To ask your thoughts on Jon Venables joining a dating site?

[Sallystyle]

With his new name no one can do a google search on him and find his history.

He was found not long ago with images of child abuse.

Should he be able to get on with his life now he is out of prison? Of course he can just as easily meet someone in the pub.

I just had a debate with a family member about this so interested in your thoughts.

Link here

www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/james-bulger-killer-jon-venables-5039227

I don't disagree that generally speaking, sentences should be longer. But do we really expect these boys to have received a full life sentence of potential 70-80 years?

And do we also expect any person convicted of murder to remain in prison until they die? I don't think it would prevent crime at all, and I would fear that if people thought they had nothing to lose then they may commit other offences. Particularly in prison where there would be no incentive for good behaviour.

We can speculate and judge all we like, but we're not the professionals who have to decide whether or not these sick, evil torturers of a little child have been rehabilitated and are not now a danger to society.

Surely that's all that matters? However heinous the crime committed by a 10 year old child it doesn't mean that when that child reaches adulthood after years of counselling they couldn't be capable of total remorse.

My gut reaction would be to string the little shits up, but take a step back and think woah - are they capable of becoming decent human beings?

I haven't the first clue and nor has anyone else on this thread.

pine Yes I read papers and I also work within the judicial system. I was merely asking you for details about a particular case you seemed to be referring to? What key words should I put into google?

If you don't want to be taken literally then don't make comments like that.

can you not see them as being victims themselves

you called them wicked and sadistic they were 10 years old

Yes Freud they were to do what they did to,that little boy, what else are they. The only victim was tgat little boy calling for his mummy whilst they were torturing him.

Nicky just type in "criminals given early release"...... quite shocking actually.

you really do not need to repeat that again

most of us will have read the reports

is that how normal 10 year old boys think, are these the thoughts of boys of that age

no of course not

pine I think you may be confused as to what I was asking. I asked what cases you were referring to where the experts stated the person was dangerous and they were released anyway?

I'm well aware criminals are early and some commit crime again.

My point was that dealing with offenders/criminals is not about retribution these days.

And I don't agree with all the decisions of the criminal justice system either. But I do not think you can lock up such young children without thinking about how our society has failed them for them to have committed this crime. It isn't right to continue to punish them their whole lives.

I don't know what the confusion is about Nick. I don't know where I gave the impression I was talking about particular cases. It seems a bit pedantic to be fixating on this. I wasn't talking about particular cases, how could I possibly remember names to give you. Am I to take it you don't think this happens?

There are elements of this thread that are descending into emotive grief porn where people appear almost to be enjoying dwelling on what was done to James, claiming to be crying for him, berating anyone who has the temerity not to feel the same way, and coming out with all the standard cliches about "bleeding heart liberals" and "do-gooders" which if anything seem to be a convenient substitute for actually applying some reasoned thought to the issues. I think it may be why they cannot assimilate the possibility that others can genuinely be absolutely horrified about what was done to James whilst also believing the sentence on the children who killed him was probably the appropriate one.

Ok, no confusion but you referenced these cases a few times and I was interested in reading them. But clearly you don't have an example of the point you were trying to make. No worries!

icimoi good post.

Pine you have made several sweeping statements, but can't back them up. I don't think it's pedantic, I think it's important you clarify such statements.

As for reading the papers - it tabloid hacks who've whipped this all up yet again. Some of the 'reporting' I've read on JV's online dating registration has been truly appalling. Statements such as he is 'trawling the internet for his next victim'. They should be ashamed of themselves.

totally agree Icimoi

Hear, hear icimoi

Nick Google "examples of criminals reoffending"......hardly sweeping statements Wowfudge, it's all pretty common knowledge. I would have thought most of the country was aware of the shambles of early release of violent criminals.

where people appear almost to be enjoying dwelling on what was done to James.....good point, I also notice that the ones who seem to have empathy for the killers seem to be totally lacking in empathy for the Bulgers.

It is possible to have empathy for all involved, you know pine.

I think that goes without saying that everyone feels nothing but compassion for them. I just dont feel I need to demonstrate it like others do.

Fair enough, we'll leave it at that then Nick

They may have known that it was wrong but could they understand how wrong??

For example, could they have understood that they were taking a little boy away from his loving parents when they had not been raised in loving families themselves???

One of the two ten year olds had a truly horrific upbringing . The other had a less than ideal upbringing and siblings with additional needs. What they did to james was truly horrific. They probably wouldn't have done what they did if they had a nurturing upbringing. However, thousands of children in this country had had similar or worse upbringings. They were ten and deserve a second chance. However their appears to be something in their personality/ brain chemistry/ dynamics between the boys which let them think kidnapping and torturing a toddler was a good idea.

They needed to have been punished and rehabilitated. It appears to have worked for Thompson . Venebales continues to be a risk to children.

I don't think people are born evil but I believe that some people are born with personalities which, given the wrong upbringing can lead to evil. Look at the evil done in war, the holocaust, Isis etc.

I have no idea why one boy has re offended and the other ( apparently) not. However we have a duty of care to protect further children from abuse from venebles. Maybe he should be recalled to prison and kept in until he's no longer a threat to children.

pengyquin: I worked with guy who had previously looked after him whilst he was in the offenders place. He said he was a very very twisted individual.

The 'guy' you talk of had no right to discuss inmates he may have worked with.

That is a gross betrayal of professional confidentiality.

I'm not so sure I agree.
With people posting that they have been 'failed' by society or the system.
I think that's just a bit of a cop out - oh blame the system.

But was it really the system that failed them? Even if they had not had a particularly loving family? Ok. But to take it THAT many steps further is what shocks us.

Many of us have , or have had, 10 year olds. And they know right and wrong. And still make wrong decisions. Daily, tiny wrong decisions. But , it's a totally different thing to go on a do THAT - all the things thompson/venables did.

And I also think it's a bit of a cop out to use the word 'evil'. Maybe we need to look for another word. Because no one seems to like the word, or many can't accept that children are 'evil'. But some children are very manipulative.
I was at a meeting and the Relate lady , who deals with ASD and adhd children was saying how some of them were.

Many of the children she met had almost minor psychopath tendencies: so self centred, detached, zero responsibility, blaming all others, etc.

And also society has changed.

Toddlers seem to learn so much younger, how to get what they want. More controlling. Some of them. I'm not saying they are 'evil', but it's a foundation, a stepping stone that can lead to more psychopathic tendencies.

I know lots of 10 year olds who are very detached in some ways, give them x box and occasional food and they literally don't want anything else. Or little else.

And babies. Nature or nurture. Not saying they are born 'evil' - once again wrong word, but totally different, from the moment they come out of the womb.
Some totally passive, very easy. Some very difficult.

And then they could become controlling toddlers, and then detached psychopathic (almost) pre teens.

Yes Thompson and venables took a step further. But I think you might be quite unsettled to find how small that step is.

Although I then come back to the fact they did take that next step. And most 10 year olds I know wouldn't.

Why did they?

Why has the 'treatment' they've had, for the last 10 years, not cured one of them (one keeps re-offending) ? I'm not sure we can ever work that out, can we?