Killers That Just Aren’t Interesting or Newsworthy
YOU’VE ALL HEARD of Jack the Ripper. Jack killed five prostitutes in the Whitechapel area of London in 1888. History buffs will also have heard of Dr. Crippen, who was executed for the murder of his wife in 1910, and George Haigh, the ‘acid bath murderer’ who murdered five people for profit between 1944 and 1949, the year he was finally caught and hanged.
Some of you will also remember John Reginald Haliday Christie. He is known to have killed seven women and a baby between 1949 and 1953. His exploits are best remembered nowadays via Richard Attenborough’s wonderfully creepy performance in 10 Rillington Place.
However, almost no one in this country, except for those directly involved, will ever have heard of Kenneth Erskine. And yet, Erskine killed his victims more recently than any of the killers listed above, he killed more of them and he killed them in England’s capital city.
Kenneth Erskine was tried and convicted in 1988 of the killings of seven old age pensioners in a three-month spell beginning in April 1986. The police are as sure as they can possibly be that he murdered at least 4 others around the same time. This because those who died were all pensioners, all of them were killed in inner London, they were all strangled, and most of them were buggered before or after death.
A senior detective is on record as having said:
“There is simply no way of knowing how many defenceless old folk he killed; it could be dozens.”
The killer was abandoned by his parents as a child and was a product of special schools and a bleeding-heart social security system. After drifting out of that system, he began his career as a burglar in 1979 at the age of 16. He was arrested on numerous occasions and, even though, at his trial, he was found to have a mental age of eleven, he was smart enough to have opened ten different bank accounts to launder the proceeds from his thievery.
This supposed retard was also shrewd enough to arrange the bedding after he killed, with the edge of the sheet tucked neatly under the victim’s chin. The better to convey the impression that they had died peacefully in their sleep.
Erskine’s previous rapsheet eventually prompted detectives to investigate his whereabouts on the days when the killings occurred and, having done so, they concluded that he might well be the man the media was calling ’The Stockwell Strangler.’ As Erskine was still collecting Social Security payments on a regular basis, a watch was kept at the office where he signed-on and he was soon apprehended.
At first, he attempted to blame the murders on a voice in his head and said: ‘I don’t remember killing anyone, I could have done it without knowing it. I am not sure if I did it.’
However, by the time he came to trial in January 1988, he had been persuaded to plead not guilty to seven counts of murder and the attempted murder of Frederick Prentice. Unfortunately for Erskine, his droolingly dim-witted performance in court, which included several attempts to masturbate himself, (he had to be tied to his seat to prevent this), did not endear him to the jury and, after they found him guilty on all counts, the Judge determined that he should serve a minimum of 40 years imprisonment. This sentence was the longest minimum sentence ever imposed in Britain at the time.
After the trial it was made known that Erskine had twice tried to hang his younger brother when he was a child, and, when he was eighteen, had stabbed his boyfriend of the time. No charges were brought, however, and he was allowed to go free. Just the thing to reinforce a fledgling f***up’s prejudice against going straight, eh?
She had been stabbed 32 times.
The previous evening Katie had accepted a lift home from Ragamuffin’s nightclub in Camberley. 12-year-old schoolgirl, Sharon Carr, was in the back seat when the older boys picked her up. She got into the back alongside the young girl and, when the boys started paying her too much attention, Carr pulled out a knife and began the frenzied attack that led to Katie’s death.
According to her diaries, Carr found the killing sexually pleasurable. One entry read:
“I wish I could kill you again. I promise I would make you suffer more. Your terrified screams turn me on… I swear I was born to be a murderer. Killing for me is a mass turn-on.”
Carr was not, originally, a suspect. It took the authorities five years to bring her to trial and they only became suspicious after she was sent to prison for committing another violent crime. In 1994, Carr had stabbed a fellow pupil and was jailed for two years. Whilst in prison, she let on that she knew something about Katie’s death. Subsequently, the police obtained her diaries and her guilt was demonstrated conclusively.
After noting that Carr had a violent history (she once chopped the head off a dog with a spade) and hearing evidence from psychiatrists that said she was suffering from a ‘severe form of anti-social personality disorder’, the trial judge sentenced her to life with a recommendation that she serve at least 14 years.
