PRISON OF ASSOCIATION – CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS

Anne Perry, the accomplished British mystery writer has written 60 books and sold over 26 million copies. She is also a convicted murderer who was sentenced to life in prison for the brutal murder of her best girl friend Pauline Parker’s mother in 1954. (Her fellow crime writer Ian Rankin interviewed her circa 2007. The interview was uploaded to YouTube .)

Unlike Karla, who has never managed to stay completely off the radar, Juliet Hulme, the name Anne Perry was born with, got out of jail in 1959, changed her name, moved to the Oakland area in California, became a devout Mormon and eventually the famous and wealthy writer she is today. In the process she variously lived in England, the United States and even Toronto, Canada, as the Globe and Mail proudly points out. She now lives in a stylish renovated piggery in the remote fishing village of Portmahomak, 50 miles north of Inverness, on the Scottish Highlands.

It was Peter Jackson’s 1994 film Heavenly Creatures that was Anne Perry’s undoing. The provincial media in New Zealand never completely forgot the sensational case and in the excitement over the movie redoubled their efforts to find out what became of her.

Even though as teenagers Juliet and Pauline had been so close the threat of separation drove them to commit matricide, they never spoke again after their early release from prison in 1959. Ironically, in 1994 Pauline Parker was also found to be living under an assumed name on a horse farm about five miles down the road from Perry’s piggery.

As reported in the Toronto-based Globe and Mail on Saturday, October 6, 2012, Joanne Drayton, an academic and literary biographer currently living in Christchurch, New Zealand has recently written a book entitled “The Search for Anne Perry” and is on a geographically small “tour” of Canada with Ms. Perry herself.

She said “I felt compelled in a way to challenge the way that she [Anne Perry/Juliet Hulme] was perceived. It just seemed to me you can’t leave someone in a prison of association forever. You have to acknowledge that someone has moved on and changed and evolved and developed a useful contributing life apart from the thing they got horribly wrong.”

Parker and Hulme hatched a plot to murder Parker’s mother because she would not allow Pauline to accompany Juliet to South Africa in the wake of Juliet’s parent’s divorce. This enraged the two teenage girls and they devised a plan to override Mrs. Parker’s decision.

Juliet brought a half-brick in an old stocking on a walk with Pauline and her mother in a remote park just outside Christchurch and the two girls battered Mrs. Parker to death with it.

The matricide shocked and reviled New Zealand, as did Karla’s horrific crimes committed 37 years later with her then husband, Paul Bernardo. Similar to the sensational media coverage in southwestern Ontario the Kiwi media speculated that the perpetrators were insane, the Devil’s servants, sexual deviates who deserved to hang. Although sentenced to life the New Zealand government arranged for Juliet and Pauline to be quietly released after only five years.

As I pointed out in “Karla: A Pact with the Devil” Juliet and Pauline were able to disappear as were the very few other women convicted of horrific crimes throughout history who eventually get out of prison one way or the other. Winnie Ruth Judd is a good example.

When Anne Perry’s true identity was revealed in the wake of Jackson’s movie, she had just published her 19th book. Her oeuvre includes the critically acclaimed Thomas Pitt and William Monk series set during the First World War, and her annual Christmas novellas.

Joanne Drayton told the Globe reporter “Because it (the movie and the revelation of her true identity) happened to her we’ve become so, I think, fixated with…that part of her story. But it is only a very small part of her story.”

Very reluctantly Perry invited Drayton to the Scottish Highlands and they spent nine days talking about her life.

“The book is crafted around what Drayton calls a conversation between the adult Anne and the child Juliet, a journey as opposed to an interrogation. While Perry, now 73, participated, this is not an authorized biography. Apparently Perry has not read it.

Recently in what Joanne Drayton described as “a surprise move” Perry decided to appear with Drayton at two upcoming Canadian festivals, Wordfest in Calgary and Banff, October 9 -14and at the Vancouver Writers Fest, October 16 -21.).

“When people can’t allow you to be something better than the murderer ever, then it’s a permanent sentence.”

I don’t know about that. Since I did the research and wrote Karla I haven’t given Anne Perry a second thought – until now. Frankly, I don’t know what the fuss is about. She is whoever she is and it is what ever it is. It seems to me that all anyone is up to in these mysteries that become connundrums wrapped in mental confusion is selling books.

