Colin Pitchfork

The terrorist who stabbed two people and who was shot dead by the police was under constant surveillance, and was allowed to buy a knife.
Not much guarantee of safety was it?

So much for the 'experts' saying this man posed no threat to young girls and released him 2 years earlier from his 'life' sentence. He has been taken back to prison because he has been approaching young women. Thank goodness the authorities acted quickly before we were reading about another girl losing her life at his hands.

Didn't take long for him to transgress - I presume and hope that this now means he will stay behind bars where he always belonged.

This monster should never have been given a second chance. Thank goodness he's back where he belongs.

It was interesting to read that Dawn Ashworth's uncle, Philip Musson, told the BBC that he thought the judge-led review "sends the wrong message".

But, of course, the Parole Boards are bound by Law to assess whether a prisoner is safe to release. And that Legislation dictates that a panel's decision must be solely focused on what risk a prisoner may pose on release and whether that risk can be managed in the community.

It seems that staff at the hostel where he was staying had become concerned about his behaviour. They concluded he was not being as honest as he could be - although there was not one specific incident that triggered an alarm.

I think there is an ongoing review of the parole system and that the law might be changed so that rapists / murderers such as Pitchfork face life in prison without the possibility of parole as the default sentence.

Over 30 killers killed again after being freed from prison between 2000/1 and 2010/11, statistics show.

Figures released by the Home Office show 29 people with homicide convictions went on to commit murder and six went on to commit manslaughter.

"We do everything we can to ensure that the public is protected from offenders but sadly risk can never be eliminated entirely." ... said a A Ministry of Justice spokesman.

Not good enough, not acceptable. Clearly there are some murderers who will never be rehabilitated and will remain a danger to the public. Bearing in mind the paucity of the services that deal with these offenders, the lack of funding etc, it is inevitable that some will go on to kill again.

"We do everything we can to ensure that the public is protected from offenders but sadly risk can never be eliminated entirely." ... said a A Ministry of Justice spokesman.

Yes it can if a whole life sentence is given, means just that and the prisoner is never released.

I have little faith in the parole system.

I have little faith in the parole system.

Neither have I.

There should be no assessment of someone like that. He should have a life sentence and stay locked up, in a male prison, for his whole life.

I hope those responsible for letting him out have a hard think about it, and about similar prisoners, knowing now that he has been approaching young girls - obviously trying out to see what he could get away with.

www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leicestershire-59377431

He’s only 61! What idiots decided he’d be safe to be released?
At least this time, they’ve realised their mistake. Let’s hope they throw away the key this time.

I wonder if he would have been released if he was housed close to the homes of those on the Parole Board? They should ask themselves the question of whether they would be happy for a prisoner to be located close to them and their family and if the answer is no - then the prisoner should remain in custody.

Should have been kept in for the whole of his life.

I’m relieved the staff in the hostel acted effectively.
We imprison too many people in this country, many of whom would benefit from good alternatives to custody.
Offenders like this man should stay in a male prison for life. Let’s all hope he doesn’t decide to self ID as female so he can gain access to vulnerable women in prison

maddyone

^I have little faith in the parole system.^

Neither have I.

I have little faith in the parole system.

According to some news reports, the conditions under which he's been released are the most restrictive, most severe, that have ever been imposed on an offender previously. Which does beg the question - if the conditions have to be so draconian, so limiting - is he safe to be at large?

The probation service is part privatised although I believe high-risk offenders are managed by the National Probation Service. There was a 'shake-up' of the service some years ago now where the government tried to "encourage innovation". The very phrase gives an insight into the thinking of a party bent on shrinking and privatising State services. And that's what worries me.

I'm sure the parole board follow the strict guidelines laid down - but who made the guidelines and what was factored into them? We don't know and are not allowed to know the details, just the principle.

