Another selfish, selfish man furious that no one was paying attention to him

[Notusuallyshocked]

This just makes me so angry...

www.suffolknews.co.uk/ipswich/news/man-who-shot-wife-and-left-her-to-die-as-he-ate-breakfast-is-9222020/

He shot his wife and left their children to find her body because she 'wasn't paying enough attention to him or his needs'.

As the judge said, 'she was carrying the entire burden of running that house whilst you took to bed.'

An 8 year minimum sentence doesn't seem long enough. Another example of undervaluing women's lives.

Imagine the carnage if 50 year old women started shooting people who weren't paying attention to them.

28 days for anyone to appeal
mailto:[email protected]
You need to give his name, the date and the sentence.
poor woman.

Thank you for the link @Etinoxaurus. I will ask for the sentence to be reviewed (as I hope the family are doing). 8 years is not long enough. A lifetime wouldn't make up for what this arrogant, self-centred man has done.

Yes, he apparently had anxiety/hypochondria, but he lied on his shotgun licence renewal application and failed to take his anxiety medication.

Those poor children . He probably made their home hellish in the lead up to the killing too.

In that article what sticks out for me.

Is that the judge's comments- surely the major item when it comes to the case- were right at the end.

And those comments were strong and clear.

Yet at the top it's loads of - MH worsening, scared of COVID, she dropped tissues, murder dropped to manslaughter etc.

Many people don't get to the end.

And even if you do, the scene has been set/ you have been presented with the stuff at the start that could well make the judge comments less powerful iyswim.

It's back to front.

I assume at least some of the top bits were from defence - who didn't win.

Why this common thing to do stuff like this in the press?

I read s thing about reporting VAWG a while back. Which said it was really unhelpful that so often media present the defence arguments during the trial uncritically.

Eg murdered women had a secret lover!!!

Later. Well no. That was an excuse made by the murderer.

Judge Levett 'highlighted that since Mrs Hartshorne-Jones’ death 120 women had been killed, with seven women a month killed by current or former partners."

that is shocking. If it was a defined group , (eg teens, pub fights)
other than abusive partners, killing at this rate, there would be uproar. But for murdered women it is just a small article in a local paper.

I'm not sure its as clear cut as selfish man kills wife- he clearly has/had a psychiatric issue - and thats not just what the defence said
I do think one issue is why should someone with mental health issues be able to get a gun licence-and whilst i can see that he lied surely you shouldn't be able to lie- there should be some sort of central check/need to get a medical sign off etc

He was given a life sentence of 16 years with a minimum of 8 years to be served in a psychiatric hospital.

Can you provide different info to show who said what about his MH please?

Loads of people have MH issues from mild to severe.

They don't go around killing people.

To have it as defence/ mitigation it needs to be full on psychosis as in no idea what doing. Hallucinating. Really far gone.

Got a link?

Judge comments don't seem impressed. Reasons for murder MH not mentioned.

Do you have the full judges comments?

He;s been remanded in a psychiatric hospital and the prosecution accepted his plea of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility- so appears to be pretty severe ( this was in the link given by the OP)
Judge also said "the case brought a sharp focus on an array of topical issues including violence against women and the impact the pandemic has had on people's mental health." ITV

Obviously it could be an elaborate defense/excuse - i think thats what the victim's family think- but based on the evidence that we can see its hard to say.
I'm not saying any of this to diminish the horror of what he did or of women who are killed by their abuser/through domestic abuse

it was not murder.
he pleaded guilty to manslaughter by reason of psychosis.

'Hartshorne-Jones denied murder at an earlier hearing. The charge was dropped as prosecutors accepted his plea of manslaughter due to diminished responsibility.'

He was charged with murder. Changed to manslaughter as would mean guilty plea.

Max sentence same I believe.? I think anyway.

So they prosecuted for manslaughter.

I'm sure you're aware that people tend to say murder in RL in a general 'he killed her' way rather than talking legalese?

Eg. Legal. Found guilty of causing or inciting a child under the age of 13 to engage in sexual.
Public- he sexually abused her.

No?

He shot his wife twice while she was in bed. Two children in the house. Then he went and had his breakfast.

