Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

The Bulger killers: was justice done?

999 replies

WannaBeWonderWoman · 08/02/2018 00:07

Following on from previous thread which was filled.

What would have been the correct way to deal with these little boys who subjected a tiny two year old to protracted agony and unimaginable suffering then?

Interested to know what all the bleeding hearts on here believe should have happened? Whether they attended an adult court and were convicted of murder which they confessed to anyway, was this crueller to them than what they put that child through? They were well treated and even when they were serving their 'sentence' they were protected and given all they wanted (more than they would have got if they'd been in their own homes probably) and had all the help and therapy it was possible to give them. Did they suffer? You could actually argue that they benefitted from killing. They have to live with what they've done, yes, but if they did I find it hard to comprehend that Thompson especially (who came across as the leader in the interviews) can.

The Norwegian case which is often compared to this is nowhere similar IMO. The perpetrators were a similar age to their victim. They were 6 which is almost half the age V&T were and they wouldn't have been tried here anyway. Most importantly that crime was not premeditated or drawn out for hours like the many horrors inflicted on James.

He was the only victim here.

OP posts:
melj1213 · 08/02/2018 16:22

I would be seeking revenge

And this is the problem. You want revenge, not justice.

The justice system is there to deal with offenders and ensure public safety and offender rehabilitation. It is not there to get revenge.

If it was about revenge where would it stop? If my child murdered your child and your revenge was to kill my child because their choices and actions lead to your child's death, surely then I have the entitlement to kill you in revenge for your actions leading to my child's death? So where does the entitlement for revenge stop? Where does the justice come from in this system?

Elendon · 08/02/2018 16:25

sentencing for him now need to be more severe

That's not going to happen though. Venables is being sentenced for crimes like every other adult is when it comes to downloading child abuse images, despite being on a life release. This might be wrong, I'm not a person to produce guidelines for judges, but it is what it is now.

Venables has to demonstrate that he is rehabilitated after 20 months into this sentence to a parole board, and if denied, remains in prison. If after 40 months he still does not convince the parole board he is rehabilitated, he still remains in prison.

Rebeccaslicker · 08/02/2018 16:26

Christ, I see Elendon is at it again. This is exactly what she did yesterday to a different poster who mixed up compensation with legal costs and expenses Hmm

The social worker gave an interview to the daily mail. That is an absolute fact, so pollythedolly is not "lying". Literally 5 seconds on google would have verified that, instead of accusing a poster of fabricating what she's read.

If you want to sneer at the veracity of the article/the truth of what the social worker said about T/the daily mail, go right ahead. But that's a very different thing to accuse them of lying about having read an article.

loobyloo1234 · 08/02/2018 16:30

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

ShortandAnnoying · 08/02/2018 16:30

This was an absolutely terrible case all round and I would like never to think of it again but it's something that stays with you. I'm surprised that so many people seem able to leap in and give an opinion on what should have happened. It must be one of the hardest judgements to make for the most expert child psychologists and judges.
Nothing that happens will really make this right and I don't think it will ever be forgotten even by people like me who just heard about it at the time.

Elendon · 08/02/2018 16:31

If the poster read the interesting article then the link should have been provided, otherwise I call lies.

I read an interesting article the other day about the existence of unicorns. Am I lying?

pollythedolly · 08/02/2018 16:32

Christ! I'll find the link...

Elendon · 08/02/2018 16:33

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Aridane · 08/02/2018 16:34

Are social workers allowed to give interviews to the Daily Mail??

Elendon · 08/02/2018 16:35

Can you link to the absolute shite I was talking about yesterday?

If you are going to make accusations then please back them up.

pollythedolly · 08/02/2018 16:36

No you didn't. pollythedolly Please don't lie on this thread.

Yes I did. I'm not a liar, thanks. I admit it's the DM but I did read such an article from an interview with his social worker:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1256109/Robert-Thompson-Social-worker-looked-James-Bulger-killer-speaks.html

Elendon · 08/02/2018 16:37

No, they are not Aridane.

