IT worker Luke D’Wit found guilty of murdering Essex couple with Fentanyl

Published

2 months ago

March 20, 2024

admin

An IT worker has been found guilty of murdering a couple with strong opioid Fentanyl.

Luke D’Wit was accused of killing Stephen Baxter, 61, and his 64-year-old wife Carol and rewriting their will to take charge of their shower mat and bathroom company.

The 34-year-old from Mersea worked for the couple and is said to have described himself as “almost like a son” to them.

The Baxters were discovered at their home by their daughter on Mersea Island in Essex on Easter Sunday last year.

Harry Baxter, their son, said D’Wit played “foul games torturing and drugging” his mother in the lead-up to his parents’ deaths.

Mr Baxter said in a statement released through Essex Police that he had already lost his mother “a long time ago” before his parents were found dead.

“I refer to the day Luke began his foul games torturing and drugging her,” he said.

“Unbeknownst to me, I had already lost my mother a long time ago.

“I feel great sadness looking back on the videos of her when she was acting strangely and seeing him in the background giggling and smiling knowing he’s the one inflicting this pain as we were all dolls in his dollhouse, victim to his manipulation.

“Our life will forever be punctured by the gravity of his actions.”

The Baxters’ daughter previously told Chelmsford Crown Court they “got on” with D’Wit, but all thought he was “weird”.

Ellie Baxter said he was brought in to help build a website but ended up visiting the house “every day”, eventually helping her mother take her medication.

She told the jury that D’Wit knew the pin code to the gate of their home and the location of a key safe.

The trial heard that two days before the bodies were found, doorbell camera footage captured him walking towards the Baxters’ house and looking at a phone.

“Was he watching them die?” prosecutor Tracy Ayling asked the court.

She added: “Was this when Mr D’Wit made everything pristine, cleaning up the cups and not leaving any trace?”

Fentanyl – an extremely strong opioid about 100 times stronger than morphine – was found in the bodies of Mr and Mrs Baxter.

The trial had lasted more than a month and D’Wit, who had denied murder, was convicted by unanimous verdict of the jury on a third day of deliberations on Wednesday.

The defendant, who used a wheelchair throughout the trial, did not appear to react in the secure dock of the court.

The judge, Mr Justice Nicholas Lavender, said he would sentence D’Wit on Friday.

‘He would have committed further murders’

Detective Superintendent Rob Kirby, of the Kent and Essex Serious Crime Directorate, said in an interview outside court that D’Wit was “without doubt one of the most dangerous men I’ve ever experienced in my policing career”.

He said: “I have absolutely no doubt that had he not been caught, he would have gone on to commit further murders.”

Mr Kirby said that “justice has been served today”, adding that D’Wit “rightly belongs behind bars”.

The defendant “fooled everyone”, he added.

“He befriended people, came across as a very amenable, helpful person but in the background he was a cool, calculated killer who spent years planning the demise of Carol and Stephen Baxter.”

He described D’Wit as a “loner” who “spent hours of his time creating false personas, all there to create control over the Baxters”.

“The level of deviousness he went to was phenomenal,” Mr Kirby said.

Asked about a possible motive, Mr Kirby said it was “unclear what was going on in D’Wit’s mind”.

“Certainly, he stood to benefit financially from the death of the Baxters and we believe that certainly this played part of the role in his motive,” he said.

UK

Early release prison scheme causing ‘high-risk’ offenders to be let out, new report finds

Published

2 hours ago

May 14, 2024

admin

Early release prison scheme causing 'high-risk' offenders to be let out, new report finds

An early release prison scheme, used to free up space in jails across England and Wales, is causing “high-risk” offenders to be let out, some of whom are a “risk to children”, according to a new report.

The examination of HMP Lewes, by the chief inspector of prisons, found that “safe risk management” is being undermined.

The findings, published on Tuesday, were part of a wide-ranging inspection at the East Sussex prison in February, but some similar problems were highlighted in a parallel report into Chelmsford prison published last week.

The government says that those guilty of serious crimes, such as terrorism or sexual offences, plus those serving sentences of more than four years, are not eligible for early release.

But this inspection at Lewes found an example of a prisoner who had their release date brought forward under the early release scheme despite deeming him a “risk to children” and “having a history of stalking, domestic abuse, and being subject to a restraining order”.

Another example cited a “high-risk prisoner with significant class A drug misuse issues” being released without a home.

“This release took place despite appeals for the decision to be reversed and staff having serious concerns for his and the public’s safety,” it said.

The report makes clear that the inspection was done only months into the scheme launching in October, and hopes the “serious concerns” they raised about its implementation were “teething troubles”.

However, these findings follow Sky News exposing widespread concern among the probation service about the early release measure, which has been regularly revised and updated since it was launched in October.

