My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

MNHQ have commented on this thread

AIBU?

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

480 replies

Sallystyle · 26/01/2015 12:57

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

OP posts:
Report
wishmiplass · 26/01/2015 13:55

Moan I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the powers that be would make sure that relevant services would know about his identity. He's not a spy ffs!

As parents (and single mothers/women/people in general) there are measures we can also take to make our children (and ourselves safe). But only up to a point.

Unless of course, we go down the road of the death penalty for such offenses (this is not, IMO, an option).

Report
alwaysstaytoolong · 26/01/2015 13:57

He is subject to 'life licence'.

Any person he starts a relationship with, any job he gets, where he lives etc etc his probation team will have full knowledge about.

Extremely unlikely that he'll be doing or able to do very much at all without their knowledge.

Report
MoanCollins · 26/01/2015 14:01

Erm, always, you haven't read much on the subject have you? His probabtion officers utterly failed last time around he was able to enter areas he was banned from for the sake of the Bulgers and took an array of hard drugs without any sanction.

Report
wishmiplass · 26/01/2015 14:02

pengy ilove

ooh, did he? oooh - that's fucking interesting.

have you considered that you might be triggering things for some people here?

just lay off with the gossipy scandalizing posts will you?

Report
Isthatwhatdemonsdo · 26/01/2015 14:05

They both should have been sent to an adult prison for the rest of their lives when they turned 18. They have no right to any decent quality of life. They never gave James a chance.

Report
Chilicosrenegade · 26/01/2015 14:05

"Unrelated male"

Nope. Nary an issue with unrelated males.

The related ones though another story....

Report
Branleuse · 26/01/2015 14:11

he wouldnt be my type at all

Report
MoanCollins · 26/01/2015 14:14

Wish, no that's not the case. They didn't interfere with a relationship until he had got a girl pregnant and only told her then, she should never have been put in that position, she should have been allowed information on what the man she was sleeping with had done before she got pregnant. He also worked as a bouncer as his criminal record check showed nothing because of his new identity. Only a tiny amount of people know his new identity, apparently even normal police officers cannot know it and if his new identity is put into the police national computer it comes up with a messaging telling them to refer it to the area Chief Constable It's very hush hush and they only appear to act when a child is at risk of danger rather than preventing the danger from happening in the first place by, for example, not allowing him to get unsuspecting young women pregnant in the first place. These women's rights are being prioritised below his, and that can't be right.

Report
needaholidaynow · 26/01/2015 14:16

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ilovechristmas1 · 26/01/2015 14:17

wishmiplass

it was not gossip Denise Bulger clariffed it

and im pretty sure the title of the op will forwarn readers that may find it distressing

Report
MoanCollins · 26/01/2015 14:18

Wish Pengy raised a very valid and interesting point When they committed the offences there was an awful lot of handwringing and worrying about the fact that they were children who didn't really understand what they had done and needed sensitive treatment as a result and weren't really to blame.

But as the years have passed it's become more and more obvious that Venables rather than being a poor misunderstood child was a sexually sadist paedophile who knew exactly what he was doing. Which has rather undermined the arguments that he must be treated with kid gloves by the system as a victim himself more sinned against than sinning.

Report
ilovechristmas1 · 26/01/2015 14:19

what about his close famil'ys identity,are they all some one different now?

didnt they move to

Report
Sallystyle · 26/01/2015 14:20

I too think he should never have been let out of prison the second time.

He has proven he can't be rehabilitated.

OP posts:
Report
MoanCollins · 26/01/2015 14:21

And I do worry about people saying he is 'closely monitored' when we know that failed last time around and he has been able to manipulate those who are supposed to be monitoring him so effectively at least one of them jumped into bed with him.

Report
Only1scoop · 26/01/2015 14:22

Knowing that sick killer could be having a date with anyone tonight yet alone a mother of young children makes me feel the need to physically vomit.

Report
TheChandler · 26/01/2015 14:27

As a more general point, anyone on an internet dating site that isn't strictly monitored and requires extensive ID checks could be anyone at all - they could use a false name, construct a false identity and background, have a criminal record (reasonably likely considering the proportion of men in the UK who have or have had at one time a criminal record) including a serious crime, be married, have children, etc which they choose not to disclose. There been a case recently in the papers where a convicted murdered contacted, from jail, a woman he had seen on tv and wrote her a letter to her home address detailing all sorts of unwanted information about himself.

In short, online dating could put you in contact with anyone and the risks are huge, as with any stranger contacting you via any method. But online contact really lends itself to facilitating a false ID. I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole.

Report
Aeroflotgirl · 26/01/2015 14:29

There was a programme about a 10 year old who killed somebody in America, they were sent to prison, then when they entered adulthood, an adult prison. This should have happened here, I have no faith in the 'justice' system.

Report
needaholidaynow · 26/01/2015 14:31

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

wishmiplass · 26/01/2015 14:33

Sorry, but I do find the tone of both posts mentioned gossipy a bit scandal-y.

I think it's unnecessary to bring up the fact that JV and Robert Thompson did worse things to James Bulger. It adds nothing to the debate, which is whether or not he should be able to get on with his life (not to dissect the level of abuse James Bulger suffered (which even with little knowledge of is horrific), which could trigger.

FWIW, my opinion is that safeguards are in place to make sure that JV is kept on the radar. Whether those safeguards are sufficient is questionable, but I think that is a question for the authorities to address.

I also think that if a bad person is determined enough to do something bad, they will do whatever possible to it - regardless of whether they have a probation officer, bodyguard or whatever in place. So your handwringing and worrying is misplaced too perhaps?

Report
gymboywalton · 26/01/2015 14:35

but how does a 10 year old become a " sexually sadist paedophile who knew exactly what he was doing."

what exactly has to happen to a child to make them into this?

Report
mutternutter · 26/01/2015 14:38

what happened to the pregnant woman. could he have a child out there

Report
Theboodythatrocked · 26/01/2015 14:38

I think this thread should be deleted.

Report
wishmiplass · 26/01/2015 14:39

I also agree he is unrehabilatable and should be back in prison btw, so am not a JV/RT apologist by a long shot.

Report
DrSethHazlittMD · 26/01/2015 14:39

I think it IS too easy to becoming pitchfork wielding in SOME cases. What happened in this case was appalling but being a child who killed a child doesn't automatically, on its own, mean that Venables and Thompson will always be a danger and shouldn't be allowed to try and live a 'normal' life when older.

There have been previous incidents where children have killed children and the murderer released after not a huge number of years, with a new identity, have children of their own and be never commit any crime, let alone an horrific one, again - Mary Bell being the obvious example.

However, there does appear to be evidence to suggest that Venables could be a threat. How you police him, is another matter altogether.

Report
Branleuse · 26/01/2015 14:41

i dont think there is an exact way. People arent born sensible moral gentle beings.
We are born animals and we are socialised with love and community.

If a child is neglected and abused, you may as well be dealing with a dangerous animal by the time theyre an adult.
He was obviously pretty far gone as a child, and had no hope in hell after them spending the rest of his childhood in jail. Jail doesnt rehabilitate children

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.