James Chadwin, Lawyer defended the Yorkshire Ripper, 75
deb...@comcast.net
By Helen Rae, The Evening Chronicle
Tributes have been paid to a top Tyneside barrister who defended the
Yorkshire Ripper. James Chadwin QC was one of the region's most
well-established lawyers and died after a long illness. He was 75.
Throughout his career Mr Chadwin was always at the cutting edge of his
profession and he defended some of the most notorious of criminals.
In the early 1980s, Mr Chadwin was a key figure in the Yorkshire Ripper
case in which he acted as the defence barrister for Peter Sutcliffe.
While defending Sutcliffe he spent many hours with the murderer, going
over every intimate detail about his case.
Yet although the father-of-four, from Tynemouth, was often thrust into
the limelight, it was not something he craved.
His clerk, Brian Bell, who worked with Mr Chadwin at Broad Chare
Chambers in Newcastle, said: "I've known Jim for over 30 years and he
was a good friend and great barrister.
"He was not one of these people who would talk endlessly about his
high-profile cases. If anything he was always loath to talk about
them."
At the beginning of his career Mr Chadwin worked as a junior barrister
in Newcastle but later moved to Leeds. However, his love for the North
East brought him back to the region.
In 1991, he defended Albert Dryden, who shot dead council planning
chief Harry Collinson when officers moved in to demolish Dryden's
illegally-built bungalow in Butsfield, near Consett, County Durham.
During the case Mr Chadwin's skill and precision unnerved many a
witness.
"He was one of the sharpest and most competent barristers," said Mr
Bell. "He was brought up in the traditional old-school form of training
where there were many wonderful characters and he was certainly one of
them. He was at the top of his profession for a very long time.
"No-one had a bad word to say about him. He will be sorely missed."
Friends and family will attend his funeral at the Holy Saviours Church
in Tynemouth at 10.45pm tomorrow.
Mr Bell added: "Tomorrow morning the courts are coming to a standstill.
I don't think they would be able to function because so many people
want to pay their respects at his funeral."
In July 2003, he was the defence QC for Mark Jobson who battered to
death his father, Keith, 59, in a frenzied attack at the terraced house
they shared on North Tyneside.
It happened just weeks after Jobson, 28, moved back into his father's
home in Ventnor Gardens, Whitley Bay, after a spell at a clinic in
Middlesbrough for long-term alcohol problems.
Mr Chadwin leaves a widow Joan and children Nick, Sandy, Jenny and Tom.
J.D. Baldwin
In the previous article, <deb...@comcast.net> wrote:
> In the early 1980s, Mr Chadwin was a key figure in the Yorkshire
> Ripper case in which he acted as the defence barrister for Peter
> Sutcliffe.
Though Sutcliffe was convicted of murder, it's worth noting that the
jury could not reach a unanimous verdict. Two or three of the jurors
wanted to convict him of manslaughter on diminished capacity grounds,
which is what Chadwin was going for. Given the mass of evidence
against Sutcliffe and even some unrebutted evidence that he was simply
faking mental illness, Chadwin managed to convince some jurors that
his client was not fully responsible for his acts.
British law permits majority verdicts in some circumstances, and the
verdict of guilty on the murder charge was entered. Later, Chadwin
managed to convince the British Home Secretary to execute an
administrative order to move Sutcliffe from prison to a mental
hospital. That's a hella good lawyer in anyone's book.
I think Sutcliffe is up for parole in a few years. I'd like to say
there's no chance he'll get it, but he was actually given a day pass
to leave the hospital (under escort) last year, so who the hell knows?
--
_+_ From the catapult of |If anyone disagrees with any statement I make, I
_|70|___:)=}- J.D. Baldwin |am quite prepared not only to retract it, but also
\ / bal...@panix.com|to deny under oath that I ever made it. -T. Lehrer
***~~~~-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Schenley
> > the Yorkshire Ripper case in which he acted as the
> > defence barrister for Peter Sutcliffe.
> Though Sutcliffe was convicted of murder, it's worth
> noting that the jury could not reach a unanimous
> verdict. Two or three of the jurors wanted to convict
> him of manslaughter on diminished capacity grounds,
> which is what Chadwin was going for. Given the mass
> of evidence against Sutcliffe and even some
> unrebutted evidence that he was simply faking mental
> illness, Chadwin managed to convince some jurors that
> his client was not fully responsible for his acts.
IIRC, the jury didn't just find Sutcliffe guilty ... they found him
sane.
Sutcliffe had already admitted his guilt ... and outlined each murder
and attack with details only the police would know. Unfortunately, he
was overheard telling his wife (who has since remarried) that if he
faked insanity ... he would only get a few years in a mental
institution.
The jury voted 10-2 for guilty and sane on thirteen counts of murder.
After two weeks of trial ... it took the jurors only 5+ hours to reach
a verdict. Two jurors felt Sutcliffe was guilty but insane.