In prison, Carr proved difficult to manage and she was eventually transferred to Broadmoor in June 1998. Despite complaints of voices calling her a lizard (‘she peeled back the skin on her arm’ to make sure that she was human) and numerous assaults against residents and members of staff, an appeal against her minimum term sentence of 14 years was heard in November 2003. Her legal team did not succeed in getting it reduced, however, and the Lord Chief Justice confirmed her original tariff.
Nevertheless, in December 2003, her appeal was re-visited and the following evaluation was cited:
“She suffers from a severe mental illness, namely schizoaffective disorder… a severe personality disorder with combined features of borderline anti-social and paranoid personality disorder… Ms Carr’s long-term risk to others is likely to be highly associated with the extent to which her mental illness can be effectively controlled by a regime of medication which she is prepared to consistently take.”
OK so far. Dr. Susan Iles seems to be saying that Carr is a psycho. Murderous loonies stay locked up, don’t they? Well, not necessarily. Especially when the aforementioned gets qualified by the following:
“Ms Carr is maturing, well engaged in individual psychotherapy and prepared to purposefully occupy her off-ward activities.”
Now you show a red rag like this to an old bull in a wig and he’ll charge, by God. Oh, yes. After reading the above, Lord Woolf, the future Lord Chief Justice, took the opportunity to overturn his original decision and reduce Carr’s minimum sentence to twelve years.
Very soon now, when your daughter decides to cadge a lift home from the local nightclub with a couple of lads and a woman in her early thirties, she could find herself in the back seat with Sharon Carr.
So, why have we never heard of Erskine and Carr?
Here’s a clue:
* * *
On 29 December 1969, 55-year-old Muriel Mckay, wife of the Deputy Chairman of The News of the World, was abducted from her home in Wimbedon.
She was never seen again. Trinidadian immigrants, Arthur and Nizamodeen Hosein, thought Muriel was Rupert Murdoch’s wife and demands for £1,000,000 for her safe return were soon forthcoming. The brothers gave instructions as to where monies should be dropped and these were followed to the letter but the money was never picked up.
34-year-old Arthur Hosein, who had been thrown out of the army in 1960, had bought Rooks Farm in Stocking Pelham, Hertfordshire, in 1967, taking up residence in May 1968. Acting the part of the county squire and lording it over the locals, he was mockingly described by them as ‘King Hosein.’ Unfortunately, his bank account did not match his self-image and, thus, the plot to kidnap Murdoch’s wife was hatched.
After five weeks and 18 abortive phone conversations, the kidnappers were traced to the Hoseins’ isolated farm and Arthur’s fingerprints matched those found on the ransom demands. The police believe that, having killed Muriel, the brothers fed her to the pigs.
In October 1970, the Hosein brothers were found guilty of the kidnap and murder of Muriel McKay and jailed for life. This was the first ever major kidnapping incident in the UK.
Arthur and Nizamodeen Hosein are pictured below:
In 1991, 21-year-old Romford resident, Christopher Barrel, was stabbed to death.
A 1992 edition of The Evening Standard described the events after the verdict was given.
“Teenager Desmond Brown, who stabbed 21-year-old Christopher Barrell in the street, was cleared, of murder and given two years probation for manslaughter. Detective Superintendent Peter Barrell wept as he said: ‘I have served as a police officer for 28 years protecting society from people like this and in our hour of need we were deserted’.
Brown, 18, was hugged by his cheering family after the Old Bailey verdict. The jury, which included nine women, had added a rider appealing for mercy… and saying they had ‘great sympathy’ for him.
The killing happened days after Christopher, a Coldstream Guardsman… left the Army. He was taking his dog for a walk in a park near his home… when he was involved in a row with Brown and two companions, the court heard. Punches were thrown, then Brown fatally stabbed him in the stomach with a lock knife he carried ‘for protection’.
Christopher’s father, who serves in the Complaints Branch at Scotland Yard, said bitterly: ‘My wife and I sat in court for three days and heard my son’s reputation besmirched and assassinated on the uncorroborated evidence of the man accused of murdering him. According to him, Christopher subjected him to a vicious assault for no apparent reason. But anyone who knew Christopher would tell you he was not like that. Our son was taken away from us nine months ago and the law has now taken away the last vestige of dignity we had left’.
Judge Robert Lymbery told Brown: ‘This case is an absolute tragedy. An incident occurred which left a young man dead and another convicted of manslaughter. The deceased was the aggressor but he was unarmed. If you had not resorted to the popular, though evil, habit of carrying a knife none of this would have occurred’.
