What is the Greenbelt festival? According to its organisers:
Greenbelt is an arts, faith and justice festival with a long and rich history. We’ll be 40 years old in 2013. That’s 40 consecutive festivals. Without a break.
“Erwin James” is a name familiar to many Guardian readers, having written for the paper since 2000. His is the nom de plume of the murderer James Monahan.
Greenbelt is boasting “Erwin James” on its 2012 lineup, for a week of events scheduled to take place later this month in Britain. James Monahan will appear as a speaker at Greenbelt, under his pen name.
The Daily Mail reported in 2009, that The Guardian had allowed Monahan to lie about details, through his “Erwin James” pseudonym. We learn:
In 1985 he was sentenced to life with a minimum of 14 years for the brutal murders of theatrical agent Greville Hallam and 29-year-old solicitor Angus Cochrane, both committed three years earlier.
Monahan had been 28 and living as a squatter when, with accomplice William Ross, 25, whom the court would later hear he ‘dominated’, he murdered Greville Hallam. The 48-year-old’s body was found, bound and naked, in the bedroom of his Hampstead maisonette. A television, stereo and video equipment had been stolen. [...] Mr Hallam met Monahan at the Golden Lion pub in Soho, where the latter was selling videos, and invited him and Ross back to his home. Monahan, 6ft 2in and powerfully built, strangled the older man with an arm lock before plundering his home.
Three months later, Angus Cochrane, a solicitor for the Coal Board based in Doncaster and in London for a conference, was set upon while walking down The Mall. He was dragged from the pavement into the rose gardens of St James’s Park. He was punched, kicked and beaten with a brick, before being left for dead while his killers made off with what little money he had in his wallet. He died of his head injuries four days later. His parents were faced with the agonising decision of switching off the life-support machine.
“Erwin James” published lies about his time in the French Foreign Legion. In reality, James Monahan had fled England following the murders he had committed in 1982, in order to join the French Foreign Legion. Yet The Guardian had allowed “Erwin James” to claim that he was working in this role, before and during the time when Monahan had murdered Hallam and Cochrane.
In one article, he stated that he enlisted in 1981. In another he wrote graphically of a tour of Beirut undertaken by his regiment in the summer of 1982. That is why The Guardian had to note:
The article below, in which Erwin James recounted his experiences in the Foreign Legion, contains information which is untrue. James was in the Foreign Legion for a time but his claim to have served with one of its regiments in Beirut in the summer of 1982 was false and a paragraph, which purported to describe his experiences there, was fiction. He did not join the Foreign Legion until the end of 1982, by which time his regiment had returned from Beirut. The article also suggested that James accompanied his regiment on missions to Djibouti and the Central African Republic. While these were regular regiment duties, James did not go there.The episode has also exposed the fact that, despite having full details of Monahan’s crimes and the extent of the violence involved, The Guardian chose not to pass on this information to its readers when introducing its columnist in February 2000.
After this exposure, “Erwin James” “apologised“:
It was a frame of mind that was exacerbated shortly after I began working for the charity, when I came across speculation on the internet as to my “true” identityand what I had done to get life imprisonment. The bloggers had started their speculation in 2002. When I first saw the questions posed on web message boards my reaction was one of mild bemusement. But as I progressed further towards possible freedom the speculation began to affect my thinking. I tried not to let it bother me, but in spite of my efforts to dismiss it, it did. I began to feel as if I was being stalked.
The fallout from my identification on that message board, and the lies I told, has led to this piece; to me feeling that I now have to be completely honest about both my time in the legion and to stop hiding from who I really am. I am aware that these revelations may prove painful for people to whom my past actions have caused immeasurable pain and distress. For that I am truly, truly sorry.
Now I hope to carry on living in the same vein as I have for the past five years, working as a writer, but of course with no further deceits.
Monahan appeared to be distancing himself from the fact that he perpetrated the crimes, by using scare quotes for the word “true”, as if it were not really him truly. He also – inappropriately -compares people wondering which criminal is writing in a national newspaper, with stalking.
The Greenbelt festival has chosen to overlook this scandal. The Greenbelt profile of “Erwin James” relies on The Guardian’s assessment of the writer. Greenbelt writes (failing to provide a link):
Ian Katz, deputy editor of the The Guardian, explains the paper’s position on its relationship with Erwin James here.
Yet no mention is made of the controversial role of the Guardian, as exposed by the Daily Mail.
