Baffles me how the Parole board still came to the decision to release him. The DNA evidence against him was overwhelming;
His defense was virtually non-existent. I doubt the greatest legal minds in the would be able to produce a fighting case,
to prove his innocence.
So where's his acceptance of guilt? Of coming to terms with his crime, or evidence of remorse?
Simms has always maintained his innocence. Which means he's either right or he's an Ian Brady-like psychopath, playing mind games
and refusing to say where he put the body of his victim. Even one of the worst human beings that ever walked this green earth -Brady
(finally) admitted to the murders of other victims, decades later. What does that say about Simms's mind?
The repeat offenders list on this site, is testament to the fact that parole boards can get it very wrong.
I might of got this bit wrong (from memory) but didn't prisoners in for murder, used to get described as IDOMs (In denial of murder)
if they hadn't admitted to the crime and this would count against them in their parole hearings? Then again i suppose laws; terminology;
procedures etc change all the time. I know he's done twice his minimum tariff, but how has he changed? I'd really like to sit on a
parole board and listen to the discussions they have, because I can't make any sense of it.
