Juan Ignacio Blanco  


  MALE murderers

index by country

index by name   A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

  FEMALE murderers

index by country

index by name   A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z




Murderpedia has thousands of hours of work behind it. To keep creating new content, we kindly appreciate any donation you can give to help the Murderpedia project stay alive. We have many
plans and enthusiasm to keep expanding and making Murderpedia a better site, but we really
need your help for this. Thank you very much in advance.









Classification: Murderer
Characteristics: Drunk and sexually obsessed by a 9-year-old boy, Lewthwaite broke into the boy's house. Disturbed by the boy's 5-year-old sister, Lewthwaite stabbed her 17 times
Number of victims: 1
Date of murder: June 26, 1974
Date of arrest: Next day
Date of birth: 1956
Victim profile: Nicole Hanns, 5
Method of murder: Stabbing with knife (17 times)
Location: Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Status: Sentenced to life in prison in December 1974. Resentenced to 20 years to life in prison. Released on June 21, 1999

photo gallery


'Monster' free despite indecency charge

By Gemma Jones, Janet Fyfe-Yeomans and Evelyn Yamine

August 30, 2006

A PAROLE authority decision to allow convicted child killer John Lewthwaite to remain on the streets of Sydney after he was charged with indecent exposure has outraged police.

The NSW Parole Authority refused to revoke the parole of the murderer of five-year-old Nicole Hanns following his arrest last week after he was found naked and with another man at Wanda Beach.

Despite pleas from the State Government and the acting Commissioner of Corrective Services Ian McLean, the authority refused to act after a magistrate at Sutherland Local Court granted Lewthwaite bail, ignoring police calls to keep him behind bars.

The decision has disgusted Nicole's family, who said: "He should have been locked up the moment he was charged."

Police photographed Lewthwaite sunbathing naked in the dunes area at Wanda - which is a known gay beat but close to a track used by children - just before 5pm (AEST) on August 19.

Lewthwaite, who lives in a unit block filled with children in Arncliffe, was lying on the sand with his boyfriend, who was fully clothed.

The popular family beach in Sydney's south is frequented by children at that time. The authority has refused to revisit the decision for another three weeks despite the Government asking it to review the decision immediately.

In another arrogant rebuff, the authority defied Mr McLean, who also asked for Lewthwaite's parole to be revoked.

The family of Lewthwaite's tiny victim, who he stabbed to death in 1974 after intending to abduct and rape her brother Anthony, fought for years to keep him behind bars.

Despite their frantic warnings that he would reoffend, the parole authority released Lewthwaite in 1999.

Anthony Hanns - now 41 - told The Daily Telegraph yesterday: "I was told when he was released that he would be on lifetime parole. He breached that and he's still out, so there's something wrong there.

"He served 20 years, a quarter of his entire life. My sister has been dead for four lifetimes. Where's the justice?"

Opposition Leader Peter Debnam called for a review of parole laws to ensure parole was immediately revoked when someone was charged with a serious offence.

The Government has appealed to the State Parole Authority to urgently review its failure to revoke Lewthwaite's parole. In a letter to the SPA chairman Ian Pike, Justice Minister Tony Kelly said: "I am extremely concerned about this decision given the serious criminal history of the parolee involved and the public interest in ensuring all appropriate measures have been taken.

"I would ask that the SPA review its decision as a matter of urgency."

Police were also angry yesterday that the magistrate let him go free.

"Police opposed bail because he is on life parole. He went to court and they granted him bail," an angry police source said.

While free to move around Sydney, the magistrate issued an order prohibiting him from going within 2km of the coast from Kurnell to Shelly Beach.

When confronted outside his unit block yesterday, Lewthwaite became abusive, telling The Daily Telegraph: "F... off, dog."

He returned to his unit block in Arncliffe minutes after school children who live in the flats arrived home.

One mother of teenage children was horrified to learn Lewthwaite lived in her building.


Killer in 'naked beach romp'

By Elicia Murray -

August 29, 2006

One of the state's worst child killers has been arrested for allegedly romping naked with other men in Cronulla earlier this month, sparking calls for his parole to be reconsidered.

John David Lewthwaite murdered five-year-old Nicole Hanns in 1974.

Drunk and naked from the waist down, he broke into Gwen and Peter Hanns' Greystanes home.

His plans to abduct, rape and murder the couple's nine-year-old son were unwittingly interrupted by Nicole, who woke up when he stumbled into her bedroom. He tried to keep her quiet by putting his hand over her mouth, but then became angry and stabbed her 17 times.

He confessed to the murder days later.

Lewthwaite, then aged 19, had been on parole at the time of the murder.