Judge Lymbery said that he had ‘a substantial measure of sympathy’ for Brown and had to take notice of the jury’s recommendation for mercy because if judges failed to do so, it might encourage juries to return ‘perverse’ verdicts. He had decided that Brown had ‘learned his lesson’ and was taking ‘a wholly exceptional course’ in freeing him.
Mr Paul Purnell, QC, defending Brown, had told the court that he was… a regular churchgoer, wanted to express his ‘regret and remorse’ and ‘felt’ for dead man’s family. But Mr. Barrell said yesterday: ‘The man who killed my son walked out of the Old Bailey whooping and laughing with his family while my wife and other sons have been left distraught’.”
Listen up you racist, fascist, bigoted Brits! One white, 21-year-old walking his dog versus three black youths, one of whom has a knife. That would make the white man walking his dog the ‘aggressor’ to nine women, three men, us PC types, the UAF and a Judge called Lymbery, OK! In fact, Judge Lymbery didn’t beat about the bush, he came right out and said it: ‘The deceased was the aggressor!’ That’s bound to have been how it was then! The fact that this assertion was based upon the testimony of the killer and his two companions is irrelevant!
“This case is an absolute tragedy. An incident occurred which left a young man dead and another convicted of manslaughter”.
Yep, I reckon the Judge got it dead right when he said that it must be as much of a tragedy for a freed killer as it was for Christopher, even though Brown just happened to express the remorse he was feeling for bringing that ‘tragedy’ about by ‘whooping and laughing with his family’.
Oh yes, ladies and gentlemen, as long ago as 1992, Judges and juries were having boat loads of sympathy for regular, churchgoing, black lads who just as regularly carried knives so that they could stab the odd, white Coldstream Guardsmen to death for walking his dog in the wrong time and place.
One dead, white, dog walker. One black family, whooping and laughing. Two years probation. ‘Perverse’ verdicts. Mercy. Sympathy. But not for Christopher Barrell, eh?
Here’s a piece from the internet dated 16 October 2003:
“God Can Solve Armed Violence Crisis… The growing problem of armed violence can only be solved by divine intervention, according to Britain’s only terrestrial Christian radio station. London-based Premier Radio, who are working closely with the Metropolitan Black Police Association… claims… the Church needs to be part of the answer…
Peter Kerridge, Managing Director of Premier Christian Radio, says: ‘It might seem unlikely to some, but we know that God has an answer to the rise in armed violence, we’ve seen the proof in people’s lives’. One of those people is Desmond Brown, who stabbed and killed a man at just 17. Desmond is sure that he’d ‘either be dead or in prison now’, had he not become a Christian. Instead, TWELVE YEARS LATER, HE’S NOW A YOUTH LEADER AT A LARGE LONDON CHURCH, WHERE MANY YOUNG PEOPLE NOW LOOK UP TO HIM AS A ROLE MODEL.“
This showed the reader how criminal lives could be turned around by the ‘power of Jesus Christ’ and read some of his own ‘story’ from the comic. ‘I had a normal childhood in the East End of London’ he said. ‘From about 14 I got drawn into drugs and street crime, muggings, robbery and that sort of thing.’
Not the little angel that was presented to a ‘sympathetic’ jury back in 1992 then. I wonder if that jury was made aware of his ‘normal’ criminal activities at the time. Judge Lymbery will certainly have been aware of his youthful normality. If the jury knew what Brown was and still freed him, I reckon they should be flogged. Along with the learned judge.
The ‘street criminal’ who killed Christopher Barrel is pictured below alongside a ‘Christian youth leader’ cum ‘role model,’ reading from ‘Cops and Robbers,’ the comic in which his ‘story’ features:
Christopher, of course, is not here to read it.
Curtis Howard, a 6ft 4in computer science student with a history of mental illness, became infatuated with 24-year-old Catherine Ayling after she went to Boston on a six-month student exchange trip in 1989.
She fended off his advances after agreeing to go out with him once but he continued to pester her by phone after she returned home. Indeed, his obsession was such that he got on a plane, entered the country illegally and went looking for the object of his affections. Though he couldn’t find her, he was able to find her sister, Sylvia. When the family was out, he broke into her home, slashed a pillow and mattress, and carved the phrase ‘Catherine is dead’ and a swastika on a door.
He was subsequently apprehended and deported. However, using a false passport, he returned shortly afterwards and, this time, managed to track Catherine down to college in Crewe.
Brought back to Britain, he pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility.
