‘Beast of Birkenhead' moniker came after murder that shocked community
Peter Sullivan was dubbed the 'Beast of Birkenhead' after the murder of Diane Sindall sent shockwaves through a community.
Mr Sullivan, who spent 38 years in prison, was jailed in 1987 for killing the 21-year-old.
Miss Sindall, a florist who was working part-time as a barmaid while she saved up for her wedding, was raped and brutally murdered as she walked along Borough Road in Birkenhead, Wirral, in the early hours of August 2 1986.
Mr Sullivan was convicted of her murder the following year and bite marks found on her body, used as part of the case against him, led to him being called the 'Beast of Birkenhead', the 'Wolfman' and the 'Mersey Ripper'.
Speaking outside court after his conviction was quashed, Mr Sullivan's sister Kim Smith said: 'Peter was called so many different names and that all needs to be squashed now because Peter was never anything of what he was being called in the first place.'
The murder became a 'catalyst for action' for women, who set up Wirral Rape Crisis Counselling Service in its aftermath, which still operates today as Rape and Sexual Abuse Support (RASA) Merseyside.
According to the service, it was after Miss Sindall's death that it was decided 'enough was enough'.
The charity said: 'With local women angry at the nature of Diane's death and how easily it could have been prevented, a change in attitude and the very first 'Reclaim the Night' march in Liverpool presented the perfect opportunity to strike.
Police said Miss Sindall suffered extensive injuries in the attack, with her cause of death established as a cerebral haemorrhage following multiple blows.
The high-profile crime was featured on Crimewatch in the weeks after her murder.
On Tuesday, Merseyside Police found itself again appealing for help to find the man who killed her.
Detective Chief Superintendent Karen Jaundrill said: 'Diane's murder sent shockwaves through Birkenhead when it happened and I would appeal to anyone who lived in the area at the time, and has any information which could help us with our inquiries, to come forward.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
38 minutes ago
- The Sun
Shameful pic of French cops watching migrants sail to Britain proves we've got to take action to stop small boats
SOMETIMES it takes a photograph to shift political debate. Hopefully, one such image will be that of French border guards standing on a beach watching on as yet another boat-load of migrants set sail across the Channel in a dinghy, heading for sanctuary in soft-touch Britain. 2 2 One of them seems even to be filming the occasion on his phone. The boat load they were watching was just one of 19 which made it across the Channel on Saturday. Between them, they carried 1,195 migrants, more than enough to fill yet one more migrant hotel. In case anyone had forgotten, we British taxpayers have handed £480million over the past year to the French authorities supposedly to police the shores and prevent boats from setting off. That was under a deal negotiated by former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak in 2023, in which Britain agreed to fund a doubling in the number of French border control guards from 400 to 800. Go through the motions A more expensive and pointless job-creation scheme would be hard to imagine. Since Britain agreed to cough up the money, the proportion of would-be migrants being intercepted before they reach UK waters has fallen from 46.9 percent in 2023 to 38 percent so far in 2025. People-smugglers have got around the extra patrols by finding a new way to play the system: Rather than launch a boat- load of migrants directly from the beach they push the boats a few yards offshore and ask their clients to wade into the waters. That, apparently, confounds the French border guards ' rules of engagement, hence they just stand and watch. But let's be frank and ask: Do the French really have any intention of stopping these boats? Starmer 'loses control' as over 1,000 migrants cross Channel in biggest daily total of 2025 – as French cops watch on Needless to say, every migrant who leaves French territory is one fewer the French authorities have to worry about. It makes perfect sense for the French to take our money and then go through the motions of pretending to stop migrants, while in practice letting them go. If Emmanuel Macron 's government really wanted to stop the boats it could do so in an instant by doing a deal with Britain in which it agreed to the systematic return of every migrant who made it across the Channel. If asylum seekers were obliged to do as international treaties supposedly insist they do, and make their claim in the first safe country in which they arrive, Channel crossings would all but cease. Let's be frank and ask: Do the French really have any intention of stopping these boats? There would no longer be any point in making a dangerous journey only to be shipped back immediately to France. But of course France won't do that sort of deal because it doesn't want the burden of thousands of extra asylum seekers to process. Meanwhile, our own government has thrown away the one tool which Sunak had painstakingly added to Britain's feeble border force armoury: The Rwanda scheme. How foolish Labour's rejection of the scheme looks now. Keir Starmer is now talking about a similar plan to process asylum claims in the Balkans, but sorry, it is too late. Labour tries to claim the credit for a fall in overall net migration, which was entirely the result of visa changes by the Conservatives, while hoping we will somehow fail to notice the sharp rise in small- boat crossings since it came to power 11 months ago. The Border Command which was supposed to tackle people-smugglers has proved to be a farce. Since the election, 38,054 migrants have arrived by small boat, with numbers this year running ahead of any previous year. The Rwanda scheme might have been expensive in terms of the cost per migrant, but that misses the point. In practice, we may have ended up having to send rather few asylum seekers to Rwanda because migrants would have had such a disincentive to travel to Britain in the first place. In the end we have the worst of all worlds. We have more and more migrant arrivals while we are still picking up the tab for the abortive Rwanda scheme. Paying dearly Accommodation funded by us to house our asylum seekers now looks like being used by migrants sent there from other countries. Nor has Starmer made use of another obvious piece of leverage. Two weeks ago he renegotiated Britain's Brexit agreement, extending French fishing boats' access to UK waters without making it dependent on France putting a genuine effort into stopping the boats. Why didn't he at least say: You can fish in British waters only if you agree to take back every single migrant who makes it illegally across the Channel? As Kemi Badenoch said last week, every time Labour negotiates, Britain loses. But then the previous Tory government hardly set an example, either, in handing France nearly half a billion a year to pretend to tackle illegal migration. Truth is that we are all paying dearly for French border guards to stand around photographing the flotilla of migrant boats setting sail for Britain — and then again to feed and house the migrants once they arrive on our shores.
