Here’s a guy who has been in imprisoned since 1966. He has always been kept in high security, he has never had the possibility of parole, he is apparently an intelligent bloke and I’m sure – given his crimes – that he will have been an object of hate to many who have crossed his path. So why is the state – our state – going to such lengths to keep him alive ? (The fact these tablets were paracetamol is irrelevant – it’s the actions that matter). I’m sure the authorities will be using some intricacy of the Mental Health Act to keep him alive in the manner they do, but why ?
What good does it serve for society for him to be locked away like this instead of allowing him to die as he wishes ? The crimes he committed – which were horrific – are those of two generations ago. Crimes that happen now seem to get less of a sentence that from back then. (In the 60’s, these cases immediately spring to mind – Hindley and Brady, The Great Train Robbers, Harry Roberts and the Krays (that’s with no searching at all). Note that the wishes of the govt’s of the day are still being respected, even today. It’s almost like the judiciary now will not overrule their predecessors.) So Brady says I want to die and every day staff have to force feed him. Can that be an experience even the staff want to repeat 3 times a day ?
He wants to die. They will not let him. If he has a heart attack do they have a defib handy and all the drugs to bring him back ? Were he to have a stroke would they whizz him into intensive care ? If he ‘died’ would they get the brain stem tests and then say “The bastard is having us on !” and insist that he stay on life support ? Why does the stupidity end ? When do they let him die ? It’s almost as if they want that last bit of control. It’s like they are wanting to deprive him of the luxury of dying.
What’s the point ?
If Brady did die and the powers that be permitted that to happen, what else would occur ? The newspapers would go into overdrive (you just know that the obits – will he even be allowed something as dignified as an obit ? – are having this latest juicy snippet tacked on the end) and they will also libel him in unbelieveable ways. The govt will proclaim that “Justice has been served !”. Relatives of his victims will be on the TV / in the news and there will be a secret burial which The Sun will get pictures of very quickly. I reckon that’s about it – and there is nothing earth-shattering in there is there ? Nothing that will change the world for the better. But if he were allowed to die when he chose, then we’d have the people popping up saying that he should have served all his life (hey, if he dies in prison then he did do just that) or that the system should not have allowed it. Allowed what ? The ultimate self-determination ?
Doesn’t this continue to give the lie that our society uses imprisonment as rehabilitation ? And if it IS punishment / retribution / vengeance / cruel then why not admit it ? Why not bring back the Death Penalty ? I for one would welcome sentences that actually meant what they said – and my problem with this case is that Life does mean life. This week someone somewhere in Britian will be handed a Life sentence. It’s accepted that such a term generally means 20 years. And that good behaviour can lop up to a third off that – so why is Brady locked up for so long ? A recent case as an example:
Alan Webster and his girlfriend raped a 12 week old baby. And he took photos. 12 weeks. He was jailed for life – but he can be considered for release after 12 years. Now what the f*ck is that all about ? I think Alan Webster should be physically beaten daily. Literally battered with 2by4 every single day for the rest of his life. And yet that bastard can be out in 12 years. There are other cases that I could find or that would resonate with other people as being on a par with Brady – I’m not saying that they ARE on a par, just that we would equate them as such. Yet the sentences are vastly different aren’t they ?
They both deserved to die. They both not only admitted guilt but were proven beyond all limits to be guilty as charged. So why let either live ?
When people used to ask me at work about changes they wanted I would sometimes ask them for 3 reasons why we should do it their way. It showed me that they had thought things through at least to the point where it was worth considering further. The number 3 was arbitrary but reasonable I thought. I certainly can’t think of 3 reasons why our society is keeping him alive.
Brady wants out – let him.