Hurrah! Another dead scrote...

[BA to the Stars]

So he probably wasn't in control of his actions. Yes, he should have been locked away for the rest of his life to protect the rest of us, but he didn't deserve to die.

As he wasn't in control of his actions, I suppose that will provide comfort to the innocent victims. Unfortuanately, it is often cases like this that until someone gets hurt that the full extent of the perpetrators illness is known - we cannot lock everyone who might have such an illness away just in case but then again the innocent majority need to be protected. A tough one.

[richard-af]

one can only notice with some glee that he obviously did not last long amongst men who would fight back. good riddance.

He was topped in Broadmoor, not beaten fair-and-square during 10 rounds according to the Queensbury Rules!

[barely_pointless]

He was topped in Broadmoor, not beaten fair-and-square during 10 rounds according to the Queensbury Rules!

he chose the rules first by killing what appears to be pensioners, and thus there seems to be a natural finality and justice to it.

Fair and square had nothing on these people who died at his hands.

[Old Greg]

I doubt that very much, the age of the victims chosen would indicate he picked easy targets, if he was truly a nutter, then you would expect to see a wider variation in age and sizes, as it stands, he picked vulnerable people.

The true mark of a coward, one can only notice with some glee that he obviously did not last long amongst men who would fight back. good riddance.

Wow, barely pointless. Are you some kind of forensic psychiatrist to understand so well how a 'nutter' would behave? If only they'd called you at the trial as an expert witness, they could have bypassed all this 'hospital' nonsense. A little harsh perhaps, but we have specialists who do understand how sick people behave and we have a judicial system with juries to make judgements based (among other things) on their expert witness.

[Methuselah]

I know you're not going to like this, but I don't agree. He was mentally ill, a schizophrenic according to the doctor from Broadmoor. So he probably wasn't in control of his actions. Yes, he should have been locked away for the rest of his life to protect the rest of us, but he didn't deserve to die.

Unlike the barsteward who tried to bomb Glasgow airport, who made a conscious choice to do what he did, and (in my opinion) deserved what he got.

I do actually agree with that. I fear that he might not have been kept safely locked up, but he should have been.

And we should above all subject people only to the punishments that are judicially assigned. So indeed, one might say that even if schizophrenic he should be hanged. That at least would be an honest point of view. We should not say that he should be locked away and then cheer if he is murdered.

[Xenophon]

Mental illness is an illness like any other, and it's caused by an imbalance of chemicals in the brain, which may just happen for no particular reason. You wouldn't say someone deserved to die just because they had cancer, would you?

My grandmother died of cancer and of course she didn't deserve to die.

You seem to believe that his actions are excusable because he was 'ill'. It is a load of rubbish. He picked on the weak and the elderly like only a true coward could.

Seems like we shall have to agree to disagree.

[Old Greg]

he chose the rules first by killing what appears to be pensioners, and thus there seems to be a natural finality and justice to it.

Fair and square had nothing on these people who died at his hands.

'Chose' is an odd word when dealing with schizophrenia. His view of the world would have been wildly inaccurate so his 'choices' were not like ours.

[BA to the Stars]

I wonder if he stabbed himself

[Xenophon]

'Chose' is an odd word when dealing with schizophrenia. His view of the world would have been wildly inaccurate so his 'choices' were not like ours.

Conicidence that they were all elderly - even the 2 that survived?

I believe not.

Here is something for all of you jumping to his defence and spouting about justice, illness and saying it was entirely beyond his control: I am glad he is dead. I am happy about it.

[Old Greg]

As he wasn't in control of his actions, I suppose that will provide comfort to the innocent victims. Unfortuanately, it is often cases like this that until someone gets hurt that the full extent of the perpetrators illness is known - we cannot lock everyone who might have such an illness away just in case but then again the innocent majority need to be protected. A tough one.

It is a tough one - I don't know the details of his guy, but locking up is not the only preventitive strategey. Thes cases often occur because of failures by the NHS to diagnose and treat people properly.