Greenbelt also writes:
He left the care home at 15 and spent the rest of his teenage and early adult years drifting, living with extended family members, and again often sleeping rough. During that time he worked in various labouring jobs, but also committedrelatively petty, mostly acquisitive, but occasionally violent crimes(criminal damage, common assault.) His directionless way of life, which included a period as a fugitive in the French Foreign Legion continued, until August 1984 when he began his life sentence for murder.
Greenbelt notes that the crimes ”Erwin James” committed were “acquisitive”, yet does not mention that his crimes included murder. No mention by Greenbelt, of the homophobic nature of one of the murders. Rather, we learn that he began a life sentence for murder in 1984.
Yet the whole persona of “Erwin James” ought to be discredited, given the lies that Monahan told via this character, about the details of Monahan’s crimes and activities.
You will note how Monahan’s time as a fugitive in the French Foreign Legion is mentioned, without reference to the lies Monahan published about this time as “Erwin James”.
I do believe that there is a time and a place to hear from repentant sinners, so long as they are aware that their repentance means they should still face justice, according to the law, and that they are aware that forgiveness does not equate to legal lenience.
Given the way Monahan has conducted himself,
Given the way Monahan has conducted himself, he is clearly unrepentant – in both a general sense, and a spiritual or religious sense.
Writing about his favourite novels, Monahan compares himself to a victim of Stalin:
Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s novel tells the story of a single day in the life of an ordinary prisoner in the gulags. This book appealed to me because I could relate to the characters in Denisovich’s labour squad
Monahan also appears to compare himself with Alfred Dreyfus:
The story of what happened to Alfred Dreyfus, a brilliant young officer in the French army falsely accused of treason and sentenced to life on Devil’s Island [..] had a huge impact on me and made me aware of the fallibility of governments and how small groups of the most powerful people in a society can usurp the integrity of a country. What I will never forget, however, is the magnitude of Dreyfus’s courage in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds.
A murderer overtly identifying with Dreyfus and Soviet victims in his imprisonment, does not seem a repentant one. Less so, when he is not even appearing as himself.
Significantly, the murderer James Monahan will address Greenbelt 2012, not as himself, but as the discredited media persona that he has created “Erwin James”: the media persona that James Monahan used to tell lies about his own past violent murders – including the murder of a gay victim whom he lured home from a bar – and time as a fugitive.
For a supposedly Christian festival with a professed interest in justice, this is giving an awful impression of Christian justice.
Please make Greenbelt organisers and participants aware of your thoughts.
How do I put it on facebook? Steps 1, 2, 3, etc, of what to do?
Just click the “Facebook” icon at the bottom of the page
Also, what does ‘Likes this’ mean – that he likes what you have written, likes the fact that this man has been exposed, or just likes hearing a scandal? If I say like it, what does that mean I’m saying?
It means you like what has been written
-for the 3rd time, do i get a reply to my queries?? My final Query is, how do I get Greenbelt organisers or participants to hear my opinions – the website I looked on mystified me – so what to do??
It’s not a comment, it’s an enquiry – any hope? Is Joseph anywhere in this scene?
Try emailing the link to the organisers and politely express your concerns
The thing is, the organisers appear to have covered this up, so they know what they are doing. It is very hard to know how to approach this, as it appears deliberate. Still, we could use the Greenbelt contact details: http://www.greenbelt.org.uk/about/contact-us/
Shalom,
Accomplice William Ross is still doing time? Why?
“homophobic nature of one of the murders”?
Was it a Gay mugging or outright murder.
Two MURDERS = 7 years a piece.
It wouldn’t happen in America.
Too many perverts on the Bench.
William Ross : The sentance was ‘life’ – The 14 years refers to a minimum term that the judge set for them to serve before they were considered for parole, Presumably Ross has been assessed as not suitably reforded to be ready for parole yet. (What surprises me is that there was another man involved who doesn’t seem to have served any term in prison because he acted as informer).
“homophobic nature of one of the murders”? : I have only seen this on a very right wing website and don’t think it is correct. The victim was gay and found naked but it seems most likely that he invited them back to his flat which they went along with in order to rob him. There is no evidence of any other homophobic actions by them. But there is no way of telling one way or the other what happen in the flat to say one way or the other.
The mugging had no gay connections as far as I can tell.
I agree that 14 years seems very low for what seem such nasty attacks. It was later increased to 25 years in a general increasing of sentances for serious criminals. Monahan / James is an exceptional case where he was eventually relased before he reached his specified duration because of good behaviour. (Generally, when someone commits 2 crimes they just serve the sentance for the worse crime so 14 years = 1 murder – I’ve never reallyunderstood that either).
