Category Archives: IPP / Lifer Sentences
One-eyed police killer Dale Cregan is set to die in prison with a whole life sentence for murdering four people after his long-running trial came to an end today.
Cregan, 30, had previously pleaded guilty during the trial to killing policewomen Nicola Hughes, 23, and Fiona Bone, 32, and father and son David Short, 46, and Mark Short, 23, last year.
He also admitted the attempted murders of three others and causing an explosion with a hand-grenade.
A jury at Preston Crown Court today found him not guilty of one remaining count of attempted murder involving a grenade attack on Sharon Hark, which he denied.
Cregan went on the run days before he killed David Short last August after he gunned down his son, Mark, in a pub in Droylsden, Greater Manchester, three months earlier.
The manhunt reached a ghastly conclusion on September 18 when he lured the unarmed constables with a bogus 999 call to a house in Abbey Gardens in Hattersley.
He gave a false name as he reported a concrete slab had been thrown through a back window.
His last comment to the call handler as he was told officers were on the way was: “I’ll be waiting.”
He opened the front door as they walked up the front garden path and immediately shot them in the chest with a Glock handgun.
Cregan shot Pc Hughes eight times, including three strikes to the head as she lay on the ground.
Pc Bone was hit up to eight times after she managed to draw and fire her Taser as Cregan discharged 32 bullets in total in barely half a minute.
He then left his “calling card” of a military grenade which he threw it on the path where the two officers lay.
The killer then dropped his gun and drove a short distance to Hyde police station where he calmly walked up to the counter clerk and said: “I’m wanted by the police and I’ve just done two coppers.”
Cregan put his arms out to be handcuffed and said he was there to hand himself in.
He then told an officer: “I dropped the gun at the scene and I’ve murdered two police officers. You were hounding my family so I took it out on yous.”
On May 25 last year a balaclava-clad Cregan stepped into the Cotton Tree pub in Droylsden and shot Mark Short who died in the arms of his father David.
On August 10, Cregan targeted David Short outside his home in Clayton, Greater Manchester as he unloaded furniture from his car.
He chased him through and out of his house and shot him numerous times before a grenade was thrown at him with “devastating consequences” for his torso – the first time a military grenade had been deployed in the country in this way.
Cregan was on trial with nine other men who faced allegations concerning the deaths of either David or Mark Short.
The first lot of verdicts were delivered in silence in the packed courtroom save for some stiffled gasps as not guilty verdicts were returned on some counts.
Fiona Bone’s sister, Vicky Bone shook her head and her father Paul Bone leaned back in his seat.
David Short’s wife Michelle Kelly also shook her head, sat beside her other members of her family wiped away tears.
Verdicts were also returned on the nine other defendants.
Leon Atkinson, 35, from Ashton-under-Lyne, Ryan Hadfield, 29, from Droylsden, and Matthew James, 33, from Clayton, were cleared of the murder of Mark Short in the Cotton Tree pub and the attempted murders of three others in the pub.
Luke Livesey, 28, from Hattersley, and Damian Gorman, 38, from Glossop, were found guilty of those charges
Anthony Wilkinson, 34, from Beswick, pleaded guilty during the trial to murdering David Short and possessing a firearm with intent to endanger life. He was cleared of one count of the attempted murder of Mrs Hark on the same day and cleared of causing an explosion with a hand grenade.
Francis Dixon, 38, from Stalybridge, was acquitted of the murder of David Short, the attempted murder of Mrs Hark and causing an explosion with a hand grenade.
Jermaine Ward, 24, was found guilty of the murder of David Short but cleared of the attempted murder of Mrs Hark and causing an explosion with a hand grenade.
Mohammed Ali, 32, from Chadderton, was found guilty of assisting an offender.
The Crown had alleged that last summer’s violence was sparked by a “long-standing feud” between two rival Manchester families – the Shorts and the Atkinsons.
The Cotton Tree shooting was said to have been ordered by Atkinson and carried out by Cregan with the help of others.
Proceedings were adjourned until 2.15pm by Mr Justice Holroyde when he will hear mitigation.
Sentencing may follow today.
Cregan smiled and shook hands with the other defendants after the verdicts. His co-accused Wilkinson looked directly at the public gallery where the victims’ families were seated, with a broad smile on his face.
