Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

C4 now - the James Bulger case **Trigger Warning - Contains Info about the case** (Title edited by MNHQ)

999 replies

Hairgician · 05/02/2018 21:36

Sat watching this now.

I do not accept the view that those 2 boys were treated unfairly. They murdered that poor little boy and they knew what they were doing and that it was wrong.

They should be rotting in jail. Aibu to say justice not served??

OP posts:
boodles101 · 06/02/2018 14:40

I've just watched this on catch up and it's truly heart breaking what they did to poor james. I found it incredibly hard to watch.
No - 8 years was nowhere near long enough for what they did. I watched Trevor Macdonalds Crime and punishment last week which documented a man who killed his neighbours when he was 13. He was given 170 years in prison and would never leave. I think this is extreme but how two different legal systems can have such a huge difference on prison sentences is ridiculous.

Rebeccaslicker · 06/02/2018 14:41

Where did I say he must have reoffended? I simply said we wouldn't know.

You said, oh no, we can safely assume he hasn't. And you are basing that on the (apparently absolutely indisputable fact Hmm) that the police are corrupt and that journalists would risk a prison sentence in revealing stuff about him.

And then you don't like having it pointed out to you that those assumptions may be enough for you, but they don't convince anyone else!

Bit odd but it's your opinion and you're entitled to it, I guess!

Rebeccaslicker · 06/02/2018 14:41

Oh no, they've also convinced babyccino. That makes two people Grin

BashStreetKid · 06/02/2018 14:42

Where did I say I didn't like anything, Rebecca? I was simply laughing at the childish use of terminology. babyccinoo has it right.

JediJim · 06/02/2018 14:42

Justonemorestep, very good post.

The boys I’m sure knew it was wrong to abduct and murder a little kiddie, but would never have known the consequences. The fact that cctv, eye witnesses and other evidence would never enter the mind of a ten year old.
What does enter my mind though, is what if they had got away with it? Would they have ever confessed? Would they have killed again? Would they have been caught without the Strands cctv?

Mishappening · 06/02/2018 14:51

I am very different now from how I was when I was 10, and from when I was 20, 30, 40 etc.

It is right and proper that these disturbed boys should have been taken out of circulation - and hopefully given some sort of help to mature in a more positive and normal way - but it is also important that they are not condemned for their whole lives for something - however appalling - that they did as a child.

I was around with small children when these events took place and it was utterly horrifying, as it did not sound like an unfortunate accident in the course of a game. Everyone was and is right to be horrified by these actions.

But I do not envy those who had to balance the fully justifiable outrage of the community and society in general with the needs of two seriously disturbed children. Lock them away for years and they just come under the influence of criminals, paedophiles and drug dealers, and become worse than they already are; let them out and risk further dreadful crimes. Such a conundrum.

Teetotal2018 · 06/02/2018 14:53

@TheInimitableMrsFanshawe I was 10 at the time. I was horrified and knew that it was wrong. These children were/are evil and should be locked up

babyccinoo · 06/02/2018 14:55

Rebecca, not sure why you find it hard to believe that police and crime reporters often work together. They need each other.

There are countless examples of it. Even in the murder of Tia Sharp, the police relied on ITV's interview with her killer to assess his body language.

Lilacblue99 · 06/02/2018 14:56

I expect some of you have dartboards with the two boys' faces on them don't you
Believe me nobody wants to see those monsters faces Hmm

Rebeccaslicker · 06/02/2018 14:58

I don't rely 100% on any assumptions, babyccino.

grannytomine · 06/02/2018 15:04

Enidthecat I would point out Mary Bell. Venables and Thompson have offended repeatedly over multiple identities. Is this true? I know Venables has but I've never heard it about Bell and Thompson

sassymuffin · 06/02/2018 15:06

I don't think it was right to try Venebles/Thompson in an adult court environment but I do think it was right they were prosecuted. They inflicted 42 separate injuries on James.

I cannot even begin to imagine what pain the Bulger family have suffered knowing what happened to their little boy.

I do think it was the correct decision to remove them from society but I always thought that a psychiatric facility would perhaps have been a better choice than a young offenders institute.

Robert Thompson was considered the "leader" and it is documented that there was blood present on his shoes and clothes. It is also reported by a police officer that he went to see the tribute flowers to James at the shopping centre with his brother two days after the murder. I find that very chilling for a child to revisit the seen of their crime and not be affected by it retrospectively. However he is the offender who seems to have been rehabilitated successfully at present.

Jon Venables is a recidivist offender and considering the amount of treatment he has received it is clear his rehabilitation has failed. has clearly show he is unsuitable to live freely in society.

babyccinoo · 06/02/2018 15:06

It's not an assumption. Scotland Yard and crime reporters even used to meet for annual drinks every Christmas. Here's the link

There's nothing tin foil hat about it, it's a pretty basic fact that they have a symbiotic relationship.

sassymuffin · 06/02/2018 15:07

*scene

Rebeccaslicker · 06/02/2018 15:08

I still wouldn't say as a sweeping statement, "we can totally rely on that to make an assumption". Especially when it's an assumption about crimes.

You might be happy with that; fine, good for you. But you and bash can't expect other posters to agree with it just because you think it's totally solid!

babyccinoo · 06/02/2018 15:09

Why do we hear about Venables being arrested, Rebecca?

readyforapummelling · 06/02/2018 15:10

You should read "The Sleep Of Reason" published by David James Smith. He worked with the boys and their families during the case and trial. Very interesting but very very sad to read.

Cronuts · 06/02/2018 15:12

I thought that venables arrest was only made public as it was thought to be in public interest?

So in theory an offended could reoffend without it being made public.

Rebeccaslicker · 06/02/2018 15:12

Oh, of course, because something that happens in one case means it would be the same across all cases. Regardless of the nature of the crime; the police force involved; etc.

It's not difficult. You're very welcome to make your assumptions. You may or may not be right.

But you can't dictate to others what they have to accept or believe. That's not how it works.

babyccinoo · 06/02/2018 15:16

Where have I dictated to others?

Rebeccaslicker · 06/02/2018 15:20

So it's not an assumption and it's not a dictation?

Ok then!!!!

babyccinoo · 06/02/2018 15:23

I never said that there were Confused

babyccinoo · 06/02/2018 15:24

*they

Butterymuffin · 06/02/2018 15:25

What a nasty thread. Really ugly.

I expect some of you have dartboards with the two boys' faces on them don't you?

Strange how some posters get their enjoyment out of declaring how nasty they find other posters and showing how far beneath them judgement of others is

JohnThomas69 · 06/02/2018 15:30

I watched this last night and it did make me try and recall how I would have felt at 10, seeing other 10 year olds committing this crime.
Im pretty sure I'd have been horrified and desperate to stop it(and I was by no means an angel at that age)
Therefore I don't buy the 'only 10' and brain development excuses.
If they had been 4 or 5 then perhaps, never at 10 years old.