DONALD MACKAY

                                                AWAITING MUG SHOT PHOTO

1. On the 20 December 1989, following his conviction for murder before Mr Justice Ian Kennedy, after a trial at the Central Criminal Court, Donald Mackay was sentenced to the mandatory term of life imprisonment. Following the practice of the time, the judge recommended that he serve 18 – 19 years before being considered for release by the Parole Board (the judge thought that fully 30 years might elapse before the defendant could safely be released, but that is another matter). In due course, Lord Lane CJ recommended that the minimum term should be only 16 years. The Secretary of State fixed the minimum term which he must serve as 20 years. Under paragraph 3 of Schedule 22 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the defendant has now asked the High Court to review the minimum term fixed.

2. I base this factual narrative entirely upon the report of the trial judge. The victim, Ann Petherick, was aged 26; she was a prostitute. The defendant was then aged 41; he was one of her regular clients. She was last seen alive on 2nd January 1989. On 19th February her naked, decomposing body was found bundled in a black plastic bag in the defendant's flat in north London after Rosemarie Saunders had gone to the police, following the defendant’s assault upon her.

3. Rosemarie Saunders was another prostitute. On the night of 17th /18th February, the defendant had picked her up. He had taken her to his flat. The agreement between them was for "straight sex". When they arrived at his flat, the defendant asked for bondage. Saunders refused. The defendant then walked naked into the room, with a rope, one end of which he fashioned into a noose, which he put around her neck; he then trussed her up. He then sexually and physically abused her for several hours. He threatened to kill her. He threatened to hang her from a hook, which he placed in the door frame. He threatened to put her body in a black plastic bag and to dump it on Hampstead Heath. He gagged her. He pulled the noose tight so that Saunders lost consciousness for a while. He attempted to bugger her and submitted her to various other indignities. So terrified had she been that she became incontinent of faeces and urine. These outrages only ended when he fell asleep from tiredness and drink. She then escaped. She was, by then, hysterical. She raised the alarm. The rope marks on her body could clearly still be seen.

4. The offences upon Rosemary Sauders gave rise to convictions, after a trial, for offences of making threats to kill, assault with intent to commit buggery, indecent assault and assault occasioning actual bodily harm. For these offences, the trial judge imposed determinate sentences totalling seven years, to run concurrently with the life sentence. In my judgement any minimum term which the defendant is ordered to serve for the murder must take account of the scale of offending against Rosemary Saunders, otherwise he will escape punishment for these ‘bestial’ offences, as the trial judge vividly described them. To put it another way: the minimum term must reflect his overall criminality, that is to say the offences committed against both victims.

5. Following her complaint, the police went to the defendant’s flat to arrest him. He was arrested while still asleep in the chair, still drunk. When they searched the flat, they found Ann Petherick’s body. Because of the decomposition, no precise mechanism of death could be established but her facial bones had been driven in by 3 or 4 heavy blows; it is probable that she died from asphyxia consequential upon those injuries. She also had a broken bone in a foot and a bruise over one shoulder blade. Although it seems to me that the inference could readily have been drawn that she had been subjected to the same kind of sexual and sadistic indignities as was suffered by Rosemarie Saunders, the trial judge was unwilling so to conclude; he heard the evidence and it would be wrong for me to make any different finding.

6. It should be noted that the defendant had a previous conviction for manslaughter in 1984, when he received 5 years for stabbing a man to death with a sword. This is plainly an aggravating factor to be considered when fixing the minimum term. I might add that it is likely to be a highly relevant consideration when the Parole come to consider whether he can safely be released.

7. I have read the Victim Personal Statement of Mrs Petherick, Ann’s mother. She speaks with bitterness of the dark shadow which her daughter’s murder has cast over her life.

8. The defendant still maintains his innocence; he has shown no remorse. I have seen the reports on the defendant’s progress in prison. He has achieved considerable academic success. However, there is nothing in this case which is so exceptional as to justify a reduction in the minimum term otherwise appropriate. In short, I see no mitigating features whatsoever.

9. The defendant has requested an oral hearing. I have read the detailed submissions in writing made on his behalf (and indeed the manuscript observations which the defendant made at the time before the tariff was first set). I am unable to see that anything could be gained from further oral argument. I decline to hold such a hearing.

