Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

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:
Aeroflotgirl · 10/02/2018 09:29

Instead of being apologetic towards James parents, they act like this. Those boys were dragged up, not brought up!

babyccinoo · 10/02/2018 09:33

The Trevor McDonald doc made an interesting point. JV was the middle child between two children with special needs, and he was apparently 'forgotten'. Not sure what they meant, but perhaps the parents ignored his unusual and disturbing behaviour because they needed one child to be without SN? Who knows.

sashh · 10/02/2018 09:35

Was an 8 year sentence in a children's home where they were treated very well (even able to indulge in sex with the staff as teenagers) too harsh then?

I've said this before, the only sentence they could get was to be detained at her majesty's pleasure in a secure children's home.

Had they been under 10 they would not get a criminal record but would have been detained in a secure children's home.

Had the pleaded guilty they would again have got the same. I think it is tragic that Denise Fergus appears to have not been told that.

I've said before that this trial being held in public was for the mob to see them. Thinking about it now I actually think it was political, as was the home secretary increasing the sentence.

The government of the day did not like Liverpool, this enabled them to demonise Liverpudlians and Liverpool again.

And this is why I think they pleaded not guilty, they had no defence, the barristers representing them did not produce a defence, so why plead not guilty.

In 1990 Richard Keith tortured and killed 3 year old Jamie Campbell in Glasgow. How many on here have even heard his name? Why wasn't the the same publicity and cries for lynching?

Just telling the jury to ignore anything they had seen on TV I think was inadequate. The trial was moved from Liverpool to Preston supposedly for them to get a fair trial, but Preston and Liverpool are close, they get the same local news so as well as the national news if you watched local news you were exposed to more coverage than had the jury been selected from further away.

HarveyKietelRabbit · 10/02/2018 09:38

RTs Mother wasn't even in court when he was guilty verdict was given.

babyccinoo · 10/02/2018 09:38

@babyccinoo But V and T were approached by adults. They lied, said JB was their brother! They could easily have walked away then, why didn't they?

But even so, I think people in general are quick to turn away and think it's nothing to do with me or brush it off. A child with bumps on its face, bleeding, in distress, crying, warrants closer questioning.

I'm not blaming those passers-by, I'm blaming our society which has made us this way.

babyccinoo · 10/02/2018 09:41

And yes, I do think, an adult firmly taking James' in hand, would not have met resistance by V&T.

Itsnotmesothere · 10/02/2018 10:07

I agree with a pp that saying some people are born evil is too easy as it absolves society of responsibility but I think in rare circumstances, some people are just born evil. I'm not saying that was the case with T and V.
We as a society have a responsibility to our children, this begins at home- to teach children to be warm and empathetic individuals. But what happens when this doesn't? How can a long cycle of abuse and neglect be ended? Genuine question. How can we as a society take responsibility when parents don't?
Classes in Canada have started which teach children about empathy using a baby. The baby comes to visit and the children talk to the baby and also talk about how the baby feels. I think something like that over here would be great. The kids that were interviewed responded very well.

ichifanny · 10/02/2018 10:13

Exactly my point that the way the behaved in court supports the fact that Thomson and venables had come from a dreadful background of probable abuse and neglect makes it even sadder that people then expected them to be culpable for their actions .

Itsnotmesothere · 10/02/2018 10:17

Ichifanny while it is sad, they still needed to be held responsible imo. Most children from chaotic homes do not go on to do that

ichifanny · 10/02/2018 10:20

Of course but what could have been done beyond what was done , saying 10 year olds should go to an adult prison is quite frankly ridiculous . It’s not ideal and if it was my child I’d be haunted by it but what was the alternative ?

lalalalyra · 10/02/2018 10:27

How can we as a society take responsibility when parents don't?

I think society needs to take responsibility because some parents don't.

Where were social services? How did two children from families known to SS not pick up any more input?

It's quite easy to blame the parents (I have issues with that mentality in general because of my parents), but where were the people who are supposed to protect children from shit parents?

Everyone has to take responsibility for their parts and that's something that isn't done often. It's always about someone else that failed.

Itsnotmesothere · 10/02/2018 10:28

I don't think they should have gone as children but I think they should have gone on to an adult prison at 18.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 10/02/2018 10:35

Come to think of it, I wonder if the two boys ... men now, of course ... are in touch with their families still

Or even each other Hmm

lalalalyra · 10/02/2018 10:35

They wouldn't have gone to an adult prison at 18 though, would they? They'd have gone to a young offenders institute.