And you feel the need to quibble over the use of the word murder?

I don't disagree that his actions were outrageous and that he sounds like a dreadful person, but a 16 year sentence is lengthy. Eight years is the minimum to be served, he might well be kept longer.

nicegerbil it's the diminished responsibility that i was focusing on
Murder is committed when a person of sound mind unlawfully kills another person
The defense of diminished responsibility reduces the murder conviction by removing malice aforethought. For example, if the offender has an abnormality of mental functioning caused by a recognised medical condition, diminished responsibility may be pleaded successfully. It will, however, be necessary to obtain and serve complex medical evidence as to the state of mind of the accused, at the time of the offence and leading up to it.

The terminology does matter- it's why it is (or should be) manslaughter if a woman kills a man after prolonged abuse rather than murder - & impacts the sentence

The judge's comments as reported here are telling. What I also took from the article is that the husband had contacts with mental health professionals in 26 days out of the 42 days preceding him shooting his wife but he refused to take the anti anxiety medication he had been prescribed. I wonder the the procedures are for informing the authorities if you have a mental health problem and hold a gun licence? This is not an example of someone whose mental health worsened but who slipped through the system.

I feel very sorry for the poor children. They have lost their mother and are now effectively parentless.

That’s two men who have shot women this year that I’m aware, who lied to get a gun licence. Clearly the licensing checks aren’t working.

@50ShadesOfCatholic

I don't disagree that his actions were outrageous and that he sounds like a dreadful person, but a 16 year sentence is lengthy. Eight years is the minimum to be served, he might well be kept longer.

16 years is lengthy?! For killing someone in cold blood with 2 children in the house? Lying for a gun licence too. Yeah, I think not. 50 years would be lengthy.

8 years is not long enough.

It makes me so sad. That wonderful, brave woman doing everything at home and for her children . And now they've lost the parent who was capable of putting them first. I don't care if he was ill, he was also a selfish, selfish man.

It's very lucky that he didn't harm the children.

@Naunet
You think? Do you follow sentencing? I do and 16years is indeed a lengthy sentence.

For manslaughter on the basis of diminished responsibility yes, 16 years is lengthy. It's unlikely that any appeal would succeed. If he carries on refusing to take medication he won't be let out on parole either.

@PastMyBestBeforeDate

Imagine the carnage if 50 year old women started shooting people who weren't paying attention to them.

It’s really not funny but as a 52 year old woman I did laugh. Sometimes the blackest of humour is perfectly appropriate.

That poor woman. I hope he has an awful time in prison and then dies before his release.

[quote 50ShadesOfCatholic]@Naunet
You think? Do you follow sentencing? I do and 16years is indeed a lengthy sentence.[/quote]
I’m not talking about sentencing guidelines, I’m talking about the value of human life. When you separate actual human lives out from facts and figures of sentencing, then you are losing sight of what actually matters here. Objectively, 16 years for killing someone like this, is not lengthy.

I'm somewhat torn on this one as the threshold for a MH defence is very high in the UK and the prosecution psychiatric experts would have to agree that he wasn't sane. He's also going to a secure psychiatric prison rather than a normal jail which is no cakewalk for anyone in fact they are pretty helish (I know someone who worked in 1) and most prisoners would prefer to be transferred to a normal prison than be there also unlike a normal sentence he won't automatically be up for parole after 8 years it will depend on his psychiatric health if they think that he is still mentally ill and/or believe that he won't properly engage with MH professionals he won't even be allowed to apply and even after his whole sentence they can still keep him if they consider him to still be a danger to himself or the public.
So whilst I would usually be outraged at such a lenient sentence under the circumstances I suspect that he will be wishing that he was done with murder and went to a normal jail very soon, just look at Peter Sutcliffe (the Yorkshire ripper) and his time in Broadmoor

I have a gun licence for clay pigeon shooting. They ask for a report directly from your GP and you also have a personal duty to disclose any mental health conditions such as stress or anxiety. I have no idea how he got around that. I do wonder if it's because he had a business and the renewal was lax. I don't keep a gun or cartridges in the house, they're stored at the gun club. They still did a home visit and interviewed me and DH at length about gun safety, storage and transport.