At 1.10pm, on the 77th day of the trial, and on the sixth day of deliberations, the jury came back into court with unanimous verdicts on all counts, but the defendants were ordered to remain seated as the verdicts were given.
Atkinson, the man accused of organising the initial murder, looked at the floor and put a hand on his head as he was cleared of all charges.
Dixon shouted “Yes!” as he was cleared. Ward, sitting behind him, burst into tears.
As Cregan was cleared of the remaining count he faced, there was a shout of “Yeah!” from the back of the dock and Cregan turned around with a smile.
Trial judge Mr Justice Holroyde QC told the jury that matters may be concluded today, with the convicted defendants sentenced, later this afternoon, subject to legal discussions.
Roderick Carus QC, defending Atkinson, asked for his client to be discharged, along with those of the other defendants cleared of all charges – Hadfield, James, and Dixon.
Dixon is on a life licence for his past serious convictions, which the jury was not told about as they were ruled inadmissible.
Cregan shook hands with Wilkinson and Ali as they were taken down past him in the dock.
Some of the senior police detectives looked grim-faced as they left court.
Mark Leech editor of Converse the national newspaper for prisoners said Cregan typified the kind of individual that deserved to die in jail.
“So often we hear of prison sentences being handed out to those who could easily be dealt with in the community – Cregan represents the kind of dangerous individual who belongs at the extreme far end of that offending scale and rightly he should die in jail.
“All those he murdered had a right to life, they each had loved ones and all of them had a right to a future – the two police officers he murdered ironically came to what they thought was his aid and he butchered them; he deserves to die in jail.”
A man who killed three children he was babysitting and impaled them on garden railings has had his anonymity lifted.
David McGreavy, 62, was jailed for life in 1973 for the murders of four-year-old Paul Ralph and his sisters Dawn, two, and nine-month-old Samantha.
He killed them at their home in Gillam Street, Worcester, in April 1973.
In 2009 a judge imposed a ban on naming him during a hearing to protect him from other prisoners. The High Court has now overturned the ban.
In January, McGreavy made a request to be moved to an open prison and his lawyers had argued that would put his name back in the spotlight and his life at risk.
Justice Secretary Chris Grayling and media organisations argued the application was legally flawed and wrongly prevented the public from knowing the full facts of the case.
McGreavy was lodging with the family at the house in Gillam Street when he carried out the killings.
‘Monster of Worcester’
Paul had been strangled, Dawn was found with her throat cut, and Samantha died from a compound fracture to the skull.
The killings earned McGreavy the nickname the “Monster of Worcester”.
The anonymity ruling was made in 2009 during a hearing when McGreavy unsuccessfully challenged a ruling that he must remain in Category C prison conditions.
On Wednesday, Guy Vassall-Adams, representing the justice secretary and the media organisations objecting to the ban on naming McGreavy, told the court: “The full facts are exceptionally horrific by even the standard of
“The order restricted the media to saying they were ‘three sadistic murders’ but that doesn’t even give you the half of it.”
Lord Justice Pitchford, sitting in London with Mr Justice Simon, ruled the anonymity order must be discharged.
The High Court heard David McGreavy had been in prison for 40 years, during which time he had been seriously assaulted in 1975 and 1996 by fellow prisoners.
His counsel Quincy Whitaker told the court naming him would put him in more danger from other prison inmates.
Ms Whitaker told the court McGreavy had previously spent two years in an open prison until “hostile media coverage” led to him being returned to closed conditions “for his own safety”.
The court heard McGreavy was first transferred to category D open conditions in 1994 but the transfer to Leyhill Prison in south Gloucestershire broke down after other inmates learned of his offence.
Ms Whitaker said the triple killings were “notorious” but no concerns had been subsequently raised about his behaviour.
Name change possibleThere were “more than reasonable grounds” for a fair parole hearing that could mean him being returned to open conditions, which was a pre-requisite for release from custody, she said.
The judge held out the possibility that in future McGreavy could be allowed a change of name to protect him.
He said McGreavy’s ninth parole review was under way and a hearing could be held later this year.
Since 2007 McGreavy has made a number of failed bids to win parole, the court heard.
The Worcester MP at that time, Mike Foster, called for McGreavy to never be allowed back to the city and described the murders as an “absolutely vile crime”.
