Showing posts with label crime. Show all posts
Showing posts with label crime. Show all posts

Monday, April 26, 2010

Dancing with the Devil


Longford, made for Channel 4 in England in 2006, is a television drama directed by Tom Hooper based on a script by Peter Morgan. It stars Jim Broadbent as Lord Longford, amongst other things a prison visitor and campaigner for liberal causes, and Samantha Morton as Myra Hindley, the infamous serial killer whom he befriends, campaigning for her release from prison.

Having recently finished a biography of Hindley I was immediately drawn to this movie. I’m so glad I saw it. Jim Broadbent is truly excellent as the campaigning peer, a performance for which he won a BAFTA award. He plays Longford very much as I imagine he was in life: a naïve, well-meaning but rather child-like individual, willing to take people at face value; willing to believe, following the tenets of his Catholic faith, that people are ultimately good.

Samantha Morton was also superb as Hindley, a manipulative and calculating woman, one who used Longford, as she used religion, towards her own cynical and self-serving ends. I thought that Andy Serkis was also excellent as a truly malevolent Ian Brady, with whom Hindley carried out the Moors murders in the 1960s, confronting Longford with truths that he clearly was not able to face.

I confess my reading of One of Your Own; the Life and Death of Myra Hindley left me with nothing more than a dislike, a mild contempt for the figure of Lord Longford as a silly, shallow and somewhat stupid old man; a man who collected killers as if he was collecting puppy dogs; a man who could not recognise Hindley for what she was.

But Broadbent’s portrayal gave deeper dimension to the man, to the importance religion played in forming his ideas and attitudes; it made me understand him just a little more, sympathise just a little more. It also showed just how vulnerable he was. Despite his age he really had no proper understanding of life and the traps it lays.

He was deceived by Hindley for many years, a deception finally made clear to him when she, under pressure from Brady, finally confesses her part in the murder of Pauline Reade and Keith Bennett. In perhaps the most telling scene of all we see Longford listen to a tape, sent to him anonymously, of the torture of Lesley Anne Downie, in which Hindley’s voice can be clearly heard, only her voice; the real tape is still too horrifying to broadcast. He listens with a look of despair. Still, in the end, his faith was only deepened by the test he had faced.

Longford is an excellent movie, one of the best TV productions I have seen.

Thursday, April 22, 2010

Hideous Hindley


I’ve not long finished One of Your Own, The Life and Death of Myra Hindley by Carol Ann Lee. At close on four hundred pages it’s a detailed account of the life and crimes of one of the most infamous women in recent British history, but I read it over two days with complete fascination, though crime is not a subject that normally I am attracted to.

Hindley is different. There is something iconic about her, something that touches on the bigger issues, something over the nature and causes of evil itself that drew me irresistibly to this book. Lee tackles the subject with a scholarly sense of detachment, though she draws some pertinent and telling judgements at points.

It’s worth pointing out that she has also written extensively about the Holocaust, highly relevant for the simple reason that the mindset of Hindley was the same pathological mindset as people like Irma Grese or Elizabeth Volkenrath, both notorious concentration camp guards. It’s difficult for me to describe this with any precision; it’s evil, yes, but at its most banal, a combination of personal cruelty, maudlin self-pity and a total lack of sympathy for other human beings. During the period following her arrest along with Ian Brady for the murder of Edward Evans the only emotion Hindley ever showed was after she was told of the death of her dog.

Lee has a compelling relaxed style, writing with ease and considerable fluency. There were parts of her lucid account that I found so difficult, parts I almost skipped, especially the section dealing with the torment and murder of ten-year-old Lesley Ann Downie, which includes a transcript of the awful tape recording Brady and Hindley took.

Years later, when she was fighting her ruthless parole campaign, Hindley wrote to Ann West, Lesley’s mother, a letter which contains a particularly telling sentence;

I now want to say to you, and I implore you to believe me, because it is the truth, that your child was not physically tortured, as is widely believed.