10. Section 276 and Schedule 22 of the Act ensure when a minimum term has been fixed by the Secretary of Sate, on a review the High Court can only confirm the term fixed or reduce it; it cannot increase a minimum term already fixed.

11. Before Lord Bingham CJ wrote his letter to the judges on 10 February 1997 (conveniently set out in paragraphs IV.49.18 – 21 of the Consolidated Criminal Practice Direction, as amended) there was no guidance as to how minimum should be set. In the absence of any other guidance, the best guide to practice is probably Lord Bingham’s letter, so which I have already referred, which suggested a starting point of 14 years.

12. This was a most terrible murder. The particularly aggravating factors here were the concealment of the body, his previous conviction for manslaughter and the subsequent offending against Rosemary Saunders. These plainly justify a substantial increase upon the starting point. I think that the minimum term fixed by the Secretary of State properly reflects the grave features of this case. Accordingly, I confirm the minimum term to be 20 years. Had this murder been committed now, I do not doubt that this sentence would be longer but I must loyally apply what I take to be the conventional tariff of the time.

13. I order, as I am required to do, that the term of 20 years is reduced by the period of 10 months and 6 days which he spent in custody before being sentenced.

14. I am anxious that this sentence is not misunderstood or mis-reported. The sentence is – and remains – a sentence of imprisonment for life. The defendant may not even be considered for release until he has served at least 20 years. That is not to say that he will then be released; indeed he will be detained unless and until the Parole Board is satisfied that he no longer resents a risk to the public. Even if the Parole Board decides then or at some time in the future to authorise his release, he will be upon licence which will extend for the rest of his life. It is as well that the public knows that many prisoners are in fact detained long after their tariff has expired.

From Daily Mail

Before me is a newspaper cutting with the headline: "Bestial killer jailed for 40 years for sex attacks." It is dated December 21, 1989, and tells of the gruesome murder of a 27-year-old woman by one Donald Mackay.

The killer was described by an Old Bailey judge as a grave danger to the public and, in particular, women. The injuries inflicted upon Ann Petherick were appalling. Her body was hidden for weeks in a cupboard and discovered only when another woman narrowly escaped a similar end after a vicious sexual assault.

Mackay had killed before, and the intention in passing one of the longest jail sentences seen for many years was that the 41-year-old should never be free to strike again.

The murder of Ann Petherick naturally devastated her parents. Their daughter had lived a wayward existence and during the trial there were suggestions of prostitution. But her parents loved her deeply, not least because they had already lost a Down's syndrome son at the age of nine.

The murder particularly affected her father. He retired from work as a civil engineer with ill health and died a year ago at the age of 66. Her mother Ida, for much of her life a nurse in Essex, now lives alone, still haunted by the terrible fate of her daughter.

Nevertheless, she believed that the length of the sentence handed down to Mackay meant she would never ever hear his name again.

That was until she recently received a letter from the probation service asking for a meeting to discuss the case. She agreed and was told that the murderer's sentence was due for a "lifer review". To her horror Mrs Petherick learned that this would take place in a few weeks' time.

I have seen a copy of the confidential document reporting on the meeting with Mrs Petherick. In it, the probation service's victim contact officer, Debbie Anderson, says Mrs Petherick was "shocked" when told that what she believed to be a 40-year sentence was in fact a 20-year tariff.

To her superiors, Ms Anderson acknowledges that time has not healed the mother's hurt. Whether she is fully aware of the distress this new development has caused or is simply adhering to a form of words she has learned from some manual, she uses bloodless language: "It is hoped by Mrs Petherick this offender is not released back into the community at the end of his tariff, if ever."

Limply, she opines that in the event of release being considered, her unit would "request" that Mackay is never permitted to make any attempt to contact or approach the family of the victim. This, while a laudable sentiment, is something of an insult to Mrs Petherick. A glance at the figures relating to crimes of violence shows the majority are committed by reoffenders who have been released without thought as to how they will roam free and cause further misery. Unsurprisingly, Mrs Petherick tells me the interview with the probation service has left her "devastated".

Nor do other areas of the judicial system come out of this episode with much credit. The Home Office Minister responsible for sentencing, Fiona Mactaggart, has explained to Mrs Petherick that, while in open court the judge deemed the crimes worth 40 years, this represented his assessment of future risk. In fact, the tariff he recommended to the Home Secretary after the trial was nearer half this amount.

