Sutcliffe

I have joined the discussion on Peter Sutcliffe, because I
gave my opinion on the police, the judge, a severe mental
illness I got flack for not simply expressing sorrow and calling
for the death penalty.

I don’t think he refused treatment because he was controlling,
he had many attacks over the years, lost the sight of eye, i think through a knifing. Doubt very much he was treated kindly by the warders, God knows how tormented his mind was , he wanted to escape and the only way was death.

I feel so much for his victims and their families, but I also
think it too easy to judge someone who was seriously mentally
ill.

What of the mass murderer who cut up his victims bodies, kept parts in the fridge because he ate them

Seems a person with a serious mental illness is evil.

Sallywally1

So glad that monster has gone.

Thoughts with the women who died at his hands and their families Richard McCann, in particular, has been outstanding with his forgiveness to the person who murdered his mother.

I remember that time in the 70s when fear stalked the streets, not just in Leeds, but everywhere. Of course now is worse, but perhaps that was the beginning?

The original poster remembers the fear on the streets in the 1970’s, comments that things are worse now and wonders if this was the beginning.
Can I just point out the Jack the Ripper was murdering women in 1888.
I agree with Anniebach and Lemongrove, the death penalty won’t deter a serial killer.
I do think the police have a far more respectful and sympathetic view towards female victims than they did in the past.
Always room for improvement and good to hold to account the ones with their head in the past.

If you are referring to Anniebach's post about the death penalty Atqui, I will always speak out against the death penalty in any circumstances.

A thread about Peter Sutcliffe is bound to invite a variety of posts, so taking the moral high ground against Anniebach s post seems unnecessary.

Just one more thought on the hanging of Ruth Ellis, she did
murder her lover, she was guilty .

She was a peroxide night club hostess, her lover a wealthy former public school educated man, he was given to battering
her, he did so when she was pregnant and caused a miscarriage, she had severe depression , but she was guilty so they hanged her.

There being a death penalty for the crime of murder never stopped murderers, and as Annie rightly says, innocent men and women were executed at times.

EllanVannin

If the death penalty was still around these monsters wouldn't murder again would they ? It's the way I see it anyway.
It might be barbaric to many---but so is murdering innocent women !

Well, he never murdered again after they caught him, did he?

Thank you lemon for replying to my post without personal
snide comments.

EllanVannin if the death penalty was still around innocent
people would be hanged as well as the guilty. And women like
Ruth Ellis would be hanged.

If the death penalty was still around these monsters wouldn't murder again would they ? It's the way I see it anyway.
It might be barbaric to many---but so is murdering innocent women !

Anniebach

We need to learn from the past, how the police handle those
murders and attacks , has much changed ?

I really do hope so Annie
I think times have changed though, ( attitudes to women)and also computers have made such a difference, I doubt there could be so many mistakes made today.It really was a sexist era, the 1970’s and early 80’s.

It was a terrible time in the North, all those years while Sutcliffe continued his killing spree.The tv programme about it recently was an eye opener.The top detectives in the case were hopeless, and when he was finally captured ( by the Manchester police I think, and on a minor matter) then they realised what they had and put two and two together and then the West Yorkshire force ( the senior team on the case) tried to bask in the glory! It was a catalogue of errors from start to finish.

Anniebach

We need to learn from the past, how the police handle those
murders and attacks , has much changed ?

Do where did your post with gratuitous details fit in?

We need to learn from the past, how the police handle those
murders and attacks , has much changed ?

Sarnia, meaning that in its dying breath it remained to be the controlling monster that it was.

I think its quite important that the focus of this thread is women killed by violent men. And the reasons for that which include society's view of women.

Public figures, in my view, have not murdered thirteen innocent women, inflicted pain, injury, anxiety and lifelong mental illness deliberately on so many others, as this monster has. This ‘Pandemic’ has affected the world, the ‘public figures’ did not bring it about.

This ghastly person was directly responsible for thirteen deaths, much more injury, terror and anxiety and an enormous expenditure of public money.

We have, in the last year, seen some public figures who will never end up in jail, responsible for many more deaths, much more misery and a colossal amount of public money.

No, Hellogirl1 you are not alone. I find it horrific that taxpayers should have to pay for this monster’s funeral. Just heard it on the radio. Surely there are alternatives.

Two women each week are murdered by partner/ex partner. I read recently this has increased during lockdown, along with incidents of domestic abuse.

I echo was Suziewoosie says and hope that next time we have a gransnet thread on victims of sexual violence, whether its within a relationship or not, more empathy and understanding is shown for the victim.

Am I alone in being horrified that we, the taxpayers, have to pay up to £3,000 towards the cost of this monster`s funeral? That is, unless his family are footing the bill.

Annie I found your post extremely insensitive and inappropriate in the circumstances. I don’t think any of us want to go over the details. He’s dead and it’s the future treatment of women that should concern us

Should have gone years ago and saved the country a load of money.

Peter Sutcliffe’s first attack on a woman , he followed a prostitute who he believed was the woman who had stolen money from him. He hit the woman with a stone in a sock,
She reported the attack to the police , they questioned him,
he said he had hit her but only with his hand, the police told
him he was lucky the woman didn’t want to press charges.

The woman was ‘ a known prostitute her husband was serving
a jail sentence’.

I find it amazing that someone can be diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia by four psychiatrists but a judge could
dismiss this. Three years later he was transferred to Broadmoor , in 2009 he was declared sane. How did they cure
paranoid schizophrenia !

Next time there’s a thread on GN which results in victim blaming , there’s clearly going to be an increase in posters criticising that approach. I look forward to it.

Alegrias2

On one of the news programs last night - I forget which one - they slowly read out each woman's name and showed her picture. No mention of how she earned a living. I liked that.

Me too. That's the way it should be as well. They were all someone's daughter and ought to have been treated with respect. I recently read The Five by Hallie Rubenhold. It's a factual book about the 5 victims of Jack the Ripper. They were all portrayed as prostitutes which was incorrect as it turns out but it suited the men of the day to label them as such and imply that they had asked for their brutal end.