James Bulger Murderer Jon Venables Returned To Prison

[Rog]

 

No need for the planned hearing then Rog?

 

No. None at all.

 

He's still serving his sentence and so the onus is on him to ensure that he remains like Casers wife, above suspicion.

[manshimajin]

Mob rule.

No, Albert, mob rule would have seen the creature strung up. Sometimes mob rule is closer to justice than the rule of law, and this is one prime example where such is the case.

 

End of story --- there is nothing more to need to know.

No need for the planned hearing then Rog?

Albert I am not sure that rational thought is Rog's strong suit.

 

Executing 10 year olds is not part of the British legal system however horrendous the crime - nor should it be. If this guy has transgressed his release conditions then what has now happened is the right thing to do - back inside and if he is guilty then stay inside.

 

What I do wonder in this case, as in many others, is what accountability their parents should have had. What is it in their upbringing that turns 10 year old kids into murderers?

 

Execution does not seem to stop crime - China hasn't stamped out corruption, murder or rape by executing people.

[Mr. Sausages]

Jack Straw now admits the allegations against him are "extremely serious", and The Sun claims it is a sex crime.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/mar/06/jon-venables-extremely-serious-claims

[Rog]

Albert I am not sure that rational thought is Rog's strong suit.

 

My thoughts are rational, my values plainly different.

 

Executing 10 year olds is not part of the British legal system however horrendous the crime - nor should it be.

 

I disagree. There are some (thankfully very rare) cases where the crime committed by a 10 year old is such that euthanasia is the right and proper thing to do.

 

If this guy has transgressed his release conditions then what has now happened is the right thing to do - back inside and if he is guilty then stay inside.

 

For ever

 

What I do wonder in this case, as in many others, is what accountability their parents should have had. What is it in their upbringing that turns 10 year old kids into murderers?

 

Some kids are born bad. The parents should be brought before the courts, but the fact that some kids are born bad should never be excluded.

 

Execution does not seem to stop crime - China hasn't stamped out corruption, murder or rape by executing people.

 

Execution has its place not only as a crime prevention measure even if only in a percentage of cases, but also in delivering justice to the victims of a crime and those victims include the remaining family where a killing has taken place.

 

If anyone seriously harmed one of mine I would WANT the guilty party to suffer. It would be part of the recovery process for me, and I am not alone. Revenge is not a thing to be despised. It is a part of delivering justice to the guilty and to the victim.

[newsnight]

My thoughts are rational, my values plainly different.

 

Executing 10 year olds is not part of the British legal system however horrendous the crime - nor should it be.

 

I disagree. There are some (thankfully very rare) cases where the crime committed by a 10 year old is such that euthanasia is the right and proper thing to do.

 

What I do wonder in this case, as in many others, is what accountability their parents should have had. What is it in their upbringing that turns 10 year old kids into murderers?

 

Some kids are born bad. The parents should be brought before the courts, but the fact that some kids are born bad should never be excluded.

 

The methods of children's euthanasia were developed between February and May 1939. First, the physicians and Nazi officials registered their potential victims. Thus, registration forms, called Meldebogen, collected data from midwifes and physicians reporting all infants born with specific medical conditions. The first killings of children in special wards by overdoses of poison and medicaments already occurred in October 1939. Recalcitrant parents who attempted to remove their children from the killing wards were rarely able to succeed. With fathers already absent as soldiers, mothers who disagreed were often assigned to contractual labor, thereby necessitating the commitment of handicapped children in state institutions. The killing of disabled children marked the beginning of the euthanasia program and continued throughout the war. Children's euthanasia was central, because children represented posterity and the Nazi physicians considered the elimination of those they considered diseased and deformed as essential to their aim of racial purification. Although it is impossible to calculate the number of children killed in these special children's wards during World War II, the best estimate is that at least 5,000 German and Austrian children were killed in these programs.

 

If you had one scintilla of humanity left in you from that raging froth of horror you spew out with monotonus predictability you would read the above and hang your head in shame. In your world of blut und bloden some are "born bad" and "euthanasia is the right and proper thing to do". [/b]

 

It is a short step from what the Nazi's did to what you advocate should be done! Utterly disgraceful, your rationality and your values are completely twisted.

