A well-known individual dubbed the “hammer killer” is not deemed ready for parole despite being granted release, as per the statement from the Justice Secretary. David Lammy raised concerns over the Parole Board’s decision to release Reginald Wilson, citing insufficient community testing.

Wilson’s criminal history, starting from a young age, includes arson conviction in 1979 and subsequent charges in 1985 for attempted burglary, wounding, and burglary. The government highlights the importance of considering this background in his parole review, 35 years after his murder conviction in 1991.

Initially sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of David Birkett, Wilson’s minimum tariff of 30 years concluded in 2021. Following a transfer to an open prison in 2023, the Parole Board approved his release on a life license last year, citing positive progress during his time in open conditions.

While the Parole Board noted Wilson’s improvement and lack of concerns during a review hearing, Lammy emphasized the limited community exposure and stress testing Wilson underwent, given his predominately high-security prison environment history.

Described by judges as having committed an “appalling” attack, Wilson was deemed to have an “untreatable psychopathic disorder” at the time of his conviction. Concerns were raised by a police officer involved in the case, believing Wilson posed a risk of reoffending, especially considering his escape attempt and violent behavior within the prison system.

During his fourth parole review, various professionals recommended Wilson’s release on life license, despite his past actions and the severity of his crime. The Ministry of Justice expressed condolences to Birkett’s family and requested a reassessment of the Parole Board’s decision following new information.

The Parole Board confirmed receiving a request to review Wilson’s case from the Secretary of State for Justice and assured a prompt consideration of the application. The decision to set aside the parole release will be evaluated based on the presented details, with transparency in providing reasons for the final outcome.