Serial domestic abuser who murdered partner jailed for 22 years
Mark Keel, 33, killed Maxine Clark at her home in Riddrie in Glasgow, leaving her with more than 50 injuries.
The judge described the 'cowardly and evil' killing as the 'actions of a brute', as he jailed Keel on Tuesday.
The 36-year-old mum had already suffered at Keel's violence prior to her death, including a neighbour seeing her with a black eye.
Keel pleaded guilty to a murder charge last month, and he will be sentenced at the High Court in Glasgow on Tuesday.
Lord Mulholland said he had been responsible for a 'savage beating' of Ms Clark. Spindrift Mark Keel
Prior to getting into a relationship with Ms Clark, Keel had previously been made the subject of strict non-harassment orders banning him from approaching or contacting three former partners.
This also included him being jailed in June 2022 for domestic violence.
In 2023, he was also told to attend the Caledonian System – a project for men guilty of such abuse – with Keel being deemed 'a high-risk offender'.
But his attendance was described as 'sporadic'.
He also went on to flout a court-imposed community payback order. In January 2024, Keel was instead put on 12-month supervision as well as an 18-week curfew.
At the time of the killing, Keel and mum-of-four Ms Clark had been in a relationship for 18 months.
He had recently moved into her home in Riddrie.
Maxine had once been described as 'healthy, happy and outgoing'.
However, she had told others of physical violence being inflicted on her by Keel.
Ms Clark had been seen with black eyes as well as an injury to her jaw. She also had 'grab marks' around her neck.
She admitted to a neighbour that Keel had punched her, but she was scared to report him for fear of repercussions.
Prosecutor David Dickson said: 'Family and friends warned her they felt Keel posed a threat to her.'
In the hours before the murder, Keel called his own mum asking to get picked up, claiming he was 'leaving' Ms Clark.
They went to his father's home in the Southside of Glasgow before he later got a taxi back to Ms Clark's house.
He was described as 'drunk' and Ms Clark was in bed when he got there.
Mr Dickson said it was at the property that the fatal attack occurred.
A child also staying at the house got up the next morning to find Ms Clark still in the bed with Keel wrapped in a blanket sitting beside her.
Mr Dickson said: 'She appeared to have fresh injuries to her face and her breathing was described as laboured.'
Ms Clark was rolled onto her side. The child left to play with friends, but returned every hour to see how she was.
Advocate depute Mr Dickson told the court: 'Keel said he thought she was having an allergic reaction and that there was no need to call an ambulance.'
At around 6pm, G4S security staff arrived to fit an electronic tag on Keel due to the curfew imposed on him weeks earlier.
But he steered them away, claiming he had just woken up.
Keel instead went on to dial 999, claiming Ms Clark's tongue was swollen and that he had not seen her awake that day.
Emergency crews arrived to find her still lying on the blood-stained bed, partially covered with a duvet.
It was found she was already dead.
Mr Dickson said Ms Clark had 51 separate injuries, including brain damage, significant bruising, fractures, and wounds.
These were likely caused by punches, kicks, and being stamped upon. The imprint of the soles of Keel's shoes were found on her leg such was the force.
The hearing was told Ms Clark was the only child of her grieving parents.
Lord Mulholland told him: 'You gave this lady a savage beating. You are a serial domestic abuser.'
Help and support is available now if you need it.
The Samaritans can be contacted any time, from any phone, free on 116 123, email at jo@samaritans.org, or visit samaritans.org to find your nearest branch.
You can also speak to Victim Support Scotland on 0800 160 1985 who offer free and tailored support. In an emergency, always dial 999 if within the United Kingdom.
Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
2 days ago
- Daily Mail
Who is mushroom killer Erin Patterson's dearest bosom buddy? Ali stood by her throughout everything - and was her ONLY friend in court when the jury found her guilty of murder
Apart from Erin Patterson 's own legal team, who were paid to be there, just one person turned up in court every single day to support the triple killer. Alison Rose Prior, known as Ali, has been the most devoted loyal friend Erin - or anyone else - could ever have hoped for. Day after day, regardless of the incriminating evidence, bitter cold or ever-growing media pack, Ms Prior stuck by her friend through thick and thin. And when the jury delivered its damning series of ' verdicts, it was Ms Prior the killer immediately turned to. 'See you soon,' Patterson told her bosom buddy before being led away to begin her likely life sentence behind bars for the three murders and one attempted murder. Ms Prior left the court thronged by media, and as she fought back tears behind large sunglasses, she told reporters: 'I'm saddened.' Escorted by G4S security staff through the precincts of Morwell Law Courts - where the Supreme Court had held Patterson's ten-week trial - Ms Prior battled to keep her composure. 'I didn't have any expectations,' she added. 'It's the justice system and it is what it is.' Patterson was later whisked away to Dame Phyllis Frost prison, 200km away on the other side of Melbourne, far from her Leongatha home in Gippsland. But despite the distance, Ms Prior immediately vowed to remain Patterson's best mate as the mother-of-two now faces decades behind bars. 'I will see her,' Ms Prior defiantly insisted to a reporter's question. 'I'm her friend and I'll see her - I'll visit with her.' Ms Prior begged media to leave her alone so she could get to her car. As a sign of the intensity and closeness of their relationship, Patterson has granted Ms Prior complete power of attorney over her estate, giving her carte blanche over her substantial wealth and property. The pair are believed to have met through Facebook, where Patterson was an avid contributor to several True Crime groups. Ms Prior, who has a daughter with a rare genetic condition, had previously campaigned locally to reform the law on registering sex offenders and to prevent them living near schools. In the weeks after the agonising deaths of her estranged husband's parents, Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail's sister, Heather Wilkinson - who were fatally poisoned by the beef Wellingtons she laced with death cap mushrooms - Patterson fled her Leongatha home as the net closed in on her. Patterson is said to have bunkered down at Ms Prior's four-bedroom bungalow, set in lush woodlands on the edge of rural Healesville, 65km north-east of Melbourne, as detectives pored over her own home looking for murder clues. Black sheets appeared around Patterson's Leongatha home ahead of the jury's verdict The night before Patterson was finally arrested, she threw a party at her home for Ms Prior and three other close female friends. On the evening of Wednesday, November 1, 2023, Patterson held the knees-up at the Leongatha property for her dwindling inner circle of friends. The weeknight gathering is believed to have been small and included Patterson's two children, a girl and a boy (who can't be identified for legal reasons). But it was still noisy enough that it was noticed by neighbours, who speculated Patterson threw the party in the certain knowledge that those murder charges were imminent. As the jury retired to consider her guilt 18 months later, it was rumoured Patterson would once again return to Ms Prior's home to hide out from the media if she was found innocent. Instead though, the jury unanimously found her guilty - and she was transported by prison van to her new jail cell as one of Australia's most notorious killers. The verdict ends one of the nation's most intriguing homicide cases - and now Patterson likely only has prison visits from Ms Prior to look forward to.