Hence this dreadful killer's sentence is now due for review. If, as the Minister puts it, he is thought to have made "sufficient progress", he could be transferred to an open prison and be released when the tariff expires early in 2009.

One must question why, after such a high-profile public trial, the sentence was then reduced so drastically in private. At the time, the public were led to believe that this man would never be seen on our streets again. Yet, behind closed doors, the most senior political and judicial figures decided otherwise.

One must ask how many other times such a sleight of judicial hand has been practised in this way. How many other victims or relatives will receive, or have received, similar news?

The decision to keep all this a secret for so long is scandalous. No one was told that the killer of Ann Petherick had, in effect, had his sentence halved. No one at the time of this crime thought about the loved ones of the victim. No one bothered to pick up the telephone and explain to Mrs Petherick that justice as promised in 1989 would not be done.

Only when Debbie Anderson from the probation service popped around did a mother realise that no one had told her the truth. That the "bestial" killer of her beloved daughter could be freed. It is a shameful story.

MAREK MIAZGA

A Polish man has been found guilty of the double murder in Luton of two of his fellow countrymen and was jailed for life on the 12th May 2008

Marek Miazga, 41, was told he would have to serve a minimum of 25 years in custody in this country.

During a month long trial a jury had heard how the victims - the Markuszeski brothers Waldeck, 43 and Andreaus, 46 were 'savagely' murdered in their rented home in Luton. They were bludgeoned with a set of weight lifting bar bells. The motive remains a mystery.

Their bodies lay undiscovered for two days until a housemate and friend made the grisly discovery.

A cash card stolen from one of the brothers was used almost immediately after the killings to plunder his account.

Miazga, pleaded not guilty to two charges of murder on May 30 2005 and to four charges of theft and four of attempted theft. He was found guilty by a jury of all charges by a majority of 11-1.

The prosecution allege a second man, Remi Piotrowski, was involved but he fled to Poland. A warrant has been issued for his arrest.

Prosecutor Miranda Moore QC told Luton Crown Court that on May 30 2005 - the day of Luton's Bank Holiday carnival, the four men were drinking heavily together. Pictures gathered from various CCTV cameras show Waldeck, Miazga and Piotrowski walking back towards Waldeck's home in Dunsmore Road. Andreaus had become parted from them.

An hour and a half later Miazga and Piotrowski are seen back in the town centre attempting to use Waldeck's bank card, and eventually obtaining some cash.

On June 2n the bodies were found by a housemate who was brought home from hospital by a female friend.

It was discovered that Waldeck had suffered 'particularly severe' injuries to his chest and head with fractures to his skull, breast bone and ribs. The injuries were consistent with being stamped on or attacked with a heavy weapon.

Footprints were found on his body which an expert said came from at least two different shoes.

Andreaus also had severe head injuries: "All areas of his skull and facial bones had been fractured. His head was physically flattened either from heavy stamping or one or more blows from the bar bells."

She said examination of the bar bells revealed it had been used as a weapon and DNA from the absent suspect was found on them, said Miss Moore.

But she said no forensic evidence was found to link Miazga to the crime scene.

Miazga who lived in Leagrave Road at the time, moved within days to Brook Street.

He claimed he never went to the house but was in a drunken stupor in a nearby park, later meeting back up with Piotrowski.

Mr Justice Keith told Miazga that he believed Waldeck was killed first after something flared up between them.

"I believe Andreaus stumbled upon the crime and had to be silenced. They were both subjected to attacks of real savagery."

After the case Mariusz Markuszeski, a brother of the two dead men, who had listened to much of the case said in a statement: "A special thanks to Bedfordshire Police who have painstakingly put all the pieces together. I have never doubted the justice system in Great Britain and I have not been disappointed.

"However no punishment can justify our loss of our dearly loved brothers who are greatly missed."

The Judge also commended the police investigation.

Acting Det Chief Insp Andrew Richer said: "We do not consider the case closed until we have the other defendant tried here for the murders."

 

RICHARD DETTMER

The killer of a popular Luton shopkeeper stabbed to death for the sake of a few pounds to spend on alcohol was jailed for a minimum of 31-and-a-half years in November 2009.

Jashbhai Patel was stabbed eight times by Richard Dettmer, 39, as he was opening the family business, Moon's Newsagents, in Park Street at 6.30am on June 14 2009.