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “PRISON OF ASSOCIATION – CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS

      • http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/23441272

        Stephen, you may not have seen the link above concerning the time Pauline Parker (Hilary Nathan) and Juliet Hulme (Anne Perry) were imprisoned.
        I think it confirms what Anne Perry has said all along about coming to repentance while in prison, is in fact correct, although there are many calling her a liar.
        I also think it confirms what she has said all along, that her and Pauline Parker were not in a lesbian relationship. She has been continually labelled a liar, but she has been telling the truth.
        Sensationalist newspaper reports and gossip in 1954 had Juliet Hulme to blame for much of what happened. ( She was the originator of the plan to get rid of the mother. She was the ringleader etc ) People seem to have a mindset of what they have seen written down from that period, and what they have heard.
        What is your take on that.

      • This looks familiar. I wrote about the case in “Karla” – toward the end of the book and did quite a bit of research on the girls and how their crime and punishment was treated by the local media – with tabloid tempered hysteria as I recall. If you’re interested have a look. “Karla” is available for download worldwide on all the major platforms including Kindle, Kobo, iBooks etc.

      • What I do know, however, is that regardless of who initiated what, or planned what, like Paul and Karla, both were guilty of first degree murder – i.e. it was premeditated. Having said that, the authorities decided to let the girls out of jail, regardless of public opinion, and both have proven themselves worthy of that – what would we call it – redemption – no, probably just “second chance.”

  1. Hmm, I’m not entirely comfortable making the assertion below, because I believe that the crime of murder shouldn’t be minimized. The premeditation and commission of murder is almost the ultimate anti-social act (and within that I include malice – meaning ‘reckless disregard’ for the possible and foreseeable harmful consequences of one’s actions). Manslaughter is a slightly different kettle of fish.

    However, even here there are gradations of harm which are important. Again, I’m uncomfortable making this argument, but just because I’m uncomfortable making it doesn’t mean it isn’t valid.

    In my opinion, the situation of Hulme and Parker, and Paul and Karla, are worlds apart. Hulme and Parker committed one murder that was instrumental to a planned outcome (meaning that their goal wasn’t the murder itself), and did not otherwise engage in a crime spree. Of particular importance is that their victim didn’t suffer, nor was that the intent.

    Paul and Karla, however, committed not just murder, but serial murder, rape, and extended torture. It could be argued that their goal wasn’t murder either, but torture – which some would argue is far worse. Their goal was the extended suffering of their victims, and their own sadistic pleasure.

    And it’s fair to say that both of them take opportunities even now to psychologically create drama and pain. Paul loves to bait people via the media whenever he gets the chance. And there is no way in h*ll that Karla would be blind to the knowledge that her new ‘career’ selling infant clothing (not to mention endlessly dispensing parenting advice to unsuspecting parents in parenting forums and teaching schoolchildren in Guadeloupe) would be hugely painful and traumatic to her living former victims (we always seem to forget about Jane and Steph Doe) & the living relatives.of her dead ones. I imagine that – for her – that’s largely the point: a big giant f*** you to everyone who hasn’t climbed aboard the ‘poor Karla’ bandwagon.

    On the other hand… “It just seemed to me you can’t leave someone in a prison of association forever. You have to acknowledge that someone has moved on and changed and evolved and developed a useful contributing life apart from the thing they got horribly wrong.”

    With no expression of remorse, I’m not so comfortable with Hulme and Parker getting out so easily either, and can understand New Zealander’s desire to get some closure to the story. And I’d therefore be inclined to view Hulmes’ career of crime novels in the same light as Karla’s career in childcare – as yet another ‘f*** you’, that only the truly unrepentant would entertain. Really, of all the career choices before them, and having taxpayer support to reinvent themselves, to choose those two particular areas is brazen in a way that only those inclined to both commit and support anti-social acts would countenance. Both Hulme and Karla could have done a thousand things to break out of that “prison of association”. Seems to me they chose not to. Seems to me they both privately wear that association proudly – like a badge of honour. Just because they haven’t committed further murders (that we know of) doesn’t mean they’re not still cheerleaders for those who do. And it doesn’t mean they’re not ‘handing on the torch’ to others to follow in their footsteps.

    Neither are that far removed, imo, from Jodi Arias selling t-shirts from prison – ostensibly in support of fighting domestic violence. Just because something *looks* like it’s “useful and contributing” doesn’t mean that it actually is.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s