> British law permits majority verdicts in some
> circumstances, and the verdict of guilty on the murder
> charge was entered. Later, Chadwin managed to
> convince the British Home Secretary to execute an
> administrative order to move Sutcliffe from prison to a
> mental hospital. That's a hella good lawyer in anyone's
> book.
Yeah ... He was initially sent to Parkhurst Prison ... and after a
time ... was found to be a paranoid schizophrenic ... and transferred
to Broadmoor, but the lawyer who got the transfer was not James
Chadwin ... it was Kerry MacGill.
> I think Sutcliffe is up for parole in a few years. I'd like to
> say there's no chance he'll get it, but he was actually given
> a day pass to leave the hospital (under escort) last year, so
> who the hell knows?
Sutcliffe has taken a few pretty good ass-whuppins' since he's been
locked up. The last attack that I know of ... left Sutcliffe blind in
one eye ... and with diminished sight in the other when he was stabbed
with a pen.
As to the day pass ... Sutcliffe was escorted in a "high-security van"
to Arnside, in Cumbria, to visit the place where his father's ashes
were scattered. All of his requests for a pass to visit his dying
father were denied.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_yorkshire/4190525.stm
Dr. Andrew Horne, a psychiatrist at Broadmoor, was interviewed a few
years ago and stated that, in his opinion, Sutcliffe was completely
cured.
Because of this new revelation ... I look forward to the day Mr.
Sutcliffe is finally released from institutional care ... and can
begin living a useful and productive life. I believe he has suffered
enough ...
Heh ... heh ... Okay ... I was just kidding ...
J.D. Baldwin
In the previous article, Bill Schenley <stra...@ma.rr.com> wrote:
> > Though Sutcliffe was convicted of murder, it's worth
> > noting that the jury could not reach a unanimous
> > verdict. Two or three of the jurors wanted to convict
> > him of manslaughter on diminished capacity grounds,
> > which is what Chadwin was going for. Given the mass
> > of evidence against Sutcliffe and even some
> > unrebutted evidence that he was simply faking mental
> > illness, Chadwin managed to convince some jurors that
> > his client was not fully responsible for his acts.
>
> IIRC, the jury didn't just find Sutcliffe guilty ... they found him
> sane.
My understanding of the Sutcliffe verdict is that the defense wasn't
really going for "insane," they were going for a "diminished capacity"
defense that would have resulted in a manslaughter verdict, not a
not-guilty one (as with insanity).
> Sutcliffe had already admitted his guilt ... and outlined each
> murder and attack with details only the police would know.
> Unfortunately, he was overheard telling his wife (who has since
> remarried) that if he faked insanity ... he would only get a few
> years in a mental institution.
>
> The jury voted 10-2 for guilty and sane on thirteen counts of murder.
Note that two jurors voted for manslaughter -- and held to that vote
-- *despite* unrebutted testimony about Sutcliffe's comments to his
wife. Either Chadwin was one brilliant lawyer ... or morons sometimes
get onto high-profile juries in the UK just as they do in America.
> After two weeks of trial ... it took the jurors only 5+ hours to
> reach a verdict.
Closer to seven hours, and even at that it was only a majority verdict
of 10-2, as noted below:
> Two jurors felt Sutcliffe was guilty but insane.
Not exactly. The "insanity defense," as such, wasn't really on the
table. Sutcliffe's defense was not that he was insane to a degree
that rendered him incapable of telling right from wrong, or of
appreciating the consequences of his actions; it was that he was
mentally screwed up enough that he wasn't capable of forming the level
of intent required for a murder charge and was therefore "only" guilty
of manslaughter. Two jurors, as noted, agreed, but they didn't return
a "guilty but insane" verdict, they simply returned a "not guilty"
verdict on the murder charges, as they were holding out for the
manslaughter finding.
In fact, Sutcliffe had reached a plea bargain with the Crown to plead
to thirteen counts of manslaughter due to diminished capacity, but the
judge rejected that plea, so they went forward with a trial. Oddly
enough, this plea bargain included seven counts of attempted murder
for the cases in which Sutcliffe did not kill his intended victims.
This makes no sense whatever, of course, but when did that ever stop
lawyers?
> Sutcliffe has taken a few pretty good ass-whuppins' since he's been
> locked up. The last attack that I know of ... left Sutcliffe blind
> in one eye ... and with diminished sight in the other when he was
> stabbed with a pen.
Even his "good" eye is, they say, legally blind.
aka Bob
INVALID...@example.com.invalid (J.D. Baldwin) magnanimously
proffered:
No snip because I'm finding this fascinating reading. I knew a little
about the trial because it was well reported in New Zealand. But I
didn't know it in this kind of detail. Remarkable ...
"It's not that I'm afraid to die. I just don't want to be there when it happens." - Woody Allen
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wax-up and drop-in of Surfing's Golden Years: <http://www.surfwriter.net>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~