Three hours earlier Dettmer had stabbed another man, James Foster, 18, who he had been drinking with in a park at Manor Road, Luton, and then demanded money from him.

Dettmer, who habitually carried a knife strapped to his leg, was angry at being thrown out of a friend's flat and having no money when he attacked Mr Patel.

The stabbing of Mr Foster had been potentially fatal, prosecutor Beverley Cripps said at Luton Crown Court.

She said a 77-year-old customer, Daniel Bacchus, had seen Dettmer struggling with Mr Patel in the shop doorway. He grabbed Dettmer and pushed him away and then saw the attacker had a knife.

Miss Cripps said: "He threatened the customer with it, saying 'if you want some more of the same', before taking some coins from the till area, possibly £20 or a little more. Then he fled.

"Mr Bacchus tried to help Mr Patel and dialled 999 before going to fetch his family who lived nearby. But he was in cardiac arrest and died shortly afterwards."

Dettmer was arrested at lunchtime the same day and at first made no reply to questions. But then he told an officer he wanted to make a confession. He first told how he stabbed Mr Foster twice in the back but the knife had then broken.

He said he had gone to the newsagents intending to steal a 'nourishment' drink. They were stored low down and when Mr Patel bent over he stabbed him.

He said: "It was a bit odd how that all came about. I stabbed him twice in the back and twice in the front [although it was in fact six times in the back and twice in the chest].

"He got up and started fighting me. I twisted the knife so he could not get hold of it."

Dettmer, of no fixed address, had originally intended to contest the murder charge on the grounds of diminished responsibility, but ten days ago wrote personally to the judge to say he wanted to plead guilty.

He has been examined by two psychiatrists who have diagnosed him with an emotionally unstable personality disorder.

Members of the family wore Tshirts with a picture of Mr Patel on the front to all court hearings.

Speaking on behalf of the family, Mr Patel's daughter, Jaina Patel, said: "Our family was a happy small family with a comfortable life and loving parents who would do anything to ensure that all our needs and wishes were fulfilled.

"My father came to this country from India to settle down and make a go of his life. He called this place home.

"He went on to build a reputation for himself and the people of Luton knew who he was, what type of man he was and what he would do for others.

"His friendliness was priceless. He would go above and beyond for anyone, especially those who needed help.

"If it was snowing he would deliver papers to his customers and many were elderly and could not get out of their houses.

"My dad was a genuine family man he was close to retirement and would look forward to seeing his grandson every day.

"With my niece she completed the family. Both grandchildren were my dad's pride and joy. Spoiling them, loving them and playing with them was something he made sure he did.

"On June 14 our lives changed in a way that was unimaginable. Our lives have come to a halt and we are rebuilding it, learning to live again but things will never be the same.

"We will miss his life which was devoted to his family and to those who were his close friends. This was not my dad's time to die."

JOHN O'ROURKE

A man who flew into a “murderous rage” and battered his lover to death at her quiet country cottage has been found guilty of the frenzied attack and was sentenced to life on the 1st December 2011.

John O’Rourke, 66, used two glass ornaments to beat Amanda Sorrell, 55, around the head and body in a “prolonged, determined attack” in her bedroom.

 

The married former plumber had always admitted killing the divorced mother-of-two, who worked at Cornwall Registration Service, but denied her murder.

Jurors heard he was the sole carer for his wife, who suffered from paranoid schizophrenia. His five-year relationship with Ms Sorrell was known to family and friends.

Following a trial at Truro Crown Court, the jury took two-and-a-half hours to find O’Rourke, from Milton Abbot, near Tavistock, guilty of murder. He received a mandatory life sentence and was told by judge Graham Cottle he must serve a minimum term of 14 years, less the 419 days served on remand, before he can be considered for parole.

In evidence, O’Rourke said he could not remember killing Ms Sorrell at her home at Pempwell, near Stoke Climsland, South East Cornwall, on September 27 last year.

He has never revealed what sparked the attack and claimed he could not remember what he had done.

Judge Cottle told him: “You took Amanda Sorrell’s life in a most brutal way. “You literally battered her to death in a prolonged and determined attack.

“In view of the nature and extent of the injuries sustained by her it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that you intended she should not survive.

