Author Topic: Psychiatrists diagnose Peter Sutcliffe as recovered (burned out) of Paranoid Schizophrenia  (Read 2615 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12966

Not necessarily, Maggie -although I admit to always having made a point, with M., that it would be different if the boot was on the other foot. However, when his son was killed, at the inquest, he made the effort to speak to the guy responsible for his death, and acknowledged to him that it was a case of there but for the grace of God.
I hope I could be that generous, Jane, I really do and hope I would strive for it. M must have been a remarkable person.  :)
« Last Edit: December 01, 2015, 01:10:PM by maggie »

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12966





Maggie you do have to put yourself in the shoes of those families of the victims and you never forget how they met their deaths. I do understand that revenge only makes you ill and bitter but so does losing a family member under the horrendous circumstances and my personal feeling would be death to him, nothing less.
Everyone in the surrounding areas of where he'd murdered were also living in fear,as I remember that time.
I remember it too Lookout and it was horrifying, I am not trying to belittle what he did or what the relatives suffered and no doubt still suffer.
My question is if he killed in psychosis as a severe and violent paranoid schizophrenic and if that was the reason for his crimes he was very ill himself. If this is the case was he responsible for his actions, if he is now burned out he has to live with what he did when mentally ill which could be a nightmare. How can someone be blamed for being ill? It can happen to anyone..... ??

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 35033
Just on the news that there's a possibility it'll go to Wakefield. I knew it !! This move would also fly in the face of the victims families inasmuch as it'll be back to the area where the crimes were committed.!

The psychiatrist who'd just spoken stated that schizophrenia never goes away particularly without medication,as even with,it only keeps it under control and is by no means a cure. It's lifelong.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 35033
Because the psychiatrist is Chinese,I'm more tempted to believe him.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12966
Just on the news that there's a possibility it'll go to Wakefield. I knew it !! This move would also fly in the face of the victims families inasmuch as it'll be back to the area where the crimes were committed.!

The psychiatrist who'd just spoken stated that schizophrenia never goes away particularly without medication, as even with, it only keeps it under control and is by no means a cure. It's lifelong.
That is the psychiatrists opinion, I have experienced something different, Lookout.  It may be that a person who has suffered from PS may be more vulnerable to it reoccurring than others but it does burn out. :-\

Offline Jane J

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 24074




Do you always have to make comparisons ? I was referring to the families of the victims---------not the Bamber relatives,and if that remark of yours isn't meant to inflame,I don't know what is.


So what would you call them, sister, bro in law, nephew and niece, if not FAMILY of victims? It's a straight forward question and WASN'T meant as inflammatory.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 35033
That is the psychiatrists opinion, I have experienced something different, Lookout.  It may be that a person who has suffered from PS may be more vulnerable to it reoccurring than others but it does burn out. :-\






It's very contradictory though and because of the nature of the illness which as we all know is at its worst without medication,in this case it would have appeared to have been used as an excuse  when he murdered those women. My take on it at this stage would be to argue that he even had PS in the first place and that he was just born evil ? Knowing that he'd do time when caught,the obvious diagnosis of PS would " cover everything " so putting him into such an institution as Broadmoor in preference to the more stark conditions of the ordinary prison.
He's moaning already about not having Freeview and DVD facilities so it'll be interesting to see if he kicks off about it. ( nothing about remorse for his murders !)

Offline Jane J

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 24074





It's very contradictory though and because of the nature of the illness which as we all know is at its worst without medication,in this case it would have appeared to have been used as an excuse  when he murdered those women. My take on it at this stage would be to argue that he even had PS in the first place and that he was just born evil ? Knowing that he'd do time when caught,the obvious diagnosis of PS would " cover everything " so putting him into such an institution as Broadmoor in preference to the more stark conditions of the ordinary prison.
He's moaning already about not having Freeview and DVD facilities so it'll be interesting to see if he kicks off about it. ( nothing about remorse for his murders !)

"Appeared to have been used as an excuse"!!! By whom, Lookout? Did they take his word for it that he had it OR was he diagnosed by someone you either believe to be a charlatan OR did he have a bent lawyer trying to get him a lesser sentence? I don't believe anyone is born evil but I do believe that there are those born with the propensity and nurture and environment play a large part in the deciding factor of its' expression.