McGreavy is currently living in closed conditions in a vulnerable prisoners’ unit
- April 1973 – Murders Paul, Dawn and Samantha Ralph
- Jailed for life later that year
- 1994 – Transferred to open prison (category D) then back to closed prison conditions (Category C)
- 2007 – One of a number of bids for parole refused
- 2009 – Told he must remain in under closed prison conditions and anonymity order granted
- May 2013 – Anonymity order lifted with ninth parole review underway
The High Court rules today on whether anonymity should continue to be given to a killer who committed “exceptionally horrific crimes”.
The gagging order was made in response to fears that the killer’s own life would be in danger if his identity received further publicity.
Justice Secretary Chris Grayling and various media organisations joined together to argue last month that the order was legally flawed and wrongly prevented the public from knowing the full facts of the case.
“The full facts are exceptionally horrific by even the standard of murders,” their counsel Guy Vassall-Adams said.
The order restricted the media to saying they were “three sadistic murders – but that doesn’t even give you the half of it”.
Even “the nature of the victims” could not be publicised, said Mr Vassall-Adams at London’s High Court.
The order was made during the course of a legal challenge by the man, referred to as M, who has spent decades in prison, against a Parole Board decision refusing him a transfer to open conditions.
It was was granted by Mr Justice Simon, who dismissed M’s parole challenge earlier this year.
He rejected submissions from the Press Association that allowing anonymity set a precedent for other high-profile prisoners to seek similar orders.
Because of the widespread implications, the issue returned to court in April for a full hearing before Lord Justice Pitchford.
Mr Vassall-Adams told the judges M’s lawyers were arguing the case was about “whether the media should be allowed to imperil (M’s) life or scupper his chances of rehabilitation”.
He said those arguments really applied to a different type of case in which individuals – like Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, who killed James Bulger – were provided with a new identity and there were injunctions against the media aimed at protecting them from being attacked while living in the community.
“The injunction protects confidential information, which is the new identities. It doesn’t prevent the media reporting what is already public,” said Mr Vassall-Adams.
M had already been in prison over 30 years serving multiple life sentences and there was no imminent prospect of him being released – “furthermore his identity has not only been public but received massive previous publicity”.
Anyone interested in finding out about his crimes could do so by a click of a button on the internet, Mr Vassall-Adams said.
Not allowing the nature of his victims to be identified “masked” what the case was about, which was the Parole Board’s refusal to recommend that he was fit for open conditions.
“Understanding the nature of the victims and the terrible treatment meted out to them gives a completely different complexion to this whole case”, Mr Vassall-Adams said.
Derbyshire Police is keen to track a man who failed to return to prison after being released on temporary licence.
Officers are trying to locate 29-year-old Andrew James Birchall, who failed to return to HMP Sudbury on Saturday, May 4 following release on temporary licence.
He was given an indeterminate sentence for robbery and burglary offences at Manchester Minshill Street Crown Court in 2009.
Birchall is white, 5ft 10in, medium build and has brown hair.
He has connections in Manchester and in Ashton-under-Lyne in Greater Manchester.
Anyone with any information about where Birchall is should contact their local police force or Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.
A policy that prioritised the transfer to open conditions of post-tariff prisoners ahead of pre-tariff prisoners was a breach of the Secretary of State for Justice’s duty to allow indeterminate sentence prisoners a reasonable opportunity to demonstrate to the Parole Board that it was no longer necessary that they should remain in prison. Failure to publish that policy was a further breach of duty.
Two prisoners (H and J) applied for judicial review of a policy, administered by the defendant secretary of state, prioritising the transfer to open conditions of post-tariff indeterminate sentence prisoners, ahead of pre-tariff indeterminate sentence prisoners (indeterminate sentence prisoners (ISP) = life sentence prisoners).
H and J were pre-tariff indeterminate sentence prisoners in closed condition prisons. Their most recent Parole Board reviews had identified that they would need to undertake further work in open conditions to demonstrate their eligibility for release. Because of constraints on resources, a policy was put in place that prioritised the transfer of post-tariff prisoners to open conditions. The relevant prison rules and policies contained no mention of any policy or arrangement for prioritising some categories of prisoners over others when implementing transfers to open conditions. H and J therefore experienced a delay in their transfers to open conditions.
