James Bulger Murderer Jon Venables Returned To Prison

[When Skies Are Grey]

No wonder we end up with the original incident when this is the example we set.

 

Really? That's some leap that fella.

[newsnight]

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!

 

I agree with the above entirely. We either have the rule of law or we have barbarity. Mrs Fergus has suffered considerably and nobody wishes to diminish her grief or her loss in any way. Mob rule as promoted by the press in the UK and the kind of horror being advocated by some on this thread is chilling to read. Has there not been sufficent examples inhumanity and bloodshed when law is abandoned to the rabid unreason of the mob? I never thought to read on these forums the comments such as advocating the "euthanasia" of ten year old children in the name of revenge. What kind of example is that to set?

[Albert Tatlock]

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

 

Actually re-offending makes a mockery of the rehabilitation process. As in this case, he's had his second chance and looks likely to have well and truly blown it. In fact regardless of whether he's guilty of a new crime or not - he's breached the terms of his life license so that should be it. There's no need for an assumed name if he's back inside for good. You really do talk through your arse a lot of the time.

He may have offended. But the whole point is...he hasn't yet...innocent until proven guilty etc.

 

And, if he is innocent...then he hasn't breached the terms of his life license.

 

Bay for blood, allow his defence to state 'unfair trial' - and be released innocent or guilty - then all you do by saying that is undermine the legal process, which is there for all of us.

 

He may well be found guilty of something...he might not...but just imagine for one moment that someone just like you, just as angry with the past as you, had found out who he was and, say, made up an allegation.

 

???

 

Leave the courts and justice to decide - and then - and only then - vent your spleen.

[Max Power]

I can not believe that some on this forum are advocating the execution of ten year old children!

 

Venables and Thompson committed an horrendous crime against Jamie Bulger and the full details have never been released. God knows what was going through their child minds when they did this but I would guess that they simply got carried away in some crazed fantasy. Venables apparently was the least evil or involved according to reports which I have read. children have been murdered in equally horrific circumstances but the shocking thing about this case is the fact that the murderers were so young, which is why it arouses so much emotion.

 

As another poster mentioned, why did it take five minutes for Jamies mother to realise her two year old was missing? How can she demand anything at all in relation to this alleged breach of Venables release conditions over and above anyone? Milking the whole thing in my opinion!

 

I think that it is absolutely correct that all details of this alleged breach are kept confidential until after whatever action is taken. I also believe that both kids were released too early and this will not have helped them in coping with their double lives.

[jimbms]

I think what this comes down to is that Venables committed a horrific crime when young and was quite rightly removed from society, now at that age there may have still been an outside chance with the right psychological treatment he could have been changed, after a time it was determined he was safe to release into society and this was done, had he then gone on to lead a decent and crime free life nothing would have been said. Now instead he got released, allowed to take a job that could involve violence (which idiot allowed this?) and now we are led to believe he has gone on to commit yet another crime that is hated by even some of our hardened and violent criminals i.e. a child sex offence, in my eyes he has been given one chance to prove he was changed and has messed this up, therefore he has now lost his right to be allowed to live in normal society, no more chances should be given for the sake of society and it's children.

[When Skies Are Grey]

As another poster mentioned, why did it take five minutes for Jamies mother to realise her two year old was missing?

 

That's hardly a fair punishment for taking one's parental eye of the ball for a short period of time. Did the punishment fit her crime? Hardly!

 

 

Milking the whole thing in my opinion!

 

However she is quite quick to jump back in front of the cameras that's for sure.

[daisychain]

As another poster mentioned, why did it take five minutes for Jamies mother to realise her two year old was missing?

 

That's hardly a fair punishment for taking one's parental eye of the ball for a short period of time. Did the punishment fit her crime? Hardly!

 

 

Milking the whole thing in my opinion!

 

However she is quite quick to jump back in front of the cameras that's for sure.

 

"Eye of the ball" this was a baby and when out shopping surely any parent would notice in a flash that such a young infant hand wandered away!!, your right the punishment she received did not fit her crime, one that will haunt her forever. Everyone pays for their mistakes....

[When Skies Are Grey]

"Eye of the ball" this was a baby and when out shopping surely any parent would notice in a flash that such a young infant hand wandered away!!,

 

I hope your sanctimonious stance never comes back to bite you on the ass.

[John Wright]

There was an enquiry after the case. It makes interesting and sobering reading all ways round as to the victims and perpetrators circumstances and the intervention or lack of by social services

 

I just think that if you call kids feral, scum bags, useless, and worse you focus on them as the objects of a hate campaign and lynch mob, you are into a self fulfilling prophecy and that is your fault not theirs

 

Never forget tat the identities of juveniles is protected from publication. We should not know they were Venables and Thompson, but shortly after arrest and charge some newspaper broke the law and published their names and detaisl causing threats tio their families. Hence name and identity change.

 

see this link

 

http://www.karisable.com/mbulg.htm

[Rog]

But why change him at all? Even if such a thing was possible and I for one absolutely believe it is not let alone be a fitting use of public funds. MUCH better to euthanise him and his partner in crime.

 

And yes, it would be a case of executing ten year olds but no ordinary ten year olds. A pair of rotten perverted pieces of human excrement whose death would have sent a message to the scum parents who breed feral brats without a second thought.

 

It could have been done without the pair knowing what was taking place, and preferably without even knowing what was going to take place, but done it should have been.

