to think the Jon Venables program on bbc 1 now is unnecessary and disgusting.

[bristolcities]

I realise the point of the program is to find out why Jon returned to jail but the interviews and graphic descriptions are unnecessary and disturbing. It seems like voyeurism at it's worst.

I know someone who worked in a secure unit with one of the boys. Apparently the main horrific injuries were caused by a train, after his death. Don't watch this stuff if it upsets you so much?

Not that it makes this any better. They were 10 year old children horrifically failed by their parents.

Children that 'walk away' from abusive childhoods (to the extent that these boys had) phsyologically undisturbed are in the minority. The whole system has changed since then but there is still not enough help for abused children.

I often wonder at what age we should start to blame the child, when a child died in a high profile case a couple of years ago, i often thought that if he had of lived he could have become a J Venables.

If you kick a puppy often enough eventually it will bite.

I thought the bit about the circumstances of jv's release with new identity at age 18 and how that was managed was interesting. I think that those decisions may have contributed to his decline and re-arrest. I'm also interested (although I recognise that this is because I work in this field) in how he developed an interest in images of child abuse and how his mind must have been deteriorating. I completely accept that the subject matter is upsetting to some but I didn't find the programme gratuitous at all. Just my opinion.

nullius like Birds said the death penalty is no deterrent so I don't think the message sent by the help they might receive is really paramount in making the decision to commit a terrible crime.

They were also failed by the system. But more notice of their life would have been taken now.

nulliusxinxverbax it's not about providing them with an excuse or an entitlement to do whatever they please it is about society trying to understand why these two boys commited murder.

If we don't seek to understand the reasons why then how can we prevent it happening again?

It's not about seeing good in all but the cycle of abuse will keep goiing round. Those two boys were damaged by their 'nuture' they weren't born evil.

nulliusxinxverbax - "daddy showed me a scary movie" might have been the shallow taboild interpretation of the case, but if you've ever read a more thorough article on the trial then you'd know that both boys had been brought up in chaotic circumstances and had been the victims of abuse themselves.

In your post at 23:44 you ask whether releasing such people sends a message that children who have a poor start in life can do what they want - do you honestly believe that anyone is born into this world with a cynical desire to perpetrate as much abuse and violence as they are permitted to get away with? That anyone would choose, as a primary school child, to spend the rest of their childhood in a secure unit because they killed a toddler?

When you're dealing with ten year olds I honestly think that the family envrionment a child has grown up with is the major factor in determining their behaviour, aside from actual mental/emotional conditions that significantly alter someone's capacity to empathise with others.

No Comeit was in reference to another post. That is not what i meant.

Sorry for the spelling mistakes, trying to type to fast.

To all asking me questions - Im sorry but you are missing my point.

My point is that I really dont care what happened to them, why they chose to do it, how damaged they must have been to do it, ect ect. They are evil, dangerous monsters. I dont believe they will ever be safe in society, so I dont think they should ever have been released. Its not about why or what for, its about the danger they pose.

Would you be happy to have them living next to you?
No?
Maybe they are.........

With the advancement of Child Protection , there would be. For example (i don't know if its in the programme), one of the boys neighbours phoned the police because he was tied naked to a washing line post, three times she had to call back before they came (two hours later). When the attended they ubtied him and did not speak to the parents, they would now have to make an SS referal. Also the boys never went to school which would 'flag up' a CP concern.

And if you were denise.....would you care why? Would hearing about their childhood take away any of your pain? I always see it from her perspective, never thiers.

I feel sick thinking I could come into contact with those two.

I really dont understand how anybody has any sympathy for them. But this is my own fault, I should never have posted on this thread as I do have very strong views on the subject. Night all.

Beer i think you're right, Robert Thompson's family were known to social services and in the other case they mentioned those two boys were also well known. Unfortunately knowing about them doesn't always mean preventing them from offending.

I often see the potential in young children to cause harm to others but it's hard to intervene until they actually do offend.

I don't believe in evil. That takes away responsibility.

Nullius- my point is that the research that CP cases are based on goes toward changing of the law regarding the removal of children ealier, to prevent damaged children. We have got to take an interest. I am not saying everyone neccessarily but certainly enough. We learn by past mistakes. This case has had a high profile but there has always been 'child' murderers and many are being released.

I didn't watch it. They aren't the first (Mary Bell springs to mind) and sadly they aren't the last. I really just don't know what to say......

Nullius- never sympathy only empathy.

I couldn't care less if one of them lived next to me! Why should I? As long as they didn't play loud music at all hours of the day and night and they kept their wheelie bin and recycling box reasonably tidy then they'd be fine as neighbours.

Do you know how many convicted murderers are released from prison? Most of them. Very few are kept locked up for life (just a couple of particularly high-profile cases such as Ian Brady who is actually detained under mental health law now anyway) or die of old age in prison. Some actually go one to contribute productively to society again, shock horror. If they commit another crime they get recalled and the assessment process starts again from scratch before they can be considered for release a second time.

nulliusxinxverbax just because i can see these boys were damaged doesn't mean i agree with the decision making in relation to their offence.

How do you propose we stop this from happening if all we do is label these kids as monsters and lock them up forever?

Of course i wouldn't want them living next to me and of course if i was in Denise Bulger's shoes i'd want them punished but i'm not. Not being her allows me to step back and discuss it in a objective way.

Amplebossom-CP has been overhauled many times. Being 'known' to SS then did not mean much. Thompson had been a victim of sexual abuse but was not on a 'at risk' register.

That was the surprise for many, Thompson was seen as the worse of the two.

Birds exactly, they would be known to SS but that doesn't mean you can prevent anything happening. I work in CP and spend most of my days in case conferences, i used to think being on the CP register or being subject to a safeguarding plan as we call it these days afforded children special protection. Now i know different