to think jackie powell is a STUPID woman

[somedayma]

who seems to have been sucked in by Ian Brady's 'charms'?

just watched the documentary on channel 4. she's so...defensive of Brady.

WHY on earth would you keep a letter in your possession that may reveal the body of one of the victims? WHY?

thecatsminion - agree with you. I don't think she did herself any favours - not everyone can come across as empathetic on screen and I know several tv presenters who are total arseholes in real life but manage to convey a warmth and friendliness on screen but when she was sitting in the car with Paddy, and her phone kept ringing, she came across as very self-important, rolling her eyes in that 'oh nooo another call from the meeja - pestering me' way - just as OLimp mentioned.

As for that theology bloke he make my flesh creep. Getting close to pure 'eeevil' obviously gave him a bit of a kick. But there are loads of weird people who visit serial killers in jail - Peter Sutcliffe has loads of women writing to him. There was a documentary about that years ago: Dear Peter.

I'm still confused about whether she took this letter to the police or not though

Lord if every advocate/lawyer/representative is going to be judged on how they look and how they come across on telly we're screwed.

Has anyone ever met Garreth Pierce?

Frizz she didn't take the letter to the police.

But she did inform them about it though. She has had an ongoing and open dialogue with the police thoughout her involvement. They chose not to take action because it was just one thing ina whole raft of Brady's attempts to keep them involved.

how can you judge that she is emotionally unsuited for the job she does. she is able to put aside her feelings on what he has done and not judge him

its people like her and others in this field that we are able to understand their behaviour more we understand so much more than we did 50 years ago. these roles are so important to gaining understanding and in helping the police when dealing with such horrendous crimes

Nancy Powell did not mention the letter until towards the end of her time with the film crew.
Initailly she was asked to become involved in respect of his mental health tribunal. Brady gave consent.

Only when that programme collapsed along with Brady they started lookig for another angle. Paddy completely changed his tack with her and started berating her for her involvement. It was a complete change, not what she originally agreed to and she was thrown. That is why she said she wasn't happy and asked for the camera to stop.

When the cameras went back on she beagn to try to explain how hard everyhting is with someone like Brady. How nohting is black and white. She mentioned the letters as an example of his manipulation. She had already told the police about them, that was not the issue.

thinking she isn't under any obligation

This is going to be difficult to understand, but if you have passionate opinions about how society is/should be structured and how vulnerable/Mentally Ill people should be treated and represented, it becomes a personal ethical and moral obligation to be involved.

I can understand why she would want to portray Brady in a certain way, against this portrayal of 'pure evil', tbh.

'Lord if every advocate/lawyer/representative is going to be judged on how they look and how they come across on telly we're screwed.'

Disagree wordfactory.

These people are being judged ALL the time (and SHOULD be judged) by their colleagues, line managers etc And however poorly JP came across on telly, we have to assume that she's well regarded in the sphere in which she works. I have very little truck with the posters who just want to slag her off indiscriminately and say she's crap at her job. I don't assume that; I assume she can do her job at least adequately because otherwise she hopefully wouldn't be doing it.

A TV audience however is a TOTALLY different deal. You don't choose to appear on TV (and particularly a C4 documentary I might add!) unless you've been sensible enough to think through how you will be presented, and preferably discussed it at length with your colleagues, and other people who can give you useful advice.

No one forced JP to participate. She chose to. I think it was a poor decision because anyone of reasonable intelligence should be savvy enough to work out that the program makers will put their own spin on it.

True janey but the original remit was about the tribunal.
Powell agreed to take part under a very specific remit.

She then found herself virtually the subject of the documentary.

If the documentary had shown any of the footage of her explaining her role, the tribunal system and possible outcomes for Brady, she may have seemed much more articulate.

PS and yes I'm aware the program changed tack once the tribunal couldn't go ahead. But really - it doesn't take a huge amount of intelligence to work out that C4 are interested in a tv audience. JP should have had the sense to let them outline the role of the mental health advocate without being directly interviewed or appearing herself.

At the end of the day, a TV audience will judge on a highly edited TV program - that's all they have to judge on! We don't see JPs work week in week out like the police/psychiatrists etc do.

