Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Ian Brady (the Moors murderer) is dead

People in Manchester may remember a local night-time talk show hosted by James Stannage. Keith Bennetts mum was a regular caller - god it was heartbreaking. She could never ever let go, and who would say she should even if they wished she could?

I've seen her up on the moors when she was still alive, the poor woman.

eta - just spotted this in the Guardian that I'd not known before. The poor family. :(

The family of Lesley Ann Downey, Brady’s youngest victim, were also put through fresh pain in the subsequent years, when the young girl’s brother and niece were killed by an arsonist who was obsessed with the Moors murders.
 
Last edited:
good riddance, lets hope thatcher is waiting for him in that special ring of hell and if that doesnt exist just let him rot in pieces
 
Brady was a psychopath in the true sense: unable to emphathise with other people's emotions. So however much bile and hatred and delighting in his death people might pour out, none of it would have cut him up one little bit.

Not that I believe in such crap as him watching us from some Other Place with satisfaction now, but I'd still rather not dignify his death with any reaction at all.
 
Shame he's dead really, it is what he wanted in the end. I'd rather he'd lived for a bit longer so he remained miserable.
 
The family of Lesley Ann Downey, Brady’s youngest victim, were also put through fresh pain in the subsequent years, when the young girl’s brother and niece were killed by an arsonist who was obsessed with the Moors murders.
Fucking hell. :(
 
Hopefully this will be the final time that the tabloid scumbags will be able to wring some circulation money out of this particular episode of pain and misery.

Well, for some peculiar reason this particular crime has resonated with the UK public for decades (something to do with a fascination for the dark side of our human nature, maybe?). So, yes, those scummy tabloids you speak of will be able to wring some circulation money out of this again; mainly in part because sizable sections of our society want to read about it. Go figure.
 
Well, for some peculiar reason this particular crime has resonated with the UK public for decades (something to do with a fascination for the dark side of our human nature, maybe?). So, yes, those scummy tabloids you speak of will be able to wring some circulation money out of this again; mainly in part because sizable sections of our society want to read about it. Go figure.

The market has spoken. :rolleyes: :facepalm:
 
Well, for some peculiar reason this particular crime has resonated with the UK public for decades (something to do with a fascination for the dark side of our human nature, maybe?). So, yes, those scummy tabloids you speak of will be able to wring some circulation money out of this again; mainly in part because sizable sections of our society want to read about it. Go figure.
It has resonated with the media, who have brought it up time and again for more than 50 years.
 
It has resonated with the media, who have brought it up time and again for more than 50 years.


I agree. But I think it has resonated, too, with the public. For what reasons, who knows? Maybe like I said, human nature has a general and grim fascination with such dark matters. Death, murder, crime, suffering etc. Because at the end of the day, people don't have to buy the papers, buy the books, listen to the media reports about these things. Yet they do - by their own choice.
 
Well, for some peculiar reason this particular crime has resonated with the UK public for decades (something to do with a fascination for the dark side of our human nature, maybe?). So, yes, those scummy tabloids you speak of will be able to wring some circulation money out of this again; mainly in part because sizable sections of our society want to read about it. Go figure.

You appear to be putting the cart before the horse, there.
Lets take another '60s example - Mary Bell. Her crimes resonated too, but memory of them would have pretty much died out by the '90s if it weren't for the insistence of the tabloids in hounding her once she left prison, outing her new identity, and plain not letting the families of her victims grieve, or letting Bell herself move on - she had, after all, served her time, and that is supposed to have paid her debt to society, so to speak.

The media feeds prurient speculation because it likes to shock the readership, plain and simple, and knows that the occasional diet of sensationalist "true crime" stories does that.
 
i watched news last night a few times, and was disappointed that none chose to mention Brady's obsession with Adolf Hitler and the third reich. Nazi crimes against children are well documented, and Brady can be seen to follow in similar footsteps. my hope is that Brady might be followed swiftly by other right wing nutjobs and murderers, starting with Anders Breivik.
 
You appear to be putting the cart before the horse, there.
Lets take another '60s example - Mary Bell. Her crimes resonated too, but memory of them would have pretty much died out by the '90s if it weren't for the insistence of the tabloids in hounding her once she left prison, outing her new identity, and plain not letting the families of her victims grieve, or letting Bell herself move on - she had, after all, served her time, and that is supposed to have paid her debt to society, so to speak.

The media feeds prurient speculation because it likes to shock the readership, plain and simple, and knows that the occasional diet of sensationalist "true crime" stories does that.

You miss out one crucial word here; "The media feeds purient PUBLIC speculation". Because a sizeable section of the public WANT to hear and read such things. Both them and the media feed of one another, it's a symbiotic relationship. Not a case of either/or. Both, in my opinion, are as complicit. A simple case of six of one and half a dozen of the other.
 
You miss out one crucial word here; "The media feeds purient PUBLIC speculation". Because a sizeable section of the public WANT to hear and read such things. Both them and the media feed of one another, it's a symbiotic relationship. Not a case of either/or. Both, in my opinion, are as complicit. A simple case of six of one and half a dozen of the other.

Are you suggesting that the news of the world conducted a social enquiry to see if the public had an appetite to read about Brady's refusal of food and other shit times whilst incarcerated?
Or does it just form part of their editorial stance?
 
Back
Top Bottom