During his trial, Judge Mr. Justice Hidden said Howard posed a threat to the family.
“Even after the death of Catherine,” he said, “it is necessary to protect the public and particularly her sister and her husband from serious harm from you.’
However, after convincing the parole board he no longer posed a threat, Curtis Howard was released after serving just seven years of a life sentence. A Home Office spokesman said:
“The Parole Board has decided that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public for Mr. Howard to be confined”.
What, is he no longer a nutcase? During his trial at the Old Bailey in 1994, the judge said he was a ‘cunning, devious, violent and dangerous man,’ who posed a threat to Catherine’s sister, Sylvia Hartington, and her husband. Is this no longer the case? Is he, all of a sudden, a nice murderer if he takes his tablets?
Of course he isn’t. Curtis Howard is a savage brute who will always be capable of an act commensurate with his brute nature. He should have been done away with long ago. If the PC crowd must pander to such beasts, at least they could keep them locked up.
But they don’t. They know that the Curtis Howards won’t be coming round to stab them ten times and slit their throats. It’s always someone else who suffers. As long as it’s not them or theirs, what do the bleeding-hearts care?
This is Curtis Howard:
This also is Curtis Howard.
Spot the difference? Politically correct touching up or an interesting choice of unrepresentative snap?
Here is an example of the dreadful unhappiness just one rotten, foreign apple can create within a previously homogeneous and secure community.
One of the longest criminal investigations in British criminal history was that concerned with a man that the police nicknamed ‘The Night Stalker.’ This person first came to the attention of the Metropolitan Police when an 84-year-old Croydon woman reported a burglary and rape in October 1992. Since that time, the description and modus vivendi of the man who raped the Croydon pensioner has been offered by the victims of as many as SIX HUNDRED similar attacks.
As Detective Chief Inspector Colin Sutton has said:
Officially we have looked at 203 OFFENCES but my guess would be YOU COULD PROBABLY DOUBLE OR TREBLE THAT NUMBER.”
On 24 Mar 2011, Martin Evans informed us thus in The Telegraph:
“Grant’s horrific catalogue of burglaries, rapes and assaults began in the early 1990s BUT IT WAS NOT UNTIL 1998 THAT A DEDICATED UNIT WAS ESTABLISHED TO HUNT DOWN THE MAN WHO BECAME KNOWN AS THE NIGHT STALKER…
In May 1999… a member of the public witnessed a man acting suspiciously near the scene of a burglary in Bromley. Noticing the man getting into a dark coloured BMW car, the witness took a note of the registration number and contacted officers at his local station. Checking the vehicle details against DVLA records, police ascertained that the BMW belonged to a man by the name of Delroy Easton Grant. Officers in Bromley spotted that the burglary in their patch bore a number of similarities to the Minstead rapist break-ins, so referred it to the Scotland Yard team. When a rookie detective within that unit was asked to check what information was known about the suspect, an inexplicable mix-up meant details of the wrong Delroy Grant were accessed… POLICE WORKING ON THE OPERATION MINSTEAD TEAM THEREFORE RULED OUT THE NAME DELROY GRANT FROM THE INVESTIGATION…
Compounding the error still further, officers in Bromley… assumed it was being dealt with by the Minstead team. HAD THEY BOTHERED TO FOLLOW UP THE REGISTRATION PLATE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE EAGLE-EYED MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, THEY WOULD HAVE FOUND THEMSELVES FACE-TO-FACE WITH THE CORRECT DELROY GRANT. Had he been charged at that stage in connection with the Bromley burglary, a DNA sample would have been automatically taken, and a match to the Minstead rapist would have been made…
Two years later the enormity of that blunder was felt once again when POLICE DISMISSED ANOTHER TIP OFF AND THEREFORE FAILED TO APPREHEND GRANT FOR A SECOND TIME. A viewer watching an appeal about the Night Stalker on BBC’s Crimewatch programme contacted police to inform them about suspicions they had about an individual living in south London. The name the person offered to detectives was Delroy Grant. Of course when the name was cross referenced against the Operation Minstead files, detectives saw that Grant had already been eliminated from their enquiries… ANOTHER DECADE WOULD PASS UNTIL GRANT WAS FINALLY CAUGHT.”
Martin Evans also told us this:
“A PHOTO FIT PICTURE OF THE ATTACKER SUGGESTED HE WAS A WHITE or very light-skinned Black man, again wide of the mark and potentially putting people off coming forward with the correct information.”