Telling that Brady had so many psychiatrists and all (bar one) worked with him for such little time periods (only a year or so) and most expressed relief when the relationship was over, however Powell keeps running around after him, sorting out his will, power of attorney - why? Why would a woman who should be living her own life, be so fixated with Brady and make it a personal crusade to defend him?

Because, she is fascinated by him, in awe of his non human personality and yes, loves the limelight herself. It is revolting actually and sadly she can't see how Brady is using and manipulating her - interesting he chose someone not too bright to use and how she has fallen into his lap and fitted the role perfectly. It couldn't have worked out any better for Brady.

And WHAT, WHAT type of woman would give back the letter to him that could put an end to a mother's lifetime of suffering who has cancer. What stupid, manipulated fool would do that? And how she was claiming that Brady was telling her that he knew where Keith Bennet's body was, like she was honoured to be told. I was revolted over their sordid, r/ship and how she has acted in the interests of him and seems to have no compassion for his victims.

No one forced JP to participate. She chose to

She will never 'win' the families wanted this documentary, they wanted support long ago when the decision was made not to charge Brady or Hindley with Keiths murder and when the search was called off. Her contribution was valuable, so she took part.

When Brady passess, she will be hounded, if she stays silent, she will be criticised, if she speaks out, she will be called deluded and manipulated, if she is unwilling to give into media pressurs and call Brady a monster.

Yes, she didn't actually explain what her role was. She came across as more of a PR manager for Brady, taking calls from the press and so on, than a mental health advocate. As I said before, while he is entitled to have a mental health advocate, he certainly seems capable of expressing and arguing for his own needs so not sure she can do a lot for him in that area. It would be interesting to know exactly what the role of a mental health advocate for a patient such as Brady is supposed to cover.

Agree that she should have expected this from the programme too. She came across very differently to the psychiatrists, and not in a good way.

This is getting into a very sticky area but there was a reference earlier to 'vulnerable/mentally ill people'. From what we the general public get to see, Brady doesn't look vulnerable - the assumption seems to be that anyone diagnosed as mentally ill is vulnerable. If Brady's mental illness is actually psychopathy, isn't that a different kind of situation to him being 'vulnerable' as a mentally ill person? I really don't mean to cause offence here and I am not very well up on how mental health conditions are diagnosed and differentiated, which is why I'm asking.

freudianslipper I have very relevant professional experience and it is blatantly obvious that she has been to some extent ... Hmmm, manipulated is a strong word, taken along on 'the ride' maybe a better way of putting it. She does seem to be involved more than would be professionally expected to be. I also would be surprised at the (level of) involvement with programme but for the statements I've just made.

loveroflife I have read two contrasting explanations of the short periods of time people spend working with Brady. One is that it's thought best by the authorities so he doesn't get the chance to form deep, potentially manipulative relationships with people. Two, that Brady himself requests that (in the case of prison guards/hospital security, I think, at any rate) because he believes that people sell their stories of working with him and not allowing them to stay in post for long helps prevent that. Hard to know which is true, but in either case, it does give pause for thought that Jackie Powell has been allowed to work with him for so long a period, and that Brady himself has not objected and had presumably wanted to keep her in the role.

Love advocates are often the only consistant person in a service users life, whilst other profesionals time finishes, that is the norm.

I work with advocates for parents going through the CP/fostering/adoption system and they sometimes have the same advocates over each child.

If the working relationship is succesful, it should be constant, that is the ideal.

JP is there for Brady's benefit, if he is fine with her staying, then she stays.

why? Why would a woman who should be living her own life, be so fixated with Brady and make it a personal crusade to defend him?

I answered that in a ealier post. She has her own life, she has a partner. This is a personal and professional crusade for her, one which those committed to social justice will understand.

She is a stupid attention seeker

Oh I agree Birds, it's a pretty thankless task being a mental health advocate, and only one you should do if you believe passionately in the human right of advocacy. But I still think that although she is in a 'no win' situation, the most sensible thing to do is remain anonymous. If the public knew that Brady has a mental health advocate, maybe even knew it's a woman called Jackie Powell, but knew no more than this, no photos, no interviews, no appearing in documentaries, then she would be placing herself in a far better position for when Brady dies and the vultures swoop again, wanting a story.