Not even if they are retired and especially if they were connected to this case which calls for anonymity.

Rebeccaslicker · 08/02/2018 16:37

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Lizzie48 · 08/02/2018 16:38

I do object to one PP saying that there were 3 victims that day. The only victim was little James Bulger, who lost his chance at life. The fact that V and T were children of course meant that they shouldn't have been tried as adults, it should have been done in a youth court.

But calling them victims is way off the mark imo.

ChaosNeverRains · 08/02/2018 16:39

Well, it’s the daily mail so I’m not going to read the article, although the words “interesting” and “daily Mail” can surely never be used in the same sentence...

But either way that social worker should have been struck off.

And really, do posters have to resort to personal attacks and name calling? HQ have already threatened to delete these threads because of it, so can’t people give it a bloody rest?

pollythedolly · 08/02/2018 16:39

*If the poster read the interesting article then the link should have been provided, otherwise I call lies.

I read an interesting article the other day about the existence of unicorns. Am I lying?*

Im not answerable to you. Who the hell do you think you are? And because you've been proved wrong by another poster as well you call them an arse licker.

carefreeeee · 08/02/2018 16:43

IMO they were to young for that trial and punishment. If rehabilitation were the main aim, placing them separately with experienced foster carers in a different part of the country along with intensive counselling/psychiatric work would have been the best option.

If punishment were the main aim, then yes jail for life.

But as with all these things it didn't happen in a vacuum. Knowing what they've done is a pretty harsh thing to live with.

There's so much obsession with this case whilst plenty of other nasty criminals are getting let out of jail every day with very little interest.

Elendon · 08/02/2018 16:43

Oh I apologise most profusely. pollythedolly You did read an article.

Rebeccaslicker · 08/02/2018 16:43

Lizzie - the context makes that difficult though. If they hadn't done it, and you read an article in the paper about a boy who lived in a small rundown council house in a deprived area with 6 siblings and a father who'd left them; a boy who struggled at school and at home; a boy whose siblings were often violent and bullying towards each other and whose mother drowned her sorrows in the pub; a boy who had no role model or anyone to inspire him to reach for something better in life - would you think that boy was a "victim" of society/crap parenting? I think I would.

Then again, it by no means justifies what he did.

That's why my criminal psychologist friend says you could debate each and every angle of this case for unlimited hours and still not have an answer, particularly if the subject doesn't want to give up the answer.

The problem is that the parole board and psychologists don't have unlimited hours or resources when making determinations!

TakemedowntoPotatoCity · 08/02/2018 16:45

Makes me sick Venables identity is still protected. He's been convicted of NEW crimes. IMO that should override the protection. Why aren't we allowed to see what the scumbag looks like now, just like with anyone else?

Sleepingbunnies · 08/02/2018 16:46

I agree potato

WitchesHatRim · 08/02/2018 16:47

IMO they were to young for that trial and qpunishment. If rehabilitation were the main aim, placing them separately with experienced foster carers in a different part of the country along with intensive counselling/psychiatric work would have been the best option.

Sorry but I completely disagree. They committed a horrible murder where they also tortured their victim, they didn't nick sweets from a shop.

Yes they have to rehabilitated, but they also needed punishment.

pollythedolly · 08/02/2018 16:48

Oh I apologise most profusely. pollythedolly You did read an article

Why thank you, I did.

I know it's the DM and the SW was being unprofessional but it is accurate regarding venables so why not Thompson? If it's true, then I find that interesting....

Aridane · 08/02/2018 16:50

Because, takenw, A’s you well know, it would make him a target for vigilantes and his life would be at risk

ShatnersWig · 08/02/2018 16:50

Sleeping and Glass Let's assume we're in some parallel universe where children who kill children are executed by the state. How would you feel if one of YOUR children killed another child? You'd happily hand them over to be killed by an executioner or the victim's parents to kill your child with their bare hands?

Swipe left for the next trending thread