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

[Hairgician]

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??

I heard Denise talking on the radio just a few weeks ago. She said when she realised James had gone missing she had two options after leaving the shop, either run left or right. She decided to run left ( I think she said ) if she’d run in the opposite direction she would have seen them.
The poor woman. I just can’t imagine what hell she’s been through.

If a report said he was a high risk to children, then 3 years is an insult to all children. Venables is clearly a paedophile and a danger to society.

Apart from the horrific loss of James, I think it's terribly sad that Ralph has nothing to do with his second son, Michael. The pain of the devastating loss must have so many reverberations for them all. the two are not mutually exclusive though are they? The reality here is that millions of absent parents have nothing to do with their children. Saying that it’s because of the loss of James is just a convenient get-out if that’s the reason he’s using.

One can have absolute sympathy/empathy for what someone is going/has been through after all, but this doesn’t mean that they should become beyond criticism.

Had James not died and he and Denise had split anyway there’s every chance that he wouldn’t have had anything to do with James either.

It was IMO inevitable that the loss of James would have an impact on any relationship, even the strongest one, and I imagine that relationships where a child has been lost are less likely to last than those where such tragedy hasn’t occurred. But the loss of a child should never be used as mitigation for someone’s subsequent bad behaviour towards others, and neither should others have to pay that price. I’m sure that the subsequent child would be deeply hurt by the inference that his father has nothing to do with him due to the loss of his brother who had been born and passed before him.

As a side point, three years seems a shockingly short sentence for Vennibles’ crimes even if he didn’t have past history. Does anyone know how the sentencing guidelines on sex related crimes are defined? After all this isn’t the first high profile case to be questioned in the past few months, thinking of the release of John warboys after just eight years.....? Although I guess in his case the fact he was only actually convicted of one rape has gone in his favour as the others are merely suspected at this point and cannot be taken into account?

I am so sad for James sand his family. He was so young, he had no chance.

I don't honestly know what should have happened to his murderers. I think it was right at the time to attempt to rehabilitate them. What was the alternative? To have two people just passing time in jail for the next 70 years till they die? Maybe some people would think that was the right thing to do. But I think it was right to try.

I think the one who has reoffended has given up his right to rehabilitation now. He should have no more chances.

But having said that, what do we actually do with him for the next 40/50/60 years? We can't end his life, we can't lock him up and throw away the key. Send all the prisoners there is no hope for off to an island and just leave them there to fend for themselves, or murder each other or whatever? Tempting.

But we are a civilised society and we have to look after him to a reasonable standard for however long his life may be. And that requires money and more importantly people who are willing to care for him.

I am so grateful to people who are willing to work with people like this, either to try to understand and help them, or just to look after them in jail when there is no hope left of helping them. I couldn't do that job.

Venables should be back in jail for life, he's a danger to children and has proved that.

I am so grateful to people who are willing to work with people like this, either to try to understand and help them, or just to look after them in jail when there is no hope left of helping them. I couldn't do that job.

It's not a 'job' it's a career and a commitment. Sadly though, there are people who are beyond rehabilitation.

It seems from the report that Venables himself is recognising this.

I am so grateful to people who are willing to work with people like this, either to try to understand and help them, or just to look after them in jail when there is no hope left of helping them. I couldn't do that job.

It's not a 'job' it's a career and a commitment. Sadly though, there are people who are beyond rehabilitation.

It seems from the report that Venables himself is recognising this.

What i find contradictory are these two proposals:

• T and V had such terrible childhoods that their brains didn't develop in the normal way, so they didn't have the same sense of right/wrong and compassion that someone with a happier home would have had. Studies show that a child deprived of love and stability and exposed to abuse will never have the usual responses.

• T has definitely been rehabilitated so it can work.

Which is it? Is it possible for some people to change? Is T just flying under the radar by being clever enough to pretend? The consequences of letting an offender back into the public can be horrific - look at sarah Payne/Roy whiting for an example.

I do not envy the psychologists and their ilk who have to sort out that sort of conundrum, not just in this case but in every case

No doubt 3 years is a pathetically short sentence. But the truth is there are so many other paedophiles like him, who get sentences like that then are released to offend again.

The real concern is that a potential partner will be able to find out about this crime but won't know his actual history.

The "three years" is misleading. JV was out on license from his life sentence. After his three years for this offence, It's up to the parole board if they make him serve the rest of the life sentence in prison rather than letting him back out on license again.

People mention their upbringings, well I admit I don’t know much about them but they both had brothers and sisters and to my knowledge following James murder, the other children were not rehomed. So I don’t see how their family life would have been that bad if the other children were not moved.
Also don’t forget the British justice system says they DID KNOW WHAT THEY WERE DOING! Hence why they sent to trial in the first place.
James body lay on the railroad for days before discovered. Neither boy told anyone else, including their own mums. Surely a hard secret to keep??
Also neither boys actually served time in a prison. They were in secure homes managed by Social services. Some of the children in there were not even criminals, yet housed with notorious child killers.