“It might be in the aftermath of your frenzied attack you regretted what you had done in taking the life of someone you had been in a relationship with for some years, a relationship which, by all accounts, both of you valued.”

Judge Cottle said his lack of an explanation for the murder left Ms Sorrell’s family with unanswered questions and he believed O’Rourke knew the reason.

He said: “I believe something happened to trigger your murderous rage and I believe you knew what that was but you have never revealed it at any stage.”

Much had been made during the trial of the mental strain O’Rourke had been under caring for his wife. Judge Cottle said that, while he understood the strain must have been “considerable”, he did not accept it caused the attack.

The court heard O’Rourke met Ms Sorrell at a local jazz club in 2005 and their blossoming relationship gave him an escape from his home life.

After O’Rourke killed his victim, he used a kitchen knife to stab himself in the neck and abdomen and paramedics later found scratches around his wrists in another apparent suicide attempt.

O’Rourke and Ms Sorrell were discovered lying on the bedroom floor behind the door with a duvet pulled over them by a friend and colleague of hers who became concerned that she failed to attend a meeting.

Ms Sorrell was on her back with a pillow under her head, O’Rourke lying cuddled up next to her.

After sentence was passed, O’Rourke’s two daughters, Victoria and Bobi, broke down in tears and were led away from the courtroom. Ms Sorrell’s family and friends also wept.

Speaking outside the court, her sons, Edward and William Salatas, aged 27 and 25 respectively, described Ms Sorrell as a “devoted mother, sister, auntie and dear friend to all”.

In a joint statement, they said: “When we heard of our mother’s horrific death our worlds fell apart. Amanda was only 55 when her life was taken, just three weeks before the birth of her first grandchild – something she was looking forward to more than anything.

“It’s impossible to begin to understand the cowardly and selfish actions of John, who violently murdered our mother.

“We will never know why he did what he did, but we are grateful that John’s failed suicide attempt has lead us to where we are today and that justice can be served on him.

“We take comfort knowing that he did not succeed with taking his own life after he took our mother’s and hope the memory of his actions haunt him until the day he finally dies alone.

“Even with the support and best efforts from the police officers in charge, we have still had to endure many delays. These delays have resulted in a 14-month wait for the trial and the sentence to finally be heard.”

They added: “During this time, John has shown no remorse for our mother or her family and friends.

“We are glad that today John O’Rourke has finally been found guilty of murdering our mum.

“We will always be shocked and perplexed that this has happened to such a lovely person.”

Detective Inspector Ian Ringrose of the major crime team, who led the investigation, said: “Amanda suffered a prolonged, vicious, inexplicable attack at the hands of John O’Rourke. “He has never offered any explanation for this completely inexplicable attack.

“Amanda was a well-respected and admired member of her local community and loved by family and friends.

“Hopefully now O’Rourke has been convicted they can start to rebuild their lives.”

CLEMENT MCNALLY

A PSYCHOPATHIC Satanist, given a 'life means life' sentence for strangling his cell mate whilst already serving life for murder, has had that cut to 20 years by top judges on appeal.

The move came despite the admission that double killer, Clement McNally, is likely to pose the gravest risk to others for the rest of his life.

Dad-of-one Anthony Hesketh, of Eastham Way, Worsley, who was in custody for a driving offence and facing drugs charges, was found dead with a ligature made of T-shirt material around his neck in September 2003, on the floor of the Strangeways cell he shared with McNally.

McNally, 34, a devil worshiper who decorated his cell with satanic symbols and suffers from a toxic brew of psychopathic, narcissistic, paranoid and obsessive-compulsive disorders, all mixed together - was serving a mandatory life term for stabbing to death his friend, Arthur Skelly, outside a party in Ashton under Lyne in July 2002.

He was given a life term, with a whole life tariff, for thesecond killing, after pleading guilty to manslaughter by way of diminished responsibility at Manchester Crown Court on July 12 2004.

But now the minimum term on his life sentence has been slashed to 20 years by Lord Justice Hughes, at London's Criminal Appeal Court.

The judge said it was not right that McNally should be denied a light at the end of the tunnel and never have a chance of release.

McNally, who was prescribed anti-depressants and mood-stabilisers, had told a psychiatrist after being jailed for Mr Skelly's murder that he had worshipped the devil for two years and had been allowed to read books on the occult while in prison, some of which came from the prison library.

