• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.
Britain's most dangerous man 'kept in same glass box as Hannibal Lecter' underneath Yorkshire prison
Robert Maudsley
Link to Hull Daily Mail Article

The serial killer was one of 12 children and was taken into care when he was just a baby.
Maudsley spent his early years living at Nazareth House, a Catholic orphanage in Merseyside, but this was a welcome relief from the chaos he was forced to endure at home.
When he was eight, he and his siblings were taken back home, where he was subjected to years of violent abuse.
His father would regularly beat his children and Maudsley often took extra beatings to protect his siblings.
Once he was even locked in a room for six months - the only contact being violence from his father.

Link to Wikipedia Article
 
A serial killer stalks the sugar cane fields.

A sugar-growing community in South Africa is reeling after the bodies of five women aged between 16 and 38 were discovered dumped on farms, writes the BBC's Kyla Herrmannsen.

Illuminated by the flickering of a small candle, Zama Chiliza's relatives sit in mourning. Items of her clothing - a white top and skirt - are laid out on a mattress on the floor, as is customary practice. The candle is placed where her head would be - symbolising the presence of her soul. Until she is buried, this candle will burn day and night. ...

The family had been aware that the bodies of some women had been found in the area months prior Ms Chiliza's disappearance - but they never anticipated she would fall victim to such a gruesome fate.

"These deaths started happening while Zama was still alive. We would hear about the horrific murders. At some stage Zama and I even discussed these mysterious killings and had our own theories about them," says Mr Khambule. "We were really worried when she disappeared," he admits, adding: "We woke up one day to be told that Zama had become a statistic."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-53905167
 
Britain's most dangerous man 'kept in same glass box as Hannibal Lecter' underneath Yorkshire prison
Robert Maudsley
Link to Hull Daily Mail Article

The serial killer was one of 12 children and was taken into care when he was just a baby.
Maudsley spent his early years living at Nazareth House, a Catholic orphanage in Merseyside, but this was a welcome relief from the chaos he was forced to endure at home.
When he was eight, he and his siblings were taken back home, where he was subjected to years of violent abuse.
His father would regularly beat his children and Maudsley often took extra beatings to protect his siblings.
Once he was even locked in a room for six months - the only contact being violence from his father.

Link to Wikipedia Article
I read that whilst he is in solitary he asked to get a budgie to keep him company but was refused.

They always seem to come from the most awful backgrounds.
 
One thing I noticed about Maudsley - all of the people he killed were bad people. 3 were child abusers/paedophiles. Maudsley was abused as a child and I think he has tried to make war on this type of person. A deeply disturbed person, because of what happened to him - which might explain why he was put into Broadmoor.
 
Quite so. Coming from that background (and one might even wonder with certain genetics, if his father was so abusive) then it sounds like he was almost bound to crack in one way or another. But there must be equally violent murderers who don't get put away indefinitely, though? And it struck me that with an indefinite sentence, what does someone have to lose if they kill someone else in the prison? nothing.
And is he really a 'serial killer'? You wouldn't call a criminal in a gang a 'serial killer' just because they've killed more than one other criminal. Am I just being fussy about semantics here. There's enough revolting romanticisation of 'serial killers' in the press without them labelling this murderer one as well?

It did make me wonder how he managed to hold one of the other people he killed in a cell for 9 hours. That doesn't sound like terribly good crisis management on the part of the prison. No I don't know the details. But it sounds a bit crap doesn't it.
And solitary confinement... I mean call me a bleeding heart liberal but if you're actually mad and not just bad (which is why you're in Broadmoor after all) then isn't that more than punishment if it's indefinite, indefinitely monotonous? If you weren't mad you'd certainly go mad. To refuse someone in that situation a budgie is just pathetic, where would the harm in that be. I doubt he's got a vendetta against budgies. If the answer is 'he's in prison it shouldn't be all about tv and fun' then my counter is that being in Broadmoor means you're not right in the head, and shouldn't things be a bit different?
Hmm. You're welcome to take issue with all or any of this. It's just what reading that made me think of.
 
At least 70% of serial killers come from awful backgrounds.

But there are two issues. One, a lot of people come from awful childhoods and are not serial killers. Two, an astonishing number of serial killers are focused on women/girls in the age range 3 to 25 years old. To the point where reading their conformity to a stereotype of the predator on a vulnerable female is massively depressing.

Women simply should not have to put up with these predators, and when they are identified they should, if possible , be taken out of the gene pool. Only when convicted beyond doubt, by DNA evidence.
 
I watched a really interesting documentary last night about Harold Jones who killed 2 young girls when he was a teenager.

And whether he might be jack the stripper serial killer.

Based on the evidence of the program it seemed very likely that he was.

Think they're looking into the case again but there is no distinct yes or no answer yet.

I don't suppose they ever really will get a definitive answer.
 
