Death of the Boogeywoman

A boogeyman died this last weekend. Well, to be more accurate it was a boogeywoman. Myra Hindley, Moors Murderess and English hate figure for over 30 years, died peacefully in her sleep. Almost everyone in the UK knew her by name. She was practically unknown outside the UK; bearing in mind the US churns out serial killers whose sadism makes Hindley and Ian Brady seem like a benevolent Aunt and Uncle, this is hardly surprising. She died without having been forgiven for her crimes, or at least not by the UK public. Are some things so terrible that they cannot be forgiven, no matter how sincere the repentance? Before looking too closely at that question it's worth reminding ourselves of her particular claim to immortality.

She, at the behest of her lover Ian Brady, participated in the abduction, torture, rape, and murder of a number of youths in Manchester (There is an official count, but if I'm honest I find that I'm starting to disapprove of the practice of keeping a scorecard for different murderers; I think it was the number of people in the UK who take pride in the fact that Dr Harold Shipman was the worlds most prolific serial killer that gave me an opinion on this, but I digress...). After putting their victims through a fairly grotty version of hell (ironically, the murder of the victim that led to their capture died quickest of all; Brady took an axe to him) in the name of getting themselves horny, they would bury the remains on the Moors in the North West of England.

One of the things that set this particular case apart was the fact that Hindley and Brady had made audio tapes of the rape and torture of one of the young girls (I'm rather ashamed to say that I can't remember her name; I believe I've already made the point in the past that it is curious how we recall the murderers and not the murdered). The tape was played in court, and Hindley's complete callousness to the fate of their victim guaranteed her the enmity of anyone and everyone who ever read any details of the case. Thanks to the efforts of the media, everyone in the UK ended up reading such details on a semi regular basis. Why was this the case? Well, it was probably because Hindley had, over the course of the last 36 years, reformed and sought parole at every available opportunity.

The tabloids greeted every new parole hearing with a barrage of headlines of the "This Evil Old Hag must be Flayed Alive!" variety, coupled with numerous interviews with relatives of the victims, forced to relieve their grief anew, all of whom (unsurprisingly) wanted Hindley kept in prison for the rest of her life. (Brady is less troublesome as far as the press are concerned; he has been on hunger strike for the last 3 years as he is determined to die. The state is equally determined to keep him alive. Brady's less than idyllic childhood notwithstanding, bearing in mind the suffering he has caused others, this seems entirely appropriate.) Even the news of her death was greeted with the sort of bile normally reserved for newly captured paedophiles. But what of Hindley herself?

Here is a woman who had converted to Christianity in her time in prison, had the backing of numerous humanitarians in her quest for freedom, and who was described by pretty much everyone who came into contact with her as "no danger to the general public". She had done (she claimed) her best to assist the authorities searching the moors to find the last victims (one body has never been found and quite probably never will). Surely this goes some way to redressing the imbalance caused by her crimes?

To be blunt, no. Not in my opinion anyway. Though I dislike the media's manipulation of public opinion in order to paint her as a demonic presence on earth, I dislike even more the idea of a serial killer being released at any point before their death. Some of the arguments used in favour of her release are pretty much all laughable (and I realise that I was in favour of the release of the Bulger killers; the difference being that those boys are young enough to have been rehabilitated), ranging from "She's accepted God into her life and so the Christian thing to do is to forgive her" to "Far worse crimes are committed today, and the perpetrators of those may well be released soon". The former means approximately fuck all when one considers the tendency towards mania shown by many of those who are committed to the religion of their parents' choice. The latter is perhaps the most insulting thing one could say to those affected by the murders; is crime now to be downgraded retrospectively?

I also resent the holier than thou posturing of those good souls who could find it in their hearts to forgive her (and yes, I am being sarcastic; it's rather easy to forgive a wrong done to someone else, quite another to forgive it when done to you or those dear to you). Their implication that, because they were magnanimous enough to forgive her, then everyone else should be, smacks of the smug self-righteousness of the left-wing do-gooder (by which I mean that shower of spunkwits who do their utmost to impose their morality on everybody else. Though their motivations are different they're no better than the religious and political right, and give the left wing a bad name).

What is more, they then mewl about how unjust it is that Hindley languishes in prison (as opposed to languishing under a few feet of dank earth on a moor). Well, sorry to break this to you, but Justice was created to serve the will of the majority. Whether whipped up into a hate fuelled fervour or simply reading the facts of the case, I rather think that it would be the will of the majority that Hindley live her life in captivity. The do-gooders response is usually along the lines that "The majority are wrong", followed by a thinly veiled piece of patronising sophistry that implies that what people need is to have their minds made up for them by a privileged few who have the intellectual capacity to make the correct decision. Which is, again, horseshit. These days we hear a lot about the right trying to reserve power to a few. This rather obstructs our view of the fact that certain of the left wing are equally inclined to elitism. Beware of anyone who says that they know what you should be thinking.

To sum up, there very definitely are some things that are unforgivable to some, and not to others. It's up to the majority to decide what can be forgiven. No one can imagine Adolf Hitler being given leniency had he thrown himself on the mercy of the Jewish people, so why should a once-evil woman be treated any differently if most people do not believe that she should be free?