Brady refuses another Plea from Keith Bennett's mother to find his body.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:08 am

Ian Brady refuses to help find Keith Bennett's body - Telegraph

If ever there was a case for the death penalty, this has to be it.

While the parents of the children Brady tortured and murdered have had some comfort in being able to lay their child to rest, this poor woman has suffered a living nightmare for 45 years because the man who murdered him has rejected all plea's to help find his body.

All his mother wants to do is lay her child to rest herself.

Police had to close their official search for Keith Bennett after 45 years. The only hope left was that Brady would finally feel some compassion and help police locate the body of this little boy.

Brady has been on hunger strike for 10 years. It does not take 10 years to die of hunger. The authorities are keeping him alive and still fawning over him. If he refuses to help locate Kieth's body, then do us tax payers a huge favour and let the twisted bastard die a lonely death in his cell with no help.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:32 am

You don't think Winnie Johnson's allowed it to define her life since it happened? "I need him to tell me where Keith is â€“ his information on my little boy is his last weapon against me"? All she's done it empower him and "he knows he is dashing what little hope I still have" is plain delusional.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:37 am

spot;1215378 wrote: You don't think Winnie Johnson's allowed it to define her life since it happened? "I need him to tell me where Keith is â€“ his information on my little boy is his last weapon against me"? All she's done it empower him and "he knows he is dashing what little hope I still have" is plain delusional.
Why on earth is that delusional. Pray tell?

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:56 am

oscar;1215382 wrote: Why on earth is that delusional. Pray tell?

It depends on what you think she still has by the way of hope. That her son's still alive somewhere? Perhaps I'm failing to grasp any concept of hope in this story.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 6:17 am

spot;1215392 wrote: It depends on what you think she still has by the way of hope. That her son's still alive somewhere? Perhaps I'm failing to grasp any concept of hope in this story. In 1987 the pair both confessed to killing Keith Bennet and Hindley claimed Brady had killed him with an axe and she helped bury his body on Saddleworth Moor.

Moors Murders Ian Brady Myra Hindley: Police Re-Open Search For Keith Bennett On Saddleworth Moor | UK News | Sky News

Before she died Hindley returned to the Moor with police to help locate his body. After these events, how on earth could Bennett's mother have any hope that he is still alive given the fate of the other 4 children they confessed to torturing and killing?

Everything i have ever read on Bennett's mother shows that she simply wants her childs body returned to her so she can lay him to rest peacefully. The location of his body may also show forensics exactly what his fate was and how he died. This would bring enormous closure to his mother. I surprised you can not understand that?

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 6:39 am

oscar;1215402 wrote: Everything i have ever read on Bennett's mother shows that she simply wants her childs body returned to her so she can lay him to rest peacefully. The location of his body may also show forensics exactly what his fate was and how he died. This would bring enormous closure to his mother. I surprised you can not understand that?

The words are meaningless. She's allowed what the murderers did to define her life ever since it happened, assuming the Telegraph report's to be trusted, in which case all she's done is to give Ian Brady unrivaled power over her life for the last 45 years. Or, of course, the Telegraph's screwing her over the way the media does, and it's not a true reflection of her position.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:07 am

spot;1215412 wrote: The words are meaningless. She's allowed what the murderers did to define her life ever since it happened, assuming the Telegraph report's to be trusted, in which case all she's done is to give Ian Brady unrivaled power over her life for the last 45 years. Or, of course, the Telegraph's screwing her over the way the media does, and it's not a true reflection of her position.
I beg to differ: I have seen many live tv interviews with the mother over the past 30 years. Have you?

Find Keith Bennett - Video Clips

Are you suggesting she is keeping this going for her own self publicity and she should forget her child and move on with her life?

Victoria · Post by **Victoria** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:04 am

I can understand that all this woman wants is a decent christian burial for her son to lay him to rest in a place where he can be remembered and where she can lay flowers it's not too much to ask. Its all any mother would want.

I can understand why she pleaded with him, she was appealing to Brady's humanity Im sorry to say what she didnt realise was niether he nor Hindley had any.

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 12:25 pm

oscar;1215402 wrote: Before she died Hindley returned to the Moor with police to help locate his body.

Although Hindley DID try to relocate the body (to try to prove she had reformed and win her 'Get out of jail free' card), the moors had altered so much in the intervening years that she had no clue as to where the body was.

What makes you think that, even if Brady were to offer to look, he would be any more successful?

As a btw, Hindley wanted to get out of jail for years. It seems awfully convenient to me that she died when she did. :sneaky: She wasn't old. Do you really think she died? :sneaky: (give proof / links) or do you think she might have been given a false identity?

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 12:39 pm

oscar;1215421 wrote: Are you suggesting she is keeping this going for her own self publicity and she should forget her child and move on with her life?

