Two murderers – the first to be considered under Helen’s Law by the Parole Board – had their requests for freedom denied.

Glyn Razzell, David Harker, and Glyn Harker were denied release after laws were passed earlier in the year to make it harder to get parole for murderers who refuse to disclose where their victim’s body was hidden.

Harker boasted that he had eaten pieces of his 32-year old victim, mother-of-4 Julie Paterson. He also served her a plate with pasta.

After she disappeared from her Darlington, County Durham home in 1998, she was found missing and went missing, he was sentenced to a life sentence.

The Parole Board said it would not free Glyn Razzell (pictured) - who refused to reveal the location of his victim's body - in the first major test of Helen's Law

Glyn Razzell, a victim of Helen’s Law, was refused to disclose the location by the Parole Board.

Although parts of her dismembered body could be found in a bin liner, hidden in a hedge, the rest of her remains were never recovered. 

Harker revealed to friends and psychiatrists he had told them he had fried a part of her thigh, and then eaten it with pasta cheese.

Although Harker’s case was rejected by the Parole Board on Tuesday, it has yet to give any details about how that decision was made.

Razzell is currently serving a life sentence for murdering his 41-year old estranged wife, Linda Razzell (another mother-of-four), who vanished while on her way from home to work at Swindon College in Wiltshire.

They were both involved in divorce proceedings when she disappeared. His trial heard that he faced a financial settlement he wasn’t ready to accept.

Razzell denied her murder, but was convicted by a jury. No trace of her body has been ever found.

Razzell, 61, was given a life sentence in 2003 of killing his wife Linda (pictured), 41, who was last seen alive in Swindon in March 2002

Razzell, 61 years old, was sentenced to life in 2003 for the murder of his wife Linda (pictured), 41. Linda was last seen alive in Swindon, March 2002.

On Wednesday, the Parole Board ruled that Razzell (now in his 60s) could remain in open prison, but could not be freed.

The decision stated that Razzell had’maintained innocence’ and described his behavior at the time as ‘controlling’. 

His behavior in custody was good. He was allowed to leave on temporary release, but he had not completed any programs or courses to address his offending.

Concerning his ‘non disclosure of information regarding the whereabouts the victim’s remains’ it stated: ‘Continued mitholding of such important data suggested a need for him to maintain a perception of himself, and self-preservation by keeping control over the narrative. 

“This and a lack of empathy for the case’s victims were both seen to have an impact on the panel’s risk assessment.

The Parole Board stated that after considering his offending and the progress made while in custody, as well as the evidence presented at the hearings the panel was not satisfied with Razzell’s suitability for release. 

The panel weighed the risks and benefits of the recommendation and recommended that he be allowed to remain open to any potential issues.

Both will be eligible for a second parole decision in approximately two years.

In January, the Prisoners (Disclosure Information About Victims Act 2020), also known as Helen’s Law was enacted.

David Harkin (pictured) - who bragged that he had eaten parts of his 32-year-old victim Julie Paterson with a plate of pasta - also had his application for parole rejected this week

David Harkin (pictured), who boasted that he had eaten portions of Julie Paterson, 32-year-old victim, and had also eaten pasta with her, was also denied parole this week.

The law is named after Helen McCourt, an insurance clerk who disappeared on her way home in 1988. It will also apply to paedophiles who refuse identification of the abusers.

Ian Simms was Ms McCourt’s killer, but he was freed last year, despite not telling where he hid her body.

Marie McCourt, Marie’s mother, spent five decades advocating for the legislation. It finally received Royal Assent in October after a series political and constitutional setbacks.

The law allows killers to be released even if they are not deemed to be a danger to the public. 

The Parole Board is legally required to determine if they have cooperated with inquiries in order to make an assessment.

Human rights laws prohibit the UK from introducing a “no body, not parole” rule. The Government warned that this could have been challenged in court.

It is hoped that this legislation will encourage more killers to confess to their crimes, and provide answers to grieving families.