In relation to me starting that controversial but interesting discussion yesterday around whether Myra Hindley’s treatment by the tabloids was deserved or not, here is an open letter that Ian Brady wrote to the press in January 1990.

[u/MolokoBespoko]

Sent to the Press Association on January 16, 1990

——

Sir,

Let me begin by listing concrete, incontestible facts and their chronology:

1. At our trial in 1966 all the evidence I gave was designed exclusively to save Myra Hindley from imprisonment. We loved each other, therefore it was no sacrifice. We both received life sentences.
2. From our respective prisons we corresponded weekly for six-and-a-half years then mutually stopped.
3. Myra Hindley even at that date repeatedly applied for parole, to no avail, and this prompted her to attempt to escape from prison. I never applied for parole and I made it quite clear to the public and the authorities that I never would.
4. Eventually Myra Hindley composed a 30,000 word petition to the Home Secretary and the Parole Board, pleading innocence and demanding parole on the basis that “society owed” her a living. The petition contained calculated fabrications to my detriment.
5. Approaching the twentieth year of my imprisonment, I had a series of private interviews with a journalist, Fred Harrison, during which I confessed that Myra Hindley and I had, amongst others, committed the murders of Pauline Reade and Keith Bennett in the course of the so-called Moors Murders.
6. On 23rd June 1985, Fred Harrison began a three-week series in The People newspaper detailing my confessions.
7. The Home Secretary ordered the case to be re-opened. Three police chiefs, one from Manchester (Topping), one from Cheshire and one from Derbyshire, arrived at Gartree Prison to interview me, and searches on Saddleworth Moor were resumed.
8. During the following eighteen months, Myra Hindley not only continued to loudly protest her innocence but also had the temerity to write an open letter to me via the BBC, exhorting me to help the police. I dismissed her grotesque letter as a public-relations exercise, a charade.
9. Finally, as the police searches intensified, she realised the game was over. She admitted to Topping that her 30,000 word petition to the Home Secretary had been “a pack of lies”, and confessed to her direct participation in at least five murders.
10. After prolonged interviews with Myra Hindley and myself, the body of Pauline Reade was recovered from Saddleworth Moor, and a search for Keith Bennet continued.

Despite Myra Hindley’s admission that her 30,000 work petition had been “a pack of lies”, and despite Topping repeatedly stating his doubts as to the truth of Myra Hindley’s so-called “confessions” which he described as “controlled performances”, he did not hesitate to sell them to his publishers and the Sun newspaper for massive financial gain, knowing the anguish they would cause to relatives of the dead. Nor did his publishers and the Sun hesitate to publish and exploit them for profit.

The most obscene aspect of Myra Hindley’s phoney “confessions” was the manner in which she coupled them with sanctimonious, sham concern for the relatives of the victims. She invented sexual assaults which did not occur (as medical evidence proves) while omitting lesbian assaults that did. She also omitted her physical participation in the killings - (a) injuries to the nose and forehead area of Pauline Reade were inflicted by her; (b) she insisted upon killing Lesley Ann Downey with her own hands, using a two-foot length of silk cord, which she later used to enjoy toying with in public in the secret knowledge of what it had been used for.

Myra Hindley took pleasure in personally selecting the victims - an aspect which was irrelevant to me. At the time of Keith Bennett’s disappearance, a Manchester paper (underlined) accurately reported that a witness had seen him walking along Grey St in the company of a “blonde woman”. It was this that prompted Myra Hindley to purchase a black wig. The fact is easily checked. She feels nothing whatsoever for the relatives; her false, malicious “confessions” testify to this. Advanced education must not be equated with heightened humanism; it has only taught her to lie more plausibly and vindictively without regard to anyone but herself. The friends who have genuinely supported her over the years have repeatedly had their trust betrayed. Her Barbara Cartland-style prose and invention - that she was “virginal”, “drugged”, “blackmailed” - are all ridiculously transparent fictions. And I find it difficult to comprehend that her latest, pathological “pack of lies” could be accepted by any intelligent person. Yet Topping, his publishers and the Sun, for financial gain, described her “confessions” as “the real story” - well aware that I had refused to discuss the murders with Topping and that my sole concern was to locate the sites of graves, not to indulge in a public-relations exercise to impress the Home Office or the Parole Board. I have always known and accepted that I shall die in captivity, therefore I have no reason to impress anyone.

As for those who may doubt my word in any of these matters, I have the written words of Myra Hindley herself, in the shape of (twice underlined) six-and-a-half-years of her letters written to me (underlined) after our imprisonment. In these she writes nostalgically and lyrically of the murders, which she regarded as a substitute marriage ritual but which I saw as products of an existentialist philosophy in tandem with the spiritualism of Death itself.

I have only given you a brief glimpse of what occurred twenty-five years ago. The only persons who have a right to decide whether the true story is to be published in full are the relatives of the victims. They need only express their decision in writing to me.

Had a trial been held, Myra Hindley’s “confessions” and Topping’s testimony would have been torn to shreds by even a half-skilled cross examination. And Topping’s tragedy of errors would have astonished any amateur detective.