Public outcry at his impending release led to political and community campaigns that prolonged his release by another five years.

He was released from prison in 1999, three days short of having served 25 years behind bars. He is on parole under strict conditions for the rest of his life.

Police patrolling the Wanda sandhills allegedly saw Lewthwaite, now 50, naked and engaged in lewd acts with another man on August 19.

Children were reportedly among the beachgoers in the area at the time.

After a short chase, he was arrested and, when questioned, said he had been sunbathing.

After his arrest, the Acting Commissioner of Corrective Services, Ian McLean, asked the parole board to consider revoking his parole.

A parole review was set for September 29, but it has been brought forward to September 15 following calls from the NSW Justice Minister, Tony Kelly.

Mr Kelly told today the Department of Corrective Services had applied extensive conditions on Lewthwaite following the arrest.

"Lewthwaite is a child killer and it is totally appropriate the authorities take this course of action - I think the community expects nothing less," Mr Kelly said.

The minister wrote to the parole board last week asking for a review of Lewthwaite's parole by an independent body.

"I am extremely concerned about this decision given the serious criminal history of the parolee involved, and the public interest in ensuring all appropriate measures have been taken," he said in the letter.

Mr Kelly said the parole board had advised him that, "given it had not received an adverse report on Lewthwaite in the seven years he has been on parole'', it had initially stood the matter over until September 29.

This was later brought forward.

"Until then, Lewthwaite faces strict conditions, which demand he take no drugs or alcohol, not gamble and subject himself to urinalysis."

Lewthwaite must not go near anyone aged under 16 unless the child is accompanied by a responsible adult. He must also undergo psychological counselling and assessments if required by his parole officer.

Mr Kelly said Lewthwaite must report to the probation and parole service once a week and to the NSW Police twice weekly.

Opposition Leader Peter Debnam said today Lewthwaite should not be free.


Media hysteria fails to prevent release of John Lewthwaite

By Cheryl McDermid -

July 24, 1999

The campaign to stop the recent release on parole of John Lewthwaite, convicted in Sydney, Australia, 25 years ago for the killing of five-year old Nicole Hanns, raised questions about the role of the mass media and the official political agenda. It also produced signs of disquiet among working people, civil libertarians and academics.

In the first place, Lewthwaite's release was used by the media outlets to seek to incite a virtual lynch mob atmosphere. Initially, Lewthwaite's parents, living in a small town on the mid-north coast of New South Wales, had proposed that their 44-year-old son stay with them after his release, but this had to be abandoned after a TV current affairs program was informed of the plans. It sent a reporter and camera crew to the town, broadcasting pictures of his parents' home and fomenting fear throughout the community.

One of Lewthwaite's sponsors then arranged for him to stay temporarily at his house in Sydney. But its address was leaked to the media and broadcast through newspapers, radio and television. The Murdoch-owned Sydney Daily Telegraph published an aerial picture of the street, with an arrow indicating the house where Lewthwaite would be staying. One radio talk-back host allowed a caller to utter what amounted to a death threat against Lewthwaite.

Urged on by the media, a small group of nearby residents marched on the house, throwing eggs, shouting abuse and finally hosing inside the home through the mailbox in the front door. An army of journalists and cameramen camped outside the house, with their reports and pictures splashed all over TV shows and daily papers.

The Telegraph ran a large picture on its front page of a woman about to push a hose through the front door. Its editorial declared: “The Daily Telegraph has maintained the view that Lewthwaite should not have been released, as there was, in the newspaper's opinion, insufficient evidence that he had been rehabilitated.... The media, as always, will be criticised by the hand wringers of society for the prominence it has given Lewthwaite's release. However, is it not wrong to reflect community concern—it is a vital part of the role of the media.”

Yet the affair shows that, far from simply reflecting community concern, the media and politicians work aggressively to fashion public opinion. Over the previous five years there had been a campaign in the media, particularly the Murdoch press, to portray Lewthwaite as the most dangerous criminal in the state of New South Wales, who should never be released.

Successive state governments, Liberal and Labor, exerted enormous political pressure on the Parole Board to deny Lewthwaite's application for parole. He had been eligible for parole since 1994, after serving 20 years in prison.

Tim Anderson of the NSW Council for Civil Liberties told the World Socialist Web Site that for two years applications for Lewthwaite's parole had provoked considerable crisis inside the Department of Corrective Services. In May 1998, nine months prior to the last state election, Lewthwaite had again been recommended for parole. The Parole Board had received reports from a number of psychiatrists, who all favourably assessed his application. Despite the Parole Board majority voting in favour of Lewthwaite's release, the head of the Parole Board had vetoed it.

