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??

Obviously children with troubled backgrounds don't normally do what Venables and Thompson did, that's why it horrified the nation the way it did. But violence in children isn't all that unusual, and it is connected to troubled backgrounds.

My DD1 (8) has Attachment Disorder (after being adopted) and has been quite violent at times, hurting me or DD2 or throwing things. She seems incapable of feeling empathy sometimes, too, which can be unnerving.

It's obviously not an excuse for children becoming violent, but demonising them doesn't help.

And rehabilitation is possible, as has been the case with Mary Bell and apparently Thompson, as far as we know. It doesn't appear to have worked with Venables, but that doesn't mean the process itself is wrong.

They don't execute a 13 year old in the USA because they wouldn't get anyone to comply with the execution order.

That's another thing about the programme. The barging of the vans by men and their baying for the vans to be opened so that justice could be given.

In other words, they wanted those 10 year old boys to be released so that they could kill them. That is not justice. It's murder.

If you're wondering about the sentencing remarks, they're out here www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/r-v-jon-venables.pdf

Babies being abused and male toddlers are a particular interest of his, apparently. Throw away the key.

That's not a normal rehabilitative regime. I wonder if she was punished? She should have lost her job for that.

I wonder if Venables actually wants to be back in prison. He seems very reckless, lots of adults who have been in prison for a few years are institutionalized so how much more likely for a child.

One thing that some people need reminding of is that Venables & Thompson are both serving life sentences. There seems to be a belief that after 8 years they had served their time and were sent off to enjoy the rest of their lives. Not so.

Thompson, for example, will never actually be "free". He is currently (afaik) living a life outside of a prison, but he is not "free" in any genuine sense of the word. He is still serving his sentence and he will till he dies. He can be recalled to prison without notice and for any reason. He can only have approved jobs, live in approved accommodation and have approved relationships.

Venables was given 3 years for his latest offence based on sentencing guidelines. But the judge was very mindful, as we should be, that this ultimately means nothing because he is already serving a life sentence - there is no guarantee that he will be released after the three years are up as other prisoners could expect. His existent life sentence means that, if the authorities decide it, he can actually spend the rest of his life in prison.

Out on licence does not mean "free".

Harvey you don't need to list all of the terrible things that happen to abused and neglected children, they should themselves be protected. It would be fair if we lived in a world where every child was given a fair and equal chance.

But the general public should be safe and protected too,

I'm not entirely convinced that when you're that damaged so as to do what those boys did, that you can truly be rehabilitated. We don't even know what went on when they were in prison, probably subjected to more abuse.

Mary Bell had a child and now Grandchildren. She has not reoffended. It would have been publicised if she did. As has been the case with Jon Venables. Do you think they'd publicise just him?

She was an extremely damaged child who was abused and neglected and roamed the streets without ever knowing if someone would be home when she returned. Her Mother tried to murder her at a young age and palmed her off on anyone that would have her. She later involved Mary in her sex working, letting men masturbate on her and into her mouth and put things into her anus.

Mary was later sexually abused in a secure unit after her crimes. The place where she was sent to protect the public from her and no-one was protecting her. Her Mum visited her and took provocative pictures of her which she sold to the News of the World.

She killed two children and didn't really understand the magnitude of her crimes until she had her own child. I absolutely believe that she is tortured by what she did.

But she was that 'evil child with the dead eyes who laughed in court'. That was in the 1960s and the James Bulger murder showed we hadn't moved on by the 90s. All those adults smacking the prison van containing children and screaming about evil and they should be executed.

I hope we get better at this.

We don't even know what went on when they were in prison, probably subjected to more abuse.

They were in a secure children's home and supervised 24/7

'Venables has proved more problematic. At 17, while still inside the Red Bank secure children's unit, he'd been accused of having sex with a female care worker' - Sydney Morning Herald

Funny that getout because since I posted that two other posters have now said that Mary Bell and Jon Venebles were sexually abused in their secure units.