I read in a newspaper that Thompson studied arts while in the secure home. His work sat proudly up in the walls on display. What an insult to James and his family!!
I would like to think that Venables would do the honourable thing and take his own life quitely, not affecting anyone else.

Thegreatbeyond

Re "making images"

No- it's was for downloading pictures which essentially counts as as "making a copy"- not making them as in carrying out the abuse himself directly.

While Venables has reoffended in his adult life, Thompson has not. Robert Thompson is, to all intents and purposes- a prison success story.

He committed a terrible crime in his childhood, served out his sentence and was rehabilitated in a secure facility, and was never heard of again once he was released. On paper, the CPS fulfilled its obligations to protect the community from further tragedy at his hands, and to rehabilitate the offender in their care.

The remaining problem is that of retribution, I think. The length of someone's Prison sentence is meant to be reflective of the debt which they owe to society.
And the manner in which James was killed, means that retribution is something which will never be achieved.

The fact that Thompson served out his sentence and has been rehabilitated is largely irrelevant, because society really doesn't want a success story in his case- they just want him to suffer as James suffered.

I think next time he's let out he may well kill another child.

I think Venables just doesn't want to be outside, its like he feels the need to be a self fulfilling prophecy. He would know he would be caught, he would know he would be recalled back to prison. Yet he carried on, like he knows this is a society he doesn't belong in.

The fact that Thompson served out his sentence and has been rehabilitated is largely irrelevant

We don't actually know that though do we? Because we were all told Venables was success story and he was actually a drug addict and alcoholic who broke his bail conditions with impunity.

Rebeccaslicker, I struggle to wrap my head around that too. Makes you wonder if Thompson is the real monster as he was seemingly able to compartmentalise the atrocity and move on effortlessly, while Venebles has been permanently screwed up by it.

I'm just thinking out loud really, none of us can really know.

JedJim, His work sat proudly up in the walls on display. What an insult to James and his family!!

?? I don't understand.

Mary Bell was rehabilitated. Thompson was rehabilitated. Both have name changed and leading normal lives. I don't know about Thompson but Bell has certainly at least one child of her own.

Venables clearly cannot be rehabilitated for whatever reason. There have been sufficient chances and he has proven he will not or cannot change. He is a risk to children and should not be released.

Thompson studied arts while in the secure home. His work sat proudly up in the walls on display. What an insult to James and his family!!

Come on now. We are not a society that expects criminals to sit silently in solitary all day. We're better than that. Those convicted have to be able to do something - preferably that has a chance of rehabilitating them. Art is a tool for doing that.
I am disgusted as anyone at their crimes, but we can't make them break rocks all day without ever a positive word to them again in their entire lives. That just makes criminals believe it isn't even worth trying to be better people.

I taught in the school where Mary Bell was a pupil. I started the September after she had left.
She was apparently a very quiet child, physically neglected and abused but intelligent. She was also a fantasist constantly making up stories.
The best book about her story is Cries Unheard by Gitta Sereny.
I am glad she made a life for herself eventually. She did time in adult prison before her release unlike Venables and Thompson.

I read he was in possession of a manual advising on safe sex with children - including examples of 2-year-olds. This manual he had acquired from the dark web.

This is sickening behaviour and regardless of his history a three-year sentence seems light.

I can only assume he is surrounded by some pretty dodgy characters. For example when he was last caught trying to destroy a computer containing downloaded images of children his social worker was present. Birds of a feather and all that...

Its sickening Lady, he was a danger to children at 10 years old, and he still is a danger to children, that time in 'rehabilitation' has done little for him. If RT is keeping his head down,and showing remorse for his actions, and trying to lead a decent life, good on him. I still think that they did not do enough time, and should have completed time in an adult prison or psychiatric facility (to help with rehabilitation).

Thompson and Bell had very, very abusive backgrounds which go some way to explaining why they did what they did and would also suggest the possibility they are good candidates for rehabilitation because they can 'unlearn' the behaviour which they have learnt through being abused themselves.

Venables didn't. It seems like his childhood might have been slightly less than ideal and there was an incident of being left home alone. But he certainly wasn't subjected to the sort of violence and abuse that would normalise what they did to James.

JediJim

I have raised this exact point many times and no one can seem to answer it. If they were actually neglected and abused then why apparently were no siblings on either side removed? Or were they and it has never been reported on? I am not minimising how hard their childhoods were however I am yet to be convinced this goes any way to explain why they did what they did .

Encase anyone missed this a few pages back . Not sure what good it can do but Denise ( James mum ) has asked for support in getting signatures

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/206851