Wife killer pilot granted private parole hearing

Brown was due to be released in November after serving half his 26-year jail sentence

A former pilot who bludgeoned his millionairess wife to death with a claw hammer will have a private parole hearing.

Joanna Simpson, 46, was murdered in earshot of her two young children by Robert Brown at her home in Ascot, Berkshire, in October 2010.

He was found not guilty of murder and sentenced to 24 years for manslaughter and a further two years for an offence of obstructing a coroner.

Her family has expressed their fury after receiving news an application for Brown's parole hearing to be held in public had been refused.

Speaking on behalf of the board chair, Sir John Saunders - a judicial member of the Parole Board, said he had concerns over "the strength of the campaign" against Brown’s release.

He added it could "subconsciously or consciously affect the ability of some witnesses to give their best evidence".

Joanna Simpson was killed with a claw hammer at her home in Ascot in 2010

Brown, a former British Airways captain, was due to be freed in November after serving half of his 26-year sentence, but his release was blocked by the government.

The Parole Board released a statement on Thursday explaining the decision not to hold his parole board in public.

Ms Simpson's mother said she was "so angered" by the decision.

She told the BBC: "We have given up all our rights to privacy to do everything that we can to make sure this evil man stays behind bars.

"Why should Brown get to keep his privacy?

"I truly hope the Parole Board can still see that Brown is a dangerous man and does not let him out.

"Sadly, everything seems to be in favour of the perpetrator.

"The safety of the victims is put below the safety of the offender.”

Ms Simpson's mother Diana Parkes (left) with her best friend Hetti Barkworth-Nanton, who has helped launch a campaign blocking Brown's early release

Sir John said there was an "intense" public interest in the case.

He said a "central issue" in the case was how holding it in public would affect Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

He explained: "While I accept the public interest in transparency and informing the public of how the Parole Board carry out their work, in my view that is outweighed in this case by the need to ensure that the hearing will be fair and achieve the right result.

"In my view, the interests of justice dictate that the hearing should be in private as is the normal way that Parole Board hearings are conducted."