He was a child himself when he committed a savage murder but he's since been convicted for downloading and distributing child porn.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10160961/Bulger-killer-set-free-and-taxpayers-pick-up-bill.html
What does the panel think?
typo in header corrected
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 5 Jul 13 at 01:55
|
About right. Nothing to be gained by locking him up for ever, I don't believe for a minute that he and Thompson understood the magnitude of what they did.
What exactly was the 'child porn' he looked at. Teenage girls or pre pubescents?
Let him try again for a version of adult normality.
|
>> About right. Nothing to be gained by locking him up for ever, I don't believe
>> for a minute that he and Thompson understood the magnitude of what they did.
>>
Don't agree with that. They were 10 at the time and my 10 year old and his friends know that torturing and killing another child is very wrong and would have severe implications.
|
>> >> About right. Nothing to be gained by locking him up for ever, I don't
>> believe
>> >> for a minute that he and Thompson understood the magnitude of what they did.
>> >>
>>
>> Don't agree with that. They were 10 at the time and my 10 year old
>> and his friends know that torturing and killing another child is very wrong and would
>> have severe implications.
>>
I agree with this poster. As far as I am concerned he should be in the ground.
Last edited by: MD on Thu 4 Jul 13 at 22:41
|
>> >> Don't agree with that. They were 10 at the time and my 10 year
>> old
>> >> and his friends know that torturing and killing another child is very wrong and
>> would
>> >> have severe implications.
>> >>
>> I agree with this poster. As far as I am concerned he should be in
>> the ground.
>
Ditto
When you think about it from a victim's perspective rather than the piece of crap that perpetrated it.
They've led away an unknowing 2 year old, who would have gone with anyone and done the most despicable things to him. It truly defies belief. They are in the same zone as Ian Brady, both of them.
I'd have problems sanctioning the death of 10 year old children (I think) but in circs like this they should rot in prison for ever, they do not deserve the opportunity to be ever free again.
You'd have the hump if they did what they did to a dog or cat..but to an innocent 2 year old boy???? What on earth must his parents have gone through.
I think some of you lose your perspective, your concerns for the assailant cover up any concern for the victim. I think if you over step the mark as bad as these two did, you've used up any goodwill from society..too bad.
|
>>When you think about it from a victim's perspective rather than the piece of crap that >>perpetrated it.
You mention Brady. Like Brady they're outliers from whom no criminological conclusions can be drawn.
If adults had done this they'd have got a whole life tariff and quite rightly so. But they were not adults, they were ten year old boys from disturbed backgrounds. Yes they knew they were committing an outrageous crime but to suggest they are 'pieces of crap' deserving of nowt but adult jail for rest of their lives is cruel and inhuman.
Thomson, by all accounts, has managed to rehabilitate himself.
Venables deserves no further chances after this one.
|
|
I'm with the biBerlingo guy ! :-)
|
>You mention Brady. Like Brady they're outliers from whom no criminological conclusions can be drawn.
In my profession unexpected behaviour is investigated closely, not dismissed as statistical outliers.
|
>> >You mention Brady. Like Brady they're outliers from whom no criminological conclusions can be drawn.
>>
>> In my profession unexpected behaviour is investigated closely, not dismissed as statistical outliers.
>>
Same here.....or else aircraft can fall out of the sky!
|
>> In my profession unexpected behaviour is investigated closely, not dismissed as statistical outliers.
Same in my profession. Somebody who is constantly getting in rows with the public or whose output is under or over expectation warrants looking at. 'Over producers' may have found a new way of doing things or maybe they're cutting corners and bending safeguards. As also pointed out outlier examples from an aircraft's flight recorders might also reveal mechanical problems or safety breaches.
It's possible that earlier identification of outlier behaviour by Thompson and Venables might have prevented the Bulger tragedy.
My point was, and remains, that once such crimes have happened they're not much help in determining sentencing policy.
|
>> My point was, and remains, that once such crimes have happened they're not much help
>> in determining sentencing policy.
>>
You are plain wrong there.
They might not be relevant for general sentencing policy, i'd wholeheartedly agree with that..but they are most definitely relevant for sentencing policy for the truly awful.