Britain's most dangerous man 'kept in same glass box as Hannibal Lecter' underneath Yorkshire prison
Robert Maudsley
Link to Hull Daily Mail Article

The serial killer was one of 12 children and was taken into care when he was just a baby.
Maudsley spent his early years living at Nazareth House, a Catholic orphanage in Merseyside, but this was a welcome relief from the chaos he was forced to endure at home.
When he was eight, he and his siblings were taken back home, where he was subjected to years of violent abuse.
His father would regularly beat his children and Maudsley often took extra beatings to protect his siblings.
Once he was even locked in a room for six months - the only contact being violence from his father.

Link to Wikipedia Article


Poor bastard.

This mans life has been hell on Earth.
 
And solitary confinement... I mean call me a bleeding heart liberal but if you're actually mad and not just bad (which is why you're in Broadmoor after all) then isn't that more than punishment if it's indefinite, indefinitely monotonous? If you weren't mad you'd certainly go mad. To refuse someone in that situation a budgie is just pathetic, where would the harm in that be. I doubt he's got a vendetta against budgies. If the answer is 'he's in prison it shouldn't be all about tv and fun' then my counter is that being in Broadmoor means you're not right in the head, and shouldn't things be a bit different?
It seems like an extraordinarily cruel way to treat someone so badly broken. Very Victorian. It's a wonder they aren't bolstering the prison coffers by charging people to come in and throw rotten fruit. He isn't even in Broadmoor which is a secure mental hospital but in prison.

Here is the budgie story. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/687659.stm

In a series of letters to The Times, murderer Robert Maudsley asks for access to classical music tapes, a television, pictures, toiletries and a budgerigar.
He doesn't have anything at all? Like I said, extraordinarily cruel. Mind, about the budgerigar:-

I promise to love it and not eat it.
:nails:

I can only hope he is exaggerating about not even having a TV, toiletries or music to listen to.
And is he really a 'serial killer'? You wouldn't call a criminal in a gang a 'serial killer' just because they've killed more than one other criminal. Am I just being fussy about semantics here. There's enough revolting romanticisation of 'serial killers' in the press without them labelling this murderer one as well?
The BBC labels him "one of Britains most notorious serial killers" but I agree with you. Plus I admit I am finding it tricky to find too much sympathy with the victims here..
But there are two issues. One, a lot of people come from awful childhoods and are not serial killers. Two, an astonishing number of serial killers are focused on women/girls in the age range 3 to 25 years old. To the point where reading their conformity to a stereotype of the predator on a vulnerable female is massively depressing.
This one seems like a remarkable exception since he targeted the abusers.
 
I don't have a problem with this sort of database being used by shared authorities. If someone has inflicted themselves on another person, leaving a biological detritus, then, on your own head be it.

Could it be used by rogue governments, and ideologically driven law enforcement - yes. I reckon that this is what fighting in the streets is all about.

What I do have a problem with are specific genetic discoveries made from an individuals DNA, that are beneficial to humanity, which are then patented/copyrighted by corporations/businesses and then marketed in the name of free enterprise.

Someone named us Sapien once...that should have been Callidus. Homo callidus.

Your opinion will vary.
Both my wife and I have submitted our DNA to Ancestry U.K. and neither of us would object to the police having access if it for the right purpose. But given that a number of close relatives have had to surrender their DNA over the years, my profile wouldn’t be hard to find.
 
Solicitor leeks details.

"I did it for fun, it was easy."

These were the words the solicitor who defended "Wales' worst serial killer" heard when Peter Moore finally confessed to his crimes in the early hours of Christmas Eve 1995.

Moore - now serving a whole-life sentence at Wakefield Prison in West Yorkshire - stabbed to death four men in north Wales during the autumn of that year, in "sexually-motivated attacks". He is also thought to have carried out at least 20 beatings with clubs and police truncheons in the two decades previously.

From his arrest that December up until his trial at Mold Crown Court in November 1996, he was represented by former Abergele solicitor Dylan Rhys Jones. Mr Jones believes Moore is the most manipulative person he has ever come across in his career, changing his story to toy with the police, "like a cat with a mouse", and even sending Mr Jones a Christmas card from prison.

Twenty-five years on, Mr Jones feels the time is now right to detail the investigation and the personal toll it took on him. The things he saw and heard over that year left him needing counselling and he believes Moore was a factor in his decision to give up practising law. He said it was not an easy decision to write the book describing his experience: The Man in Black - Peter Moore: Wales' Worst Serial Killer.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-53934380
 
It seems like an extraordinarily cruel way to treat someone so badly broken. Very Victorian. It's a wonder they aren't bolstering the prison coffers by charging people to come in and throw rotten fruit. He isn't even in Broadmoor which is a secure mental hospital but in prison.

Here is the budgie story. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/687659.stm


He doesn't have anything at all? Like I said, extraordinarily cruel. Mind, about the budgerigar:-

:nails:

I can only hope he is exaggerating about not even having a TV, toiletries or music to listen to.

The BBC labels him "one of Britains most notorious serial killers" but I agree with you. Plus I admit I am finding it tricky to find too much sympathy with the victims here..

