Note: although it is a simple matter to discover the true identity of “John”, the internet being what it is, I’m not going to blatantly do so here, as there is an indefinite court order prohibiting naming either of the boys.
This is another entry into my series of a behind-the-scenes look at the episodes I write for the podcast Casefile. These posts will explain how and why I choose each case and the research that goes into writing the stories.
A still from Channel 4 doco “Psycho: Kill me if you can”
This one is about Case 104: Mark and John. Note there are spoilers below.
I have a penchant for internet-related cases, so when I first read about the Mark and John case, it was a no-brainer that I was going to do it.
Research-wise, I watched the Channel 4 documentary “Psycho – Kill me if you Can” (as well as the drama rather loosely based on the case, UWantMe2KillHim) and went through the archives of every news article about the case. I contacted “John’s” lawyer and some people who claimed to know the boys.
The one article that always comes up at the top of the searches is an article in Vanity Fair, by a journo who had apparently met both boys. I wrote to the author of the Vanity Fair article asking if she would help me out with some of her archives, and she refused and promptly blocked me, for reasons I fail to understand because I was very polite.
I got some of the transcripts of the chat rooms through a couple of different sources and pieced together the story as well as I could from them. But OMG going through some of the trash and trying to figure out WTF these people are saying to each other was an arduous task:
ah big an sweaty I’ve cried so much you wouldn’t believe I don’t n wot to do ooooooooooooooooommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmggggggggg o fook I can’t sleep Ill make it up 2 u in a bed with each ova well wat I do 4 u, he wants me 2 do 4 him ur my gf and I Love you I care! We hav sumfin on him neway he knows where they liv u dnt av 2 well dnt ell him if nothin else happens your not fighting u tell him I don’t wan u fighting I would do nethin 4 u! But when I’m pissed off they dnt wanna b near me! dont get yourself hurt I dnt want u tlkin 2 him so u r there 4 me I (l) u 2 babe I dnt want ne1 getting hurt he needs sorting out I woz talking 2 him 4 ages so just w8
So, yeah, that was fun.
I thought I had found a brand new angle, yet to be reported anywhere else, when I found a news article about a person who had the same real name as “John”, from the same area, who was the same age. The article said that person, aged 21, had been arrested and sentenced (by the same judge) to indefinite detention for public protection after he admitted sexual activity with a child, sexual assault, and threatening behaviour.
It went against (uncorroborated) things that people who claimed to know him had said, but it seemed way too coincidental not to be the same person. I had already written up an ending that included that information in it, when I decided I had better make sure. I asked the barrister who had defended 14-year-old “John” if they were oe and the same person. He genuinely didn’t know but guided me to obtaining the court transcripts for the 21-year-old with the same name as “John”.
Nothing in the information about the background of the 21-year-old contained in the court documents matched up to what we knew about “John”. Different home life, different family, schooling and no mention of the “Mark & John” conviction among the litany of earlier crimes laid out in the documents. It remained possible (I’m not sure if under UK law, the “Mark & John” conviction would be omitted from the judges sentencing remarks due to the gag order) but certainly not definitive enough to leave in the script.
All in all, it was an enjoyable one to research, especially after the horrors of the Dnepropetrovsk Maniacs. It’s always nice when nobody dies.
Worried about being catfished? Always smart to use a VPN. I use IPVanish
