To think he should NEVER be released - HORRIFIC STORY WARNING ***warning reiterated by MNHQ - disturbing content***

[ShockedandOutraged]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6457161/Hes-bad-Ian-Brady.html#article-6457161

After committing a crime like this, it can never be guaranteed that this man is not a risk to society. What parameters do the Parole Board use to determine this? He has not been around to lose his temper/in a position to kill children while inside.

The reports details a network of 'friends' that this fiend has as support when he's out. Who on earth could be friends with something like this?

How can he even want to be released? If he had any remorse he'd have killed himself before now.

The poor parents of these children. Is there anyway they can fight against this?

This creature should not be released. The Parole Board says he has 'insight' & can cope with stress.
'Insight' my arse & if he can cope with stress then I'm the Queen of England.

What I want to know why, is why he gets parole but Myra Hindley didn't?
They both committed heinous acts.

Well I can see the Parole Board having blood on their hands amongst other things.

David McGreavy could get a new identity but he'll be found out. Then what's the betting he'll be killed by by a member or members of the general public? (Serves him right.)
So one person dead & a few more in prison.
So Parole Board total result: financial cost hundreds of thousands/millions & emotional/moral cost infinite.

I’m not telling people what they should and shouldn’t post.

I’m asking you to stop replying to me because I find it irritating.

Perhaps now just stop obsessing with what I’m posting as it’s getting irritating?

Ooh the irony

Maybe make some coherent points rather than cherry picking from other posters posts.

Seems like the Parole Board has made a poor decision.

The Worboys Parole Board decision was legally challenged.

Like pps said earlier he only gets 45 years in jail which is 15 years for each child killed.
So by that reckoning Colin Pitchfork who has now served 30 years in jail for killing 2 teenage girls should be released (15 years for each child)

Like McGreavy, the local community of the area where Pitchfork murdered are still paying the price today.
Parents still don't like their children walking down The Black Pad & the murders still cross peoples minds when walking down it.
I know this for a fact as have family & friends in the area.

I’m not telling people what they should and shouldn’t post

I’m asking you to stop replying to me because I find it irritating

youre telling me what not to post, I am people!

Is it naive to assume two of the terms of his license will be a) zero contact with children ever under any circumstance and b) zero alcohol or illegal drug use ever under any circumstances?

That isn't a loss of control under stress and then a panicky cover up. That is deliberate, sustained, sadistic viciousness

Don’t forget, he refused to disclose the location of the bodies! They were discovered in a neighbours garden. He never disclosed it. That is not a loss of temper. That’s an exertion of control.

I lam always puzzled that people can decide that someone has reformed/has insight/found god/shows remorse.

The truth is people can say anything to achieve an end. And do.

The finding god thing intrigues me most. God forgives anything apparently (according to my bullying horror of a colleague) and someone who commits a heinous crime is a better person than me because they have said forgive me, I have sinned and I have Jesus in my heart.

I'm bloody sure that God or Jesus could not forgive a bastard like this.

Let him bloody rot where he is.

FWIW I don't and never will agree with the death penalty
I would be happy to see this man remain in prison for the rest of his days though

This is my position exactly, and a point sometimes forgotten is that a true life sentence without parole - as seen in many US states - might well be regarded as a greater retribution

As Graphista mentioned, when the death penalty was abolished the objectors were assured that "life would mean life". For me, this has been watered down far too much and it's high time to bring it back

Too few prisons? Build some more, using the money wasted on endless political vanity projects

@VictoryOrValhalla
You can't have zero alcohol use as a licence condition because alcohol is legal.
You also cannot have "zero contact with children" because children are in supermarkets, walking along the street, everywhere you go. He would definitely have "no unsupervised contact with children" as in one on one time but no one could avoid children for the rest of their lives.

There is a strict list of what licence conditions can be imposed on a released prisoner. It can't just be made up, it has to fit in the defined list. It also has to be "proportionate" as otherwise the person can legally challenge it.

Not saying this individual has found God by the way But plenty others do.

Apparently the parole board has said it is now 'less likely' he will reoffend.

Less likely?? I'd want an assurance that he would never reoffend.

I've just read about it on the BBC news.

Their poor mother. My heart weeps for her.

I’ve definitely seen no alcohol as a license condition before a few times. Can’t recall specific cases but I’ve seen it. Same as I’ve seen no phones or access to internet despite both being legal.

VictoryOrValhalla it's entirely correct to believe that any number of conditions might be applied ... but extremely naive to assume they'll necessarily be kept to

Naive, too, to think sufficient prompt action would be taken if he didn't

how can "no alcohol" or "no internet" be enforced though?

No idea how they enforce it, but I’ve definitely see it as a licensing condition. There was a case a couple of years ago of a man who police considered a huge risk to women despite never having been convicted of any crime, can’t remember precise details but they gave him some sort of an order that specified no devices with access to internet. There were threads on MN about it at the time.

Another condition was that he was to inform police 24hours in advance of him having sex with a woman. Again, how do you enforce that? But it was one of his conditions.

oh no I believe you I just wondered how they make sure the conditions are being stuck to, I suppose you can track someones internet usage but how would you know if they had consumed alcohol?

if someone breaks those terms would they end up back inside? or just a slap on the wrist?!

Well if you’re on license then it should be straight back to prison I would assume. I’m (obviously ) not an expert in these matters.

I’ve definitely seen no alcohol as a license condition before a few times

You can impose a limit which must not be exceeded but you can't say no alcohol at all. You also can't say no phone or internet use any more (there was a time when you could) only that it needs to be available for inspection at any time. This is in part due to things like universal credit being all online etc.

If someone breaks a licence condition there is a process.

1. To breach has to be confirmed.
2. It is then discussed by the probation officer and manager whether it is a recall situation or a warning.
3. If it is a recall situation, then the area chief has to sign it off.
4. Once it's signed off, processed etc (standard is 24hours, emergency is 2 hours), then the person is arrested....if the police know where they are!

I think the world had moved on and whilst giving someone a new identity might have worked a few years ago. With SM and facial recognition I wonder how long before he is discovered.

You might be able to give someone a new identity and get away with this in somewhere like the US which is a vast country but we are a tiny island by comparison.

If let out I suspect although he will be watched 24/7. One day he will disappear and never be seen again.

Agree with the vast majority of posters. He obviously should not be released. As with other cases, the parole board wouldn’t have had the information to make a proper assessment on risk and their lack of public accountability and transparency means they are not fit for purpose.

If he committed such heinous crimes today the CPS and court process would seek to find out much more about his motive/psychological state, even with a guilty plea. In 1973 I expect no one (including the judge) would think he would ever be released.

There is very little supervision or support for these offenders and what services do exist are extremely stretched. No one is really going to be checking who he is associating with, his computer activity, where he spends his time (other than a work or volunteering placement) etc, particularly once the public interest has calmed down.

Where I live, prisoners released on license from lengthy prison sentences are housed in very central, expensive streets with a mix of neighbours - families, students, young professionals and tourists. The ideal location to be anonymous. Can only hope that he continues to be monitored by the tabloids etc and is not allowed to slip under the radar like so many of these types of child killers (Peter Tobin, the Wests, Robert Black). Absolutely no doubt that he will offend again.