Labour is calling for the government to be more transparent about the parameters of the scheme.

“The public will rightly be worried to hear of cases where violent prisoners are being released without a proper assessment of the risk they pose to the public, and specifically children,” said the shadow justice secretary, Shabana Mahmood.

“It’s being left to prison inspectors to tell the public the truth because this government is refusing to level with them on the scale of the prisons and probation crisis,” she said.

Prisons across England and Wales are under pressure, and severely overcrowded.

Figures published on Friday showed 87,691 people are currently behind bars in England and Wales.

The number of people that can be held in “safe and decent accommodation” in prison, known as the “certified normal accommodation” or “uncrowded capacity”, is considered by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) to be 79,507.

That means the current overall system is at 110% capacity, or overcrowded.

Responding to the inspectorate report, the chief executive of the Howard League, Andrea Coomber, said: “This is the latest in a seemingly never-ending line of inspection reports revealing major problems in a prison system that has been asked to do too much, with too little, for too long.”

“While action to ease pressure on jails is necessary, this temporary measure is no substitute for what is really needed: a more sensible response to crime that puts fewer people behind bars and more money into services that can help them,” she said.

As of 23 May, eligible male prisoners across 84 prisons in England and Wales can be freed up to 70 days before the end of their sentence. This has been extended from the original 18 days as overcrowding pressures in prisons continue.

A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “While we will always ensure there is enough capacity to keep dangerous offenders behind bars, this scheme allows us to ease short-term pressures on prisons by moving some lower-level offenders at the end of their custodial term on to licence.

“These offenders will continue to be supervised under strict conditions such as tagging and curfews, and the prison service can block the earlier release of any individual who poses a heightened risk.”

UK

Commons approves plans to exclude from parliament MPs arrested on suspicion of serious offence

Published

2 hours ago

May 14, 2024

admin

Commons approves plans to exclude from parliament MPs arrested on suspicion of serious offence

MPs arrested on suspicion of a serious offence face being barred from parliament under new plans approved in a vote on Monday night.

It comes despite the government putting forward a motion that recommended MPs only face a ban if they are charged with a violent or sexual offence – a higher bar.

On Monday night, MPs voted to reverse government moves to water down the measures on “risk-based exclusions” to ensure members can be excluded from parliament at the point of arrest for serious sexual or violent offences, in line with the original recommendation from the House of Commons Commission.

The commission’s initial proposal was later revised by the government to raise the threshold for a potential ban to the point of charge.

But in a surprise move, MPs voted 170 to 169, a majority of one, in favour of an amendment by Lib Dem MP Wendy Chamberlain and Labour MP Jess Phillips to reinstate the original intention of the policy.

MPs were given a free vote on the matter, meaning they were not forced to vote along party lines.

Politics latest: Court ruling ‘blows PM’s claims about Rwanda plan out of the water’

The division list showed eight Conservative MPs voted in favour of the opposition amendment, including safeguarding minister Laura Farris, former prime minister Theresa May and backbench MP Theresa Villiers.

Ms Villiers was herself recommended for a suspension from the Commons for one day in 2021 after she and several other Conservative MPs breached the code of conduct by trying to influence a judge in the trial of former MP Charlie Elphicke, who was convicted in 2020 of sexually assaulting two women and jailed for two years.

The result means those who have been arrested on suspicion of a violent or sexual offence will be banned from parliament, pending the approval of an independent panel.

Mike Clancy, the general secretary of the Prospect trade union, said the outcome was an “important and overdue victory for common-sense and those working on the parliamentary estate”, while FDA general secretary Dave Penman added: “Parliament is a workplace for thousands and these new formal procedures give staff the safe working environment they deserve and would expect in any other workplace.”

Ms Phillips, who advocated for the case for exclusion at the point of arrest, wrote on X: “Shit! We won the vote by one.”

In the debate preceding the vote, she told the Commons: “Today, just on this one day, I have spoken to two women who were raped by members of this parliament; that’s a fairly standard day for me.

“Exclusion at the point of charge sends a clear message to victims that not only will we not investigate unless a victim goes to the police but we won’t act unless they’re charged, which happens in less than 1% of cases. ‘So what’s the point?’ was essentially what this victim said to me.”

No hiding place for suspected Commons sex pests

Jon Craig

Chief political correspondent

@joncraig

In a dramatic knife-edge vote, MPs have voted that there should be no hiding place for suspected Commons sex pests.

Former prime minister Theresa May led a small group of eight Conservatives voting with Opposition MPs to defy the Commons Leader Penny Mordaunt.

To the fury of many Opposition MPs, Ms Mordaunt wanted MPs accused of serious sex or violent offences to be barred from parliament only when they’re charged.

It was officially a free vote. But the vast bulk of MPs voting to delay a ban until a charge were Conservatives, including several Cabinet ministers.

