TV Personality Ray Gosling Arrested After Confessing To Killing Lover On Television

Television presenter Ray Gosling has been arrested on suspicion of murder after the BBC ran a segment where the 70-year-old confessed to smothering his lover who was suffering from AIDS. He starts the segment by saying that he wanted to reveal his secret: “I killed someone.”

Gosling portrayed the act as part of a pack to act if his lover’s suffering became too great. In the interview, Gosling said “It’s a terrible situation. I loved him to bits. . . We had a pact – he said if the pain gets bad and if nothing can be done, don’t let him linger on. . . I don’t think it’s a crime.” It is a crime and Gosling gave more details saying “I said to the doctor: ‘Leave me… just for a bit,’ and he went away.
“I picked up the pillow and smothered him until he was dead. The doctor came back and I said: ‘He’s gone.’ Nothing more was ever said. . . .When you love someone, it is difficult to see them suffer.”

It is a case where the mitigating circumstances should carry considerable weight, but prosecutors feel compelled to prosecute to avoid having individuals decide such questions. This type of horrible scene would not occur if assisted suicide were legal and available in such cases. Of course, this type of pact is probably quite common and doctors look the other way. Gosling made it an issue by being honest, but perhaps it will get people to think about the issue of the right to assisted suicide.

For the full story, click here

15 thoughts on “TV Personality Ray Gosling Arrested After Confessing To Killing Lover On Television”

  1. To concieve of such an act an then to follow through living every second of it,I don’t think that there is anything they could do to this man that would make him feel any worse.IMHO.

  2. Thinking about this, it seems that if Ray Gosling’s partner was dying of AIDS related illness and “needed” to be suffocated, that this was quite some time ago, considering that there are people now who have been HIV positive for many years and are still alive and well.

    Mr Gosling also says that he would not tell the police who, where or when it was so I don’t see how he can possibly be charged for the murder of someone whose name is not known, the location is unknown and the date is unknown. For all we know, this could have been made up for TV.

    This man is not a cold-blooded killer on a murderous rampage, he is a elderly man who helped someone that he loved die quickly rather than lingering in pain. I think that anyone who has watched a loved one suffering can understand his actions and while I would not normally condone killing someone, I see little point in prosecuting him.

  3. Professor Turley,

    End of life decisions are best left to the patient and his medical provider. Not to be too insulting, but, it would be best if lawyers and the law itself would butt out of these decisions except in the most egregious circumstances. It is also dicey when private individuals get involved these choices.

    As much as one can sympathize with Ray Gosling, his decision was at best rash and was a really bad precedent. This was a case that definitely needs to be played out in a court of law. The bit with the pillow is particularly disturbing.

    There are options; hospice care has become quite advanced and the treatment of chronic pain is much more advanced too. Again this is an item best left to the doctor and his patient.

    Trying to find a legal solution to this issue is not possible. Lawyers, being the hair-splitting obsessive-compulsives they are, will only make this situation worse. It is a mine-laden field that guarantees multiple explosions of unintended consequences. The legal profession lacks the tools to solve the conundrum because the larger society lacks the tools to deal with individual mortality.

    The best solution is to allow Hospices a wide latitude in how they handle the terminal ill. This would mean a high legal bar for both malpractice and criminal law suits. The Hospices could then create there own best practices which then would receive a patina of legal acceptance. Of course this would mean there would be an area where lawyers would have to accept the proposition that somebody is more knowledgeable then they are; an absolute anathema to the legal profession.

  4. Sharon is well connected. Her father owns Keller’s drive in who seemed to make a fortune in vast real estate holdings. Numerous properties were placed in Sharon’s name by her Dad. Sharon’s Dad also was friends with Henry Wade. No big deal until you figure out he was the No. 2 man at the FBI and was asked to take the FBI over when Hoover died. Sharon also worked for Henry for a number of years. Would I say Sharon is connected? Absolutely.

    But to have the Prosecutors Association to submit a Recommendation after the Master did not find her guilty or responsible or dereliction of duty is something that makes me wonder why. She has yet to find against any prosecutor, regardless of the conduct. They have opened themselves up to retribution in the biggest way. I wonder what made them do that. Can’t tell me that there are too many ethical prosecutors. It is like saying that the tooth fairy doesn’t exist.

  5. “This type of horrible scene would not occur if assisted suicide were legal and available in such cases.”

    I couldn’t agree more. Seems to me that the people of Washington and Oregon have got it right.

  6. Duh:

    it is also very much less expensive to send someone to prison for life. so you have a 2 fer against the death penalty.

  7. Byron,

    I think the extension is a moot point. The attempted filing took place a little after 5 PM on 9/25/2007. At 8:14 PM the drugs started to flow, and he was pronounced dead at 8:23 PM.

    To me, this is a case of “Would it have killed you to take a look at what we’ve got? I can guarantee you that it would kill him if you don’t.”

    I used to be in favor of the death penalty before I realized how many times they convict innocent people. Unlike many years ago, today we can do a pretty good job of making sure the convict doesn’t escape, but more importantly, we can undo a wrong life sentence. We can’t do that with the death penalty.

  8. Being in the UK I’m suprised that the doctor didn’t administer an overdose of morphine.

  9. AY:

    Why would a judge in a capital murder case not keep her office open, especially if she knew there was going to be a filing from the defense attorney? Do judges set the exact minute of filing or is there some leeway? Can you get an extension? I can see having hard and fast rules for certain things but when a persons life is at stake it seems a bit cold and callous to not grant a few extra moments.

  10. OFF TOPIC but worth the read

    This is an interesting twist on the special masters report.

    Prosecutors urge commissioners to reprimand Judge Sharon Keller

    The Austin American-Statesman reports that prosecutors have filed documents saying that the judge deserves to be reprimanded or removed from office for refusing to keep the clerk’s office open late to allow an appeal in September 2007 from death row inmate Michael Richard.

    Judge who refused to keep office open in Death Row case shouldn’t be removed, ruling says

    It goes on to say that she violated no established rules and blames the Defenders Office for the miscommunication.

    The above is absolute BULLSHIT. I have tried to get into that same court office (building) at 4:59. It is locked and unless you are friends with the security, you ain’t getting in.

  11. an individual should have a rght to end his life if he believes it to be in his best interest to do so. to prevent or make suicide a criminal act is to imply that an individual does not own his own life.

  12. I don’t disagree with what Mr. Gosling did. It was not a malicious act, and should not be prosecuted as such. I cannot be described as anything but an act of compassion.

    I hope I’m never in a position where that choice needs to be made for me, or that I would need to make it for someone else.

  13. Dr. Jack had the right concept and thwarted the system after they had stripped him of his medical license. I agree with what he did and he did a great job promoting this cause. I do not feel that this man should be prosecuted. He provided the greatest service with love in his heart, rather
    than malice or greed….

Comments are closed.