[manshimajin]

Execution has its place not only as a crime prevention measure even if only in a percentage of cases, but also in delivering justice to the victims of a crime and those victims include the remaining family where a killing has taken place.

Would it have stopped murder in this case? Doubtful in the extreme. IMO justice is not retrospective revenge. Better to have a properly policed society in the first place.

[Jimcalagon]

Readers of todays Daily Mail can work themselves into a a paroxysm of indignation by reading

Bulger killer's job as a bouncer: Venables dodged vetting process to work at nightclub l

 

So someone who was violent and deranged as a kid went on to become a nightclub bouncer. Who'da thunk it?

[oldmanxfella]

Readers of todays Daily Mail can work themselves into a a paroxysm of indignation by reading

Bulger killer's job as a bouncer: Venables dodged vetting process to work at nightclub

 

Readers of the Daily Mail can work themselves into a a paroxysm of indignation by reading just about anything in the Daily Mail ... probably including the Horoscopes which start "Today you will become a racist, homophobic bigot ..." for all star signs.

[newaccount]

child porn now according to the press.

 

scum.

[Mr. Sausages]

NOTW say "He was discreetly rushed to a jail we can't identify under an assumed name and false charges. ... He was whisked to a new jail and booked in under the name of a genuine prisoner whose file said he had been charged with rape."

 

It's possible that the newspapers don't actually know what he's done as they appear to be using false charges, maybe to justify his solitary confinement to prison officers and other inmates. Rape and child porn charges fit the bill of solitary confinement.

[Rog]

 

Would it have stopped murder in this case? Doubtful in the extreme. IMO justice is not retrospective revenge. Better to have a properly policed society in the first place.

 

Who can say in any specific case? It might have done if the scrotes had been brought up in a society in which the death penalty did exist, and in which criminal kids and juvenile delinquents were punished properly.

 

And why should justice not include a “revenge by proxy” component for the injured parties?

 

It should not be the guilty just being made to pay a cost for evil acts, misbehavior, or breaking a law.

 

Injured parties are prevented from seeking revenge by the law, the law therefore has a duty to extract revenge on their behalf.

 

What’s more the punishment should be a damm sight more than simply being locked up.

 

It should include the option of breaking the spirit of the guilty, and inducing a raw fear and cold dread of ever having to face such punishment again.

 

But more than that jail is too often an inappropriate penalty for what has been done. Much better to impose pain or at the very least discomfort by a variety of means appropriate to the offense, because when push comes to shove inflicting pain is what it’s all about.

 

For example fines should be income and or wealth related; community service should be real and nasty and those engaged in undertaking it as a punishment clearly identifiable; corporal punishment really should be re-introduced especially for acts of violence or recidivism in the case of minor crime, and at least some form of death sentence reintroduced.

 

A softly softly ‘do gooder’ approach has been tried and has failed. Today crime is endemic and, at least on the Mainland, MUCH more prevalent than official figures show due to a variety of reasons. Especially the actions, or rather the lack of actions by the Crown Prosecution Service where in some parts of the country crimes go unprotected simply because of lack of staff or are being hidden by fixed penalty tickets or simply police ‘moving people on’ where a few years ago they would have been up before ‘the beak’ in short order.

 

As for a more effective police force, that looks fine at first glance, but wouldn’t it be much better to have fewer police enforcing the law and far more people not breaking the law in the first place?

 

That would deliver a society that was more free, and reduce the horrible nanny state in which people get away with what they can get, or think they can get away with.

 

Much better get medieval on bad behaviour. Most criminals, especially those involved in crimes of violence, are cowards and the prospect of being hurt, really hurt or serving ‘hard’ time would stop many leaving the hard core psychopaths and genetic scum (and they DO exist) to be dealt with properly.

 

It’s time to “roll the clock back”.

[Pat Ayres]

A softly softly ‘do gooder’ approach has been tried and has failed. Today crime is endemic and, at least on the Mainland, MUCH more prevalent than official figures show due to a variety of reasons. Especially the actions, or rather the lack of actions by the Crown Prosecution Service where in some parts of the country crimes go unprotected simply because of lack of staff or are being hidden by fixed penalty tickets or simply police ‘moving people on’ where a few years ago they would have been up before ‘the beak’ in short order.