Following the election, a Parole Board hearing was presented with the same psychiatrists' reports, with the same recommendations, at which point Lewthwaite was released.

Anderson stated that Lewthwaite was unique, being a long-term offender who had survived his jail sentence. “Deteriorating health, suicide and mental instability take a heavy toll among prisoners with long jail sentences.” Unlike most long-term jail inmates, Lewthwaite had received protracted and strong support from his family and a number of gay men who had visited him in rotation for two decades.

Mark Findlay, Associate Professor of Law at Sydney University, participated in drawing up a pre-release program for Lewthwaite. He explained to the WSWS that men outside Lewthwaite's family had sexually assaulted Lewthwaite in his youth. This abuse and his confusion regarding his sexuality created a disoriented and aggressive young man. Combined with alcohol it resulted in an explosive and tragic outcome.

Lewthwaite was only 18 when he murdered Nicole Hanns after breaking into her family home in an attempt to abduct her older brother. In a drunken rage he stabbed her when he did not find nine-year-old Anthony. Afterwards, he went to church twice to find a priest to whom he could confess. Unable to find one, he confessed the next morning to a parole officer, who took him to a police station where he was charged and arrested.

Findlay said: “He is one of the rare offenders who has come to terms with his offence—he has grown in jail rather than stopped. He confessed straight away and never tried to deny his guilt.

“During the first 10 to 15 years [in jail] it would have been terror with significant levels of protection due to the nature of his offence. It was only in the last eight to nine years that he was able to stand alone in jail. He was able to go into the prisoners' café to work in the kitchen, which entailed considerable risk as the other inmates had knives. He took that risk, however. Then he went into the prisoner's gallery, where he had contact almost entirely with visitors. This gave some measure of his reaction.”

Findlay explained that the main concern with the release of long-term offenders was not the prospect of them re-offending but suicide. “Lewthwaite's situation exposed that nothing is done for prisoners on release. There should be a post-release program put in place. Instead they are tossed out onto the street with $20. Long-term offenders don't last long after release.”

After his release and at the height of the campaign against him, Lewthwaite released a note expressing his remorse. It read in part: “I have always felt grief and great sorrow for my crime ... if I had any doubts about re-offending in any way, shape or form I would not have taken on the responsibility of hopefully being allowed a chance to go back into society.”

Some informed commentators were briefly quoted in the media. George Zdenkowski, Associate Professor of Law at the University of New South Wales, told the Sydney Morning Herald that the level of professional advice, commissioned by various authorities in Lewthwaite's was extraordinary. “They got nine different psychiatric reports.... If they err they err on the side of non-release.”

But such facts were largely suppressed in the media. The affair brought into focus the increasingly publicised role being given to the families of victims. Governments and the media are mercilessly using them to pursue a definite agenda of harsher and longer penalties against offenders, both adult and juvenile.

Gwen Hanns, the mother of the murdered girl, had argued publicly against Lewthwaite's release for a number of years. This campaign was facilitated by the introduction in 1994 of the Victims Rights Act to allow the family of victims to make representations to the Parole Board and in rare cases to the Serious Offenders Review Board. Accordingly, Hanns lobbied aggressively for Lewthwaite to remain behind bars.

This practice introduces a subjective and emotional factor in assessing long-term offenders. In many instances, this overshadows the professional and medical advice gained over years of treatment. The grief and despair of the families is cynically exploited to demand more severe sentences.

Hanns has not only campaigned against Lewthwaite's release but also for the introduction of a law that demands community notification when a convicted child killer or pedophile is freed. It is similar to Megan's Law in the United States, which was the result of lobbying by the mother of murdered seven-year-old Megan Kanka. American civil libertarians and lawyers point out that it breaches constitutional rights and leads to vigilante action.

The campaign against John Lewthwaite reveals an attempt to engender in society the conception that serious offenders must never stop paying for their offence; that there is no possibility of rehabilitation; and that society in general has no responsibility toward them. It is the conception that terrible and tragic deeds are simply the result of evil individuals. The very notion that a person's social environment and experiences play a part in moulding their personality and actions is seen as “liberal hand-wringing”. The only treatment seen fit is punishment and continued incarceration.

It is apparent that in Lewthwaite's case the conscious incitement of community prejudice by the media had an impact on a small layer in society. However, it created concern and opposition from other sections. Local residents denounced the media hounds who encircled Lewthwaite's residence. “Leave him alone,” was a common comment. This was barely reported.

The fact that Lewthwaite's persecution did not receive broad support, and was viewed with alarm by others, finally forced the media to pull back. Numbers of people interviewed voiced their opposition to the blatant media provocation and attempt to railroad public opinion. For that reason the story has dropped from sight, for now.



home last updates contact