Confessions of a Psycho Killer

It's obvious they cut the interview part from the crime professor who even mentioned in the beginning of the documentary that Patrick needed help. That professor seemed to be very objective but yet we dont see her anymore at the end part of the documentary. Like what another reviewer mentioned here this documentary just keep doing what people in the 70s did. Calling people a psycho even thought the professor has mentioned u shouldn't be calling people a psycho cause it has a lot of layers to it. Patrick himself has called for help in his interview when he's still 22 years old. And then the government still didn't give him any help and then this biased documentary trying to get money from his story what have they done exactly to do something about that? They haven't even included a more recent interview with the so called psycho killer. They only interviewed the writer of his book (who I'm very certain doing this for monetary benefit from Patrick story and Patrick himself probably know nothing about this book) and other old people who obviously havent the slightest knowledge of psychology and psychiatry of the recent years. So very disappointed with this doc cause it's obviously done by people who's looking to get benefits from other people misery. Of course what Patrick did was heinous and horrific. But we should stop trying to use these people story and benefit from people who are obviously have problems with their mental health and not even trying to help them.

I read a book today about Patrick MacKay which led me to this documentary on the mostly forgotten serial killer. Recent parole board hearings have thrust Patrick back into the limelight in Britain.

The missing element is any kind of present day interaction with the fascinating subject. Instead, we are given an unending interviews with psychoanalysts, journalists and cops with nothing all that insightful to add to the case.

Some recordings of MacKay were the only parts of interest to me, as he recites the killings with no emotion at all.

The crime scene photographs of Father Bream are quite unsettling, as he had been dispatched with both a knife and an axe.

Meanwhile, by the end of the film, Patrick is still awaiting a parole hearing. He remains a suspect and several other murders.

The documentary represents a survey of the Patirck Mackay case largely because he is now being considered for release.

However, there is careless handling which doesn't induce comprehensive assessment after his 47 years in prison, but rather opts for some of the cheap thrills.

The title's use of the word 'psycho' as well as a tendancy towards sensationalisation, even glamourisation of altered states of psychotic behaviour is not appropriate. The approach seems inspired by Mackay's own startling photo-booth images of himself as a young man pulling garish faces. But 'psycho' isn't a useful or accurate term and it's meaning is prejducial to notions of mental illness so why use it in the title ?

The film does cover some of the historical narrative concerning the significant level of neglect of mental health care Mackay expereinced in his youth. But it sidesteps the fact that found guilty of only 2 counts of manslaughter due to diminshed responsbility he was sent to prison anyway rather than a secure psychiatric unit.

This means there are now important questions as to the continued level of neglect of mental support Mackay may have exprienced during his entire prision term and to what extent this might form a miscarage of justice and a failure to apply the correct 'treatment'. The use of a young voice-over to narrate various quotes attributed to Mackay only highlight Mackay's lack of skill and insight into his own mental health whilst confirming neglect of any suitable psychiatric treatment has remained an issue.

Further there's a tendancy to over expose images of Mackay as a yonug man whilst ignoring the fact Mackay grows into a middle aged man in the prison system, experiencing some of the most progressive rehabiliative programs of the 80s and 90s.

The examination of the prision system Mackay will have experienced as well as Mackay as a mature man is absent as the film short cuts to an alarmism in the face of threatening assertions about Mackay's possible release put forward by the now retired nd aging police involved with the case over 40 years ago.

The film also makes some as yet unjustifiable assertions concerning suspicion about the numbers of people Mackay was suspected of killing, going as far as asserting he may be Britain;s most prolific serial killer. Yet Mackay was only convicted of 2 manslaughters and his own admissions were unreliable. The police have never proved his association with the mentioned cold cases.

Greater clarity as to if Mackay and his release constitutes a threat to public safety lies in all these absent examinations which the director substitutes instead with a strategy to influence political intervention on the matter through amplifyying sensationalist degrees of fear-mongering.

In my view, good documentary would have saught to present the complexity of grey area whilst upholding the idea that the prison system is a place of potential rehabilitation, a route Mackay was made subject of in his punishment and so it is this aspect of rehabilitation as well as a failure to provide appropriate psychiatric care as attitudes evolves over the decades which should be under scrutiny.

One only hopes that the parole board may be more enlightned in their views than this film and it's conclusions in the matter of creating suitable judegment of Mackay's rights as well as potential risks.