The Sun
2 days ago
- The Sun
Prince Harry's lawyers must produce documents on alleged payments to witnesses in latest legal claim
PRINCE Harry's lawyers must produce documents on alleged payments to witnesses in his latest legal claim, a judge says. Harry and six others — including actress Liz Hurley, Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish — are suing Daily Mail publisher Associated Newspapers Limited. In May, ANL's lawyers asked the High Court to let them see documents 'that relate to payments, royalties or inducements'. Yesterday Mr Justice Nicklin ruled paperwork must be handed over. He said: "I am satisfied that documents held by the claimants that can support a case that a witness has been paid or offered other inducement for their evidence, whether directly or indirectly, should be disclosed. "That is because there is a real prospect that Associated will be able to rely upon this evidence to attack the credibility of such witnesses. "Ultimately, the issue of whether the payment or inducement does affect the credibility of any witness is a matter to be resolved at trial." ANL denies its accusers' claims that it hired private investigators to tap phones and even carry out burglaries. It previously described the claims as "lurid" and "simply preposterous". A trial is expected to start in January and last for nine weeks. 1
Telegraph
2 days ago
- Telegraph
Prince Harry ordered to reveal any payments to witnesses in case against Daily Mail
The Duke of Sussex has been ordered to reveal to the High Court any 'payments or inducements' made in return for evidence in his claim against the Daily Mail. Associated Newspapers, the publisher that owns the Daily Mail, is accused of carrying out or commissioning unlawful activities such as hiring private investigators to place listening devices inside cars, 'blagging' private records, burglaries to order and accessing and recording private phone conversations. The publisher denies the allegations made by a group of high-profile public figures, including the Duke, Baroness Lawrence, Elizabeth Hurley, Sir Elton John, Sadie Frost and Sir Simon Hughes. Instead, they claim that incentives were 'offered or paid' by researchers working for the claimants' legal team, including a £5,000-a-month deal with a private investigator called Gavin Burrows. In a ruling handed down on Friday, Mr Justice Nicklin criticised the 'inconsistent and incoherent approach' made by the claimants to providing such evidence, declaring their explanations 'unconvincing'. He said there were 'serious questions to be answered' about the status of the claimants' research team, particularly the documents they held and whether there had been adequate disclosure. The judge ruled that the group should search for and hand over any documents that suggest that Mr Burrows, or any other potential witness, 'has skin in the game'. The trial is due to take place in January 2026. The judge's latest ruling follows a two-day case management hearing in May, during which Antony White KC, for Associated Newspapers, asked the court to order the claimants to 'search for and disclose any documents that relate to payments, royalties or inducements paid, provided or offered, or any demands or threats made, in order to obtain documents, information or other co-operation'. The barrister said a limited number of documents had been disclosed, which showed that 'payments were made or offered' to 'procure evidence and invoices'. Mr Justice Nicklin said he was satisfied that any documents suggesting witnesses had been paid or offered other inducements should be disclosed. 'That is because there is a real prospect that Associated will be able to rely upon this evidence to attack the credibility of such witnesses,' he added. 'Ultimately, the issue of whether the payment or inducement does affect the credibility of any witness is a matter to be resolved at trial. In this case, the stance adopted by the claimants has been undermined by their inconsistent and incoherent approach to disclosure of documents relating to payments to potential witnesses and/or other inducements.' The claimants were also ordered to conduct further searches for evidence relating to what has been described in court as their 'personal watershed moment' – when they became aware that they had a potential claim. The Duke of Sussex is said to have sent a text message to Baroness Lawrence alerting her that 'information' had come to light 'that she would want to know about', prompting her to join the legal action just a few months later. In a subsequent email sent by the Duke to Baroness Lawrence about the material his barrister, David Sherborne, had 'come across', he said 'he and one of his team would be keen to come and speak to you… in order to explain what this material shows and what your options are'. The Duke was told he had a potential claim by Mr Sherborne, to whom he was introduced by Sir Elton while on holiday at the singer's home in France. Associated Newspapers had sought information about such 'moments', including details of who had allegedly provided what information to whom and on what dates. 'Surprising' lack of documentation Mr Justice Nicklin said he found the lack of documentation on these pivotal moments 'surprising'. Such revelations would surely have prompted 'communications between trusted friends and family members; messages seeking advice or guidance, or expressing shock or outrage,' he said. The judge noted that a 'complete absence of corroborating documents' may be used to suggest these moments were not 'quite as shocking' as claimed. Meanwhile, the claimants' attempt to access broader call data and other information was refused by the judge, who described the requests as 'disproportionate or unfocused'. Broad allegations made about the alleged use of unlawful information gathering across all Mail titles over 25 years were also rejected. Mr Justice Nicklin warned that such allegations could not prove individual claims and that the court would 'tightly manage' the scope of the generic case to prevent the litigation from becoming 'a wide-ranging public inquiry'.