I have no idea what would(n’t) happen in America. (From what I’ve seen of the programs on high security prisons in America it seems that you reap what you sow. If you treat people as animals then they will treat you as animals).
I would have thought that perverts on the Bench would be more likely to increase the length of sentences than reduce them.
Hi, Generally your posts (and this site) maintains a high standard but I have quite a few problems with this blog. I can’t see how the festival would be persuaded by the comments as it isn’t clear what precisely your criticism / main point is and the blog seems to contain a number of errors. These are my comments on what I think your main points may be -
(a) ‘awful impression of Christian Justice’ : I would think that one of the main features of “Christian Justice” is Forgiveness and after that would come concern for the poor & oppressed etc. ‘Forgiveness’ might be a reason for including James / Monahan rather than excluding – so I don’t understand this comment that ends the piece.. It may be that by ‘Justice’ you are talking about the judicial system and the justice it carries out. This is a different meaning and I’m not aware of any commonly held Christian view on the Judicial System. I think the talk was one of a number on prison reform so it would seem appropriate to (cautiously) listen to someone who had been through it and seems to have come out better rather than worse by it.
(b1) that his lying around 10 years ago about his activities at the time of the murders makes him unsuitable: I agree that this incident might affect how you would evaluate what he had to say and so would be useful to know but I would approach any talk by an ex-prisoner with an element of caution, however reformed they might seem, and perhaps the unusual wording of the title of his talk, ‘My truth about prison’ was also meant to point to that caution. But if you were to exclude people from talking because they had lied you would have a lot of silence. (Even if the prohibition was only against ‘major lies’ whatever that could mean). Does the lie undermine what he has to say? The various respected organisations that he is part of presumably don’t think so.
(b2) Perhaps the use of his new name is seen to be part of this lie. Many convicts get a new identity after prison and it’s quite likely that the prison stipulated that he didn’t use his real name when he started writing for the newspapers. It seems reasonable that an ex-prisoner be given a chance of a new name when released, for the sake of their family and possibly to help the victim’s family, if not for him. If this is the name that he now uses it would be odd to revert back to his previous name. It doesn’t seem to have been used to cover his identity as the Greenbelt site clearly states his previous name and that he had committed murder.
(c) He is unrepentant – in a general sense … or a religious sense: He seems to have repeatedly expressed his repentance – does a lie 10 years ago falsify that? ‘Religious repentance’ is probably irrelevant as he doesn’t claim to be a Christian. (Like other speakers who are atheists of from other faiths (Judaism and Islam from what I could see)). If a person repents and then repeatedly does the same thing then we have good grounds for questioning their repentance but generally it is difficult to determine what is really going on in the heart.
It may be that I’ve missed the main point of your argument – I’m sorry if that is the case.
Other issues I have with the blog that aren’t main points are -
- Unjustified use of the pejorative term ‘boasting’
- The Greenbelt write does say that he was convicted of murder
- You don’t justify your statement that the Guardian allowed Monahan to lie : I would assume that they didn’t know that it was a lie. The Daily Mail didn’t say the Guardian allowed it in the section you quoted.
- Also the Mail doesn’t indicate that Monahan ‘lured’ the victim to the victims flat (an unlikely scenario) and no evidence is provided that it was homophobic attack – I’m sure the Mail would have included this if they could. (Unless this is in part of the article that isn’t quoted).
- The quotes about Solzhenitsyn’s novel and Dreyfus aren’t given a source and don’t seem relevant. I assume they came from general autobiographical writing by Monahan about his life in prison and a prisoner who does a lot of reading is likely to identify with stories of other prisoners. This is part of his story of how he got through prison and not really relevant to how he sees himself today or whether he speaks at Greenbelt.
No one is claiming that Monahan’s crimes were anything but horrific. But that doesn’t seem to me to make it wrong to ask him to contribute his experiences and views to a debate on prison reform.
Andy
I have mixed feelings about this man. I want to see people rehabilitated and society better for it, and also to hear a voice on the inside of prisons, but on the other hand it is hard to stop my stomach turning that this man, having committed two murders, not in one single moment of madness, but 3 months apart, leaving plenty of time for reflection after the first murder only to kill again, has earned a career which is the envy of many citizens without such skeletons in their closets. But emotion aside, I don’t think that the lies about his past ten years ago are relevant. I’m not saying he is an honest or reformed man – he could be an expertly deceitful sociopath for all I know. But the lies about joining the foreign legion were strategic and were probably done to throw those trying to unmask his identity of the scent, rather than because of lying for the sake of lying.