That was brave, so close to a general election. Surely those MPs who voted against a ban upon arrest will be attacked by their political opponents at the election for being soft on suspected sex pests?

The timing of the vote was perhaps unfortunate, coming amid renewed controversy earlier this week over sex pest Charlie Elphicke, the former Conservative MP who was jailed for sex offences.

At the weekend his ex-wife Natalie, who defected from the Conservatives to Labour last week, was accused of lobbying a former justice secretary, Sir Robert Buckland, on his behalf, an allegation she dismissed as “nonsense”.

And despite missing the weekly meeting of the parliamentary Labour Party earlier, Ms Elphicke duly voted with her new colleagues for a ban which would have almost certainly penalised her ex-husband had it been in force.

After the vote, leading supporters of the arrest ban were jubilant and stunned by the closeness of the vote. “Incredible!” Labour’s Stella Creasy told Sky News. Mr Rees-Mogg, however, condemned the proposal as a “power grab”.

It’s a historic vote. It doesn’t matter how close it was. Accusers will argue they’re now better protected. And MPs who supported the tougher ban argue that it brings the Commons into line with other workplaces.

Well, up to a point. MPs still have many perks and privileges that other employers and employees don’t. And Parliament still has a long way to go before its working practices and grievance procedures are brought fully up to date.

The exclusion policy was put forward following a number of incidents involving MPs in recent years and concerns about the safety of those working in parliament.

Currently, party whips decide if and when an MP accused of an offence should be prevented from attending the parliamentary estate.

Under the new plans, a risk assessment will take place when the Clerk of the House is informed by the police that an MP has been arrested on suspicion of committing a violent or sexual offence.

The risk assessment will be carried out by a risk assessment panel, appointed by Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle.

Commons leader Penny Mordaunt cited the “large” number of “vexatious” claims lodged against colleagues as a reason to require a member to be charged before exclusion.

Former minister Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg used the debate to describe the exclusion plans as an “extraordinary power grab by standing orders to undermine a fundamental of our constitution”, while Sir Michael Ellis, a former attorney general, said: “A person must not suffer imposition before guilt has been proven.”

UK

King Charles tells of losing sense of taste as he discusses cancer treatment side effects

Published

2 hours ago

May 14, 2024

admin

King Charles tells of losing sense of taste as he discusses cancer treatment side effects

The King has spoken about losing his sense of taste as he discussed the side effects of cancer treatment.

During a visit in Hampshire, he made the remark as he spoke to a veteran who had previously undergone chemotherapy for testicular cancer.

The monarch is receiving treatment for an undisclosed form of cancer and was given permission by his doctors to return to public duties last month.

Ahead of his first major investiture on Tuesday since his cancer diagnosis, the King officially handed over the role of colonel-in-chief of the Army Air Corps to Prince William today.

The monarch and the heir-to-the-throne were pictured smiling while chatting together during a visit to the Army Aviation Centre in Middle Wallop, Hampshire, on Monday.

It came as Kensington Palace posted two photos of the Prince of Wales during previous visits to the Army Air Corps.

“Time flies! Looking back at the last two visits to @ArmyAirCorps in 1999 and 2008 ahead of today’s handover at Middle Wallop,” the post on X said.

The Army Air Corps is the Duke of Sussex’s old unit, in which he served as an Apache helicopter commander and co-pilot gunner during his second tour to Afghanistan in 2012.

The decision to hand the role to William, who served as a helicopter pilot with the RAF, was seen as a blow to Harry when it was announced last year.

The King admitted the handover was “tinged with great sadness” – but hoped the Army Air Corps would continue to go from “strength to strength”.

He said: “Let me just say what a great joy it is to be with you even briefly on this occasion but also it is tinged with great sadness after 32 years of knowing you all, admiring your many activities and achievements through the time that I’ve been lucky enough to be colonel-in-chief of the Army Air Corps.

“I do hope you’ll go from strength to strength in the future with the Prince of Wales as your new colonel-in-chief.

“The great thing is he’s a very good pilot indeed – so that’s encouraging.”

The King also unveiled a plaque commemorating an Apache AH Mk1 going on display, the first of its kind to be installed at a UK museum.

William will embark on his first engagement with the Army Air Corps on Monday afternoon, receiving a briefing on its work and inspecting training and operational aircraft.

After speaking to soldiers, he will then leave the base in an Apache as part of a capability flight.

On Tuesday, the King will knight the Archbishop of Canterbury for his key role in the coronation, and bestow a damehood on bestselling author Jilly Cooper.

The monarch will greet 52 recipients in total, one by one, at Windsor Castle.

The King has invested a handful of people with honours over the past few months.

However, these ceremonies took place in private during individual audiences at royal residences.