 

As for a more effective police force, that looks fine at first glance, but wouldn’t it be much better to have fewer police enforcing the law and far more people not breaking the law in the first place?

 

That would deliver a society that was more free, and reduce the horrible nanny state in which people get away with what they can get, or think they can get away with.

 

Much better get medieval on bad behaviour. Most criminals, especially those involved in crimes of violence, are cowards and the prospect of being hurt, really hurt or serving ‘hard’ time would stop many leaving the hard core psychopaths and genetic scum (and they DO exist) to be dealt with properly.

 

It’s time to “roll the clock back”.

 

Which mainland do you refer to exactly and are their police force actually doing their job and preventing crime or just sitting on their fat arses and waiting for a crime to be committed

As for rolling the clock back, besides the mixed metaphore so beloved of someone trying to appear more intelligent than they actually are, just how far back can Norfolk go FFS?

Crimes going unprotected? are you ill?

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Execution has its place not only as a crime prevention measure even if only in a percentage of cases, but also in delivering justice to the victims of a crime and those victims include the remaining family where a killing has taken place.

Would it have stopped murder in this case? Doubtful in the extreme. IMO justice is not retrospective revenge. Better to have a properly policed society in the first place.

Why? That doesn't deal with crime, and more importantly the reasons behind crime. The police just bring people to justice who have committed crime and sometimes act as a deterrent by their presence.

[daisychain]

My thoughts are rational, my values plainly different.

 

Executing 10 year olds is not part of the British legal system however horrendous the crime - nor should it be.

 

I disagree. There are some (thankfully very rare) cases where the crime committed by a 10 year old is such that euthanasia is the right and proper thing to do.

 

What I do wonder in this case, as in many others, is what accountability their parents should have had. What is it in their upbringing that turns 10 year old kids into murderers?

 

Some kids are born bad. The parents should be brought before the courts, but the fact that some kids are born bad should never be excluded.

 

The methods of children's euthanasia were developed between February and May 1939. First, the physicians and Nazi officials registered their potential victims. Thus, registration forms, called Meldebogen, collected data from midwifes and physicians reporting all infants born with specific medical conditions. The first killings of children in special wards by overdoses of poison and medicaments already occurred in October 1939. Recalcitrant parents who attempted to remove their children from the killing wards were rarely able to succeed. With fathers already absent as soldiers, mothers who disagreed were often assigned to contractual labor, thereby necessitating the commitment of handicapped children in state institutions. The killing of disabled children marked the beginning of the euthanasia program and continued throughout the war. Children's euthanasia was central, because children represented posterity and the Nazi physicians considered the elimination of those they considered diseased and deformed as essential to their aim of racial purification. Although it is impossible to calculate the number of children killed in these special children's wards during World War II, the best estimate is that at least 5,000 German and Austrian children were killed in these programs.

 

If you had one scintilla of humanity left in you from that raging froth of horror you spew out with monotonus predictability you would read the above and hang your head in shame. In your world of blut und bloden some are "born bad" and "euthanasia is the right and proper thing to do". [/b]

 

It is a short step from what the Nazi's did to what you advocate should be done! Utterly disgraceful, your rationality and your values are completely twisted.

 

Well said.

[John Wright]

JackStraw is a politician. Not his job to contact Mrs B. A senior probation officer was sent as soon as it happened. Yes she is a victim but it does not put her in any better position than anyone else as far as political contact.Why are the papers asking for him to meet her.

 

I hate this baying for blood, Yes Venables and Thompsson did something very bad, a long time ago,now they are out on parole they deserve the same as any one else, ie innocent until proved guilty and fair trial. Subject of course to the tighter controls on recall.

 

Why are our press so obseessed with outing these two and othesr before them. It is only this obseession which results in false identities and injunctions

 

It makes a mockery of rehabilitation and pushes the authorities into absurd postures

 

Why are we Brits so blood thirsty. OK we are better than the yanks but by comparison to our continental cousins the way we treat and deal with serious young offenders and the blood lust of our gutter press led mob is barabaric

 

No wonder we end up with the original incident when this is the example we set. How can kids realy learn it is wrong to kill when the prees are still full of "put away foerever and lose the key type commenst at best and at worst well!