No, yes and yes. I'm glad she's at least keeping you entertained.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 2:24 pm

Rapunzel;1215533 wrote: Although Hindley DID try to relocate the body (to try to prove she had reformed and win her 'Get out of jail free' card), the moors had altered so much in the intervening years that she had no clue as to where the body was.

What makes you think that, even if Brady were to offer to look, he would be any more successful?

As a btw, Hindley wanted to get out of jail for years. It seems awfully convenient to me that she died when she did. :sneaky: She wasn't old. Do you really think she died? :sneaky: (give proof / links) or do you think she might have been given a false identity?

Yes, your right that the moors would have changed over so many years but there was always police theorie that Brady marked the spot wher his victems lay in some way.

As Brady has refused to co-operate, this is still unknown.

If Hindley's death was a cover up then it would have had to be extremely elaborate as she suffered years of recorded illness. If it was a hoax and it was revealed, then the outrage could have possibly been the biggest scandel the government ever faced. Due to her long illness, i don't think any department would be foolish enough to risk it.

Myra Hindley - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 2:26 pm

spot;1215535 wrote: No, yes and yes. I'm glad she's at least keeping you entertained.
Have you ever had to bury one of your children?

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 3:31 pm

The chances that he would be able to remember would be pretty slim I should imagine.

45 Years is a long time.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 3:56 pm

abbey;1215587 wrote: The chances that he would be able to remember would be pretty slim I should imagine.

45 Years is a long time.
I do agree with you there. However, Hindley at least accompanied police onto the moors for a week or so doing her best to remember the landscape and possible markers. Brady just refuses to go to the moor to even look, full stop. I also remember reading something years ago that with the other bodies of the children that were recovered, he had placed a marker at the scene. If he did the same with Keith Bennett and it's still there, there is a slim chance they could find him.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:36 pm

oscar;1215561 wrote: Have you ever had to bury one of your children?

What an impenetrably dense question. Anyone throwing 45 years into dedicated victim mode is obviously making a majorly wrong lifestyle choice.

buttercup · Post by **buttercup** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:52 pm

Oh boy am i out the loop, i thought she (Myra) was still alive.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:04 pm

spot;1215618 wrote: What an impenetrably dense question. Anyone throwing 45 years into dedicated victim mode is obviously making a majorly wrong lifestyle choice.
Again, i beg to differ. If you have never had the misfortune to have your child undergo an autopsy so you know the exact cause of death and to bury them so you have the comfort of knowing where they are, that they are at peace, in a place where you can pay your respects and grieve, then, you will have no idea what i'm talking about. I unfortunately do have that misfortune.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:10 pm

oscar;1215624 wrote: Again, i beg to differ. If you have never had the misfortune to have your child undergo an autopsy so you know the exact cause of death and to bury them so you have the comfort of knowing where they are, that they are at peace, in a place where you can pay your respects and grieve, then, you will have no idea what i'm talking about. I unfortunately do have that misfortune.

And that's relevant to the thread somehow.

I think not. I'd call it an underhand piece of emotional claptrap myself.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:14 pm

spot;1215626 wrote: And that's relevant to the thread somehow.

I think not. I'd call it an underhand piece of emotional claptrap myself.
Think what you like Spot..... I'll post the death certificates up here if you want the proof, the point i'm trying to make, is if you have never lost a child or a baby, and you have no idea of how they died and where they are, how can you understand what Kieth Bennett's mother has felt for the past 45 years?

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:15 pm

oscar;1215629 wrote: Think what you like Spot..... I'll post the death certificates up here if you want the proof, the point i'm trying to make, is if you have never lost a child or a baby, and you have no idea of how they died and where they are, how can you understand what Kieth Bennett's mother has felt for the past 45 years?

45 years of stroking the killer's ego is demented behaviour. How obvious does it need to get?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:20 pm

spot;1215630 wrote: 45 years of stroking the killer's ego is demented behaviour. How obvious does it need to get?
Folk are individuals Spot and you should know that. What is right for you may not be right for me and keith Bennett's mother. Her son was undoubtably murdered and possibly tortured. She does not know how he met his end and where he is. You may be able to move on with your life after something like that, but i'm not so sure i could. Who are we to judge her? we all take grief differently.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:22 pm

oscar;1215631 wrote: Folk are individuals Spot and you should know that. What is right for you may not be right for me and keith Bennett's mother. Her son was undoubtably murdered and possibly tortured. She does not know how he met his end and where he is. You may be able to move on with your life after something like that, but i'm not so sure i could. Who are we to judge her? we all take grief differently.

