Killer who stabbed woman 60 times 'should be freed and no longer a danger'
A killer who raped his victim and stabbed her 60 times in a horror murder almost three decades ago should be freed, the Parole Board has said. Farm worker Steven Ling was locked up for life in December 1998 after admitting his horrific attack on Joanne Tulip, 29.
His vicious murder in Stamfordham, Northumberland, on Christmas Day 1997 was inspired by sadism, the sentencing judge said in 1998. Ling was sentenced to life with a minimum term of 20 years, which was later reduced to 18 years by the High Court.
Ling - who was 23 at the time - has now been recommended for release following his fifth parole hearing. A charge of rape was left on file during the original court case - which means he is not a convicted sex offender.
READ MORE: Man, 29, dies in hospital after collapsing during UK race.
Don't miss the biggest and breaking stories by signing up to the BirminghamLive newsletter here
But in its ruling, the Parole Board said: "Ling has always accepted that he raped the victim." Sentencing him to life at Newcastle Crown Court in 1998, Mr Justice Potts told Ling: "You inflicted appalling injuries on Ms Tulip while you were having sexual relations with her.
"I'm also satisfied that there was in your motivation an aspiration of sadism." He added: "You will never be released so long as it is thought you constitute a danger to women."
At a parole hearing in July, two psychologists agreed that Ling should be freed from prison and spoke of his enduring 'shame' about his 'monstrous' past. Ms Tulip's mother Doreen Soulsby previously branded the parole exercise a farce after it was ruled that the killer's evidence could be given in private.
Two psychologists, identified only as A and B, recommended Ling could be released on a risk management plan. Psychologist A believed the risk Ling posed was 'not imminent' and was 'manageable in the community'.
They added: "I believe that now means his risk is at a level where he does not need to be kept in prison anymore." Psychologist B told the panel: "I believe he meets the test for release and no longer needs to be detained for the protection of the public."
The panel heard that a past risk assessment identified a number of factors which led to him attacking Ms Tulip including preoccupation with sex, sexual interest in indecent exposure, capacity to use force to secure sexual gratification, entitlement towards sex and a negative attitude towards women. The assessment also identified issues with Ling's self-worth and self-esteem.
Both psychologists agreed there was no evidence of an enduring interest in inflicting violence to achieve sexual gratification. Asked if he appreciated the 'gravity' of his offending on Ms Tulip and her loved ones, psychologist A said Ling discussed it quite regularly, which can be 'helpful' in deterring him from unhealthy thoughts.
Psychologist B said: "He will refer to himself as a monster when talking to me. He has talked about the struggle to come to terms with the person he was that night, leading up to it as well.
"I agree that I think it helps occasionally to revisit the enormity of the index offence to avoid complacency." Asked why Ling used so much violence in 1997, psychologist B said: "There was both a panic, a desire to get away with the crime, and there was a kind of rage that erupted that was about her, about women, about his life, about himself and he absolutely lost control."
Psychologist A added: "I think the areas of risk that we do understand well in regards to attitude towards women, a desire for revenge and humiliation, the sex and rape fantasies ... those factors combined with that extreme emotional reaction, linked to the triggers that we have discussed just now, give an explanation for that behaviour."
In its published decision, the Parole Board panel said: "The panel was satisfied that imprisonment was no longer necessary for the protection of the public." His release is subject to conditions, which include informing the authorities of any relationships he might have; being subject to monitoring and a curfew and staying out of an exclusion zone to avoid contact with his victim's family.