Why were these men free to kill (TRIGGER WARNING RAPE AND MURDER)

[Italiangreyhound]

This is a truly horrific story.

Why were these men free to kill (TRIGGER WARNING RAPE AND MURDER)

But if you want to avoid the horror or reading it, just know two murderers were released and murdered again.

Both murders men, at least two of their victims women. When will male violence be addressed?

How does this keep happening?

I wonder if the fact their first two victims were elderly means (as far as I know their first two victims). Is there some sort of bias in sentencing, or any other factor?

"Unwin had been released on licence in December 2012 having battered a pensioner to death during a break-in on Christmas Day 1998 in Houghton-le-Spring.

The fire he started to cover his tracks meant the victim could only be identified by his medical records.

McFall was released on licence in October 2010 after killing a pensioner with a hammer when she disturbed him breaking into her home in Carrickfergus in May 1996."

Anyway, I can't make sense of this, how was it decided that these men safe to go back into society?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-43896258

@Ereshkigal thank you, she was wonderful. I miss her very much. And how I feel pales in comparison to the dreadful pain her parents have to live with every day.

Behind every story of women being murdered by a man in the news are people who can tell stories like this. Who can explain that the woman who died mattered, that she was valued and loved, what her life meant. But it doesn’t suit the courts or the media to put it in the public domain. Which is very sad.

Just awful.

So sorry Smeddum. The way you talk about her is so lovely. I'm also glad you gave that reporter what for.

I started this thread a while back about killers released to kill again which talks about the murder of Quyen Ngoc Nguyen (among others). link

There was also this thread about the reporting of the murder of Leanne McKie by her husband, which focused on her supposed spending. Horrible thread. The deleted comments by one poster were particularly bad. link

Truly depressing stuff.

@Smeddum “a talkative girl “ ffs. That has given me the absolute rage, that terrible article. I am so sorry for your beautiful friends dreadful death, and for you and everyone who loved her.

@Popchyk thank you.

I remember thinking the same about Leanne McKie, the sly wee digs about spending, about holidays and clothes as if that was some kind of twisted justification!

That thread is heartbreaking. That Rochelle poster just doesn’t get it at all. “Oh it’s only 3”. Fuck me, say that to those three women’s families. See how far that gets her! I’m appalled.

@Smeddum I am so sorry for your friend.

"Even the trial and the media coverage tried to attribute blame to her, they spoke as if she wasn’t important, that she didn’t matter and as if she somehow brought it on herself. They described a “haphazard” lifestyle, they reduced her to a caricature of a woman in court and in the media, as if she was nothing."

That is so appalling. Where is the accountability for what is said in court. Why can these things not be taken to a higher authority?

"The appeals thankfully all failed, but were extremely traumatic for her family and friends, most of all her parents who will never be the same again because this bastard was released.

The justice system is fucked."

I am so very sorry, I cannot understand how we have come to this as a society. I honestly think they need to find a way to make prisons productive so that there is no reason to release people unless they really do deserve to be released. A life sentence should mean a very realistic time. Maybe they should not die in prison but maybe some should.

"It’s just so fucking unfair that his rights were considered paramount, when he actively chose to do what he did for his own gratification." It is heartbreaking. I wish we could do something.

That report' in the newspaper is FUCKED UP! Who cares if she met a man in the pub or was talkative or chatty or not shy! The sentence "He also faces a charge of repeatedly failing to notify police of her death." just shows how mad this world is. He killed her that is the thing the court needs to prove. All the rest is shit and is not needed, it just obscures the real issue.

"Sorry to derail OP, I completely agree with what you’re saying and I guess it’s a bit too close to home."

It is not a derail because this is part of the issue! If we women have no respect and deserve no respect in life or in death then maybe some sicko really feels it doesn't matter. The only way to make men know this does fucking matter is to lock them up and stop their liberty. So they cannot do this ever again and so that they act as a sign to other sick fucks that this is what is awaiting them life in prison.

If we women have no respect and deserve no respect in life or in death then maybe some sicko really feels it doesn't matter. The only way to make men know this does fucking matter is to lock them up and stop their liberty. So they cannot do this ever again and so that they act as a sign to other sick fucks that this is what is awaiting them life in prison.

This! Absolutely, every single word of it.

Thankfully (I can’t believe I’m conditioned to be grateful for this) the fucker that killed our Sam is unlikely to get out, or at least be very elderly by the time he does. But there are much younger men, who have committed acts of extreme violence against women and girls who WILL get out. The fact that the system allows this sickens me.

It’s all very well bleating about the “human rights” of the perpetrator, and I’m not usually a “hang em high” type, despite it all I do not believe in the death penalty because 1 innocent person being put to death by mistake is not worth the risk, but in this instance, for violent, self gratifying murder for kicks or as part of DV lock the fuckers up and throw away the key. Prioritise the rights of the victims, not the person who chose to take a life as if it was worth nothing.

The narrative when murderers of women are released is "this man is no longer a risk to society" but what it actually means is this man will not harm a stranger (who could be male) rather than this man will not harm any woman. So women are considered pre-responsible for anything this man may do because they either were overly friendly or not friendly enough, or they didn't limit their movements and this is not considered damaging to society because this is what society supposedly is.

