James Bulger's 18th birthday

[Chris]

Well, in certain circumstances, at least with adults, they do throw the key away. They don't do it with children, and I'm very glad they don't. A society that gives up on a 10-year-old child is barbaric. No matter what the child has done, we have to model a better standard of behaviour. Thankfully, as a society, we do.

[colin25]

Is there any crime you wouldn't forgive?

I don't agree, I think there are evil people...just as I believe there are good people.

And shades in between. I don't think that everyone can be cured.

The model of behaviour is one where we don't accept that anything goes, that being a child means you should never be punished. That you can do anything, and be forgiven.

[Chris]

Originally Posted by colin25

Is there any crime you wouldn't forgive?

It has nothing to do with forgiveness - it is all about an appropriate level of punishment and rehabilitation in order to serve justice, protect the public, deter other would-be criminals and, where possible, return the offender to a useful status in society.

Forgiveness is for the victim, or in the case of murder the victim's family. And God, if you believe in him/her/it (I do - but that's another topic entirely).

I don't agree, I think there are evil people...just as I believe there are good people.

And shades in between. I don't think that everyone can be cured.

I believe that the human being is a fundamentally selfish and self-serving creature, who nevertheless in most cases can be educated, trained and socialised into a lifetime of behaviour that is largely acceptable to other humans.

'Good' and 'evil' are in this context merely relative tags we use for behaviour that is 'acceptable' or 'not acceptable'. Some humans choose to go against what's acceptable, others go against it due to some flaw or other. In that sense, yes, some can be 'cured' and some cannot.

The model of behaviour is one where we don't accept that anything goes, that being a child means you should never be punished. That you can do anything, and be forgiven.

I would say a great big trial, a guilty verdict, eight years locked up and a lifetime of state supervision is poorly described by the phrases 'anything goes' and 'never be punished'. You may feel the punishment was inadequate, but to suggest there was none is just bizarre.

As for forgiveness ... as I said, that's down to the victim, the victim's family, and possibly God. In the case of James Bulger, clearly his mother doesn't forgive, nor is she apparently ever likely to. As for God, well take your pick of the religions available to you. Mine, and that of most religious people in the UK, says that anything can be forgiven.

[Hom3r]

IMHO we should adopt the US "3 Strikes" justice system.

On your 3rd offence LIFE NO PATROLE. (No human rights BS.)

Murder should use these up straight away.

If you can't do the time DON'T do the crime.

[colin25]

Originally Posted by Chris

It has nothing to do with forgiveness - it is all about an appropriate level of punishment and rehabilitation in order to serve justice, protect the public, deter other would-be criminals and, where possible, return the offender to a useful status in society.

I don't see the punishment fitting the crime...to kill a child, even if you are a child, is one where i think "society" must ensure it doesn't happen again. Getting 8 years is nothing, and i don't see it as a deterrent.


I believe that the human being is a fundamentally selfish and self-serving creature, who nevertheless in most cases can be educated, trained and socialised into a lifetime of behaviour that is largely acceptable to other humans.

'Good' and 'evil' are in this context merely relative tags we use for behaviour that is 'acceptable' or 'not acceptable'. Some humans choose to go against what's acceptable, others go against it due to some flaw or other. In that sense, yes, some can be 'cured' and some cannot.

I use those terms as generic terms, to distinguish the extremes in behaviour. I don't see killing achild as ever acceptable. It is not relative, it absolute.

I would say a great big trial, a guilty verdict, eight years locked up and a lifetime of state supervision is poorly described by the phrases 'anything goes' and 'never be punished'. You may feel the punishment was inadequate, but to suggest there was none is just bizarre.

Eight years for killing a child..is not punishment..just an inconvenience.

As for forgiveness ... as I said, that's down to the victim, the victim's family, and possibly God. In the case of James Bulger, clearly his mother doesn't forgive, nor is she apparently ever likely to. As for God, well take your pick of the religions available to you. Mine, and that of most religious people in the UK, says that anything can be forgiven.

Hence why I think religion has its place, but not in Justice. A lot of crimes are perpetuated in the name of religion.

[Chris]

Do you think the treatment of Thompson and Venables was religiously motivated?

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Product 13

I found this an interesting read.

This was not reported by a social worker. Any social worker assigned to this case will have to abide by the same confidentiality restrictions everyone else was under. In fact, all social workers, anywhere, are bound by similar restrictions.

