Yorkshire Ripper 'fit for release'

Yorkshire Ripper 'fit for release'

www.news.com.au

THE notorious Yorkshire Ripper has been classified low risk and recommended for release from a high-security psychiatric hospital, reports say.
Broadmoor Hospital’s doctors have told lawyers representing the Ripper, Peter Sutcliffe, who murdered 13 women and tried to kill seven others that he is no longer dangerous, The Sun reports.

According to a source close to Sutcliffe, the medics will support his bid to get out of Broadmoor as they believe he is effectively cured as long as he keeps taking his medication.

And if the Ministry of Justice, headed by Jack Straw, agrees with their verdict, he will be moved to a medium-security unit.

That means he would skip the high-security step of the mental hospital process and be given much more freedom.

(visit the link for the full news article)

If Ministry of Justice agrees then he will be released.

Sutcliffe is a serial killer. He should remain incarcerated for the term of his natural life. LIFE in prison.

He has taken the life of 13 women and injured 7 others.

This guy still requires medication.

He was on a mission from God???

Sutcliffe believed he was on a “mission from God” to kill prostitutes but not all of his victims were sex workers.

To kill prostitutes? He is a nut job and should not be up for release.

The green light relies on one person?

Utter BS!





www.news.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)

He was jailed in 1981 but transferred to Broadmoor in 1984 after being ruled mentally ill. He refused treatment until 1993, when the Mental Health Act Commission said it should be given forcibly.

edit to add: 1981 - 2009 = 28 yrs jail?

wow so all the women he killed only warrant 28 yrs in jail?
Why is he even up for consideration????




[edit on 17-2-2009 by Thurisaz]

He is nuts.
Maybe the long time of meds and seclusion have stabilized him.
But he should be heavily monitored.

You need to read it again lol

he's being released from Broadmoor, which is a psychiatric institute...

He's not being released to the street or anything like that... they're simply moving him to a medium security prison... allowing him to skip the max security step...

I repeat... read again... he's not being released from prison lol

reply to post by nj2day


LOL I read it. The nut job should not be entitled to any restrictions being lifted.

Seems rather silly... 'he refuses to take his meds' but we can give him more freedom because he is not dangerous.

farout

oh and how much is all of this costing the taxpayer?



[edit on 17-2-2009 by Thurisaz]

Originally posted by Thurisaz
reply to post by nj2day

 

oh and how much is all of this costing the taxpayer?

bah, Its The U.K's ordeal... I figure they can do what they want with their own taxpayer money... I try not to impose American cultural values against other cultures. It never works out well...

reply to post by nj2day



we are all in recession. What one country does effects us. I am not USA but Aussie. Just absurd the amount of money flaunted around.

Do you have any idea how much Public Servants get per annum?

Some are paid more than Police & Nurses. BS. Oh anyway, not to go off on a tangent but this just annoys me. LOL

Originally posted by nj2day
He's not being released to the street or anything like that... they're simply moving him to a medium security prison... allowing him to skip the max security step...

I would of thought his personal situation would be better in Broadmoor, when he goes to 'normal' type prison he is gonna be a bit of a high profile prisoner... I know if I were ever in prison I would want to keep my head down, imagine the prison kudos some thug would get for beating him.

I think finance may be a big consideration here, must cost a fortune to keep someone in Broadmoor, he's gonna have a less comfortable life in regular prison, I'm not concerned for him at all, let him rot anywhere... The cheaper on the tax payer the better IMO. He sould of been hung years ago. But that time has passed, keeping him as an example will have to do.

Originally posted by Thurisaz




"oh and how much is all of this costing the taxpayer?"