People have choices. To define oneself for the rest of one's life as the parent of a murdered child is futile and maudlin self-mutilation.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:28 pm

spot;1215632 wrote: People have choices. To define oneself for the rest of one's life as the parent of a murdered child is futile and maudlin self-mutilation.
I think we could be up all night arguing the toss so i shall have to agree to disagree with you on this one.

Just an after thought....... you say to define oneself for the rest of your life as the parent of a murdered child is futile...... would you say the same of the McCanns? Should Maddelaine's mother give up her futile search and move on with her life?

Do you remember Ben Needham? Snatched on the island of Kos at the age of 2 yrs old? His mother is still writing to Gordon brown 16 years on begging for him to launch a fresh enquirey. Should she forget him and move on?

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:31 pm

oscar;1215634 wrote: I think we could be up all night arguing the toss so i shall have to agree to disagree with you on this one.

Just an after thought....... you say to define oneself for the rest of your life as the parent of a murdered child is futile...... would you say the same of the McCanns? Should Maddelaine's mother give up her futile search and move on with her life?

Do you remember Ben Needham? Snatched on the island of Kos at the age of 2 yrs old? His mother is still writing to Gordon brown 16 years on begging for him to launch a fresh enquirey. Should she forget him and move on?

You're going on to missing children at that point. If you'd like to try to explain "he is dashing what little hope I still have" we might find out what the difference is. As I started out, it depends on what you think she still has by the way of hope. That her son's still alive somewhere? How can anyone have lost touch with reality to that extent?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 6:40 pm

spot;1215637 wrote: You're going on to missing children at that point. If you'd like to try to explain "he is dashing what little hope I still have" we might find out what the difference is. As I started out, it depends on what you think she still has by the way of hope. That her son's still alive somewhere? How can anyone have lost touch with reality to that extent? When she says' Brady is dashing what little hope i still have', you seem to be under the impression that she has some hope of her child still being alive. I find this unlogical. She has made repeated plea's to Brady to assist the police by re-visiting the moor as Hindley did with police to try to see if he recognised the landscape enought for police to dig for his body. When she talks of 'the little hope she has left', i take that to be that is the hope that her childs body will be found and she can find out how he died through forensics and give him a peaceful Christian burial. A place where she can visit her son and grieve for him.

What would be the point of her asking Brady to go to the moor with police as Hindley did, if she believed her son was still alive?

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 6:44 pm

oscar;1215644 wrote: What would be the point of her asking Brady to go to the moor with police as Hindley did, if she believed her son was still alive?Goodness knows. What's the point of focusing on it for half a century's worth of keeping the man amused that way? Or do you not think it amuses him?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:03 am

spot;1215646 wrote: Goodness knows. What's the point of focusing on it for half a century's worth of keeping the man amused that way? Or do you not think it amuses him? Why do you think he is amused by it? Why not that he's just an evil old bastard who hasn't an iota of compassion? If he is so 'amused' as you put it, why does he go on hunger strike?

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:07 am

oscar;1215719 wrote: Why do you think he is amused by it? Why not that he's just an evil old bastard who hasn't an iota of compassion? If he is so 'amused' as you put it, why does he go on hunger strike?
He's not got a lot else to do, he's still into domination scenarios and he likes attention.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:15 am

spot;1215720 wrote: He's not got a lot else to do, he's still into domination scenarios and he likes attention.
Which takes us nicely back to my opening post. He's been on hunger strike for 10 yrs..... it's time to let hime get on with it and die.

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:20 am

oscar;1215724 wrote: Which takes us nicely back to my opening post. He's been on hunger strike for 10 yrs..... it's time to let hime get on with it and die.

He can't give informed consent, he's in a psychiatric hospital. If he weren't mentally ill he'd have just been another normal person like you or me. Mental illnesses aren't a matter of personal choice, they're a disease.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:29 am

spot;1215726 wrote: He can't give informed consent, he's in a psychiatric hospital. If he weren't mentally ill he'd have just been another normal person like you or me. Mental illnesses aren't a matter of personal choice, they're a disease. Was he mentally ill when he tortured and murdered 5 children? They are the one's he has confesed to, there is a slim possibility there could have been more.

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:18 am

oscar;1215731 wrote: Was he mentally ill when he tortured and murdered 5 children?How would one go about discovering the answer to that? There's a degree of political interference even in transfer to a mental hospital for high-profile killers. This is from the Guardian at the time he was finally moved:Brady may be moved to Broadmoor / 'Moors' murderer may be transferred to a mental hospital, The Guardian, August 3, 1985

Ian Brady, the Moors murderer, is now only one step away from being transferred to a secure mental hospital. Two psychiatrists who have examined Brady at Gartree prison, Leicestershire, have formally asked the Home Office to transfer him. The Home Secretary, Mr Leon Brittan, will probably take a decision next week. He may reject the application in 'the public interest.'

