The Bulger killers: was justice done?

[WannaBeWonderWoman]

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.

butchy if my toddler had suffered what those two lads did to JB I can honestly say I may be capable of murdering them. I think something would break in me and I’d lose any compassion I would say it would be a primal feeling. You may find that chilling, I’m just being honest. It’s quite clear I’m not the only one who feels like that. No one knows how they would react in such a situation

Butchy agreed

That makes it ironic somewhat though, as 10yos can also lack self-control.

Strong I agree, though Denise has said she is not baying for blood, she just wants justice, who knows what she really feels about them. She is entitled quite rightly to her feelings.

I don't understand the fuss about the adult/juvenile court issue. Their guilt was clearly not in question.
Would the punishment, such as it was, have been massively different?
Maybe it would have been less stressful and intimidating for them but I can't imagine that would have affected their life chances very much after what they had already done.

Barbarian no that’s not my thought process at all.

I actually know some one who murderered somebody when a teenager. They have rehabilitated and have a young family.

What bothers me is the content of what they did and the prolonged attack on this child. Can you be ever really rehabilitated after that? You must be very very broken and disturbed to do such an act and I think that act alone would irreversibly change you.

Playing the system and being rehabilitated are two different things

baby don’t twist my words. I certainly have never implied I am a better mother than Denise and it’s offensive that you are saying that I have.

What those sick fucks did was not a lack of self control. you are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine.

A child who kills another child should be executed and something nasty happen to their parents who raised their child to be that evil

That is a scary opinion to have.

So you believe it's all nurture and not nature? Nothing we do is to do with our genes and everything we do is down to our parents and our parents alone? Not our friends/schools/clubs/other relatives/general environment.

In Scotland there has been discussion about moving the criminal age of responsibility from 8 to 12. If it was 12 in England and Wales the boys would no doubt have been detained and rehabilitated, but they would not have been tried and would not have had a criminal record - until Jon V started his antics as an adult and we don't know if that would have happened if he had been treated differently.

This country needs to learn a lot about rehabilitation. The DBS system is not fit for purpose. Too many people who've not committed violent crimes are in jail. And children who offend need more rehabilitation and less sanctimonious claptrap from people who somehow think they are perfect human beings when they definitely are not.

I'm not James' mother. No doubt I'd have a different view if I were. But that's why we have a justice system to take (hopefully) an objective rational and non-emotional view. (Not that the Sally Clark case was objective and I still want to know how the lawyers who withheld evidence in that case were not disciplined/struck off).

Just a question. Why do people keep saying that we know that Robert Thompson hasn't reoffended?

How do we know for sure, I mean we wouldn't necessarily know would we?

We know about Venables because it was leaked.

what makes it ironic somewhat though, as 10yos can also lack self-control

Wow. I’d say. Christ on a bike - most minimising post of the year goes to baby

Ladyincement - if you read the judges sentencing report he states he has given the maximum sentence for that particular crime which is the limitation he has however the parole board are able to decide after 20 months to keep him in for the 40 months, then after that they can keep him in prison under his original life sentence. It is difficult to read but worth it to understand why the short sentence.

Unfortunately the length of sentence for those sorts of crimes is extremely low IMO

It was probably 100% improvement on what they were used to.

God, yes.

strong

Then in that case, it would not be safe to allow you on the streets. You should be locked up for life and they should throw away the key.

baby get a grip.

strong and sleeping

Would you write to Denise Fergus and tell her that if it had been your child, you would have killed the two boys without a doubt?

Or would you tell her you admire her for having the strength to go on for her other 3 sons?

baby get a grip.

I would not want you, a woman capable killing of two ten yo boys, anywhere near me.

You must have missed my post at 09:49 baby

Thank you, ZanyMobster.

Someone I know works in a very secure unit for under 18s who have committed terrible offences - I suppose we don't hear about many of these due to anonymity of all concerned. Anyway, she was saying that they will all stay institutionalised beyond 18 as they are a threat to society.

The thing is that someone might commit a crime as a "child" but shortly afterwards is an adult. They can't just get a pardon at the point where they have to cross into an (undoubtedly more unpleasant) adult setting.