This man raped and murdered two young girls, not one, but two. Has his sick mind been 'rehabilitated' during his sentence? Is he remorseful? Is he, or has he ever been, aware of his depravity - is he even concerned about it? According to the hostel staff he has not been "as honest as he could have been" when questioned about his activities.

Fortunately, he's now back in prison and there will be many obstacles in front of him winning the right to be released again. Which begs another question - did the parole board make a mistake in releasing him?

I can see why people do not trust the parole system.

if the conditions have to be so draconian, so limiting - is he safe to be at large?

How draconian were they really, if he was able to approach young girls?
Plural was used, so not just once.

A person who managed to evade justice is not entirely stupid. An innocent man was arrested until DNA evidence, used for the first time in a criminal investigation, proved it could not have been him. Then Pitchfork got a friend to give a DNA sample for him too.

Someone like that could manipulate and deceive a parole board into thinking he was remorseful and a reformed character.

Offenders like this man should stay in a male prison for life. Let’s all hope he doesn’t decide to self ID as female so he can gain access to vulnerable women in prison

I agree, Iam64, he should stay inside a closed male prison for life and I hope he doesn't persuade well-meaning people that he should be transferred to a women's prison.

It's absolutely appalling that we have to hope that he won't be put in a women's prison, because the prison authorities have proven themselves stupid enough to do that, if he claims to be a woman.
I don't want to derail this into a thread about 'trans' prisoners but it is a relevant consideration.

FarNorth

^if the conditions have to be so draconian, so limiting - is he safe to be at large?^

How draconian were they really, if he was able to approach young girls?
Plural was used, so not just once.

Well, 'draconian' in theory, but not in implementation.

Obviously he was allowed out and about on his own, but under what terms and conditions, we don't really know.

FarNorth

It's absolutely appalling that we have to hope that he won't be put in a women's prison, because the prison authorities have proven themselves stupid enough to do that, if he claims to be a woman.
I don't want to derail this into a thread about 'trans' prisoners but it is a relevant consideration.

However manipulative he might be, I doubt the parole board would be fooled into believing he'd transformed overnight into a trans woman.
There will be an extensive review of his breach of conditions, and they'd have to be monumentally stupid to put him into a women's prison - especially given all the publicity to date.
It won't happen.

what idiot decided he was safe to be released
He ticked all the boxes, gave all the right answers, nodded in all the right places. Kept his head down and knew how to work the system when his time came.

Yes, devious people can hoodwink the parole board. Remember the terrorist who did just that and what he did as soon as he was released? I have no faith in the current system and the do-gooders who sit on the boards.

I'm glad you're so confident Dickens.
I expect those who assessed him thought he wouldn't approach young girls.

Exactly Meryl if only he'd had a bit more patience - probably the draconian conditions would have been eased off a bit and he could have got acquainted with anyone he wanted to.

FarNorth

I'm glad you're so confident Dickens.
I expect those who assessed him thought he wouldn't approach young girls.

We don't know exactly what the conditions of his probation are / were. But the very fact he is now back in prison for approaching young women would indicate that he's breached one of those conditions - because it was probably one that was in the forefront of their minds. So I'm sure they did think of it.

I don't have much faith in the parole system, or the board that makes these decisions for release, but for them not to have considered this possibility would be staggeringly negligent. They did think of it, put restrictions in place which he breached and that's why he's now behind bars again. Hopefully, permanently.

What defeats me is that it is known that men like this are manipulative, and can play it for the long game, not only that but Pitchfork had a history of manipulation throughout the justice process - yet still he was let out because they were convinced he was no longer a danger.

What leaves me wondering is why he started acting in an inapproropriate way so quickly when he must have known how closely he was being watched - Just shows how the instincts of men like this can master them so that they act in their own worst interests.

Psychopaths don’t fundamentally change. I believe they can become increasingly cunning and manipulative. It seems that happened here but then given ‘freedom’ this sexual psychopath couldn’t stop himself starting to act out the fantasies he’s been working on.