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 think what a lot of people on this thread are losing sight of is that it's about an adult who enjoys looking at pornography, not a child.

Thompson, as far as we know has not reoffended. So all the cries that putting them in a youth offenders institute, naming them and trying them as adults was irretrievably damaging are rather odd. Because Thompson, who was indisputably the most damaged child went through exactly the same thing but has not reoffended.

I find it disturbing that Venables has been handed carte blanche by some to behave as he wishes without ever having blame attached when we know from Thompson that it's perfectly possible to go through the same thing and not resort to looking at images of child abuse.

And we also know the authorities have lied by telling us that they're not a danger to the public then warning people off them because they are, er, a danger.

And there is also an inherent danger in the way they are a great liberal monolith. It was so important to the liberal dominated institutions that managed them their release should be a success that they were prepared to hush up reoffending until it became really, really serious. Their management has become heavily politicized and to admit failures in their release or management is to admit failures in an entire ideology and anybody who is hurt by Venables reoffending or distressed by it like the Bulgers or the woman he got pregnant are simply collaterol damage in this great liberal experiment.

What has happened with Venables was not inevitable, Thompson proves that. In Venables case they were too quick to declare he wasn't a danger. If the conditions for proving that had been harsher presumably Thompson would have been out but not Venables which, it appears, would have been the correct course of action.

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

I would have thought and hoped she had a better understanding in her line of work and actually looked at the issues as to why a child may be seen to act in a manipulative way rather than name calling regardless of their diagnoses

Often those who have been abused, neglected will act in a what some may see as a manipulative way it's a defence often driven by confusion, anger, hurt and a need to protect themselves

I agree with icimoi that there is a lot of grief porn on this thread. Typing out what happened in detail while talking about how much people have/are crying for that poor child. Nobody would dispute that what happened to James Bulger was horrific beyond most people's imagination, but equally one does not have to be seen to be crying to know that. Your level of empathy is not measured by how much you cried for someone, neither is it measured by how much you despise those who committed the crime, or how much you acknowledge that there was something very wrong with the mindset of a ten year old child to have committed this crime in the first place. The one does not cancel out the other.

I wouldn't necessarily say that the system was to blame for what happened, but equally there must have been some notion that there was something amiss with these boys in order that they carried out this crime in the first place. We cannot know whether JV was motivated to download images of child porn because of his time in prison, because of his personality or because he just cannot cope being on the outside. Someone made reference up thread to the fact that when he called his sw and they came round he was in the process of trying to remove a hard drive from a computer. That sounds awfully calculated to the point of wanting to be caught to me rather than wanting to cover up. Paedophiles are usually very careful to hide evidence. The fact that the sw found him trying to do so would imply more that he wanted to be found. Exactly why that is we cannot know. but I can only imagine that living under a new identity which you cannot divulge to anyone isn't exactly a picnic lifestyle. Perhaps he is a dangerous paedophile. perhaps he is a desperate who is unable to live with what he has become. He has committed crimes as an adult and for those he rightly was held accountable. Whether that further sentence was long enough was for the justice system to decide not the vijilanti mob.

It is a recognised fact that children who are abused are more likely to go on and commit crimes. Not always crimes of abuse, but children in care for instance are far more likely to offend in some way. How many times do we hear said of someone who has been abused that they have grown up well balanced all things considered? I've certainly heard it said.

My dp was horrifically abused as a child. I cannot go into detail on here because it is not my story to tell, but if I say that he is visually impaired as a result you can imagine the kind of levels I am talking about. I have lost count of the number of people who have said that it's amazing that he is well balanced and that if he had become a twisted individual as a result of the abuse he had suffered no-one would be surprised. now, while I certainly don't think that abuse in any way justifies turning to crime, if you grow up not knowing right from wrong because the most horrific things are done to you and no-one is ever held accountable, then sometimes the only way you find out that what is being done to you is wrong is when you repeat the cycle and someone makes you accountable for doing so, by which time it is too late......

"And we also know the authorities have lied by telling us that they're not a danger to the public then warning people off them because they are, er, a danger." I presume you are referring to partners etc... it simply wouldn't be possible to withhold that kind of information from someone who was entering into a relationship with someone living under a new identity like that. And it would need to be managed by the authorities not only because of perceived risk (if there was one) but also because there are other factors to consider e.g. this information is confidential, it cannot come out that you are e.g. living with john venibles if you choose to pursue the relationship. We know only too well how the press react to snippets of information about him, and every time that happens he is put at risk of vijilanti attack. And while some might say that he has only himself to blame for that, we don't live in a society of mob rule.

wannabe......I was one of the posters who said I cried when I saw pictures of James and I make no apologies for that. I only mentioned it because the thread seemed to be getting bogged down with the rights or wrongs of the treatment of Venables and Thompson and the poor little innocent boy they had killed seemed to be forgotten about. I agree your measure of empathy is not about how much you cry but as I said It was my way of getting the attention back to James. It certainly wasn't a boast about crying but I have to say that some people don't seem to have much empathy at all. It is them that I would have more of a problem with.

Wannabe, it WAS possible to withold that information. He got a woman pregnant and before that they didn't tell her. Now she is left with a child who can never know who his father is because apparently Venables right to have sex with women is more important than women's right to know whether the person they are potentially getting pregnant by is Venables.

