A CHILLING NEW IMAGE OF A WIFE K:!LL3R HAS EMERGED FOR THE FIRST TIME IN TWO DECADES — AS HIS VICTIM’S FAMILY MAKES AN EMOTIONAL PLEA FOR THE NIGHTMARE TO FINALLY END

Wife killer pictured for first time in 20 years as family begs for ‘end to ongoing agony’

Glyn Razzell, 64, is fighting to be freed from a life sentence for the murder of his estranged wife Linda in 2002

Smirking Glyn Razzell was today seen being driven away from the High Court – more than 20 years after he was jailed for life(Image: Jordan Pettitt/PA Wire)

A wife killer who refuses to say where he hid his victim’s body was today pictured for the first time in more than 20 years.

Glyn Razzell, 67, was pictured leaving the High Court today as he fought to be freed from a life sentence for killing his estranged wife, Linda, 41, in 2002. He was last seen in public was in 2003 when he was convicted of killing the mother-of-four after she disappeared on her way to work at Swindon College, Wiltshire, amid divorce proceedings. Her body has never been recovered.

The Parole Board has cleared Razzell for release from a life sentence but the Ministry of Justice has called for the decision to be reversed, telling a two-day hearing Razzell’s risk was not properly considered. Today Linda’s partner, Greg Worrall, begged for “an end to the ongoing agony” as he claimed Razzell was continuing to exert “coercive control over people even in death”.

View 5 Images

Linda Razzell, 41, vanished without trace on her way to work in Swindon, in May 2002 and was last seen parking her car(Image: PA)

Today Linda’s partner Mr Worrall appeared via video link and told the High Court: “We have rebuilt our lives based on the fact he cannot harm us any more.” He said Linda’s family had “picked up the pieces of our shattered lives” with the support of friends and family.

He said: “We have found love and purpose in our new lives.” Mr Worrall added that there is a “sadness which will always be there” after his partner’s murder, especially on holidays and anniversaries. He said that during Razzell’s parole applications in 2019, he could “show remorse” and disclose where Mrs Razzell’s remains were.

Mr Worrall later said: “He knows the pain this is causing Linda’s family and children. We need an end to this ongoing agony.”

View 5 Images

The eldest of Glyn and Linda’s four children, Cat Razzell, believes her father is not safe to be released(Image: Ian Vogler / Daily Mirror)

On Monday the Mirror told how Glyn and Linda’s eldest daughter, Cat Razzell, 38, believed her father was not safe to be released. She says he still poses a risk to the public and demonstrates continuing cruelty to his children by withholding the location of Linda’s body.

In a statement, Cat said: “We do not believe a convicted murderer should progress through the prison system while denying the offence, showing no remorse, and withholding the only information that could bring our family any measure of peace or closure.”

She added: “I don’t have a wish for my dad to die in prison. This is about giving us information that we need and it’s about us, as a society, saying, ‘this is unacceptable and there will be repercussions’. Because, currently, failing to disclose a body doesn’t carry meaningful or effective consequences.”

View 5 Images

Razzell previously told a Parole Board panel he did not know what happened to Linda and said he’d try to find her if released(Image: Jordan Pettitt/PA Wire)

Razzell, who is attending the hearing in London and sitting in the dock, was jailed for life with a minimum of almost 16 years in 2003 for murdering Linda. The Parole Board ruled three times from 2019 that Razzell should remain behind bars, but in April decided he could be released on licence.

The Parole Board’s decision came after consideration of Helen’s Law, named after Helen McCourt, who vanished on her way home from work in 1988. The law requires the Parole Board to take into consideration a killer’s refusal to disclose where they hid their victim’s body.

Referencing the law, Mr Worrall said: “We were assured he would never be released if he did not reveal Linda’s whereabouts.” He continued that he felt Razzell was still a danger to women and was committing the crime of preventing a lawful burial. He added: “Am I safe? Are my family safe? Are the wider community safe?”

View 5 Images

Razzell was denied parole in 2019 but the Parole Board said in April he could be freed – before the MoJ referred it to the High Court(Image: SWNS)

Razzell, of Crewkerne, Somerset, has always denied being responsible for the killing, and a Parole Board panel found in 2023 that he “does not want to lose his desired status of being a ‘wrongly convicted murderer'”.

In its April decision, a Parole Board panel said that it had “serious doubts” about Razzell’s honesty and that there was a “very significant” risk in the context of relationships, but said this was “not imminent”. It decided that he would comply with licence conditions as he was “strongly motivated not to return to custody”.

The MoJ can refer a Parole Board’s decision to release a prisoner to the High Court if it believes the release would undermine public confidence in the parole system, and the court must be satisfied that imprisonment is no longer necessary for the protection of the public.

Matthew Stanbury, for Razzell, told the court that there should not be “undue focus on one particular course which is seen as a silver bullet in fixing risk”. He also said that psychologists had paid “close attention” to Razzell’s case and that a psychologist had spent 17 hours with him, as opposed to an average of about six with other prisoners.

Mr Stanbury said this gave professionals a “much deeper understanding of Mr Razzell”. The barrister said in written submissions that the Parole Board’s decision was “detailed and thorough”, and that the MoJ’s case “comes close to treating denial as conclusive to risk”.

He said: “The claimant’s case is predicated on wrong assumptions or assertions that the defendant’s denial of his offending, and attendant non-completion of offending behaviour programmes, are a bar to release. Both factors were properly considered and weighed by an experienced Parole Board panel which considered the countervailing factors and matters in the round.

“There is no, or no sufficiently cogent, basis for departing from the panel’s decision.” The hearing before Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb continues.