Also it fucks me off that in court cases against murderers and rapists there is the prosecution for the crown but no legal representative for the victim which is what leads to this awful continuation of victim blaming and no attempt to correct it. Surely it would be fairer to have Crown prosecution, Defendant lawyer and victim lawyer or even just victim support.

Surely it would be fairer to have Crown prosecution, Defendant lawyer and victim lawyer or even just victim support.

Yes!!! Absolutely. It is the victims who are lost in the whole ridiculous rigmarole of court and pomp and ceremony, and yet it is they who should be paramount in the whole process!

I realise that this is also the case for robberies etc but it is particularly in sexually driven murder and rape trials where the victim somehow seems to be put on trial rather than the defendant as we saw so clearly in the Ulster rugby trial where the victim had to answer questions for longer than the four defendants combined.

@Smeddum I totally agree. The death penalty thing is not an option because we need to hold up a high standard for the rest of the world where death penalty still happens. However, life should mean life. I know they need some incentives to keep criminals in prison in line. And chance of parole may be one of them. But realistically when a sick fucko takes a person's life, any person, they need to know they will be an old man (or woman) when they get out of jail.

I think they should all have jobs in prison and pay for their keep and there would be no reason why anyone needs to be let out unless they are safe to go out.

If we had the death penalty then Stephen Unwin, William McFall, Simon Mellors, Theodore Johnson and Robert Chalmers would all be dead after their first murder.

Because we don't have the death penalty, it is Quyen Ngoc Nguyen, Janet Scott, Angela Best, Yvonne Bennett and Sam Wright who are all dead instead. Because these men were freed to kill again.

We've just ended up with dead innocent people instead of dead guilty people.

Which is a rather sobering thought.

Because we don't have the death penalty, it is Quyen Ngoc Nguyen, Janet Scott, Angela Best, Yvonne Bennett and Sam Wright who are all dead instead. Because these men were freed to kill again

That’s a very powerful statement, and you’re right. Absolutely right.

Smeddum

Because they don't give a shit if some random strangers are in danger. They assume it'll never happen to them or their families, and demonstrably think that women who get murdered are to blame in the way they let lawyers and courts pick these cases apart - as others have said, the women are always too friendly and should have protected themselves more, or not friendly enough and should have appeased them more.

Boys will be boys and men will be men and all that jazz.

Reading about poor Quyen's murder this morning made me cry with rage and sorrow, for her, and for all the other women murdered by men. Why the hell were those monsters freed in the first place?
Smeddum Your tribute to Sam is lovely.

@OlennasWimple @Notonyournellly thank you.

@Ardant you’ve nailed it.

Sadly, it is beyond what the trashy papers say, but what is actually being said about the victims in court. Women are first assassinated in body, then in character by the court/media. It is frequent, not exceptional. :(

In Samantha's case, she is accused of being "too talkative". But in patriarchy, a woman is always "too something". Whether that is 'too angry', too antagonistic', 'too mouthy', 'too friendly', 'too loose', 'too uptight'. The list is endless. And contradictory.

And in many cases, the victim cannot reply and defend herself or her character or actions. Instead of saying how it really is - this is a sexual predator who chose to rape/kill. It's a way to minimise and excuse male violence.

In Samantha's case, she is accused of being "too talkative". But in patriarchy, a woman is always "too something". Whether that is 'too angry', too antagonistic', 'too mouthy', 'too friendly', 'too loose', 'too uptight'. The list is endless. And contradictory.

So true.

It's not a derail, Smeddum. What happened to your friend strikes right at the heart of why these attitudes are so dangerous and how they result in men literally getting away with murder.

At one point they said Sam was too nice! One of her favourite sayings was “it’s nice to be nice innit?” With a big cheesy grin. And they even used that against her, like she was stupid or foolish for being kind.

She should have been able to get old, to become who she wanted to be and to fulfil her potential.

They all should. There’s a thread on here about a woman who is cycling a day for every woman murdered by a man in 2016 and 2017. She’s on 46 from 2017 already.

She wrote on her thread about raising awareness and hoping to get support to women before it happens. And she wrote the most chilling thing I’ve read on here

”But the bodies keep coming”

That stopped me in my tracks.

And they even used that against her, like she was stupid or foolish for being kind.

They would. Because that's how female victims get blamed for everything they did. Because it must be their fault in some way, right?

@Popchyk you are right and as I say it is the issue of death penalty used indiscriminately in other places that would worry me, not those men being removed from society permanently. But they could be kept in prison permanently if prisons could be made profitable so the wages earned by prisoners would be paid to cover costs of the prisons, so we as a society did not pay for prisons. I don't understand why it is how it is.

" There’s a thread on here about a woman who is cycling a day for every woman murdered by a man in 2016 and 2017. She’s on 46 from 2017 already." Can you link to it @Smeddum please?

Why as a society is there not more research into male violence, is there any fucking research into it?

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/26/mass-killer-toronto-attack-man-men

Hope this link works

this is the thread