Lennon's
[Photo via Spotify]

John Lennon’s killer didn’t want ex-Beatle to “suffer” during attack

At a parole meeting, John Lennon’s murderer, Mark David Chapman, reportedly claimed to use hollow bullets to not allow the ex-Beatle to suffer during his untimely death outside of his Manhattan home in 1980. Chapman has since been denied parole for the 10th time.

Read more: Pussy Riot call out Bella Thorne for “appropriation”

In his late-August parole meeting, Chapman admitted to wanting fame in exchange for killing the most influential man at the time. However, while he wanted the musician dead, he did not want him to suffer, according to a story from New York Daily News.

“I secured those bullets to make sure he would be dead,” Chapman says. “It was immediately after the crime that I was concerned that he did not suffer.”

The killer goes on to express his shame for the attack but still shows little remorse.

“As each year goes by, I feel more and more shame,” Chapman says. “Thirty years ago I couldn’t say I felt shame and I know what shame is now. It’s where you cover your face, you don’t want to, you know, ask for anything.”

“I can’t say that I am 100 percent remorseful and I am weeping,” he continues.

Additionally, Chapman references “The Catcher in the Rye” and the devil as personal motives for the attack.

After Lennon signed a record for Chapman earlier that day, the killer decided to wait until the musician and his wife, Yoko Ono, came back from a recording session to attack.

“I was too far in,” Chapman continues. “I do remember having the thought of, ‘hey, you have got the album now, look at this, he signed it, just go home.’ But there was no way I was going to go home.”

Mark David Chapman is currently at Wende Correctional Facility. He will be up for parole again in 2020. However, the killer doesn’t believe he deserves to get it.

“Of course I want to be released,” Chapman says. “Do I deserve to be released? That’s another question. No… I don’t think somebody that did what I did deserves anything.”

What are your thoughts on the case? Let us know in the comments below.