H and J submitted that (1) the delay was a breach of the secretary of state’s duty to allow ISPs a reasonable opportunity to demonstrate to the Parole Board that it was no longer necessary that they should remain in detention; (2) it was irrational and unfair to prioritise post-tariff prisoners ahead of pre-tariff prisoners, regardless of their position on the waiting list; (3) the secretary of state was unlawfully operating an inflexible policy; (4) the policy was unlawful because it was unpublished and was inconsistent with published policy; (5) their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 art.5 had been breached; (6) their rights under art.8 had been breached; (7) the policy discriminated between pre-tariff and post-tariff in the enjoyment of their art.5 rights contrary to art.14.
HELD: (1) The secretary of state was in breach of his public law duty.
In consequence there was excessive delay in implementing the transfers of H and J to open conditions to enable them to undertake the work required to meet the objectives for their Parole Board reviews on the expiry of their tariffs (see para.66 of judgment).
(2) Prioritisation of post-tariff prisoners was rational and fair because they were already eligible for release. They were at least presumptively detained unlawfully and the legality of their detention was subject to art.5(4). There was a pressing need for the secretary of state to address their position. Ceasing the transfer of determinate prisoners and increasing the number of ISPs transferred would have resulted in unacceptable pressures on the management of the prisoners (paras 73-74 of judgment).
(3) The secretary of state’s discretionary power to place prisoners under the Prison Act 1952 s.12 was sufficiently wide to entitle him to adopt a policy on the prioritisation of certain categories of prisoners when deciding how to clear the backlog. He was required to apply that policy in the interests of consistency and fairness whilst retaining an open mind to the need to make exceptions in appropriate cases. The policy had included an express provision providing for exceptional circumstances. H and J were unable to point to anything exceptional about their cases (paras 76, 79).
(4) The new arrangements were properly characterised as policy. There was a public law duty to publish the new arrangements for the transfer of prisoners to open conditions. The prioritisation scheme affected the timing of their transfer which could affect the outcome of a Parole Board review and thus release. Importantly, prisoners could not make an individual request for their cases to be treated as exceptional if they were not aware of the arrangements, R. (on the application of Lumba) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  UKSC 12,  1 A.C. 245 applied. It was not appropriate to quash the policy merely because of a failure to publish when it was lawful and J had suffered no detriment. The appropriate public law remedy for an unlawful failure to publish was a mandatory order requiring publication (paras 83-85).
(5) The instant court was bound by the decision in R. (on the application of Wells) v Parole Board  UKHL 22,  1 A.C. 553 in which the art.5 rights of ISPs had not been breached, despite the fact that the ECtHR consequently reversed that decision in James v United Kingdom (25119/09) (2013) 56 E.H.R.R. 12 and found that a breach had occurred, Wells followed and James considered. H and J’s art.5 rights had not been breached (paras 89-95).
(6) J’s art.8 rights were not interfered with by the delay in transfer to open conditions. The transfer, of itself, did not bestow upon J temporary leave in the community, to visit his family or to pursue employment decisions. The decision to grant such leave would be made separately from the transfer decision and would depend upon a specific assessment of risk (para.102).
(7) Although the ECtHR had ruled otherwise in Clift v United Kingdom (7205/07) Times, July 21, 2010, the instant court was bound by the lower decision of the House of Lords in that case that a prisoner’s status acquired by virtue of the length of his sentence was not a status protected by art.14, R. (on the application of Clift) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  UKHL 54,  1 A.C. 484 followed and Clift v UK considered. H and J’s art.14 rights had not been breached (para.108).
R (on the application of KEITH HANEY) v SECRETARY OF STATE FOR JUSTICE : R (on the application of PETER JARVIS) v SECRETARY OF STATE FOR JUSTICE (2013)  EWHC 803 (Admin)
QBD (Admin) (Lang J) 11/04/2013
A jihadist terror cell which plotted mass murder worse than the July 7 attacks with the blessing of al Qaida has today been jailed.
Ringleader Irfan Naseer, 31, was handed a life sentence at Woolwich Crown Court and will serve a minimum of 18 years before he is considered for release.
The rest of the Birmingham gang, which aimed to explode up to eight rucksack bombs in suicide bombings, were sentenced to serve a total of up to 72 years behind bars for their part in the plan.
Police believe it was the most significant terror plot to be uncovered since the 2006 conspiracy to blow up transatlantic airliners using bombs disguised as soft drinks.