You make the mistake of mixing these people up with the general population. They are not like the general population....and need to be treated accordingly.
|
>> If adults had done this they'd have got a whole life tariff and quite rightly
>> so. But they were not adults, they were ten year old boys from disturbed backgrounds.
>> Yes they knew they were committing an outrageous crime but to suggest they are 'pieces
>> of crap' deserving of nowt but adult jail for rest of their lives is cruel
>> and inhuman.
...and what they did to a poor innocent boy, wasn't?
Why do people have their hearts bleed for those that commit these awful acts..and not the people who really ought to have the sympathy.
There are many, many hundreds of thousands of youngsters who are brought up in deprived backgrounds, who do not go out and commit unspeakable crimes.
|
>> But they were not adults, they were ten year old boys from disturbed backgrounds.
>> Yes they knew they were committing an outrageous crime but to suggest they are 'pieces
>> of crap' deserving of nowt but adult jail for rest of their lives is cruel
>> and inhuman.
They were old enough to know right from wrong, they were old enough for the law to say they can be prosecuted...and their crime so heinous that they deserve far stronger than the liberals 'let them try again' approach.
|
>> >> But they were not adults, they were ten year old boys from disturbed backgrounds.
>> >> Yes they knew they were committing an outrageous crime but to suggest they are
>> 'pieces
>> >> of crap' deserving of nowt but adult jail for rest of their lives is
>> cruel
>> >> and inhuman.
>>
>> They were old enough to know right from wrong, they were old enough for the
>> law to say they can be prosecuted...and their crime so heinous that they deserve far
>> stronger than the liberals 'let them try again' approach.
We're never going to agree on this. I'n not a bleeding heart but I don't care much for state sponsored vengeance, still less when it's taken against minors. Punishment, deterrence and rehabilitation are the marks of a civilised penal policy.
What they did cannot be undone by 'throwing the key away'. It's arguable that putting them in front of an adult court, where they could barely see over the dock and then naming them was a crime in itself. In other countries, and we need look no further afield then Scotland, they'd probably not have gone to a court as such at all.
I suspect Venables is irredeemable and this has to be his last chance. He's 30 now and has had enough training, rehab and experience of probation to know the boundaries.
|
>> Don't agree with that. They were 10 at the time and my 10 year old
>> and his friends know that torturing and killing another child is very wrong and would
>> have severe implications.
I'm not saying they didn't understand it was wrong, wicked even. They didn't have an adults understanding either and should not be treated as though they did.
Venables is still out on licence and will be recalled again if he breaks terms of his parole. Another strike and I suspect he'll be out of circualtion for a long time.
|
>> Another strike and I suspect he'll be out of circualtion for a
>> long time.
>>
And the victim of that strike? I'm sorry Bromps, I often see things your way, but not this time.
Time to throw away the key.
|
>> About right. Nothing to be gained by locking him up for ever, I don't believe
>> for a minute that he and Thompson understood the magnitude of what they did.
>>
>> What exactly was the 'child porn' he looked at. Teenage girls or pre pubescents?
>>
>> Let him try again for a version of adult normality.
It was 8 year old girls being raped. (according to one news source), he also pretended to be a mother of a child to gain more images, and was convicted of distributing.
You don't find pictures of 8 year olds being raped without actively going out of your way to find.
So my view? He had his chance, he cocked it up, badly. Clearly he is a born wrong 'un and should never be released. He has proven it was not a "child crime", he has failed as an adult so there is plenty to be gained by locking him up for ever, for a start we don't want him fathering children.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 4 Jul 13 at 23:01
|
Locked up forever as a minimum, preferably executed.
I wouldn't have given him a second chance, but in any case he blew that as well.
|
|
Someone will probably find him and deal with him.
|
>> Someone will probably find him and deal with him.
>>
Not before tens of thousands of pounds of public money (i.e. our money) is spent on housing him and giving him a new identity.
|
>> Not before tens of thousands of pounds of public money (i.e. our money) is spent
>> on housing him and giving him a new identity.
For the fourth time (this time) according to my memory of the Telegraph article, at £250,000 a pop.
He was a bad child, and he's still a bad man.