Daily Mail
39 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Government threatens to SUE ex-Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich over £2.5bn from sale of the Blues - as fund remains frozen THREE YEARS after Russian sold club
The UK government has threatened to take former Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich to court in a bid to seize the proceeds from the club's sale — nearly three years after it was offloaded under pressure from sanctions. Chancellor Rachel Reeves warned on Monday that ministers were 'deeply frustrated' at the lack of progress in unlocking the frozen funds and said legal action was now firmly on the table. Abramovich was forced to sell Chelsea in 2022 after being sanctioned over his alleged ties to Vladimir Putin in the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Despite the sale going through for a record £2.5billion — with the Government pledging the money would support humanitarian causes — the cash remains stuck in a UK bank account. 'We are deeply frustrated that it has not been possible to reach agreement on this with Mr Abramovich so far,' said Reeves. 'While the door for negotiations will remain open, we are fully prepared to pursue this through the courts if required, to ensure people suffering in Ukraine can benefit from these proceeds as soon as possible.' Abramovich has previously insisted that the money be distributed to all victims of the war — rather than exclusively to Ukrainians. But Government officials have refused to budge, maintaining the funds must support humanitarian efforts in Ukraine alone. The situation remains highly complex, with international partners involved and legal obstacles continuing to delay a resolution. The funds cannot be moved without a specific licence from the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI), the same body that authorised the 2022 sale. Campaigners have repeatedly criticised the hold-up and called for greater transparency. In March, Lyra Nightingale of the legal charity Redress said: 'It has been committed for humanitarian purposes in Ukraine and yet three years later we're still waiting for its deployment. There is a very real lack of transparency.' Abramovich bought Chelsea in 2003 for £140million and oversaw one of the most successful eras in the club's history, winning 21 major trophies including five Premier League titles and two Champions League crowns. But in March 2022, he had his UK assets frozen and was banned from entering the country. Liz Truss, who was then serving as foreign secretary, accused sanctioned oligarchs of having 'the blood of the Ukrainian people on their hands', adding: 'They should hang their heads in shame.' While Abramovich denied having close ties to Putin, Chelsea were left in limbo until a special licence allowed the club to continue operating and ultimately be sold. An auction, conducted at pace by Raine Bank, led to American billionaire Todd Boehly and Clearlake Capital taking control. Nearly all senior staff from the Abramovich era have since left the club.
Times
an hour ago
- Times
UK calls for French crackdown on shallow-water migrant crossings
Britain is pressing France to 'swiftly' close a legal loophole that prevents police from apprehending migrant boats in shallow waters amid growing frustration in government at French inaction. The home secretary told MPs it was 'disgraceful and unacceptable' that more than 1,195 migrants had been able to cross the Channel in 18 boats on Saturday, marking a new daily record high for crossings this year. The French authorities only prevented 184 migrants from making the crossing on Saturday, despite agreeing in February to amend laws to allow police to intercept boats in shallow waters. Yvette Cooper said that she had been in touch with the French interior minister urging him to speed up the change in approach, saying there needed to be 'stronger action' to prevent crossings. 'The gangs are increasingly operating a model where boats are launched from further along the coast and people climb in from the water, exploiting French rules that have stopped their police taking any action in the sea,' she said. 'This is completely unacceptable. The previous government raised this with France for years, but to no avail, and I have raised it with the French government since the summer. 'The French interior minister and the French cabinet have now agreed their rules need to change. A French maritime review is looking at what new operational tactics they will use, and we are urging France to complete this review and implement the changes as swiftly as possible.' British law enforcement agencies are concerned that criminal gangs exploited the fact that French police were focused on the Champions League final in Paris on Saturday. There was widespread disorder in the French capital. French police guidelines currently prevent officers from intervening offshore unless it is to rescue passengers in distress. In practice, the guidelines mean that officers can stop boats leaving the beach by puncturing them but may do nothing once they are in the water unless migrants call for help. In recent years, traffickers have exploited the rules by asking migrants to wade waist-high into the Channel, where they are picked up by dinghies launched from further afield, often from inland canals. The dinghies are piloted by smuggling gang operatives who haul migrants on board with police watching on from the beach. In February, Bruno Retailleau, the French interior minister, indicated that he wanted a change in police doctrine to enable officers to intervene in the water up to 300 metres from the coast. 'We have to review our organisation so that we can board these boats … arriving to pick up migrants,' he said. Le Figaro, the French newspaper, said ministry officials were still working on what are being termed the 'feet in the water' guidelines to implement the policy. However, Le Marin, the French maritime daily, said the proposed change of doctrine had met with fierce opposition, including from local police officers. Among the concerns are logistical issues such as whether officers are safe wearing body armour in the water and how to protect their weapons in the water. Sir Keir Starmer said that the public had 'every right to be angry about small boat crossings'. He claimed that hundreds of boats and engines had been 'seized', raids on illegal working were up and 'almost 30,000 people' had been returned. 'We are ramping up our efforts to smash the people smuggling gangs at source,' he said. However Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, described Starmer's words as 'rubbish', while Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said this year had been the 'worst in history' for illegal immigrants crossing the Channel. 'The government's laughable claims to 'smash the gangs' lies in tatters. They're not smashing gangs, they're smashing records,' he said.