This one seems like a remarkable exception since he targeted the abusers.
Well, he was in Broadmoor until he killed and started to eat a fellow inmate. At which point presumably he was decided too dangerous and Broadmoor would have had to protect their other inmates. I'm a bit surprised no-one has taken his case the the European human rights court.

I don't have any sympathy for his victims and I don't see why he shouldn't have a TV or radio - they could be outside the box except for some kind of remote controls and a loudspeaker in the roof. He is obviously not responsible for his actions, not in any real sense.

Without in anyway wanting to defend them, I do have some sympathy for a very small number of SK's that have had really really shite lives, even worse than the average SK - Aileen Wournos and Richard Chase spring to mind.
 
Last edited:
Quite so. Coming from that background (and one might even wonder with certain genetics, if his father was so abusive) then it sounds like he was almost bound to crack in one way or another. But there must be equally violent murderers who don't get put away indefinitely, though? And it struck me that with an indefinite sentence, what does someone have to lose if they kill someone else in the prison? nothing.
And is he really a 'serial killer'? You wouldn't call a criminal in a gang a 'serial killer' just because they've killed more than one other criminal. Am I just being fussy about semantics here. There's enough revolting romanticisation of 'serial killers' in the press without them labelling this murderer one as well?

It did make me wonder how he managed to hold one of the other people he killed in a cell for 9 hours. That doesn't sound like terribly good crisis management on the part of the prison. No I don't know the details. But it sounds a bit crap doesn't it.
And solitary confinement... I mean call me a bleeding heart liberal but if you're actually mad and not just bad (which is why you're in Broadmoor after all) then isn't that more than punishment if it's indefinite, indefinitely monotonous? If you weren't mad you'd certainly go mad. To refuse someone in that situation a budgie is just pathetic, where would the harm in that be. I doubt he's got a vendetta against budgies. If the answer is 'he's in prison it shouldn't be all about tv and fun' then my counter is that being in Broadmoor means you're not right in the head, and shouldn't things be a bit different?
Hmm. You're welcome to take issue with all or any of this. It's just what reading that made me think of.
I say give him his budgie and a few things to keep him occupied and entertained. I think they're damaging an already-damaged individual by denying him these few things.
 
Further to the above, re Maudsley - I'm not in favour of the death penalty generally , but in this case surely he is getting a punishment worse than death? He would appear to be being subjected to ongoing mental torture.

I don't state that as my belief, just throwing it into the air as a discussion point.
 
I say give him his budgie and a few things to keep him occupied and entertained. I think they're damaging an already-damaged individual by denying him these few things.

The budgie wouldn't be safe. Nobody would take responsibility for giving a pet to someone as dangerous as he is. The Daily Mail'd eat them for breakfast.
 
The budgie wouldn't be safe. Nobody would take responsibility for giving a pet to someone as dangerous as he is. The Daily Mail'd eat them for breakfast.
I guess that's the problem. The media's opinion.
 
Why not? Don't they matter for some reason? Didn't they have families who loved them?
They were violent child molesters and/or murderers. . He had been abused as a child. I'm actually surprised there aren't more like him, but he is a virtually unique case - sadly many abused children seem to turn into abusers themselves.
 
Can't say I really approve of birds in cages of any kind - that's cruel in itself, but I'd offer him alternatives such as a mouse, rat, or summat. Tell him if he eats it he won't get another, & don't tell the Mail.

He might find there's something he can care for. Can you imagine being banged up 23 hours a day with little to keep yourself occupied? I'd give him a radio as well, can't see what's wrong or dangerous with that. I'm assuming he's allowed books but maybe he's not much of a reader..
 
What this man did, and to whom, is understandable to me.

As a growing child he must have seen some extremely daunting acts done to his siblings, by the people who were meant to be the people you run to, when things like this happen to you and your brothers and sisters.

When this happens there comes a time when you say to yourself - fuck it, what can they do to me that they haven't already done?

And when you come across these sorts of people who would inflict this behaviour on defenceless bairns, you know that you're doing the world a favour by removing them.

The actions of the Turnscrew is vindictive, morally repugnant and to a degree, sadistic, which speaks volumes to me, about him, rather than Mr Maudsley.

I say give Mr Maudsley his classical music, his literature, and his budgie.

Your opinion may vary.
 
This answers some of your questions: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jvcham...c-genealogy-golden-state-killer/#908b4c65a6d0
From what I recall, the GSK was caught because a relative had used one of these websites and police requested information. They then compared the GSK DNA with the data they had, looked for relatives of the partial match they got, and found a guy who had lived near the scene of all the rapes and murders - who was of course DiAngelo. It raises ethical questions -- of course it's great that they caught such a brutal killer, but if this technology exists it means we have very little privacy about our genetic data, and if we happen to live in a country that can't be trusted to have reasonable laws, we may end up in trouble (imagine for example it being desirable to keep a particular ethnic heritage secret).

Interesting, thanks and to Maximus Otter too.
 
I suppose Jack the Ripper tours are in just as bad taste, but have the excuse of the murders taking place over a century ago, so there's nobody left to mourn the victims.
 
Back
Top