I understand that the families involved, who want the story told, might have wanted her to take part, but IMO the sign of a really strong effective mental health advocate would have been someone who stuck exactly to their remit and didn't allow themselves to be swayed by the victims families. Her responsibility is to her client. It doesn't mean she can't empathise hugely with the victims families, but she should have had the professionalism to detach, and stay away from TV cameras

I don't think for one minute she was revelling in the attention like some posters are saying btw. I think she felt extremely uncomfortable by the end, and probably worse now, with the backlash. I don't think it was about wanting the limelight, I think it was just a really poor judgement

the assumption seems to be that anyone diagnosed as mentally ill is vulnerable.

If you are sectioned under the MH Act then that goes hand in hand with a level of Vulnerability and needing protection.

You cannot be sectioned and not be vulnerable.

She came across very differently to the psychiatrists

Their role is 'medical', hers is rights based and 'social'.

It would be interesting to know exactly what the role of a mental health advocate for a patient such as Brady is supposed to cover

Anyone trying to explain this via the media will be attacked, as it isn't popular to support people who are serial killers. Public opinion to a degree cannot shape this service.

In my friends case there are only a few of us that knows that she works in Broadmoor, as at the start of her career she had very bad reactions and was accused, as JP has been, of being one of the 'death row' admirers.

loveroflife
You sound like you spend too much time reading tabloids.
Brady has had a lot of shrinks because he has moved a fair bit. He has refused to co operate with a lot. Shrinks in this kind of work have a high turnover.

Who knows why he has stuck with Powell. You seem to have decided that she is in awe of him. I doubt it's that. H'd become very bored of that.
What exactly are all these wonderful things you think she's done for him? He's lost pretty much every challenge he's mounted. He woudn't have won his tribunal IMVHO.

eighties what on earth males you think Powell didn't explain her role? It was just cut. Along with all the other hours and hours of footage of her dealing with the tribunal.
The film makers used the bits they wanted so that she is now the story. Oh and the magic letters.

Funny how no one, not Powell, nor the police, nor any of his shrinks or indeed anyone who has dealt with him believes he will say where Keith is burried. Yet still the public who are in no way involved want to dance to that particular tune.

Very often participants are told one thing, then get a nasty shock when they start filming or see the edited result.

They'd never get their programmes made otherwise.

When Gareth Peirce took on the case for the Guildford Four (free of charge initially by the way) she was depsised and publically castigated.

Samaritans don't get paid; prison visitors don't get paid. It's not at all unusual to work for free.

i am genuinely interesedt in what way lisaro

to me the programme was edited to make her look that way to make her look obsessive and in awe of him becasuse it makes better viewing. has a relationship of some sort grown maybe that we can not understand how are we to understand when we are not privvy to what goes on between them. does not mean she is horrified by what he has done but she beleives in her work and what she does

i never once got the impression she was not aware of his manipulation but i found it hard to understand how she is able to put aside the man and his crimes, i find it hard to understand becuase i could not do so but i am grateful others can

Eighties chick - thanks, interesting although I just find it again a mockery that Brady calls the shots of who he wants to work with him and for how long. I'm sorry but when we are dealing with cold blooded rapists and child murderers the rule book should be thrown out of the window. The brute is SUB HUMAN - testified by many in the programme, so normal rules need not apply. Thank god life meant life then and they are force feeding him, thus denying him his wish to die.

Birdsgottafly - This is more than a standard, professional r/ship though? She is overwhelmed by him, consumed, the pages of notes, the calls at all hours of the day and night - she looks weirdly exhausted by it all, but at the same time revelling in the responsibility of being the closest person to him. Who, professionally would WANT to represent and advocate for someone who has committed the crimes he has? And I'm sorry, but the words Brady and social justice do not go together.

I find it hard to believe that JP is unsupported in her role so if people felt she wasn't coping or had got too close to Brady then would she really be allowed to continue. I'm another one that doesn't believe that Brady would have revealed Keith's burial place - its his last bit of power and control to keep everyone interested in him. Nor would I be suprised to find that IB dangles this sort of information in front of people regularly as an attempt to manipulate the authorities into doing what he wants.

The only person who could have put Winnie out of her misery was Ian Brady and I genuinely believe he never had an intention of doing so.