say cured, I mean cured (like cured of cancer). I don't keeping someone's symptoms under control with medication.
 
Imagine that -- judging a criminal based on their crime! What could be next? Judging a patient by what disease they've got?
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
Dunno. I'm not a mental health professional.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

Neither am I but I would think that if psychiatry were able to cure even one person from homicidal mental illness it would make the news.

I'm more of the belief that psychiarty can't cure this type of mental illness but it continues to insist that some people are "virtually cured" to justify their own existance.

Unless their is proof that anyone has ever been cured why should anyone with homicidal ever be released? It's like releasing a new drug to the public without knowing if it's going to kill you or not.
 
From what I've read I would be very surprised if Sutcliffe has been play acting for all these years, I would be even more surprised if he was now safe. But I recognise that is a layperson's view and one that is based only on books etc. about his case and imprisonment so I have to say it should be up to the experts to make the determination of whether he should be released or not. The idea of him being released sends a shiver down my spine.
 
I would expect most people that kill someone under the direct influence of their illness would be schizophrenic, which is really a condition that is managed by medication rather than cured. In some cases their illness can be managed to an extent that they pose little risk, but there is always a danger of them deciding to discontinue medication, so they would need close supervision. Some other murderers could have a psychological disorder such as antisocial personality disorder (formerly known as psychopaths, or sociopaths) for which there isn't really any reliable treatment at the moment.
 
I pretty much agree with Darat. It's not our call, but the idea of him being released this side of nursing home/hospice territory gives me the creeps.

Rolfe.
 
Sorry for the derail here, but please, someone tell me this CNN story is wrong about the circumstances regarding Thompson and Venables release:

The boys were given new identities and passports and since 2001 have been protected by an injunction banning publication of their images taken after 1993, and anything that could reveal their current names and locations.
Click to expand...

They were given new passports?! They were permitted to travel outside the UK to other countries who had no idea who they are?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/03/03/uk.bulger.venables/index.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom