Des Review: How Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative Government Enabled One of Britain’s Most Prolific Serial Killers

British TV series Des highlights how the social conditions of 1980s Britain allowed serial killer Dennis Nilsen to remain undetected.

ITV’s Des is a three-part thriller starring David Tennant in the eponymous role about the arrest and trial of real-life Scottish serial killer Dennis ‘Des’ Nilsen, who murdered up to 15 young men in London from 1979-1983. One thing I did not expect from the show was a criticism of the UK government and social conditions of the time that allowed such a violent criminal to kill without capture for over 3 years in Britain’s capital city.

Des opens with a montage of newsreels and real-life footage from London in 1983. This serves to explain how the social conditions created by then-Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and her Conservative government allowed Dennis Nilsen to prey on those most vulnerable in society undetected for so long. Nilsen’s victims were usually young men that were homeless, addicts, gay, or all of the above.

The newscaster’s voice and the news images of social depravity in 1980s London contain an overarching criticism of Margaret Thatcher and so-called ‘Thatcherism’, as the newscaster explains how the lack of opportunities for young people, who travelled to London in hopes of finding a home and a job but found neither, often led to drug addiction and/or homelessness. Likewise, the ostracisation of the LGBTQ+ community often led to similar poor social and living conditions for queer people, as the UK government under Thatcher no longer felt any obligation to those in need of social services.

Thatcherism essentially meant extreme right-wing, conservative policies and the end of the ‘Welfare State’. This was seen not just in terms of society and the rise of far-right traditionalism (perhaps epitomised by the National Front – a UK-based fascist political party) but also the shutting down of many British industries such as coal mining, which led to a chasm of unemployment and an immeasurable loss of opportunities for many people looking for work. Whilst this undoubtedly affected the working classes up and down the country, it hit young people particularly hard, as they were just starting out in life and had no life savings to fall back on. The privatisation and outsourcing of many British industries created a culture of hopelessness and despair. Combined with the lack of access to social services, this meant that more often than not, young people turned to drugs and/or became homeless.

Thatcherism also meant that people slipped through the cracks. Those most vulnerable and affected by the rise and incessant onslaught of Conservatism were left to fend for themselves, as is the way with extremist neoliberal policies and the prioritisation of individualism above all else. In fact, a common method that Nilsen deployed to entrap his victims was by offering them food, warmth and shelter – the basic necessities of human survival. His victims were often so deprived of these basic necessities that they did not stop to consider the possibility that this man posed a danger to them. Nilsen gave his victims what Thatcher’s Conservative government would not.

Des (ITV, 2019). Dennis ‘Des’ Nilsen (David Tennant) is arrested by the London Metropolitan Police Force in 1983.

The Tory Government of the 1970s/80s created the type of victim that Nilsen preyed on and did not even show enough remorse retrospectively to identify each victim and award them justice, showing the callousness and danger of Tory right-wing politics. As soon as the police force reached a convenient amount of identified victims, and only after they had identified the one victim thus far who did not fit Nilsen’s usual victim profile (Kenneth Ockendon was a wealthy, straight, visiting tourist from Canada), the police effort/investigation to identify all of Nilsen’s supposed 15 victims was called off, just like that.

This shows two things: a) how little the police/government/elite care about getting justice for those most marginalised – so marginalised that they could disappear and literally no one in a position of power noticed or did anything about it – and b) how eager they were to sweep this investigation under the rug, as it was tragic and utterly embarrassing how the police could allow such a prolific serial killer to murder for so long under their watch.

Whilst the main detective, DCI Peter Jay (Daniel Mays), and a couple of his pals were unhappy with this decision and even continued finding possible victims in their own time, they still did not treat victims with much care or sensitivity. This is epitomised by the heartbreaking interview of Carl Stottor (Laurie Kynaston) – whom Nilsen actually killed and then resuscitated – by DCI Jay, where Jay is so hell-bent on finding new evidence to convict Nilsen that he fails to pay attention to Stottor’s needs and obvious signs of trauma. Nilsen becomes the focus of Jay’s attention rather than the people he hurt.

DCI Peter Jay fails to protect Carl Stottor from the additional trauma of Nilsen’s trial.

This shows the lack of knowledge the police had about serial killers, and the lack of care shown when the victims were society’s most marginalised groups. Those in charge just wanted the investigation wrapped up after confirming a convenient 6 victim identities, rather than actually seeking justice for every person hurt by Nilsen. Even the relatively moral DCI Jay is confronted by one of the victim’s family members, who points out that all the police care about is that they were the ones who caught Dennis Nilsen. And she’s right – to some extent, the police receive the same notoriety as Nilsen and will most likely be remembered for their success, rather than their glaring failures.

To end this post, I would like to describe a scene from the third and final episode of Des: Nilsen sits talking to the writer of his biography in a private room at the court, he holds up a newspaper with a headline that reads “NILSEN’S HOUSE OF HORRORS” and remarks “The only ‘house of horrors’ I’ve ever seen is No. 10 Downing Street”. From this, we can infer that the government have committed acts that are more insidious than any one serial killer. Even though Nilsen committed the acts of murder, he was enabled by a system that created, vilified, and ignored his young victims. This is, of course, not to excuse Nilsen’s atrocities, but merely to point out that the government, police and society also played a role in the harm that came upon potentially 15 young men (we will never know for sure due to the abrupt closure of the police investigation), who were left behind and forgotten by the system that was supposed to protect them.