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 absolutely would have locked them up and thrown away the key. Monsters like them keep me up at night. I feel no pity for them but my body and soul ache for the Bulgers.

Enidthecat
Totally agree.

Jaygee61
What an utterly ridiculous and offensive comment.
As other posters have said - having a terrible childhood does not excuse monstrous behaviour when you are old enough to understand right from wrong, nor does it give you free rein to inflict similar (and in James Bulger' s case, worse) treatment on a defenceless baby.

You ought to be ashamed of that post.

Worridmum
How about some punctuation and not making up words, then it might be easier to read what you are trying to say, even though from what i did understand of it, still utter bollocks.

These child cases are too distressing to think about but as a parent I feel guilty to pretend that they didn’t happen. Sympathy of course to James parents, always acted with dignity throughout.

Of course Venables and Thomson been just a few months younger, they would have been below the age of criminal responsibility and would not/ could not have been prosecuted

Excellent post Thierry

Do Venables and Thompson understand what they did ? Do they reflect on it as adults ? Are they sorry they did it ? Sorry that James is dead ?

Were Venables and Thompson's parents investigated for child neglect and cruelty when it all came out ?

I wonder if either of them have children themselves now.

For goodness sake! These are not children, they are evil monsters.
No matter how bad or horrific your childhood it , it is no excuse for the evil they commited.

What a pathetic, lame exuse.
They are most deffintly NOT the victims here.

Boo hoo bad childhood. PLEASE!

Christ I hope not decorations i would question the sanity of any woman who would have a child with a child murderer. (Though, you wouldn't know would you?) God it does not bare thinking about.

Surely you would think that the guilt would be too much to live with? I mean how have these two slept at night? How do they live with the guilt?

No doubt they were products of their upbringing but what was the judge supposed to do, slap on the wrists because they had a bad start to life?

He was supposed to give them a sentence of precisely the type he received.

Plenty of people have awful upbringings, they don't torture and murder toddlers.

Non-argument. Each child's experience, mental health status and character is different.

The fact that one has gone on to repeatedly view child sexual abuse is proof that they shouldn't have been released.

So how do you reconcile that with the fact that the other has followed a lawful existence since release?

I think they should have been locked up for life. And nothing will ever change my opinion on that.

It was unimaginable and truly heinous. The fact it was children committing the crime made it worse somehow. There was no history of serious abuse, no mitigation except one had mild learning difficulties and the other was a child sociopath. Venables has shown a tendency to continued offending.
I think given his lack of remorse, inability to accept the horrific nature of his actions that to release into the community is quite high risk. I’d hate to damn a child forever and believe some young offenders benefit from a fresh start but I’d need convincing that Venables should be freed again having breached his licence.

Bifswif why?

It really is a unique situation and I don't think there is a real solution. They will never be 'free'. Whatever identity they are given, they will always be running away, hiding from their past.
I don't think any sentence could feel like justice for Denise Bulger. They brutally murdered her baby. I think I would feel the same way.

Quite honestly, despite the fact how much they were clearly failed as young children I feel there is no coming back from their behaviour. To get to that point, they are beyond help quite honestly

Of course they should have been tried as adults, it was legal to do so. YABU

That’s not what the European Court of Human Rights held though

They were 10. At 10, you understand that doing what they did to that poor wee boy causes immense pain and suffering. That’s all they needed to know. Not the long term consequences of their actions. ALL they needed to know was they were hurting a little child. That knowledge should have been enough to stop them. But it didn’t. The lack of that awareness doesn’t make them troubled children, it makes them psychopaths.

YNBU. They should have been given life imprisonment. At least.

YANBU. Just watching it on catch up now. It's always really disturbed me.

Clearly the boys were from difficult backgrounds but did anything actually happen to the parents? I.e. Was it looked at how they learnt this behaviour? Were they punished?

I can’t watch it. All I can think is how that poor baby must have been screaming and crying for his Mummy.

Keeping in mind that despite the punishment they received one has gone on to commit further offences each time he has been released, what do you think the judge should have ordered?

If the possibility of repeat offending is the only relevant criterion when sentencing people, we would need to lock up the vast majority of criminals for decades. Should we go back to life imprisonment for stealing a loaf of bread?

*Jaygee61
What an utterly ridiculous and offensive comment.
As other posters have said - having a terrible childhood does not excuse monstrous behaviour when you are old enough to understand right from wrong, nor does it give you free rein to inflict similar (and in James Bulger' s case, worse) treatment on a defenceless baby.

You ought to be ashamed of that post. *

I’m not. I never said their upbringing excused what they did. But it might go some way towards explaining it.

This topic always brings out the dumbfucks and the grief ghouls. Ghastly business all round. But Venables can only be sentenced for crimes he has actually committed (not ones he has already served time for, and not because of what he 'might' do - and bear in mind that he has not committed another crime of actual violence against a person) and Thompson appears to have stayed out of trouble and remained anonymous.

They were 10. At 10, you understand that doing what they did to that poor wee boy causes immense pain and suffering. That’s all they needed to know. Not the long term consequences of their actions. ALL they needed to know was they were hurting a little child. That knowledge should have been enough to stop them. But it didn’t. The lack of that awareness doesn’t make them troubled children, it makes them psychopaths*

This. Evil, horrific monsters. They will be living next door to someone and (probably children) who has no idea who they are because they are protected. It's just wrong!

For those who sympathise with Thompson and Venables, perhaps if you knew the true extent of the torture they inflicted upon that tiny, innocent little boy, you might change your mind. Those evil monsters knew exactly what they were doing. They set out to murder James. They had plenty of time as they dragged him for 2 and a half miles in the freezing cold, to let him go, but they didn't. I read Ralph's book and the part that will never leave me is when he wrote that there was a blue handprint on one of the boys coats and James had said to him 'Don't hurt me'. That darling boy begged for his life, begged for his mum and Dad and still they kept attacking him. Those monsters should have been severely punished for what they did, but they weren't, they were never punished, yet Denise and Ralph are serving a tortouous life sentence.

so what to you think should happen to them??
a slap on the wrist?
remember how small and defenceless James was.
he was 2 ffs