Of this Lee says that Hindley, while trying to explain that Lesley was not mutilated prior to death, completely failed to grasp that the ordeal to which the little girl was subjected before her murder was precisely that – physical and psychological torture. Yes, what more need be said?

The part of the book that I found of particular interest was that dealing with Hindley’s years in prison prior to her death in November 2002, the time when she mounted a systematic campaign to convince people that she had changed, that she was no longer the same person, that she had rediscovered the Catholic faith of her youth. The whole thing seemed to me to be entirely fraudulent, as if she was not even beneath an attempt to deceive God himself in her cynical drive for freedom.

The one person she did not deceive was Diana Athill, a literary editor who was approached by Hindley’s supporters to work on a proposed autobiography. She insisted on meeting the woman before she would commit herself. The interviews took place but Athill declined to get involved, doubting the worth of the project as a means for Hindley to come to terms with the past. Afterwards she wrote:

When she did what she did she was not mad – as Brady was – and although she was young, she was an adult, and an intelligent one. It seems to me that there are strands of moral deformity which cannot be pardoned: that Stangl was right when, having faced the truth about himself, he said “I ought to be dead.”

Franz Stangl, for those who may not know, was a commandant of the Sobibor and Treblinka extermination camps.

There were plenty that Hindley did deceive, none more so than Frank Pakenham, the seventh earl of Longford, who was long active in her campaign for release. I have to say, though, I think she was particularly ill-served by this muddle-headed do-gooder (not a term I like, but it fits his character so.)

He raised her expectations in the early seventies, only a few years after she was sentenced to life imprisonment. It was because of him that her state of denial and self-deception deepened; because of him that she did not finally admit her part in the murder of Pauline Reade and Keith Bennett until the late 1980s. There seems to me to be an odd kind of similarity between the liberal and the psychopath. Like Hindley Longford had no interest in the victims of the Moors murders, no interest in the feelings of the families of the butchered children.

At the end of the book I felt nothing for the subject other than contempt and distaste. I struggle sometimes with the concept of evil, asking myself if it is something tangible, is it something, in other words, that has an objective existence beyond the individual choices we make? It might be easy to answer if I believed in Christian notions of good and evil, but I don’t. All I can say is that in the person of Myra Hindley evil took on an objective form, one that never went away.

Lee concludes her book by commenting on the obituary of Hindley in the Independent, where it was said that she had no ‘judgement’ – “But judgement was precisely what Myra Hindley had –in a sense, it is all any of us have – and she chose to use it with the most wicked intent.”

I ended, I confess, by crying for the family of Keith Bennett, whose remains, never discovered, still lie somewhere on those bleak, windswept Moors.

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

She Didn’t Like Mondays


The callousness of those who carry out mass shootings, such a feature of the modern age, particularly in the United States, is something I find depressing and disturbing, especially when motives are almost impossible to determine, or, better said, the professed motives only serve to add to the callousness. More than this, the perpetrators seem to be without any depth, any soul; two-demnsional figures without humanity; they have become computer-generated figures, actors in a video game.

I only discovered that facts in the case of Brenda Ann Spencer quite recently. Who is she? Nobody of any real importance, I suppose. It’s just that in 1979, when she was sixteen years old, she took a rifle, a .22 gifted to her by her father, and went on a shooting spree at Cleveland Elementary School in San Diego, California.

By the standards of other mass shootings, by the standards of, say, the Columbine Massacre, her escapade did not amount to much, killing ‘only’ two people and injuring nine more. No, that’s not the remarkable thing; it was the reason she gave for the shootings after she was disarmed and in custody – “I just did it for the fun of it. I don't like Mondays. This livens up the day. It was just like shooting ducks in a pond.”

There was no hate, there was no passion; there was no resentment at personal rejection -she just didn’t like Mondays. It’s beyond inhumanity; it reaches into the true soulless shallows of complete dehumanisation; other people only exist at the outer limits of consciousness, objects of entertainment.