I work in a a medium secure hospital so it will cost £5000 minimum a week to keep him. The Primary Care Trusts pay for this out of their funding by the NHS. That is with one member of staff observing at all times. We have a patient at the moment who is costing the tax payer £1700 a day, he has 3 members of staff at all times and lives on a ward by himself.
For that money they are given their own bedrooms, have 4 meals a day, get to go out shopping, fishing, sailing etc. They have no rent to pay, no outgoings and they still receive benefits and they have the cheek to refer to the £10,000+ they have in the bank as their hard earned money and complain because they have to pay £100 to the member of staff whose nose was broken by them!

Call me cynical if you like but this sucks.

Somebody like this would never survive on the UK streets. Vigilantism is one of the Uk's deciding factors.

In this day and age, paedophilies get battered and murdered. Many killers, infamous due to the media will be hunted by family members and friends of the victims.

I know for a fact that the Jamie Bulger killers have a bounty on their heads in liverpool. If anybody recognised them, then they would never be found again. It's common knowledge in Merseyside.
Hence the authorities moving them away to another country.

They should be locked up for life.


[edit on 18-2-2009 by mr-lizard]

Regarding costs as to keeping prisoners and secure patients - it is a ridiculously high figure, but I've often wondered - as with a lot of things that have price tags - just how exactly is this money spent when it's claimed it costs X amount of money. I'd hazard a guess that, as with a lot areas in the NHS and the civil service, a large percentage of that money is actually disappearing into things like 'administration'.

As for Sutcliffe's mental health and the issue of medication, after transfer he'll be in the same boat as many thousands of prisoners up and down the country - on medication (anything from anti-depressants to anti-psychotics) that are in prisons rather secure hospitals. What's the use of keeping them specifically in secure hospitals if courses of medication are the main form of treatment?

If being on medication because of mental health issues was the criteria for secure hospital placements as opposed to regular custodial sentences, then this country would need several dozen more 'Broadmoors'.

He refused treatment until 1993, when the Mental Health Act Commission said it should be given forcibly.


He will not be a threat as long as he takes his medication?????


So, are they going to have a guard shove pills down his throat morning noon and night in the new location?


I hope his new cell mate is a politician.

I know this is waaaaaaaay off the theme of the thread, but if we had hung him!!!!

We would not be caring one bit about him or concerned at the cost of keeping him alive.

As it has already been pointed out, he's only fit for release from Broadmoor, not into the public again completely.

Then again, we all know how the less secure establishments work these days, i guaruntee you'll see this thing out on a shopping trip soon accompanied by a member or staff.

Oh well, as far as i'm concerned, let him out. The sooner that happens, the sooner someone will put an end to the constant fleecing of the taxpayer to keep him in prison. I'd give this freak six months on the outside.

CX.

reply to post by Thurisaz
I live very close to where Sutcliffe carried out his horrific murders.At the time us gals were terrified to go out at night ,I c'ant even begin to describe the fear in North Yorkshire.It was'nt just prostitutes that were at risk as one murder was a young innocent girl.A man as sick and deranged as he was must never be allowed out of secure confinement.A man who did the most horrific things to his victims will never be safe in any minimum security.

Well the Gordon Brown seems to think differently about any hope of a future release...

Ripper freedom unlikely - PM

CX.

Originally posted by badgerprints

I hope his new cell mate is a politician.

Brilliant... Star for you

Originally posted by ufo girl

I work in a a medium secure hospital so it will cost £5000 minimum a week to keep him. The Primary Care Trusts pay for this out of their funding by the NHS. That is with one member of staff observing at all times. We have a patient at the moment who is costing the tax payer £1700 a day, he has 3 members of staff at all times and lives on a ward by himself.
For that money they are given their own bedrooms, have 4 meals a day, get to go out shopping, fishing, sailing etc. They have no rent to pay, no outgoings and they still receive benefits and they have the cheek to refer to the £10,000+ they have in the bank as their hard earned money and complain because they have to pay £100 to the member of staff whose nose was broken by them!

My Brother works in an Insane Asylum...so I have heard of the goings on... but the cost is BS.




[edit on 18-2-2009 by Thurisaz]