Also on the point of rehabilitation - there is also punishment and deterrent. Someone could be rehabilitated in 2 days, but you can't let them out just because they were unlikely to murder anyone else. What if I bumped off Gt Aunt Ethel for an inheritance? It would be a one-off incident, and I would have no intention of killing anyone ever again nor have any motive for doing so. But I'm sure we'd all agree that to let me off with no sentence would be a poor example to society and not very fair on the victim.

but they would not have been tried and would not have had a criminal record - until Jon V started his antics as an adult and we don't know if that would have happened if he had been treated differently

Are you suggesting Venables might not have been a paedophile if he had been treated in court differently? How's that then?
I've never heard paedophilia being described as 'antics' before, either, what an odd choice of word.

Look , Thompson hasn’t been arrested for a crime atleast to the public’s knowledge. It doesn’t mean to say he hasn’t. He is hardly going to win a citizen of the year.
Venables only came to light back in 2010 because probably a police or probation officer leaked it to the press. Venables actually was nicked for drugs and assault charges prior to 2010 and the public were never informed.
As someone who briefly worked in s prison, I would say that having Venables in custody is actually a bit of a burden for the prison service. He would have a single cell probably in protected custody from other prisoners. I’d also assume that hed get transferred a lot, to avoid compromising his identity. So having Venables in custody is basically a bit of a logistical nightmare, but what’s the alternative? Keep letting him free? No thanks I’d rather pay my tax and keep him secure.
Most people in my opinion wanted them to serve a longer sentence, had they have served a longer sentence then maybe the public may have been slightly more forgiving. I may be completely wrong. This case was so emotionally difficult to deal with.

What I would say is that I’m sure the case messed up a lot of the police dealing with the case. I can’t even imagine being the forensic team or the pathologist that had to clear up after the murder. I’d imagine it would haunt them forever. If these boys can carry on with life then there is probably something in their heads that separates them from normal rational people. How else would they cope?

I just watched the Trevor McDonald programme. The whole thing just strikes me as being unspeakably sad. None of us can ever know what prompted those boys to act that way, how they feel about it now, what small thing might have altered what happened that day. ...
Speculation about it is pointless.
I work with a lot of very messed up families in some horrible situations. I can very much see how this kind of thing can happen-if circumstances and personalities collide in such an awful way. What are we doing, and what have we done in the last 25 years as a society to stop it? Nothing at all really.
I don't believe kids are born evil. I do think they are a product of their environment and those around them. And nether of these two acted as a check or balance against the other-with unthinkable dreadful consequences.

I'd say Denise Ferguson is fairly measured for someone in her position. I can totally see why she feels the boys were 'rewarded for their behaviour' -in Thompson's case in particular it seems that a life in juvenile detention might actually have been better than that he was living at home for example. That must be very galling for her. For all my liberalism I'm not sure I would have blamed her if she had taken the law into her own hands.

But that said, I can't see what good would have come from giving them some draconian sentence or keeping them in prison for life (had they not as in Venables case reoffended). Neither draconian punishment or the seemingly softer option they got will bring James back, but is it possible that rehab might have allowed them to at least contribute to society rather than draining the tax payer for evermore in prison? We don't have the death penalty and so a choice has to be made. I assume that was the reasoning behind it and I can see the merit in it whilst also understanding that it seems hugely unfair to James and his family.
In the case of Venables-rehab hasn't worked-and it seems it won't. So in his case then yes I think defeat now needs to be admitted in terms of sentencing.

In all of it I just feel really sad for James' parents. I'm not sure I'd get over it, I admire his Mum for being able to carry on.(is his dad still alive as he is rarely mentioned?)

Yes darth his Dad is alive and has a young daughter now.

Darth yes he is alive. I guess he has chosen not to get involved with the media.

Wow. I’d say. Christ on a bike - most minimising post of the year goes to baby

How is it minimising, Atring?

Strong

BerryFerry : "Tbh I actually don't understand why anyone would want to watch these programmes, seems like rubbernecking to me."

What a ridiculous thing to say. I and millions of other viewers, watched the Sir Trevor McDonald programme.