Satanic symbols

His cell was adorned with satanic symbols, including a pentagram and an inverted cross.

Nevertheless petty criminal, Mr Hesketh, was locked up with him and met his death through the man who called himself 'the hands and eyes of Satan.'

Lord Justice Hughes, sitting with Mr Justice MacKay and Mr Justice Davis, said of Mr Hesketh's killing: "McNally had no particular grievance against his victim - he simply suffered an urge to kill him.

"He said it was exciting - better than sex. He said Satan told him to do things and it was his job to do as he was told.

"He said he was not in the least bit sorry for what he had done, but had derived a great deal of pleasure from subsequently thinking about it.

"He suffers from compulsive homicidal urges and poses an exceptional risk to other prisoners. He made it perfectly clear that he would kill again if the opportunity arose and the urge to kill was of sufficient intensity."

However the judge said it was wrong not to give McNally the chance of being freed if, at some point in the future, his mental state stabilises to the extent that the authorities no longer consider him a danger to society.

He told the court: "The life sentence was plainly correct as he was likely to represent a danger of the gravest kind, for a period which could not be determined.

"However the imposition of a whole life tariff was a mistaken application of the process of sentencing.

"The life sentence itself is designed to cater for a prisoner in whom it cannot be seen when, or if ever, they will cease to be a danger to the public.

Danger

"The Parole Board will not release a prisoner under a life sentence until it is convinced that they no longer pose a danger to the public.

"The minimum term should be set on the basis of the severity of what the offender has done and his level of culpability for it.

"If this man never ceases to be a danger, he will never be released.

"But what cannot be known is whether his condition will change in the future.

"Accordingly, we set aside the order, declining to set a minimum term, and the question of his dangerousness now and in the future is reserved to the Parole Board.

"His culpability was plainly reduced because he was in the mentally abnormal condition that he was, but the circumstances and gravity of the acts were considerable.

"It was a second homicide within about 15 months. It was a pointless killing, generated simply to satisfy an internal impulse.

"The appropriate course now is to set a minimum term which takes account of both the murder and manslaughter offences. We arrive at a minimum term of 20 years.

"However, the plainest evidence of the absence of a risk would be needed before any consideration could be given to his release.

"It may very well be that there is never sufficient evidence of an absence of danger, but those decisions lie in the future and, to that extent, this appeal is allowed," the judge concluded.

WAYNE DOHERTY

A builder caught by DNA evidence 27 years after raping and murdering a woman has been jailed for life.

Wayne Doherty, 50, raped and killed Norah Trott, 63, whose naked body was found dumped by the side of her garage in November 1978 in Rochford, Essex.

Doherty's DNA sample, obtained in 2004, matched an analysis of semen stains on the victim's clothing.

In November 2005, The judge at Basildon Crown Court said he must serve at least 23 years before being considered for release.

Doherty was also given a 10-year concurrent sentence for rape.

Outside court, Mrs Trott's former husband Ronald, 84, said: "This is a great day for the forensic science services and for justice and our jury system.

"I think that the forensic scientists and Essex Police have done a marvellous job in so diligently following up their inquiries 27 years after this terrible event.

"No-one can bring Norah back to enjoy the retirement she was looking forward to, but convicting her vicious killer is the next best thing."

The two-week trial heard Mrs Trott had been repeatedly struck in the face and her attacker had stamped on her body, breaking her voice box so she could not scream for help before he raped her.

Her killer was never caught but the jury heard that in July 2004, Doherty, who had lived close to Mrs Trott's home, was stopped for drink-driving in Cambridge.

A routine mouth swab matched a sample obtained by scientists from Mrs Trott's body and clothes, which had been placed on the national DNA database in March 2003.

Martyn Levett, prosecuting, said there was a one in 190 million chance of the DNA found on Mrs Trott's clothing not belonging to Doherty and a one in 180,000 chance of the DNA found on her body belonging to someone other than Doherty.

After the jury's unanimous guilty verdict the court heard Doherty had a conviction for indecently assaulting a two-year-old girl around 100 yards from where he killed Mrs Trott and a number of other convictions for unrelated offences.

Very dangerous man

Judge Philip Clegg said Doherty was "plainly a very dangerous" man from whom the public needed protection.

He praised the efforts of the forensic scientists and police involved in the case.