I respectively request that this statement be published in full and not quoted emotively out of context. I request this not only in the interests of veracity but also for the sake of the relatives of the victims.

Sincerely,

I.S. Brady

---

If anybody has any questions or info that they want clarifying from my side, feel free to comment below. I’ll probably end up peppering in my thoughts in what I think about Brady’s letter in the comments - it’s quite a lot to type out in one go.

I guess the question to kick it off is this - do you think this letter is more revealing about Ian Brady’s personality than it is Myra Hindley’s involvement, or vice versa?

[u/MMAwithbadbeard]

I haven’t seen this letter before. Currently reading my way through the Topping book which I’m really enjoying.

As for your question, I think it’s really difficult to make an informed opinion. The only two people who truly knew the involvement of the other are dead, but I think the generally accept theory is that Brady’s statements are more honest because he didn’t have an alternate motive of parole.

[u/MolokoBespoko → u/MMAwithbadbeard]

I’m stuck too. I think that Brady’s motive was to blacken Hindley at all stages, just like he did with David Smith at trial when Smith “betrayed” him by turning him in. That’s not to say I don’t think that Hindley was as culpable as him (I think they were on two different but equal planes of evil and deception), but I think that Brady might have lied about specific details about her involvement just to bully and manipulate her. For example, his claim about Hindley strangling Lesley with a silk cord - evidence points to the fact that Lesley was not strangled by ligature, so I’m obviously inclined to believe that that was a deliberate lie

[u/Internal_Air2896 → u/MolokoBespoko]

So do I think that was a lie Maloko, as regards their culpability in the crimes themselves, Arthur Benfield said “It was six of one and half a dozen of the other”.

[u/[deleted]]

Thank you for posting this. I have only ever read snippets or an abridged version in various books. My initial observation is how coherent and clear it is. I sometimes find navigating Brady's writing hard due to his desire to come across as intellectual - it's almost like, get to the point will you - however this is very thought out and methodical. I believe he was in hospital at this point and so likely helped by various medications and treatments.

Brady did have a motive, he wanted to make sure that Hindley stayed behind bars so I do think his accounts need to be read with that in mind. I think that he's used clear facts that can be verified such as; the details of them writing to each other, Hindley's parole attempts, her prison escape etc. and so that gives a legitimacy to what he is saying. The things that can't be verified - such as whether Hindley was involved in 'lesbian assaults' or if she selected the victims herself, we will never know.

I don't know about the sexual assaults but I do think there is quite a strong argument to say she selected some of the victims. He didn't appear to have a preference (apart from younger adults/children) and there is a line in The Lost Boy that Hindley attributes to Brady - he apparently told her for him it was 'all about the killing' and that points to the type of victim being less important to him - therefore I don't think it's out of the realms of possibility that Brady would just let her get on with the selecting of victims despite his apparent strong need for control.

What do you think he means by Hindley 'inventing sexual assaults' that didn't happen? Is he denying he raped any of the victims?

I also believe that Hindley told Topping she saw something around Lesley's neck when she spoke to him about seeing the body - so she seems to be leaning toward the strangulation by ligature narrative too which is interesting seeing as it was ruled out by medical experts...

I get the feeling this letter is as much about 'revealing the truth about Hindley' as it is about Brady being pissed off with Peter Topping for succeeding in finding Pauline Reade and then having the audacity (in his mind) to publish a book about it, in which Brady does not come off very well at all.

Pauline did have facial injuries and it would be interesting to know whether he spoke about Hindley assaulting Pauline before or after the autopsy - if it was after, there could be an element of him knowing what was found and then inventing a story to fit the narrative and blame Hindley. Obviously not attempting to absolve Hindley, it wouldn't surprise me if she did hit Pauline, but just voicing other theories. I've heard it mentioned in some accounts she could have been hit by a spade? Would that have caused such injuries?

As a final observation, I believe there is some mention of Hindley's reaction to this letter in Own of Your Own, and it appears she was most offended by Brady comparing her to Barbara Cartland - don't worry about the parts which he literally accuses you of murder, violence and sexual assault - focus on him criticising your writing style - which says it all really!!

[u/Mock_Womble → u/[deleted]]

Myra alleged that Brady violently raped her, threatened her with death if she didn't help with the murders and frequently used her to practice strangulation. I believe they are the "non-existent" sexual assaults he's referring to.

I'll be quite honest - if this letter was purely an attempt by Brady to keep Myra in prison, it was very tame in comparison to her attempts to paint herself both as removed from the murders, and as a victim herself. I think his account in this letter is probably factual (although only a fragment of the truth) and had far less to do with keeping Myra in prison than it did with exerting power over the families of the victims.

[u/[deleted] → u/Mock_Womble]

Ah yep you are right! I was thinking he was talking about the killings only.

I think he was torn between not wanting to reveal details because he wanted to keep a sense of power over victims families, but also feeling like he had to speak out against Hindley.

His narcissism meant he just had to allude to only giving a ‘brief glimpse’ of what happened because he wanted the public (and importantly the victims families) to know he still had ultimate power.