Sentencing, Mr Justice Henriques described Nasser as a “skilful bomb-maker” and the group’s “leader, driving force and man in charge”.
Addressing the defendant, who appeared to mutter under his breath, the judge said: “Clearly nothing was going to stop you, short of intervention of the authorities.
“I have no doubt you would have continued with your plan but for that intervention.”
The judge warned the chemistry graduate that although he would be considered for licence in 18 years, a parole board would not release him until he renounced “extremist views”.
At the head of the gang with Naseer were his “inseparable” lieutenant Irfan Khalid, 28, and Ashik Ali, also 28, who provided them with a safe house.
Khalid boasted that the attack was going to be “another 9/11″, while Naseer was heard agreeing that the July 7 attacks had not done enough damage because there were no nails in the bombs.
Sentencing Khalid to an extended sentence of 23 years and a minimum of 12 behind bars, Mr Justice Henriques said he took into account that Khalid had been found to be in the bottom 2%-5% in terms of cognitive ability.
Partially-sighted Ali, wearing a white robe, was given an extended sentence of 20 years and must serve a minimum of 10 before he can be considered for release on licence.
The judge said he did not accept the defendant’s portrayal of himself as the group’s “tea boy or runner for others”.
In a conversation heard by police, Ali told his estranged wife Salma Kabal, who was cleared earlier this month of withholding information about the plot: “Oh, you think this is a flipping Four Lions. We’re one man short.”
In February, Naseer was found guilty of five counts of preparation of terrorist acts, Khalid of four, and Ali of three, all between Christmas Day 2010 and September 19 2011.
For Naseer, from Sparkhill, Khalid, from Sparkbrook, and Ali, from Balsall Heath, this included planning a bombing campaign, collecting money for terrorism and recruiting others for terrorism.
Mr Justice Henriques said Naseer bore “sole responsibility” for sending Shahid Khan, 21, Khobaib Hussain, 21, Ishaaq Hussain, 21, and Naweed Ali, 25, to Pakistan for terror training in August 2011.
Three of the youngsters, all from Sparkhill, were forced to return just three days later after relatives got wind of the sinister reasons for their journey.
Sentencing all four to 40 months in prison, of which they will serve a minimum of 20 months, the judge said: “It is a chilling thought that unbeknown to your parents you left this country intending to undergo a period of terror training.”
The four had pleaded guilty to engaging in conduct in preparation for terrorist acts by travelling to Pakistan for training in terrorism.
Attempting to fund their plot by posing as Muslim Aid charity street collectors, the group duped legitimate supporters into giving them money.
They raised £12,000 for themselves in this way, but were forced to apply for tens of thousands of pounds in loans after losing more than £9,000 of the money playing foreign currency markets.
“Chief financier” Rahin Ahmed, 26, from Moseley, was sentenced to 17 years and will serve six years before he can be released on licence after he admitted collecting, investing and managing money for terrorism.
Ashik Ali’s older brother Bahader Ali, 29, Mohammed Rizwan, 34, and Mujahid Hussain, 21, were also recruited by the cell.
Bahader Ali and Rizwan were said to have been unsure whether to join the “ammal” (action) against “infidels” in the UK or fight abroad, while Mujahid Hussain helped with fundraising.
Today they received sentences of between six and four years in jail for their role in the plot.
From Sparkhill, Rizwan had pleaded guilty to engaging in conduct in preparation for terrorist acts, while Bahader Ali, from Sparkbrook, and Mujahid Hussain, from Yardley, both admitted entering a funding arrangement for the purposes of terrorism.
Bahader Ali also pleaded guilty to collecting information about terrorism and encouraging the preparatory acts of others and Mujahid Hussain admitted having information about acts of terrorism.
The gang were thwarted by the largest investigation ever carried out by the 450-strong counter-terrorism unit, involving 24-hour surveillance and the bugging of the men’s safe house.
Mr Justice Henriques said he wanted to ensure that the officers who worked on the case receive a judicial commendation for their “extraordinary” work.
A “highly dangerous” man who raped a young girl in Peterborough and attacked three others in a night of terror has been jailed indefinitely.
John Hinton, 23, who described himself as “the devil”, preyed on the girls near Central Park in the early hours of June 5 last year.
Each was left fearing for her life, Peterborough Crown Court heard.
After raping the final victim, a 15-year-old girl who cannot be named for legal reasons, he asked her on a date and bragged about attacking two other women earlier that night.
