I remember many years ago reading a piece in the Guardian by one Erwin James and becoming immediately addicted. Each time an article from him was published (I think it was every two weeks) I went straight to it. Since that first report I have followed his story with interest and admiration. And that’s where the trouble starts.
In today’s Guardian Erwin James writes a remarkable account of his life and crimes. He began writing for the Guardian while serving two life sentences in prison for murder. He never profited from his journalism and, on his release after 20 years in jail, he maintained his pseudo-pseudonym from the public in order not to cause further grief to the families of those whose relatives he had killed. Last week he was finally outed on the internet and has today come clean in the newspaper.
No doubt there will be people who now damn him for having profitted from the prison system. Having gone in as a useless criminal who had leeched off society for most of his life, he had taken the opportunity to catch up on his missed education and got himself a job as a writer. When recidivism statistics are relatively high, he represents the success of one whom the Prison Service served well and turned around. He deserves praise and admiration.
I have been involved in prisons in various marginal capacities for many years. In my present role I spend most Christmas Days in one of South London’s three main prisons (Brixton, Wandsworth or Belmarsh), but do not have a prison in my own Episcopal Area – which, therefore, limits any regular involvement. But what always impresses even the casual visitor to a prison is the serious concern of the authorities that prison must be about more than punishment. presumably we all have a vested interest in prisoners changing their ways and emerging from an expensive system to play a constructive part in society.
I sometimes wonder if that presumption is accurate. I wonder if we would be happier just to see them suffer and emerge as unchangeable criminals – which would make us feel better about not being like them.
The piece by Erwin James deserves a close reading. He makes no excuse about his guilt and describes the conflicted emotions and psychology that someone in his position experiences during and after emerging from prison. If someone as clever, cultured and ‘together’ as Erwin James finds it so hard, pity help those who are uneducated, immature, emotionally cracked and socially unsupported.
Actually, his name isn’t Erwin James. Or, it is, but they are his two first names. Henceforth he will be known as James Monahan – using his real surname. His article is a wiping clean of the past and gives him the opportunity to integrate his life/lives for the first time in a quarter of a century. This man deserves huge credit for his bravery in changing, for his ‘confession’ of past mistakes and an exposure of the torments that make life so difficult for people in his position.
I hope he continues to get the support he needs. And I hope he will continue to write about the issues he knows about. I further hope he will get understanding from the public and the acknowledgement and encouragement he deserves – and needs now more than ever.
April 24, 2009 at 11:28 pm
He has my understanding and enormous respect. I’m wondering who could fail to give that, but I expect I am naive. As an admiring reader of his column, I was so moved by that article in today’s Guardian. I thought – it just shows that it can be done – amendment of life. A huge lesson for me.
April 25, 2009 at 11:54 am
It must have been embarrassing for The Guardian newspaper to discover that they had printed lies from James Monahan about being in the Foreign Legion in 1981, when he was still in England and only fled to France in December 1982, following the robbery and aggravated murder of Greville Hallam and Angus Cochrane. On the other hand, there does seem to be some basic editorial sloppiness here, since it was they who employed him in the first place and ought to have known where he was. All praise to the vigilance of numerate citizen journalists.
This is an interesting story that reminds in some ways of the IRA murderer Patrick Magee (though Monahan is further on in remorse). What this needs to make this redemption (rather than reform) is to bring this to the Cross where the last vestiges of pride can be extinguished.
April 25, 2009 at 11:10 pm
I think the Guardian put him in an awkward position asking him to write as an ‘expert’ about something that dated from that phase of his life. I can understand how details might be a bit hazy, especially if he’s aware that the families of his victims might read his account and react to it.
In terms of his achievement – yes, it’s impressive. But his account in the linked piece in the Guardian also shows the difficulty, or impossibility, of leaving behind what he’s done without a process of repentance and forgiveness.
When I worked as a lay prison chaplain I went on a course for staff dealing with sex offenders, which explained to us the process that those who were accepted onto a rehabilitation course went through. First they recounted their crime to the group; then they acted out(in mime – no actual physical contact) their crime to the group; and lastly they acted out their crime to the group with themselves as their victim. When it worked, this process gave someone enough insight into their crime to never want to do it again. a ‘turning around’ in fact.
What struck me was how hard, if not impossible, it must be to live with the knowledge you’ve managed to avoid up to now – how it feels for your victims and their families – without any possibility of forgiveness, and how hard to move forward with only your own strength and resolve to rely on.
He – and others in his position – need our prayers. As do the families of his victims.
October 17, 2009 at 8:25 pm
This man is a sick excuse for a human. He recently gave a talk at my school and i was able to talk to him afterwards and learnt that actually he is not repentant for what he has done. He said he was happy the route his life had taken and how he got to where he is because his life is so much better now. He has greatly benefitted from the death of his victims and this is sick and twisted. He has not changed and is the same man he always was, if you can even bring yourself to call him that.
He also told me that he thought he deserved a good life because he was intelligent, and his victims would have wanted him to be successful in life. Well i know for a fact that if i was murdered i would not want my murderer to benefit from my death. He has no right to say this about his victims, whose lives he so cruelly took, receiving only 10 years per person. I would hate to know that this is what my life is worth, a mere 10 years. When in reality i could live 10 times this amount of time.
