Glyn Razzell, convicted of murdering his estranged wife in 2002, will continue to serve his life sentence after the High Court overturned a recent Parole Board decision recommending his release on licence.
Razzell, from Crewkerne in Somerset, was originally sentenced in 2003 to life imprisonment with a minimum term of nearly 16 years for the murder of Linda Razzell. Linda, a mother of four, disappeared while travelling to work at Swindon College during the couple’s divorce proceedings. Her body has never been recovered.
In April of this year, the Parole Board ruled that Razzell could be released on licence. However, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) referred this decision to the High Court, questioning the adequacy of the Parole Board’s risk assessment.
READ MORE: Landowner Threatens to Close Popular Wild Swimming Site Over Fire Risks
READ MORE: Yeovil Town’s Billy Rowley Anticipates Exciting Return to Huish Park
During a hearing earlier in the week, MoJ barristers argued that the Parole Board had not properly evaluated the risks posed by Razzell, citing previous decisions from 2019 onwards that recommended he remain incarcerated.
Family members of Linda Razzell also voiced strong opposition to his release. Her cousin, Julie Westmore, expressed concerns that the family would “not feel safe” and feared that any hope of ever locating Linda’s remains might be lost if Razzell were freed.
Attending the hearing in London, Razzell and his legal representatives opposed the High Court’s intervention. His barrister maintained that there was insufficient reason to overturn the Parole Board’s decision.
On Friday, Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb quashed the Parole Board’s ruling, stating she was “not satisfied that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public that Glyn Razzell be confined.” She added, “I am not persuaded that the risk has diminished to such a level that offender management is capable of keeping the public safe if the defendant is released.”
Under current procedures, the MoJ can challenge Parole Board decisions if they believe the release of a prisoner would damage public confidence in the parole system, with the court required to determine whether continued imprisonment is essential for public safety.
The Parole Board’s April decision acknowledged “serious doubts” regarding Razzell’s honesty and identified a “very significant” risk concerning future relationships, though it considered the risk not to be imminent. They concluded that Razzell was “strongly motivated not to return to custody” and likely to comply with licence conditions.
The board took into account Helen’s Law, designed to factor in whether convicted killers disclose the location of their victims' remains. Razzell has consistently denied responsibility for Linda’s death.
Tristan Jones KC, representing the MoJ, criticised the Parole Board for overlooking Razzell’s lack of transparency, stating that licence conditions could “not fully address the risks” he presents.
In written submissions, Razzell’s barrister, Matthew Stanbury, argued there was “no, or no sufficiently cogent, basis for departing from the panel’s decision.”