I wonder how it is that you "know" he's moaning about lack of Freeview and DVD facilities. I'd guess a paper gave the information. Make no mistakes, Lookout, I'm not condoning what he did. PS doesn't excuse it but it MIGHT explain it.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 35033
"Appeared to have been used as an excuse"!!! By whom, Lookout? Did they take his word for it that he had it OR was he diagnosed by someone you either believe to be a charlatan OR did he have a bent lawyer trying to get him a lesser sentence? I don't believe anyone is born evil but I do believe that there are those born with the propensity and nurture and environment play a large part in the deciding factor of its' expression.

I wonder how it is that you "know" he's moaning about lack of Freeview and DVD facilities. I'd guess a paper gave the information. Make no mistakes, Lookout, I'm not condoning what he did. PS doesn't excuse it but it MIGHT explain it.





So as if by magic his schizophrenia is no more ? He either had it or he didn't. Just because a person has,or shows certain symptoms of an illness or a disease doesn't mean to say that they have that illness or disease. Some symptoms mimic illnesses/diseases of which are benign and mental illness is no different.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12966





It's very contradictory though and because of the nature of the illness which as we all know is at its worst without medication,in this case it would have appeared to have been used as an excuse  when he murdered those women. My take on it at this stage would be to argue that he even had PS in the first place and that he was just born evil ? Knowing that he'd do time when caught,the obvious diagnosis of PS would " cover everything " so putting him into such an institution as Broadmoor in preference to the more stark conditions of the ordinary prison.
He's moaning already about not having Freeview and DVD facilities so it'll be interesting to see if he kicks off about it. ( nothing about remorse for his murders !)
I don't know if he has PS or not and although I'm not na├»ve I tend to believe the psychiatrists on this occasion.  In the past I worked with retired State Registered Mental Nurses both of whom had worked nights for about 40 years on the locked wards in the local huge Mendip Hospital.  They knew the guy I spike of in a previous post from that time and told me how dangerous he used to be, they both were quite confident that violent paranoid schizophrenics burned out as they got older.
I'm not really arguing with you Lookout, I am just posing a moral question ie. if someone kills when mentally ill, are they responsible for their actions?  Also, when or if they do recover from their psychosis
can they still be deemed responsible for their crimes?
I don't know the answer. I think it's a conundrum and far from straight forward. :-\

Offline Jane J

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 24074




That's as maybe,but Broadmoor is the safer and secure environment ( so far as the public and victims families of his atrocities are concerned ) with like for like inhabitants which is where he should stay. I can't wait to see what happens if and when he's moved,probably to Wakefield which would cast an even darker shadow over Jeremy.
Let's hope he gets lynched wherever he goes.

A little while back you asked my why I had to make comparisons. I'll ask you the same question. According to what the law says, you are judging two men, both guilty of killing numerous people. ONE of these men, you're desperate to see released because you believe him to be innocent. The other, a sick man, now supposedly recovered, NOT being released but sent to a high security establishment, yet your hopes for him are that "he gets lynched wherever he goes."

Offline mat

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
A little while back you asked my why I had to make comparisons. I'll ask you the same question. According to what the law says, you are judging two men, both guilty of killing numerous people. ONE of these men, you're desperate to see released because you believe him to be innocent. The other, a sick man, now supposedly recovered, NOT being released but sent to a high security establishment, yet your hopes for him are that "he gets lynched wherever he goes."

What's good for one is good for the other surely? Infact why don't we hope Sutcliffe and Bamber take each other out like the animals that they are? 

I have no problem with his prison move. We can't say that he SHOULD be locked up there because Doctors say so, and then say he shouldn't be moved...Even thought he doctors are saying he should be.

It seems the Dr's are only right when we agree with them.

The family of his victims have said they don't care where he is locked up aslong as he is inside and their opinion is good enough for me.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 35033

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4668
I am just posing a moral question ie. if someone kills when mentally ill, are they responsible for their actions?


If they cannot distinguish right from wrong then then no. But very few people qualify for it.

It would not surprise me if sutcliffe never had any serious mental illness at all. His defence team probably told him to go along with the idea that he was ill.

"Truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is."

"The idea that he could invent a tale of a killing spree by a mentally disturbed woman to be lent credibility by further violent episodes over the following decades is hard to credit."

Offline mat

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
If they cannot distinguish right from wrong then then no. But very few people qualify for it.

It would not surprise me if sutcliffe never had any serious mental illness at all. His defence team probably told him to go along with the idea that he was ill.

It seems to have become the status quo at times hasn't it.