Murderer Stephen Wynne can move to open prison, judge rules
Merseyside PoliceA man who murdered a mother-of-three and dismembered her body has won the right to move to an open prison after a judge dismissed a government objection.
Stephen Wynne was jailed for life in 2006 and ordered to serve a minimum of 21 years for killing Chantel Taylor.
In 2022, the Parole Board recommended he should be moved to an open prison, but the Ministry of Justice refused.
However, a High Court judge ruled that was "outside the range of reasonable decisions" open to the government.
Wynne, from Birkenhead, murdered Ms Taylor in 2004, but was only caught when he tried to set light to a mosque in the town in revenge for the 7 July 2005 London bombings.
The former soldier admitted murdering the 27-year-old and was jailed for life at Liverpool Crown Court in January 2006. Her remains have never been recovered.
His minimum term, which was originally 21 years but was later reduced to 18 years at the Court of Appeal, is due to expire in July.
'Deep distress'
At the High Court in March, Mrs Justice Steyn was told a Parole Board panel considering Wynne's case had examined a dossier of about 1,000 pages and 16 reports over a period of more than 19 months.
In her ruling, she said the "consensus amongst the professional report writers, across every report", was that the risks presented by Wynne could be "effectively managed in open conditions".
She said the experts believed he "did not present a risk of absconding" and he "should be transferred to open conditions".
The court was told the panel heard from Jean Taylor, Chantel's mother, about the "deep distress and devastation" felt by her family.
Mrs Taylor has previously joined other victims of crime to deliver a petition to 10 Downing Street, which called for life sentences to "mean life".
The panel also heard from Wynne and was told risk factors in his case included "substance misuse, alcohol and drugs", "poor emotional and anger management", "impulsivity" and "use of weapons and reactive violence".
However, it concluded he had been a "calm, resolved and compliant prisoner", was "unlikely to abscond", had shown "insight" and had a "sustained period of good behaviour going back many years".
'No good reason'
The Ministry of Justice, which was not bound to accept the panel's recommendation, later said there was "not a wholly persuasive case" for Wynne's transfer.
It said risks "cannot be effectively managed in open conditions" and made reference to the "extreme violence" of the murder, Wynne's "impulsivity" and his "tendency to justify his actions".
In a High Court challenge, Wynne's lawyers argued the department's position was "irrational", with reasoning that was "conspicuously brief, superficial and unpersuasive".
Mrs Justice Steyn concluded that it was "clear" that the department had "provided no good reason for rejecting the panel's recommendation".
She said the decision to reject the panel's recommendation was "outside the range of reasonable decisions" open to the government.
"The lack of any good reason to depart from the panel's recommendation is particularly striking given the panel's depth of analysis, the clarity of their conclusion, and the consensus of opinion amongst the panoply of professional witnesses," she added.