[Maggy J]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

This was not reported by a social worker. Any social worker assigned to this case will have to abide by the same confidentiality restrictions everyone else was under. In fact, all social workers, anywhere, are bound by similar restrictions.

I'm also pretty certain they wouldn't make themselves so easily identifiable.

[sniper007]

Just a reminder to those that have forgotten what these killers did, from Wikipedia:

Evidence found on CCTV at the Strand Shopping Centre in Bootle showed the kidnappers Venables and Thompson casually observing children, selecting a target. The boys were playing truant.[3] Throughout the day, Venables and Thompson were seen stealing various items including sweets, a troll doll, some batteries and a can of blue paint,[4] some of which were found at the murder scene.[5]
It was later revealed by one of the boys that they were planning to find a child to abduct, lead it to the busy road alongside the mall, and push it into car traffic.[6]

CCTV still of James Bulger being kidnapped by Venables and Thompson (above Bulger), recorded on shopping centre CCTV


That same afternoon, James Bulger (often mentioned as "Jamie Bulger" in press reports, although never called "Jamie" by his family), from nearby Kirkby, went with his mother Denise to a nearby shopping centre. He was approximately 2½ feet tall. While inside a shop, Denise realised her son had disappeared. He had wandered out of the shop on his own and was spotted by the two boys. They approached him, spoke to him and won his confidence, before taking him by the hand and leading him out of the precinct. This moment was captured on a CCTV camera at 15:39 (this reference states the time as 15:42).[7]
The boys took Bulger on a 2.5 miles (4.0 km) walk, leading him to a canal where he sustained injuries to his head and face.[3] During the walk, the boys were seen by 38 people.[8] Bulger was clearly distressed, but most bystanders did nothing to intervene assuming he was a younger brother.[3] Two people challenged the older boys, but they claimed that Bulger was a younger brother or that he was lost and they were taking him to the local police station.[9] Eventually the boys led Bulger to a railway line near the disused Walton & Anfield railway station, close to Walton Lane police station and Anfield cemetery, where they attacked him.[3]
Facts established at trial show that, at this location, one of the boys threw blue modelling paint on Bulger's face. They kicked him and hit him with bricks, stones and a 22-pound (10.0 kg) iron bar.[10][11] They then placed batteries in his mouth.[12] Bulger suffered skull fractures as a result of the iron bar striking his head. Alan Williams, the case's pathologist, speculated that Bulger suffered so many injuries that none could be isolated as the fatal blow.[13]
Before they left him, the boys laid Bulger across the railway tracks and weighted his head down with rubble, in hopes that a train would hit him and make his death appear an accident. After Bulger's killers left the scene, his body was cut in half by a train.[14] Bulger's severed body was discovered two days later, on 14 February.[3] A forensic pathologist testified that he had died before he was struck by the train.

[Chris]

Who do you suppose might have 'forgotten'?

[punky]

Anyone else worried here that the reporting of the breach of bail could be prejudice?

I don't know how the bail system works.

For example:

1. Has he been returned (i.e. remanded) pending trial for posession of indecent images of children? And after a sucessful conviction in court his bail is revoked and he serves out his original sentence + new sentence?

or

2. Only a parole officer needs to be satisfied that a prime facie case exists and his bail is cancelled. He serves out his original sentence and then faces trial at a later date, should CPS push it forward, on the kiddie porn?

If its former, I really hope our over-zealous media (who are talking as if he has been convicted of possessing kiddie porn) are responsible for him being released as a technicality.

[Chris]

So far as I can see, the parole board are effectively judge and jury in this case. They can return him to jail indefinitely (because he is on life-licence release) if they don't like the way he has conducted himself in the outside world. He could be locked up forever, even if there is never an actual trial over whatever it is he is now accused of.

[Damien]

Well surely he can't be seen to have broken the licence until he is convicted of the crime?

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by Chris

So far as I can see, the parole board are effectively judge and jury in this case. They can return him to jail indefinitely (because he is on life-licence release) if they don't like the way he has conducted himself in the outside world. He could be locked up forever, even if there is never an actual trial over whatever it is he is now accused of.

I would go with that jailing him indefinitely, all we need now is for the other half to join him.

[punky]

Originally Posted by Damien

Well surely he can't be seen to have broken the licence until he is convicted of the crime?

Well, I think the rationale is you don't need a court to prove you are worthy of parole (a parole board does it), so you don't need a court to have it cancelled either.