Public Hearing Application for William Dunlop

Standard

Application for a public hearing in the case of William Dunlop

You will find below a summary of the applications for the oral hearing of William Dunlop to be made public.

From: Parole Board Published 1 April 2026 Get emails about this page

Applies to England and Wales

Documents

Proforma for Representations

MS Word Document, 241 KB

This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.

Request an accessible format.

If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email info@paroleboard.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.

Details

Summary of applications

Kevin Hogg:

• This case has been in the public domain for over 30 years with sustained national and local media coverage.
• The offender was the first person retried under the Double Jeopardy Law.
• Ongoing media interest includes documentaries and broadcasts in 2023 and 2025 linking the offender to other alleged offences.
• The Applicant argues that no new or private information would be disclosed, as the offender’s history and victim statements are already known.
• Following earlier parole reviews, the Secretary of State for Justice twice rejected the recommendation from Parole Board panels for open conditions.
• The family states they have little confidence in the parole process and they want transparency and fairness for all.

• It is argued that the offender’s circumstances have not changed and that a public hearing would ensure the scales are balanced for victims and their families and that the decision making rationale is clear.
  Ann Ming:

• This case has been in the public domain for over 30 years with sustained national and local media coverage.

• The offender was the first person retried under the Double Jeopardy Law.

• Ongoing media interest includes documentaries and broadcasts in 2023 and 2025 linking the offender to other alleged offences and highlights the Applicant’s campaign to overturn the Double Jeopardy Law.

• The Applicant argues that no new or private information would be disclosed, as the offender’s history and victim statements are already known.

• Following earlier parole reviews, the Secretary of State for Justice twice rejected the recommendation from Parole Board panels for open conditions.

• The family states they have been failed by the CJS and they want transparency and fairness for all.

• It is argued that the offender’s circumstances have not changed and as the last hearing was public, a precedent has been set.

• A public hearing would ensure the scales are balanced for victims and their families and that the decision making rationale is clear.
  Naomi Corrigan:

• This application is made on behalf of The Gazette and Teeside Live.

• This case has been followed for decades and Mr Dunlop’s previous public hearing was reported on.

• There is a high level of public interest in this case and the hearing should be made public in the interests of justice, transparency, and public confidence in the Parole Board’s decision-making.
  If anyone wishes to make representations regarding this application the Parole Board Rules now allow for submissions from the press and public. There are five working days from publication in which to do this. You can make these representations via the proforma attached on this page. Proforma for representations - GOV.UK ]

The deadline for representations is midday on Friday 10th April 2026 (taking into account bank holidays).

Updates to this page

Published 1 April 2026

Sign up for emails or print this page

Get emails about this page Print this page

Related content