Ruth Ellis, last woman hanged in UK, granted posthumous conditional pardon

[IwantToRetire]

Ruth Ellis, the last woman to be hanged in the UK, has been granted a conditional pardon in light of evidence that she was a victim of domestic abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour.

Ellis was executed in 1955, aged 28, after she shot and killed her partner, David Blakely, whom she met two years earlier while working in the nightclub she managed.

The application for a pardon was brought by four of Ellis’s grandchildren who said her responsibility was profoundly shaped by domestic abuse, trauma and circumstances that were never properly recognised at her trial.

On Wednesday, the deputy prime minister and justice secretary, David Lammy, announced in parliament that, on his advice, King Charles had granted Ellis a conditional pardon.

It reflects the fact that, had the case been heard today, it is possible partial defences of loss of control or diminished responsibility could have been put before a jury. If accepted, they might have reduced her conviction from murder to manslaughter.

Full article https://www.theguardian.com/law/2026/jul/08/ruth-ellis-last-woman-hanged-uk-posthumous-conditional-pardon

Ruth Ellis was a murderer. She doesn’t deserve a pardon

As a grounds of excusing murder, this is somewhat dangerous, and rather demeaning to women. Apart from the fact that she clearly appears to have been a woman with a will of her own, however many mistakes she made (and she managed, after all, to divorce an abusive husband, divorce not being easy in 1951), the argument could be applied to untold thousands of women in Britain – alas, as I know from having listened to the stories of hundreds of them myself in a British hospital. None of them shot their abusers, however, and most managed in time to escape them, though they often found someone similar.

Telegraph article at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/08/ruth-ellis-murderer-doesnt-deserve-pardon/

Also in full at https://archive.is/c6lZD

Press comment - Centre for Women's Justice

Centre for Women’s Justice (CWJ) welcomes the decision to grant a posthumous conditional pardon to Ruth Ellis, the last woman to be executed by the British state just over 70 years ago. We pay tribute to her grandchildren who have fought for this important outcome on her behalf. In making this announcement, the government has accepted that Ruth Ellis’ actions were “profoundly shaped” by the abuse and trauma she experienced, and argue that if the trial had occurred under modern law, she could have put forward partial defences of loss of control or diminished responsibility and benefited from an ‘improved understanding’ of the impact of domestic abuse, including coercive control.

Sadly, under the current law it is very possible that Ruth Ellis would still have been convicted of murder. CWJ is working with more than 30 women who are victims of domestic abuse who have killed their abuser and been convicted of murder in circumstances very similar to hers. Evidence of domestic abuse and coercive control is still not well understood or properly applied by the courts in these cases. The only difference between then and now is that we don't have the death penalty.

Evidence relating to the defence of loss of control is that it is almost completely unavailable for victims of domestic abuse who kill their abuser, and requires urgent reform. Likewise very few women in such circumstances can access self defence as our research shows. The Law Commission are currently undertaking a consultation on reforms to the Homicide Laws, which includes looking at much needed reforms to ensure there are effective defences to murder for victims of domestic abuse who kill their abuser.

She might still have been convicted of murder but she would hardly have received a custodial sentence today, let alone the death penalty.

That is good news.

Good. If you don't want to get killed, don't abuse people. It's not actually our job to judge people or punish them. Who gave solicitors and judges the right? God? Something in their blood? If that woman were an actual danger to society then fair enough, get her out of the country (or kill her..?) but this bloodthirsty need for punishment is bizarre. A dangerous man was removed from society. I'm not sad about that.

You can't 'prove' it's wrong to kill people, you just don't want to live in a society where that happens (neither do I). Let's move away from punishment and look to prevent. How can we prevent men (and women) from abusing their partners.

I'd like to see a pardon for poor Edith Thompson (Bywaters and Thompson). She didn't kill anyone. She was judged on her adultery, and dragged drugged and weeping to the gallows.

This is long overdue

Agree @FizzingAda; absolutely

I understand Ruth Ellis had been a victim of abuse (sexual ??) throughout her life and was traumatised by that but what exactly did David Blakely do to justify being shot?

I think I read he was unfaithful, but it can't just be that.

He beat her up and may have caused her at one time to have a miscarriage.

What on earth are the conditions?

Who gave judges the right to judge people? Well it's literally their job!

If you want to live in a country with a justice system, we need people to fulfil these roles.

Unfortunately these people are only human and prone to the same mistakes as the rest of us. Thankfully there are more checks and balances and oversight than there used to be, and poor decisions can be challenged.

Their relationship was toxic and obsessive. Blakely beat and abused her consistently throughout, punched her in the stomach so she miscarried - and if I remember correctly, it was not long after the miscarriage that she killed him and there's a question mark over her state of mind, even though it was premeditated. So yes, he was cheating, but it isn't 'just' cheating, it was a compounded and highly toxic situation.

I seem to recall, though, that there is also some murk about her friendship/relationship with his jealous rival Desmond Cullen, supposedly on her side, who may have encouraged Ruth and I believe bought her the gun she shot Blakely with. And then scarpered once she was convicted and hung. There's definitely more suspicion on his role these days in encouraging Ruth and what was going on there than there used to be.

I don't see it as a pardon in the traditional sense, because that it just a posthumous change in the sentence that should have been given.

I do think it will mean something to the family to have official recognition that she should not have had the death penalty.

Yes. I mean, not much help to her now, is it, but it will give the family some comfort as it was highly controversial at the time, even.

There were appeals for clemency even back then, and the judge (Nigel Havers' grandfather) wasn't particularly happy about having to pass the death sentence on her, from what NH has said, it played on his mind for the rest of his life and he even contributed to funds for her kids, but the Home Secretary (Gwilym Lloyd George) had refused all calls for clemency so that was that.

I don't agree with this being a good thing, sorry.

I don't think, horrible as it is, that someone being abusive to you in the past is excuse for murder. Just the same as I don't accept the 'mental torture' excuse from men who have killed their wives after discovering adultery.

It is different if it is active self defence and they are attempting to harm/kill you.

Women shouldn't be infantalised. We all have the power to walk away from abusive men and choose differently.

Women shouldn't be infantalised. We all have the power to walk away from abusive men and choose differently

I don't think you have much understanding of abusive relationships. Some women will be able to walk away. Many, many more won't. You are victim blaming.

It's not letting her off murder though - it's saying she'd have been sentenced to life imprisonment rather than hanged. There were extenuating circumstances, and that's the whole point with coercive abusive relationships - it's not as simple as just "walking away".