They wouldn't have gone to adult prison until 25.

lalalalyra · 10/02/2018 10:36

puzzled They are banned from contacting each other.

The media seem to suggest they are still in touch with their families.

Thompson' mother moved to ve nearer the facility he was in.

Itsnotmesothere · 10/02/2018 10:48

Well as you can see I don't know too much about the system. Regardless, they should have continued their sentence at 18 in my opinion

TemporaryScouserNameChange · 10/02/2018 10:49

Walton and Bootle are really rough WC areas with high unemployment or they were when I lived in L'pool. I would never go out there at night, especially if I was a man and whenever our train stopped there I would put my head down and mind my own. I am bringing this up because on here and in the news they are making out V was a middle class kid from a nice family. He so wasn't. His situation was just slightly better than the misery that T's was. The other comment I want to make here is that I see similarities between this and Rhys Jones' murder.

IMO V&B are what we in LP call "scallies" or individually a "little scally". Not trying to be offensive, I just think a lot of you don't understand their background. This means you play truant, steal sweets from shops whist your mate distracts the keeper, bully your classmates, have no manners, call the police names to their faces and are not interested in school. This is usually because your parents pay you no attention, don't care and on top of this there is poverty, dad has run off and zero discipline. It is the "scallies" that are involved in all the petty crime, drugs and gangs in Liverpool and this is were we get our bad rep from.

I don't see any difference between these boys and the ones who murdered Rhys Jones because I think they come from similar backgrounds. Given their background I think V&T wold have gone on to be involved in drugs and/or gangs if they hadn't been involved in this. No one to my knowledge has actually ever questioned why there is so much crime and violence in Liverpool by young men. I think the question is actually broader than why did V&T kill James.

babyccinoo · 10/02/2018 11:07

Really interesting, Temporary

Also worth adding again that RT's mum was an alcoholic, who married her husband to escape her abusive alcoholic dad (unfortunately her husband was also abusive, and also from an abusive home).

GrumbleBumble · 10/02/2018 11:19

lalala 25 ? Young offenders institutes are 18-21 (22 in some circumstances) what happens 21-24 if not adult prison?

lalalalyra · 10/02/2018 11:26

Grumble I was just going by www.gov.uk as I'm not as familiar with the English system as I grew up just over the border.

If they’re sent to prison, they’ll be sent to a place that holds 18 to 25-year-olds, not a full adult prison.

Thymeout · 10/02/2018 11:54

I think the problem with sending them to another institution to be 'punished' is that this would have undone any rehabilitation achieved in the previous setting.

I'm surprised at posters who don't seem to understand that deprivation of liberty is punishment in itself. The fact that RT's confinement was probably less abusive than his home life is an indictment of his home life not an indication of the 'cushiness' of conditions in a secure unit.

chipvinegar · 10/02/2018 12:07

I think I would find it hard to believe that my child had committed such a crime. I know people think AT and SV should have behaved differently but I don't really think I would be able to accept my 10 year old son being capable of such a crime. I might think it's a set up, the boys own family did it and want to blame elsewhere, that my son had been led into admitting it but the lies were actually the admission of murder.

It would be really really hard to wake up to the reality that actually they did do it... I assume

babyccinoo · 10/02/2018 12:17

Also annoying were the headlines about drunk mums in the redtops.

As if only mothers are responsible for how their children turn out. Fathers get an easy cop out.

JediJim · 10/02/2018 12:43

Someone made a serious comment about how can a ten year old stand trial if we don’t have jury’s. What a ridiculous point. Of course we cant have ten year olds in a jury. I think it was the journalist Blake Morrison? He seemed more sympathetic to JV and RT.
I do believe however that they shouldn’t have gone to an adult crown court. They almost certainly wouldn’t have understood what was going on and probably sat there bored throughout the entire hearing.They should have absolutely gone to a court, but a juvenile one. The court wasn’t really about innocent or guilty I don’t think but more about the punishment. Sending the case to an adult crown court was surely distressing for everyone.
I agree it seemed Michael Howard increased the sentence more for political gain than genuine reasoning.

JediJim · 10/02/2018 12:53

I said it before but I’m sure the adults that didn’t stop the boys feel guilt. Not their fault in anyway but even so.
One lady who did appear on the programme but stated she saw the boys from a distance. She was the only one prepared to speak about it. She said she felt awful afterwards.