Broadmoor is the obvious choice. An earlier proposal to move Brady there was stopped by the Home Secretary in December 1983. Ministers said then that the reports did not fulfil the statutory requirements. Brady, who has been trying to obtain a transfer for several years, issued a High Court writ through his London solicitors earlier this year claiming damages against the Home Office for failing to provide proper medical and psychiatric care.

He refused this year to apply for parole from his life sentence, which was imposed in 1966 for the sexual assault, torture and murder of three children, but his papers were sent to the Home Secretary. Mr Brittan indicated in May that the case would not be reviewed again for another 10 years. Mr Benedict Birnberg, his London solicitor, has indicated that Brady does not want to be released but that he does want treatment for a serious mental disorder.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:32 am

spot;1215748 wrote: How would one go about discovering the answer to that? There's a degree of political interference even in transfer to a mental hospital for high-profile killers. This is from the Guardian at the time he was finally moved:Brady may be moved to Broadmoor / 'Moors' murderer may be transferred to a mental hospital, The Guardian, August 3, 1985

Ian Brady, the Moors murderer, is now only one step away from being transferred to a secure mental hospital. Two psychiatrists who have examined Brady at Gartree prison, Leicestershire, have formally asked the Home Office to transfer him. The Home Secretary, Mr Leon Brittan, will probably take a decision next week. He may reject the application in 'the public interest.'

Broadmoor is the obvious choice. An earlier proposal to move Brady there was stopped by the Home Secretary in December 1983. Ministers said then that the reports did not fulfil the statutory requirements. Brady, who has been trying to obtain a transfer for several years, issued a High Court writ through his London solicitors earlier this year claiming damages against the Home Office for failing to provide proper medical and psychiatric care.

He refused this year to apply for parole from his life sentence, which was imposed in 1966 for the sexual assault, torture and murder of three children, but his papers were sent to the Home Secretary. Mr Brittan indicated in May that the case would not be reviewed again for another 10 years. Mr Benedict Birnberg, his London solicitor, has indicated that Brady does not want to be released but that he does want treatment for a serious mental disorder.

As this article states, his decision to starve himself to death is not impaired by his mental illness. He was diagnosed as mentally ill long after he had tortured and murdered the children.

BBC News | UK | Ian Brady: A fight to die

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:43 am

oscar;1215755 wrote: As this article states, his decision to starve himself to death is not impaired by his mental illness.You don't think you're reading selectively, do you?One psychiatrist, Tony Maden, supported Brady in court saying his decision to starve himself to death was "unimpaired by his mental illness".

Another, Malcolm McCullogh, says Brady is "intelligent, engaging, interesting to talk to, knowledgeable but able to dangle one on a string if he knows you want to know something about him".

The judge sided with the medical opinion, expressed by Dr James Collins, that Brady's hunger-strike was a "psychopathic over-reaction" to his forced transfer, initiated as part of a battle of wills, part of his obsessive need to exercise control.I'd trust a psychiatrist's opinion as far as I could spit into a hurricane, personally. Power-obsessed freaks the lot of them.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:46 am

spot;1215759 wrote: You don't think you're reading selectively, do you?One psychiatrist, Tony Maden, supported Brady in court saying his decision to starve himself to death was "unimpaired by his mental illness".

Another, Malcolm McCullogh, says Brady is "intelligent, engaging, interesting to talk to, knowledgeable but able to dangle one on a string if he knows you want to know something about him".

The judge sided with the medical opinion, expressed by Dr James Collins, that Brady's hunger-strike was a "psychopathic over-reaction" to his forced transfer, initiated as part of a battle of wills, part of his obsessive need to exercise control.I'd trust a psychiatrist's opinion as far as I could spit into a hurricane, personally. Power-obsessed freaks the lot of them. This is contradictive. if you don't trust the phychiatrists opinion in this then how can you trust the diagnosis of his mental illness?

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:57 am

oscar;1215761 wrote: This is contradictive. if you don't trust the phychiatrists opinion in this then how can you trust the diagnosis of his mental illness?

I'd not trust any diagnosis of any mental illness, his or anyone else's. The fact that nobody attempted a diagnosis before he started killing doesn't mean he wasn't mentally ill when it began. I'm not sure what use the concept of mental illness is if it excludes someone behaving that way.

You ignored "you don't think you're reading selectively, do you?" for some reason.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:20 am

spot;1215765 wrote: I'd not trust any diagnosis of any mental illness, his or anyone else's. The fact that nobody attempted a diagnosis before he started killing doesn't mean he wasn't mentally ill when it began. I'm not sure what use the concept of mental illness is if it excludes someone behaving that way.

You ignored "you don't think you're reading selectively, do you?" for some reason.
I think you are equally as guilty of selective reading as my dog is of selective hearing.