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.

petition.parliament.uk/signatures/42648898/signed?token=B7S4OjbAY26lBOwDangb

Just thought I’d leave this here.

So what I'm saying is the two crimes aren't entirely separate. James Bulgers murder was also sexually motivated.

What two crimes? What are you talking about? Woollysheepsheep

Can you provide conclusive evidence that JB's murder was sexually motivated? And can you please explain the other sexually motivated crime you are alluding to?

Yes I did because they knew I'd already posted the link and they were being a goady fecker. Butchyrestingface

Wooly - this is detailed in Ralph Bulger's book. He/officers believed that it was sexually motivated and that there were details left out as they were not required for a murder conviction. This isn't just hearsay. This is part of the reason I believe Venables was never actually rehabilitated (not sure re RT). I just think they were both released as they had no idea what to do with them when they became adults, I do truly hope that RT is rehabilitated though and potentially they believe this of him at the time of his release too, we certainly haven't heard about him to the extent of JV.

Ralph's book is definitely the more upsetting of the two (his and Denise's) as he was aware of all the details and is brother identified James so they are detailed in that, it is very very difficult to read.

Yes I did because they knew I'd already posted the link and they were being a goady fecker. Butchyrestingface

Well, your feeling threatening sure manifests in an odd way.

As you were though. No skin of my nose.

It is reported by the press that the evidence suggesting sexual assault was inconclusive. Some say that the sexual element of the murder was never fully reported to the public. It was reported, however, that they did horrible things to his genitals. Details of which, I will not post

Elendon - no one can conclusively say that it was or wasn't sexually motivated unless they were fully involved in the investigation at the time. Ralph was told of evidence to suggest there was some kind of sexual assault (which I of course will not say on here) so it is of course possible he has made it up. Even the articles many people have linked to on here aren't conclusive evidence, they are recounts from various people involved, not actually factual statements.

If this is the case, and JV was involved in that assault, then the viewing of graphic images of toddler boys is fairly obviously linked.

I imagine that viewing a book that contains advice on how to 'safely' have sex with children is generally considered a sexually motivated crime.

This thread has descended in mob rule and wishes to become an echo chamber.

I will leave you all to it.

Oiche Mhaith

Isn’t this why we need to look at the crimes separately rather than stating that because he had committed a previous crime and because of its public nature, he should return to jail permanently?

If you were comparing shoplifting to drunk and disorderly I'd see your point, but Jon Venables has already murdered a toddler in a violent manner and has now been found guilty of possession of child abuse images for a second time. That is surely enough to recall him to prison for his life sentence; how else could you 100% guarantee the safety of children should he ever be released?

He may have been a child himself when he murdered James but it can't be erased nor discounted when assessing the risk he still obviously poses to children.

I actually don't really agree that it should be looked at separately, they are all serious crimes and a violation of the terms of his parole (as were the drugs, violence etc he was not put back in prison for earlier on). As far as I'm concerned they all warrant him having a much much longer sentence for. It is taken into account previous convictions for sentencing for any criminal so why not JV? I obviously do not know what the terms of his parole are so maybe you are right and they must be counted as completely separate.

I can't quite get my head around it

Thompson lived in Walton, not far from the murder scene, with his mum and two younger brothers. The arresting officer ended up speaking to Thompson’s seven-year-old brother.

He said: “He knew about the murder, so much so that he and Thompson had been down to put flowers by the tracks.

"I remember hearing that and wondering if we were making a terrible mistake. I mean, what adult could be that conniving if they had murdered someone, let alone a child behaving so cynically?”

MissEliza what are you on about? At no point have I minimized the crime of downloading child images, but it is a fact here that the crime has been sentenced according to the guidelines for that particular crime. The only difference here will be that JV will be assessed against his life licence as well as against the belief as to whether he poses a danger to children at the end of the three year period, whereas others who will have been sentenced for the same crime at the same time will be sentenced to the same period and will only be assessed against whether they pose a threat according to that particular crime.

And whether we like it or not, the law clearly does View the crimes differently, hence different sentencing guidelines. And that is surely a valid discussion in and of itself? After all, three years four months is the maximum for that crime, I’ve seen cases where people have been sentenced to house arrest or suspended sentences only.

So stop hurling around insults which have no basis what so ever.

And it is a valid question as to whether the assumption of rehabilitation is based on committing any future crime or whether the rehabilitation programme is taylored towards the actual crime the individual has committed.

At ten the boys hadn’t reached puberty. The judge has stated now and made the connection between the previous crimes, however, at the time that connection may not have been made as it could not be assessed as to whether the child had sexual motivations. Iyswim.

Yes I did because they knew I'd already posted the link and they were being a goady fecker.

Actually, I didn't know you'd posted the link Elendon. since I do occasionally step away from Mumsnet. You hadn't in your original post. (Which we now know wasn't fully accurate in summarising the link anyway, but hey ho.) And as for being a GF, would you like to take a look in the mirror? You've been badgering people for links all along, but inexplicably find it threatening when someone asks you for one. Anyway, I hope you're feeling better soon.

Chaos - my understanding of it though is that although he can only be sentenced to the maximum sentence for that particular crime the parole board can decide to detain him within his life sentence. I read the judges sentencing report and that is what it suggests. It does say that any criminal offence is a breach of licence so presumably that could be shoplifting even I guess although the parole board seem to be happy for him to push the limits after releasing from the last child sex abuse images charge. I may have read it wrong (note to all -
please don't read if you think it will upset you, it's a tough read)

www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/r-v-jon-venables.pdf

At ten the boys hadn’t reached puberty. The judge has stated now and made the connection between the previous crimes, however, at the time that connection may not have been made as it could not be assessed as to whether the child had sexual motivations. Iyswim

I agree and was struggling to work out how to word it. So yes, iswym

Must be incredibly difficult working on a parole board, imagine making the wrong call.

The main problem with this thread is people are saying what they have 'heard' and 'read' instead of sticking with the facts, that have actually been proven correct and reported properly

I wasn't aware until today that 3 years before James Bulger was murdered an 11 year old boy from Scotland tortured and drowned a 3 year old.

The incident was barely reported, in fact to add insult to injury when James Bulger was murdered a Scottish politician said 'this would not happen in Scotland's.

The boy who did this served only 7 years and is now living his life happily.

I.dont think justice was served in either case, people who commit crimes such as this are beyond help. They aren't going to become decent, human beings just because a few well meaning people have tried to help them.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk/1999/jan/14/gerardseenan

That's very true, loobyloo1234. As I said, 10 years old is very different from 6 developmentally. So it's not a good comparison imo, though both cases are equally tragic for the families of course.

I couldn't agree more Lizzie - I just took umbrage to people trying to compare to minimise what J and V did - and to try and persuade us that the Norwegian way would have been better. They were quite different indeed

Itsallabitstrange - I have never heard about this case before, it is awful and justice definitely wasn't served, I am actually shocked this case was not brought up at the time of James Bulgers murder.

I've never heard about the Jamie Campbell case either. How awful. At first I thought it might be because there wasn't a big alert and hunt to find him as there was for James Bulger, but then I saw that there was. Is this England-centric British news for us? I'm also shocked this didn't get brought up in relation to Thompson and Venables.

Itsallabitstrange

You say the boy who "did this is now living his life happily".

What does that mean? Has he reoffended?

itsallabit that’s dreadful, I’ve never heard about that little boy. Sometimes I do believe evil really exists.

The boy who did this served only 7 years and is now living his life happily.

Do you know this for sure?

Horrendous case that aswell. I would compare that to the J & V case much more than I would two 6 year olds