Below you can see the most recent of the police efit of the Night Stalker alongside the man himself.
Spot the difference?
The police will have known what the Night Stalker looked like for a long time now. They will have known that the efit shown above was utterly unrepresentative. As Martin Evans points out, the character portrayed looks more like a white man than a black man.
Incredibly, the favoured rag of the liberal intelligentsia and the ‘aren‘t immigrants wonderful’ crowd, The Guardian was still showing us the above off-putting efit on 16 March 2011. Check it out:
On 24 March 2011, The Mirror told us this:
“NIGHT STALKER DELROY GRANT WAS CONVICTED TODAY OF BEING ONE OF THE MOST PROLIFIC AND DEPRAVED SEX ATTACKERS IN BRITISH HISTORY. Police apologised for botched chances to stop the 53-year-old rapist earlier as HE WAS FOUND GUILTY OF PREYING ON THE ELDERLY IN A CAMPAIGN OF PERVERTED TERROR LASTING 17 YEARS…
BETWEEN 1992 AND 2009 THE MASKED SEXUAL PREDATOR PREYED ON FRAIL MEN AND WOMEN IN SOUTH LONDON AND VIOLATED THEM IN THEIR HOMES, sometimes for several hours. MANY OF HIS VICTIMS, AGED UP TO 89, WERE BLIND, DEAF OR HAD CONDITIONS INCLUDING ALZHEIMER’S AND PARKINSON’S DISEASE…
The sex beast’s luck finally ran out when police swooped on his car in the early hours of November 15 2009. More than 70 undercover officers, supported by hidden cameras and a helicopter, staked out several streets in Shirley, near Croydon, in an ambitious operation AFTER COMMISSIONER SIR PAUL STEPHENSON CALLED FOR A ‘STEP CHANGE’ IN THE HUNT.”
So, may we assume that, before 2009, whilst the night-stalking father-of-ten was ‘preying upon the elderly in a campaign of perverted terror’ for more than seventeen years without being apprehended, previous constabulary bigwigs hadn’t thought such a campaign merited such a ‘step change’?
On 25 March 2011, The Telegraph told us this:
“Not only is it the sheer volume of his crimes that are so shocking, but also the ages and vulnerability of his victims – MOSTOF WHOM WERE OVER 80. Delroy Easton Grant was BORN IN JAMAICA in 1957, the youngest of three boys, HIS MOTHER WALKED OUT ON THE FAMILY when he was aged just two…
At the age of 15, Grant’s father George… moved to Britain bringing the teenager with him. A deeply Christian man, George, hoped the move would give the youngster a better chance in life than if he remained on THE VIOLENT STREETS OF JAMAICA. SHORTLY AFTER ARRIVING IN THE UK HE BEGAN HIS CRIMINAL CAREER… HE SOON GRADUATED ONTO MORE SERIOUS OFFENCES.”
The migration to our shores of the good Christian folk would, indeed, have provided them with ‘the better chance in life’ they were looking for. Unfortunately for the British people, the presence here of those who emerge from the ‘violent streets of Jamaica’ invariably produces a consequent diminution in their own life chances.
The Telegraph continues:
“In 1975 he met 19-year-old Janet Watson in a pub in Bermondsey. He swept her off her feet and they married just weeks later after a whirlwind romance. Janet said: ‘He was very charming and sophisticated. I thought I’d found my soul-mate. BUT THEN THE VIOLENCE STARTED’.”
‘Then the violence started.’
Hey, Delroy! Lots of lads in the prison system love their mothers. Lots of them love their grandmas and granddads as well. And whatever they got put away for, they would never think to harm an old age pensioner. They’re waiting for you, Delroy!
The PC Crowd insists, ad nauseam, that the Delroy Grant types ‘enrich’ our lives.
I say the PC Crowd should be arrested, tried and found guilty of aiding and abetting the crimes of all of those who ‘shortly after arriving in the UK’ embark upon a ‘criminal career.’ In my opinion, those who have preached the gospel of diversity, cohesion and the Multicult over the decades, as they airbrushed the savagery of the first, second and third-generation immigrant out of the picture, should be tried for treason.
The political establishment of the Western World has been at war with the indigenous populations they control for a long time now. Mass immigration and political correctness were the favoured Weapons of Mass Destruction that the governmental elites chose to to use against us. The Grants, Erskines, Carrs, Browns and Hoseins were, and still are, their footsoldiers.
* * *
Source: Rogue’s Gallery