GetOut - there are many, many children who have been abused in childrens homes and secure facilities. It's happened for decades and still happening now.

It is the perfect place to abuse children if you are a child abuser. Not least because you are in a position of absolute power over vulnerable children and they are likely to be disbelieved because they're ' evil....liars.....disturbed....mentally ill'.

Have you not seen all the cases of institutional child abuse?

Woollypinksocks What abuse was he subject to prior to the home? Nobody ever comes up with shit for Venables, who was the one holding James' hand as he was walked out of the Strand in that infamous picture. No motive was found by his release, no progress was made.

Now he's downloading pictures of babies and particularly male toddlers being sexually abused and downloading a manual on how to do it himself 'safely'.

Yes he was supervised in the unit. But it does stand that it was reported in the media that a staff member was accused of having sex with him and that staff member hasn’t worked in that field as far as I’m aware since (both things reported not my own knowledge)

I wonder if Venables actually wants to be back in prison. He seems very reckless, lots of adults who have been in prison for a few years are institutionalized so how much more likely for a child.

I wondered this too, granny. We now have to trust the Parole Board not to release him until he no longer poses a risk. I understand the onus would be on him to prove it would be safe, rather than for the PB to prove he is a danger.

I know all about Mary Bell and her childhood.

It's all just circumstances. People understandably have sympathy for them because they were children.

If they'd got to 25 and then murdered, people would have no sympathy, but they'd still be the same people with the same awful childhood.

I understand what might have drove those boys to kill, but my sympathy is with James and his family, because James is dead and his mother is still suffering.

I have read the judges sentencing document. It is pretty upsetting. You would like to think the parole board will take it seriously this time. I don't believe they have acted in anyone's interest in the past.

There is lots to suggest that Venables was not suitably rehabilitated yet he was released after just 8 years, reoffended and was released after just 2 years again even though the charges could be seen as being related to the initial crime which has elements of a sexual nature.

I really hope he ends up serving his life sentence now. He clearly cannot be out in the community safely. It won't necessarily be justice as far as the Bulgers are concerned but means anyone in the future is protected from him.

It is worth knowing that these units are pretty well covered by CCTV and would have been even back then but bedrooms are not covered.
Most of the young people would be subject to 20 min through the door checks throughout the night

Anybody have a link to watch it? It’s not 4oD?

*Someone said that Mary Bell and Robert Thompson are proof that rehabilitation has worked.

I'm just saying that we don't really know that do we?*
We can only work on the evidence so far. There is no guarantee that you or I will not prove to be killers on the fullness of time, but particularly in Mary Bell's case, a significant amount of time has elapsed to instill a comparable amount of faith that what she did as a 10 / 11 year old is well and truly in the past.

Evening everyone,
We have had many, many, many reports about this thread, and we have done our best to keep it open. It now seems to be descending into sniping and personal attacks, however, which limits our options rather.
What we're going to do is let it continue for a bit and if it comes back on track we'll be able to leave it. As ever, we're not hugely comfortable when threads like these wander in the realms of speculation, so if we could ask everyone to bear that in mind as well?

Please delete this thread mumsnet.

JediJim Why would you post that?

Even if CCTV is in some units (and it isn't in all) it doesn't cover everywhere and certainly doesn't cover outside trips.

Plus, sexual abuse can and often does occur with other people present in the room (that is often exciting to the offender) and was the case in many of Dr Larry Nassars victims who didn't really understand until much later that they had been sexually abused because other people were around.

There are many posters on MN who have reported being sexually abused even in a room full of people who would have been horrified to know.

Harvey These are the kind of backgrounds a lot of these 'evil' children and young people have.

It's desperately sad, but it still doesn't mean they should be allowed to walk free and harm others. Imprisonment shouldn't be about punishing them, but keeping other people safe.

I'm finding it bizarre that people can't grasp this.

Why they did it is an extremely valuable question in terms of understanding what some children go through and future prevention.

But the idea of "blame" is not so relevant to whether the public is safe with them roaming free.