Peter Sutcliffe wins right to ruling on release
High Court to decide on minimum sentence tariff for serial killer
Tuesday 02 March 2010
Latest in Crime
On Facebook
From the blogs
Roy Hodgson for England: A club of one
To argue against Harry Redknapp for England is akin to arguing in favour of bankers bonuses. While s...
Time for a reality check on the Sri Lankan civil war
Sri Lanka, much like Britain, has side-lined accountability long enough.
Children Of Alcoholics week: One million children may just be the tip of the iceberg
Children Of Alcoholics week starts today. So, what are the aims for Nacoa during this important week...
Review of Being Human: ‘Being Human 1955’
Following on from an episode tinged with tragedy, this week lifted the mood with something lighter.
Peter Sutcliffe, the Yorkshire Ripper, has won permission for a High Court hearing which will determine whether he could one day be released.
The serial killer launched his attempt to obtain a hearing on how long he should be imprisoned in 2008, but reporting restrictions which kept the proceedings anonymous were finally lifted yesterday after a judge ruled that the ban risked infringing the "overriding principle that justice should be seen to be done".
Sutcliffe, 63, who now prefers to be known as Peter Coonan, was given 20 life sentences in 1981 for the murder of 13 women and the attempted murder of seven others in Yorkshire and Greater Manchester over a five-year period, which made him one of the most prolific killers in British history.
A 30-year tariff, which is due to expire next year, was recommended by the judge at Sutcliffe's trial but never formally adopted by the Government at the time. Since then, tariff-setting powers have been transferred back to the courts to counter concerns of political intervention in sentencing powers.
Sutcliffe, who has spent all but three years of his sentence inside Broadmoor high-security hospital, does not feature on a Home Office list of 35 prisoners serving "whole life" sentences, and applied to the High Court to determine whether he should be added to that list or given a finite prison term.
Mr Justice Mitting ruled yesterday that Sutcliffe was entitled to a hearing to set his tariff, likely to take place later this year. A decision to give the serial killer a limited term "for retribution and deterrence" would eventually allow him to seek a parole hearing to decide whether he was fit for release.
The High Court in London heard that Sutcliffe, who claimed he was on a "mission from God" to kill prostitutes, had enjoyed "very considerable success" during his treatment after he was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia. The Ripper, in fact, targeted at least 10 women who were not sex workers, including his youngest victim, 16-year-old Jayne MacDonald.
Dr Kevin Murray, the psychiatrist who has been in charge of Sutcliffe's care since 2001, said in a 2006 report that the former lorry driver now posed a "low risk of reoffending".
The report also questioned whether Sutcliffe, who mutilated his victims using a hammer, a sharpened screw driver and a knife, should have been convicted of murder for the killings, suggesting in "blunt and firm" terms that he was suffering from schizophrenia at the time and should have had a plea of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility accepted by the trial judge, Mr Justice Boreham.
Mr Justice Mitting ruled that Dr Murray's report could not form part of the evidence to be heard at the tariff hearing, but in a surprise move suggested it could be grounds for a referral to the Criminal Cases Review Commission, the body that investigates suspected miscarriages of justice.
The tariff hearing could still decide to impose a whole life sentence on Sutcliffe. The sanction is normally imposed if an offender has murdered two or more people with a substantial degree of premeditation and if the victims were abducted or there was a sadistic or sexual element to the killings.
After reports last year that Sutcliffe might be transferred to a lower security hospital, Gordon Brown said it was "very unlikely" he would ever be released.
- 1 Lightning kills an entire football team
- 2 Fear for deported Saudi 'ridiculous', says Malaysian home minister
- 3 Eight arrests as Murdoch 'throws staff to the wolves'
- 4 Israel blames Iran for embassy bomb attacks
- 5 Now The Sun tries to call in its favours from Downing Street
- 6 I was born to be a killer. Every night I see the Devil in my dreams
- 7 BBC to issue global apology for documentaries that broke rules
- 1 Kate Allen: It's time for America to put an end to this shameful scandal
- 2 Spotify: 1 million plays, £108 return
- 3 Chemotherapy is 'safe during pregnancy'
- 4 BBC to issue global apology for documentaries that broke rules
- 5 Rhodri Marsden: What we like and what we don't like are often closer than you'd think
- 6 Lightning kills an entire football team
- 7 I was born to be a killer. Every night I see the Devil in my dreams
- 8 Henry does it his way, ending on a high note
- 9 Modern lovers: The 'sexual body warriors' and pioneers transforming 21st-century relationships
- 10 Redknapp hints at same old faces for England
Free trial of new Independent iPad app
Get your daily dose of the best of British journalism, sponsored by American Airlines
Win a three-week coastal jaunt
Spend three weeks exploring every nook and cranny of gorgeous Atlantic Canada.
Amazing restaurant offers
Three glasses of free champagne and a special menu at 46 top London restaurants.
Latest Independent competitions
Win anything from gadgets to five-star holidays on our competitions and offers page.
Commercial thought leaders
Watch the best in the business world give their insights into the world of business.
Day In a Page
Apple admits it has a human rights problem
James Lawton: AVB looks all at sea
Procrastination: Not now – I'm busy
Silent revolution at the Baftas
The diva who had – and lost – it all


Comments