 

As for the mother of the Bulger baby, in her position I would be using every means at my disposal to highlight the utter inadequacy of the present justice and punishment system. She has had no justice for what was done to her child.

[somewhatdamaged]

I agree with Rog. Why spend the money on the futility of trying to "rehabilitate" these two awful human beings.

 

Can children be this evil when they are young and grow into pleasant, useful members of society?

 

It's been said many times before, in the UK we are too soft on criminals, too much of the PC squad saying how we should be helping murderers, paedophiles and rapists deal with what they have done, and spending an inordinate amount of cash over time trying to change people who are never going to change and should be executed, reducing the amount of scum we have living with us in society

 

If you were absolutely assured you would be executed if guilty of rape, instead of being put in a prison cell with a PS3 and a plasma TV, i'm pretty sure at least some of them would think twice. That alone is an accomplishment.

 

But no, according to the PC squad, it's not the rapists fault, it's a chemical imbalance. It's not the paedophiles fault, it's a chemical imbalance. It's not the murdering, torturing kids fault, they are simply too young to know what they were doing, the poor mites.

[jimbms]

What I do find very interesting is that all the ones on MF who at other times come in spouting off about how people should not be locked up and prison is not the answer and that with proper help the criminals can change as they only committed the crime due to how society treated them, have for some unknown reason kept stum and not realy said much in this thread, seems facts will always prevail, an evil little shit can only grow into an evil big shit.

[Albert Tatlock]

What I do find very interesting is that all the ones on MF who at other times come in spouting off about how people should not be locked up and prison is not the answer and that with proper help the criminals can change as they only committed the crime due to how society treated them, have for some unknown reason kept stum and not realy said much in this thread, seems facts will always prevail, an evil little shit can only grow into an evil big shit.

I don't think that is the case at all, reading the thread. And remember, facts only prevail, WHEN and only WHEN they actually become facts. There are no facts available in this case yet regarding further offences.

 

Rehabilitation can, and often does work, but it won't ever hardly work in an overcrowded and underfunded prison system, in parallel with underfunded social services and an underfunded/understaffed probation system.

 

When it comes to 'punishment', people seem to conveniently forget that the bulk of prisoners (99% plus) eventually get released back into society - and fail to notice or realise that this 'lock em up and throw away the key' approach demonstrably isn't working. It might give a short term revenge to victims and society, but the current approach and sheer number entering the prison system (when for at least 50% of them - and us- there are better/cheaper alternatives, such as community service, paying off fines in different ways etc.) and is failing society - big style.

 

Labour has introduced 14,300 new offences since taking office in 1997 - twice the rate issued by the tories even at their right wing best.

 

The whole criminal justice system is bolloxed and its' aims and objectives need completely redesigning, as things will only get worse and worse without such a redesign and a reassessment of priorities. It further is creating an underclass of, having been inside and not being rehabiltated - longterm unemployed, hopelessness, back to old habits, back on drugs etc. etc.

 

But the general population seem to be complete dickheads when it comes to understanding this, and seeing what is happening as a result, right in front of their own noses.

 

It's a far bigger and more complex picture than: 'more bobbies on the beat', 'lynch mobs' and 'quick fix revenge'. But the majority are too stupid and too well led by the tabloids to even realise it.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

What I do find very interesting is that all the ones on MF who at other times come in spouting off about how people should not be locked up and prison is not the answer and that with proper help the criminals can change as they only committed the crime due to how society treated them, have for some unknown reason kept stum and not realy said much in this thread, seems facts will always prevail, an evil little shit can only grow into an evil big shit.

You're obsessed with me. I keep quiet on the matter because I have already come across enough stupid Daily Mailesque arguments,and perspectives on here to put me off posting anymore.

 

Some people think they should never have been released - well...they would have to be after serving their time. And some are framing this as argument of rehabilitation against long-term imprisonment. I don't agree with either.

 

And other people want to talk about rehabilitation. Well what is the way to goissue, is it the 'rehabilitation' 'process' that has failed because it is inadequate? Is it because they are simply bad? Maybe they could actually be made to be less disposed to committing crime - but the State system of justice failed them because of its inadequacies. I don't know. But there seems to be a lot of idiots who think they do know - that such people are just EVIL.

[jimbms]

Some people think they should never have been released - well...they would have to be after serving their time. And some are framing this as argument of rehabilitation against long-term imprisonment. I don't agree with either.

 

And other people want to talk about rehabilitation. Well what is the way to goissue, is it the 'rehabilitation' 'process' that has failed because it is inadequate? Is it because they are simply bad? Maybe they could actually be made to be less disposed to committing crime - but the State system of justice failed them because of its inadequacies. I don't know. But there seems to be a lot of idiots who think they do know - that such people are just EVIL.

It is not as black and white as you make it, there are and have always been some people in society who need for the safety of society to be removed from it one way or another, they are those that no amount of rehabilitation or short term punishment will change, one example being Josef Mengele, he was not raised in poverty or put down by society, he was a well educated and raised man who had all the cream of society had to offer him yet he opted to use the life saving skills and talants he had for the use of torture, mutilation and murder of innocents, now please show me one argument that can prove that after a short sentance or treatment that he could have been changed and deemed safe to go into society, same goes for Viktor Brack, Joachim Mrugowsky or Maria Mandel just to name a couple, come on please justify why the death sentence of these 3 and the sentence in absentinia of Mengele was not right.