John Lloyd-Jones, representing Hinton, described how his client had “extremely dark and disturbing fantasies”.
After his arrest, he wrote dozens of pages of disturbing diary entries while being held inprison.
Describing the attacks, prosecutor Jonathan Seely said: “The defendant engaged in a series of serious sexual attacks on young women, culminating in the most serious rape and assault of a 15-year-old.”
The attacks began shortly after midnight when Hinton assaulted two friends before chasing one of them, pinning her to the ground and attempting to pull her clothes off.
He only fled when he was disturbed by residents living nearby, the court heard.
After attacking the two friends, Hinton followed another young woman.
“He approached her from behind and put a hand over her mouth,” Mr Seely said.
“She started to scream out and yell ‘rape’.
“He stopped and ran off when a vehicle passed by.”
Mr Seely said that in the final incident, the girl had been walking alone when Hinton approached from behind and punched her to the ground.
Mr Seely said: “She fell unconscious and when she came round he told her to shut up or he would kill her and ordered her to come with him to the park.
“He threatened to slit her throat before he raped her.
“She believed if she tried to run away he would kill her.
“The attack lasted about 20 minutes.”
Afterwards he showed her a magic trick and said he would like to start a relationship with her, he added.
Hinton, of Wesleyan Road, Peterborough, appeared in court via video link from HMP Peterborough, after admitting rape, attempted rape, sexual assault, causing actual bodily harm, wounding and assault by beating at an earlier hearing.
Mr Lloyd-Jones, mitigating, said Hinton had been diagnosed with a personality disorder and posed a high risk to the public.
But experts had decided he was not appropriate for detention under the mental health act.
“This was one night of madness by somebody who has been a witness and victim of serious physical and sexual abuse as a child,” he added.
Judge Nic Madge imposed an indeterminate sentence for public protection and said Hinton should serve at least six years in jail.
He said: “There is a serious risk of danger to the public by further offences by you.
“You will be released only when it is no longer necessary for you to be detained for the protection of the public.”
Three members of an al Qaida-inspired terror group that plotted to bomb the London Stock Exchange and build a terrorist training camp had their indeterminate sentences quashed by the Court of Appeal today.
Three judges in London instead imposed “determinate” custodial sentences of 17 years and eight months in the case of one of the men and 16 years in relation to the two others.
The Islamist extremists originally received the indeterminate sentences for public protection at London’s Woolwich Crown Court in February last year.
Mohammed Shahjahan, now 29, was at that stage ordered to serve a minimum term of eight years and 10 months, while fellow Stoke-on-Trent-based radicals Usman Khan, 22, and Nazam Hussain, 27, were ordered to serve at least eight years behind bars.
Allowing their sentence appeals, Lord Justice Leveson, sitting with Mr Justice Mitting and Mr Justice Sweeney, ruled that Shahjahan now has to serve 17 years and eight months and Khan and Hussain 16 years.
All three received extended sentences meaning that each will have to spend an extra five years on licence after they are freed from prison.
The trio were originally sentenced along with six others – four of the nine were from Stoke, three from Cardiff and two from London.
The appeal judges said that having “reduced” the three sentences by removing the sentence for public protection, they had come to the conclusion that it was right to make a “marginal” adjustment to the term imposed on another appellant.
They knocked six months off the five-year sentence originally handed out to Mohibur Rahman, now 28, from Stoke-on-Trent.
Rahman had received the five years for possessing two copies of the online al Qaida magazine Inspire for terrorist purposes.
The judges also dismissed a sentence appeal by Omar Latif, 29, from Cardiff, who was jailed for 10 years and four months, with an extended period on licence of another five years, for attending meetings with the intention of assisting others to prepare or commit acts of terrorism.
An “evil” killer was today sentenced to at least 40 years in prison for the cold-blooded murders of his mother and father – but went to jail protesting his innocence.
Conman Stephen Seddon, 46, was branded a “monster” by a judge after blasting his elderly and doting parents to death with a sawn-off shotgun to get his hands on their money.
But Seddon, who told “lie after lie after lie” to escape justice, shook his head and shouted “I’m an innocent man” before he was ordered to “keep quiet” by the judge, who jailed him for life with a minimum 40 years before parole.