Personally i believe that anyone who can take someone elses life, let alone two lives does not deserve to live. Especially as he does not care anymore. He says himself in one of his articles, ‘Each time I was released I was full of good intentions, but each time I sank rapidly back into my earlier destructive and directionless way of life.’ What makes this time so different ? Just because he is no longer in prison does not mean he is safe and does not mean he won’t revert back to his previous behavior. He should not be allowed to walk the streets like any other man or woman, acting normal and leading a life many would now aspire to. His victims are unable to have this because he intentionally murdered them. People should not have to walk the streets unknowing of his disgusting past and unforgivable crimes.
People who say that he has their respect for ‘reforming’ are obviously wrongly informed and have not thought about the seriousness of his crime. They have also obviously not had the opportunity, unlike i, to speak to him about his crimes and realise he is anything but sorry for what he did. The thing he said that truly made me realise how unrepentant he was was when he said, ‘I am not sorry for what i did, just for getting caught.’
So if you really think he deserves your prayers put yourself in the situation of his victims family members and think how you’d feel if the man who murdered your brother/father/son was allowed to walk free down the street and live a life which many people would wish for, a good life which your loved one could have have if they had not been murdered.
November 5, 2009 at 2:40 pm
I am sorry that Ella W says what she/he has posted on this site. I have nothing but regret for my past actions towards Greville Hallam and Angus Cochran – is was 27 years ago but all is still fresh in my mind as it always was. I would never canvass for forgiveness or say that “I am not not sorry for what I did, just for getting caught.” That would be an unforgivable thing to say, as my crimes too were unforgivable. I do understand that there are many people out there who have no time for people like me – I have no interest in canvassing for my interests. I am grateful I was given another chance – if I could change the past there is nothing I would not do.
November 5, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Thanks for this response.
November 12, 2011 at 12:33 am
Hello Nick – thanks for this interesting blog.
I’d like to read a definitive account of Erwin James’ life as a criminal and how he went from a thug to a brutal murderer, detailing all the grizzly aspects such as why Hallam was naked and bound. Otherwise, we will only think the worst and that Hallam was raped and tortured before he was strangled.
I’m not a bloodthirsty person with dark tastes; I just want to know how one can change from being that vicious to being what seems to be quite a compassionate and well versed writer. I think that Erwin knows the mind of a criminal better than somebody like PD James, for example.
The important aspects to know would at what stage he went so bad and what was the psychology behind that. I could read psychology reports but I think it would be better coming from the horses mouth so to speak and once the very dark truths are revealed then one might realise that he really has revealed a lot and so he will be trusted as a result.
I doubt that he could write such things if he even wanted to, but it would be educational for some people and for his detractors. A very abusive childhood can obviously cause a lot of damage, but it’s still not clear in my mind how things turn out the way they do with people like Erwin.
It’s taboo for most ciminals to write such things but for people like Erwin it might be a good idea, considering that he is reformed and an award winning writer.
There might be many more crimes and victims that he can admit to, but that will take a lot of courage and he may end up in jail again. But shouldn’t he be thinking of doing the right thing more than anything else? Such dark revelations are a kind of honesty and form of repentance in my book. If he posts it on his blog then he will earn my respect.
It’s different however, in my opinion, to admit to killing or harming evil people, because the system will not take that into account. Erwin’s victims were hardly evil I think. So, in order to purge any guilt one has, i think it is necessary to tell the whole truth.
I actually came across Erwin James when i was researching about John Healy on the internet.
- Mat from Manchester.
November 12, 2011 at 11:30 am
Mat, I think I wrote this a long time ago and a degree of correspondence followed – including from Erwin James. I think the key issues from his part are ‘confession’ (telling all) and from our part our ability as a society to ask whether, once a penalty has been paid, someone has the right to start again. Not easy questions – and even harder to do.
November 14, 2011 at 6:49 pm
Yes Nick, thanks! I am surprised to see my comment here; i thought you were going to say that this is closed now. I got a notification, but it went to your newest blog. I noticed that this was an old blog after i sent the comment. I would have understood that you closed this one, especially in terms of the idea that one should not bother somebody who is trying his best to get on with a new life. I was tired the night i wrote that.
As for one’s right to start again, well … it depends on the crime. Erwin might well be a better man than i now but one thing that i do know is that it is the system and the government that set the guidelines up for the length of a sentence and most of the time i think that these sentences are way too short. So, many of us believe that these so called x-criminals are still criminals and that they have certainly not ‘served their time’ as the saying goes.
I do believe however, that prisons should be a much safer and healthier place for prisoners than it currently is. I don’t believe in making it a hell like most people do, including the religious ones.
In the case of extremely severe crimes, i think that such a criminal should never be released even if they have reformed. Hence my request to get further info from Erwin as to what he really did. Only the people in the court proceedings knew what he really did.
The reason i believe that some criminals should not be released is not because i can never forgive them but because a clear message should be sent out to budding young psychopaths that ‘you will never get away with this’. If a person has really made a change then i will forgive them personally. But such a change in some of these criminals might lead that person to deep depression and suicide. But that is part of the process and the person should be helped more at that stage. I believe in some cases though that such a person will be sincerely content with leading a monastic life to pay his respect to his tortured and dead victims. This life, like that of a monk, would be carried out in the confines of a place outside of the rest of society and like a monastery the people there would be of the same sex and celibate.
These monk-like people will volunteer to do good work and that may even be writing and such literature will rightfully find its way outside to the rest of society.
I am more an atheist than a theist, but i can see the value in a monastic type of life for certain people and such a life would be a great privelege for a prisoner to go to, rather than be excecuted which i don’t agree with. Such a place however would not have as much security and any escapees should be rare if good judgement is used in the first place and such escapees will have proven their falsehood.
Thanks for reading this far. Regards.