Brenda Ann Spencer is still in prison for her crime, and may remain there until she dies. The most apt comment on her actions that day is a song called I Don’t like Mondays by The Boomtown Rats, an Irish band. The lyrics are chillingly precise:

The silicon chip inside her head gets switched to overload
And nobody's gonna go to school today
She's going to make them stay at home
And daddy doesn't understand it
He always said she was good as gold
And he can see no reasons, 'cause there are no reasons
What reason do you need to be shown?
Tell me why?
I don't like Mondays
Tell me why?
I don't like Mondays
Tell me why?
I don't like Mondays
I want to shoot the whole day down

The telex machine is kept so clean and it types to a waiting world
And mother feels so shocked
Father's world is rocked
And their thoughts turn to their own little girl
Sweet 16 ain't that peachy keen
No, it ain't so neat to admit defeat
They can see no reasons 'cause there are no reasons
What reasons do you need
Tell me why?
I don't like Mondays
Tell me why?
I don't like Mondays
Tell me why?
I don't like Mondays
I want to shoot the whole day down, down, down, shoot it all down

And all the playing has stopped in the playground now
She wants to play with her toys a while
And school's out early and soon we'll be learning
And the lesson today is how to die
And then the bullhorn crackles
And the captain tackles with the problems and the hows and whys
And he can see no reasons 'cause there are no reasons
What reason do you need to die, die?
And the silicon chip inside her head gets switched to overload
And nobody's gonna go to school today
She's going to make them stay at home
And daddy doesn't understand it
He always said she was good as gold
And he can see no reasons 'cause there are no reasons
What reason do you need to be shown?
Tell me why?
I don't like Mondays
Tell me why?
I don't like Mondays
Tell me why?
I don't like, I don't like, (Tell me why?) I don't like Mondays
Tell me why?
I don't like, I don't like, (Tell me why?) I don't like Mondays
Tell me why?
I don't like Mondays
I want to shoot the whole day down

Monday, March 8, 2010

Victorian Crime


There is a huge literature on this fascinating subject, from an analysis of statistical trends to the examination of individual cases, too much to detail here. What I will say is that crime, as we understand it today, might even be said to be the creation of the Victorian age. Literacy had created the demand for a popular press; and the press fed on the public's taste for crime, particularly in its more lurid forms.

Let's take one case where Victorian perceptions shaped, and continue to shape, how one particular case has been projected and understood: namely the Whitechapel Murders of 1888. Here we are in the realm of Jack the Ripper. He was a 'gentleman', was he not, one who may even have come all the way down to the slums from the palaces of royalty? Well, in fact, we know virtually nothing about the Ripper, because he was never caught. But the journalists of the day were quite happy to fulfil the popular prejudice, no doubt stimulated by the publication two years previously of Robert Louis Stevenson's The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, that the Ripper was a 'toff', who got his 'pleasures' slumming in London's seedy east end.

'Mugging' was also the creation of the Victorian age, or at least the popular anxiety associated with the crime is. It began with the 'garrotting panic' of 1862. Assailants would attack a victim from the back, half-throttle and then rob him. The technique itself had been learned from the practice in convict ships, where it was used in restraining prisoners. The panic began when an MP was attacked in this fashion after leaving a late sitting in the Commons. Soon the press was full of adverts for 'anti-garrotte collars' for gentlemen!

The next big concern was over the nature of criminality itself. Most law-breakers, of course, were from the urban poor, the seedbed of the new 'criminal classes'. An explanation was required, beyond mere poverty of course, and was readily supplied by the likes of Edwin Chadwick, the Poor Law reformer, who believed criminality was the response of the idle and the feckless, tempted by easy returns as an alternative to honest labour. Temperance reformers placed the blame on alcohol, just as reformers in education blamed ignorance and lack of opportunity. For the evangelists, it was all due to the abandonment of the standards set by religion. With the growth of popular forms of Social Darwinism heredity became a factor; and by the end of the century the notion of the habitual criminal, tainted by birth and background, was gaining ascendency over the notions of morality and idleness. From this management and control became the dominant elements of law-enforcement; and so it remains today