Enough already.
|
I am not a proponent of the death penalty, two wrongs don't make a right, giving in to our baser instinct of revenge lessens us as humans and the punishment is not proven to serve as a deterrent. Moreover even most proponents of the death penalty would not see it applied to minors.
I am sure that the parole board considered their decision carefully, however there are other examples of people on parole (and as in this case released under license from their life sentences) committing new and perhaps related crimes (we had the rape and murder of Jill Meagher in Melbourne recently committed by a rapist out under license).
Venables' accomplice seems to have kept to the straight and narrow or avoided media reporting anyhow? I believe that people are capable of redemption (something which the death penalty denies of course), however - and in this case, it seems to me that the second crime - especially as it marks the perpetrator out as posing a danger, ought to result in a much longer return to prison than 2 years both as a punishment and for the protection of society.
|
I'm with this geez gentleman ^
|
|
Wifey doesn't agree with me though, she thinks "he is a born wrong 'un and should never be released".
|
|
I noted when conducting management exercises that it was the women students who were keenest on swingeing punishments. Whereas men might suggest counselling and cautioning an offender, women were more likely to say something like "Sack him immediately and cancel his pension".
|
I wonder what sort of environment he was brought up in and incarcerated.
I understand 'nonces' are kept separate from other inmates. Are they kept together and as a result form their own communities where they may consider their behaviour normal? Could be a breeding ground for sharing information on web sites and other sources.
Castration would prevent them adding to the gene pool.
|
>> "he is a born wrong 'un and should never be released".
One is somewhat at a loss to know what to do with people like Venables, Brady and other sadistic psychopaths. The important thing is to keep them out of everyone's hair, and if that means shutting them in a cage for ever, feeding them powerful drugs or cutting bits out of their brains, so be it. I don't feel much sympathy for them and don't much care what happens to them.
But: wrong 'uns are generally made, not born. It's a pretty safe bet that such people have experienced, or witnessed at close quarters, a good deal of cruel and violent behaviour from infancy onward. Inside the crazed brute lurks a cowering damaged child.
Who doesn't necessarily inspire sympathy. There's nothing to prevent a damaged victim from also being loathsome and despicable. Bit complicated what?
|
|
I am favour of his release.. under his own name. Why spend more money on him?
|
>>I am favour of his release.. under his own name. Why spend more money on him? <<
Now that would be cruel!! ;-) ;-)
|
Venables is damaged goods and I don't think fit for release. His conviction for downloading and distributing child porn years after the original crime demonstrates he still has a dangerous attraction for young children.
I wouldn't be surprised to see him in the news for further offences in years to come.
|
|
And who's he going to hurt on that journey?
|
"There's nothing to prevent a damaged victim from also being loathsome and despicable. Bit complicated what? "
My wife's friend, an unmarried lady, adopted (was fobbed off with) a boy with 'foetal alcohol syndrome' - though this wasn't known at the time of the adoption, and he didn't really show the classic physical/facial traits. He is now 19 and he has made her life a misery with his totally unreasonable behaviour; he doesn't know truth from lies, nor fantasy from reality, nor good from bad. I have appeared at the nick as an 'Appropriate Adult' for him on a couple of occasions and he wastes an immense amount of police time ..... and oxygen.
Nobody, absolutely nobody, knows what to do with him.
|
From another site:
Venables and Thompson were both 10 when they killed James Bulger. Ten. think about someone you know who is ten. What makes two ten-year-olds kill a toddler? Several years before young people are considered old enough to make choices about having sex, getting married, voting, yet apparently fully able to weigh up the issues around killing according to the book throwers. So what gets a ten year old to the point where they are able to do what they did? I couldn't pull the trigger on a blackbird with an air-rifle as an immature 18-year-old when something suggested that it might be interesting to see what it felt like. So what happened to them? And did whatever happen to them contribute to the position they were in on that day? If it did, then is throwing away the key the most profitable solution, or should we be sharing the focus elsewhere
Kind of sums it up for me.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 9 Jul 13 at 15:09
|
>> Kind of sums it up for me.
Venables was 30 when he started peddling child porn. Despite the fact he knew he was on license.
Kind of sums it up for me.
|
Jon Vanables - Bromptonaut