"It is entirely due to their perseverance and dedication that the perpetrator of this lady's rape and murder has finally been brought to justice," he said.

"I hope it brings a degree of resolution to those who have been mourning her death for many years."

SEAN CREIGHTON, SIMON TURNER, DANE GARSIDE, DEAN TAYLOR, MALCOLM BULL, KARL GARSIDE, IAN CAMERON.

Seven members of the Outlaws motorcycle gang were sentenced to life in prison at Birmingham crown court on the 28^th November 2008 for the murder of Hells Angel Gerry Tobin.

The men were convicted of killing Tobin on the M40 in August 2007. The two last members of the south Warwickshire chapter of the club on trial were convicted of murder yesterday after jurors deliberated for eight days.

The seven include Sean Creighton, 44, from Coventry, who pleaded guilty to murder and firearms charges before the start of the trial last month.

The others were Simon Turner, 41, from Nuneaton, Dane Garside, 42, Dean Taylor, 47, Malcolm Bull, 53, Karl Garside, 45, and Ian Cameron, 46, all from Coventry.

The sentence was passed by Mr Justice Treacy.

The 35-year-old mechanic was shot on his way home from a bikers' festival. A green Rover in the outside lane of the M40 pulled alongside him and two shots were fired from different weapons. Tobin was hit just below his helmet and his customised Harley-Davidson spun on for 200 yards before it came to a halt.

Creighton, the man whose finger was on the trigger of one of the guns, claimed to be the "sergeant-at-arms" of the south Warwickshire chapter of the Outlaws, the main rivals to Hells Angels.

Creighton had plans for the Outlaws, long in the shadow of the Angels, to make their mark that weekend. For three days, he and fellow members had been carrying out reconnaissance on the roads round the Bulldog Bash festival in Warwickshire and from 5am that Sunday he had been ordering his fellow members into action.

Police believe the shooting was probably part of the feud between the two gangs and the hit must have been sanctioned at a high level by the Outlaws.

Detective Superintendent Ken Lawrence said: "They are taking a big risk which will have an impact on the whole organisation so it would be illogical to think that a chapter would do that acting alone." He said the chapter could have suggested the hit themselves or could have been given the task by a different part of the organisation. The Bulldog Bash was taking place on their territory.

Creighton directed the operation as the crowd of 30,000 left the festival. Along with two other men, Dane Garside and Turner, he parked the Rover in a layby on the A46 and waited for someone wearing the distinctive Hells Angels death's-head insignia to go past. Three others in the chapter, Dane's brother Karl, Cameron and Taylor, were in a Range Rover further up the motorway.

A seventh member, Bull, was in a third car, apparently acting as a link between the two groups. Creighton had decided that a Hells Angel – any Hells Angel – would die that day.

The Angels had attended the Bulldog Bash for 20 years. In the territorial world of motorcycle clubs, one club entering another's area can be a source of conflict but, according to other bikers, the Angels had long had tacit permission to attend the Bash and would not have had any notion of what awaited one of their members that day.

It is estimated that there are 250 Hells Angels in the UK and slightly fewer Outlaws. The gangs first clashed in the 1960s, when three Angels were murdered in the US.

Because such gangs do not cooperate with the police, detectives thought they were in for a protracted investigation. But while the hit was professional, the planning and the cover-up were amateurish.

The police knew they could be looking for a burnt-out Rover and when one was almost immediately reported, they investigated its pedigree. The name of the registered owner proved to be fictitious but its previous owner was Creighton. The Outlaws had left other clues: Creighton and Dane Garside were seen on CCTV at a nearby petrol station wrapped in hats and warm clothes on a hot summer's day and a search of the chapter's unofficial clubhouse in Coventry yielded two shotguns in a bag with Turner's fingerprints on it.

The detectives also had two unexpected breaks: Bull spoke to them, breaking one of the club's rules, and Creighton, faced with strong evidence against him, decided to plead guilty. Bull was separated from the other defendants in the dock and is in a different prison, now at risk not only from Hells Angels but from other Outlaws. The police speedily arrested all the members of the chapter.

Timothy Raggatt QC, prosecuting, had told the jury of six men and six women: "This wasn't a case of a man being killed for any personal motive or any personal reason. This was a man who was targeted not because of who he was, but because of what he was. In one sense, Gerry Tobin was a random victim."