Seddon, a convicted fraudster with an “insatiable thirst” for money, was named by his parents Robert Seddon, 68, and Patricia, 65, as sole beneficiary of their £230,000 estate in their will.
The father-of-three first tried to drown them by staging a road accident and driving a car into a canal with them strapped in the back, Manchester Crown Court heard.
He then “played the hero” boasting of his supposed rescue attempts after aborting the murder plan when bystanders went to their aid in the submerged car.
After that plan failed, armed with a sawn-off shotgun, he went to their quiet suburban home in Sale, Greater Manchester, last July 4.
His mother, still recovering from the canal crash, tried to fight him off in the hallway but went to the ground where her son put the gun against her left temple and pulled the trigger.
His father, in the lounge, was shot from close range in the neck as he either lay or was about to get up from a sofa.
He then placed the gun on his father’s lap in a bid to make it look like a murder-suicide.
Passing sentence, Mr Justice Hamblen told the defendant: “One can only imagine the horror of your parents’ last moments in this life, when they realised what a monster their son, whom they loved, had become.
“Mercifully their deaths were swift. The reason for the attempted murders and the murders was greed. You needed money.
“In Greek mythology, someone who killed a parent would be pursued until death by the Furies. Throughout time it has been recognised as a terrible and unnatural crime.
“You have done so by the barbaric act of shooting them at point-blank range with a sawn-off shotgun.”
Loved ones of the murder victims hissed “Yes!” and burst into tears after Seddon was convicted by a jury yesterday following a five-week trial.
In a statement read outside court, the family said: “The past nine months have been a very sad and emotional time for our family.
“The shock of having both Pat and Bob taken from us in such horrifying and tragic circumstances has left us feeling numb.
“Pat and Bob were a kind, loving and selfless couple who will be missed by their family, friends, and especially their grandson Daniel, who they cared for with great love and affection.”
Seddon had lived the high life in the past, posing in his Bentley Turbo, jetting around the world and staying at the Waldorf Astoria in New York on one trip.
The money came from a scam and he was jailed for fraud, but his thirst for money remained unquenched.
His parents had already gifted him £40,000 in cash and bought his home in Seaham, Co Durham, to keep a roof over his head.
The couple, married for 47 years, made a will in October 2009, naming each other as beneficiary if one of them died, with their estate worth £230,000.
But if they both died, their son Stephen got the lot.
On March 20 last year Seddon made the first attempt to kill his parents by faking the car accident, taking his parents out for a surprise meal as a belated Mother’s Day present.
With his parents and nephew Daniel in the car, Seddon veered off the road and into Bridgewater Canal in Timperley, south Manchester.
Witnesses who ran to assist shouted for him to get off the car – as he was making it sink.
By July last year his father at least had come to realise the terrible truth about his son.
Robert Seddon confided in his GP that he believed the canal “accident” had been a deliberate attempt to kill him – and he intended to confront his son.
The next day he was dead.
Police believe it was almost a triple murder.
Seddon had taken three shotgun cartridges with him – he did not realise his nephew Daniel was in respite care that day and so not at home when the killer came calling.
Detective Superintendent Denise Worth, from Greater Manchester Police, said: “I actually find it difficult to put into words – someone who could kill and murder their own parents.
“It is hard to describe somebody prepared to do that. He portrayed himself as a devoted and loving son and told lie after lie after lie. He’s just an evil, wicked man who did it all for greed.”
A prison officer has admitted selling secrets to the Sun newspaper today.
Prison officer Richard Trunkfield, 31, from Moulton, Northamptonshire, admitted leaking information about a high profile prisoner to the tabloid – Converse believe it relates to the face-slashing of Ian Huntley at HMP Woodhill in March 2010.
He pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office between March 2 and April 30, 2010.
Trunkfield was arrested as part of Operation Elveden, which was set up to investigate allegations of newspapers paying police and prison officers for information.
Mark Leech editor of Converse the national newspaper for prisoners in England and Wales said for Trunkfield a prison sentence was almost inevitable.
“This prison officer breached the trust placed in him, thankfully he does not represent the majority of prison staff who act professionally and do not cash in on the information in their possession – I wonder how many other prison officers are however waiting for officers from Operation Elveden to come knocking on their door too?
“The courts take a serious view of these misconduct in public office convictions, and it seems inevitable that Trunkfield will spend some time locked up - although it will not be in his former prison.”