They were released from prison on the understanding they were no longer a danger. Then when this woman fell pregnant they informed her that he was a danger. Which one is it? One must be a lie. Either he's not a danger or he is. You can't tell the public at large he is not a danger then go around telling individuals that he is a danger.

This thread isn't about the murder of James Bulger or the story behind what turned a young boy into a murderer.

Its about a man who has been convicted of possessing child pornography having access to dating websites and possibly getting involved with a mother and her children without her knowledge of this.

pine you seem incapable of understanding that there is no need to keep bringing this thread back to what happened to James Bulger. There isn't a contributor who doesn't know and no one has dismissed his suffering and that of his family when discussing JV and JT.

Unless I am mistaken the OP was about the merits of JV being able to register for online dating and the possibility of him having a relationship with someone who didn't know his true identity. If someone did ask the authorities about him, it would be flagged up because there are systems in place for offenders living under new identities.

From what little I know of JV he needs professional help. He does not need to be pursued and persecuted all his life for a heinous crime committed as a ten year old.

I was unaware that a partner of Venables had become pregnant by him?
did she know who he was?
What happened to the child? do we know?

Sorry, x post with Moan

This is deeply worrying...

If he is 'no longer a danger' why does the person he becomes involved with (and there are potentially many of them down the years if he doesn't 'settle' as he is still a young man) need 'warning'.

Very wrong for a child not to be able to discover his/her father is Venables. A child has a right to know it's parentage, where at all possible.

My guess is that, for whatever reason, he 'cant cope' with the outside / the strain of new identity which is why he will continue to re-offend in an obvious way until he is repeatedly returned to some sort of incarceration.

Very sad outcome all around.
Most sad for the poor baby he killed so appallingly and that baby's family of course, but sad all around too, as the 'collateral damage' potentially increases over the years.

After doing a quick Google it would appear that she was never told it was him, she saw a picture of what he may look like now and ended the relationship after discovering he was a Category 1 offender.

They met on a dating website which would indicate this is old news being trotted out to reignite the fire.

Apparently he had a girlfriend who miscarried his child and there is another woman who thinks her ex partner, a schedule one offender, was JV and she had a child by him. There is no proof of this.

Mindreader that is what this thread is about

do we need to know that he has been on a dating site

do you need to know who she is

do we need to know any details of this situation

imo the answer is no and to let the authorities deal with JV and RH

why do you or I need to know what difference does it make to our lives

should he be out that is for those who are dealing with him to decide. from what we hear (and this is what the press choose to print) it sounds as though he almost wants to be caught but again the constant chasing him down and reporting on his action by the press is not helping anyone and complicates matters further

wowfudge it wasn't my intention to put any more posts up, I was purely defending my previous post which had been indirectly referred to by another poster. "there is no need to keep bringing this thread back to what happened to James Bulger", really?? well I'm sure I'm not the only one to have mentioned him, and you really think there can be a discussion about Venables and Thomson without what happened to James being mentioned?.....I've yet to see one.

Wowfudge .....would you be happy for JV to live next door to you, after all you say he shouldn't be pursued and persecuted all his life.

Pinefruits no matter how horrific a crime a child commits you cannot define their every breath afterwards by bringing it up.

Yes, clearly his actions and his treatment had a massive impact on who he is but we cannot saysay conclusively that he's a danger because of something that happened 22 years ago.

The fact he's accessed child pornography as an adult does make me wary of him though and through this we can probably accurately state that there is something very wrong with his thought processes and not someone I'd like to unintentionally rub shoulders with. But that goes for any paedophile.

Actually I do because you have repeatedly referred to it as though some of us are too stupid to compute this when thinking about the alleged situation the press are now reporting on.

I agree wholeheartedly with Freudians.

there is an underlying grief hijacking going on

i cried so i must feel more for the Bulger family

no one was not moved by what happened then and now this is why it is being discussed

empathy is not one sided it is not about you showing your emotions it is about understanding how the person/persons is feeling and recognising their feelings as their own not yours to be part of

pine - I would. I don't know who any of my neighbours are really. I talk to most of them and those who keep themselves to themselves I respect their desire for that. I don't know if any of them has a criminal record and if they have this hasn't impacted on me in any way. Why should JV be any different?

As long as anyone who lived next door to me wasn't a bad neighbour what difference does it make to me?

I form my own opinions on people from interactions with them. I'm no fool, but I don't need to be told what to think by the press.

Totally agree with Freudians.

I left the thread about 5 pages in as it was turning into a gossip fest about how much people were "in the know" about what did/didn't happen to JB and the treatment of JV and RT.

That's not empathy, its Voyeurism.

I cried so I must feel more for the Bulger family......did somebody write that?
*Wowfudge.....actually you do what? and what have I pepeatedly referred to?
I find it rather strange that some people get uncomfortable about people expressing their feelings. Perhaps it emphasizes their own lack of empathy.

That's your choice then Wowfudge, I don't know if you're a mother or not but as a mother I wouldn't simply because I don't think Venables should be anywhere near them.

pine actually I do think there can be a discussion about JV and RT without the constant references to what they did to JB. Which you have repeatedly referred to.

I'm not uncomfortable about expressing my feelings - what are you on about?

I don't know but it would be a shock for who ever dated him.

Then you've got the foundation of a relationship in which it would be built on lies.

Does he deserve to be loved, I guess is one of the questions.