James Bulger

[Monty27]

Hang your head in shame Vincent Lambre.
You low life creep.
Anyone?

Also, the film Boy A (which launched Andrew Garfield) was based on the tragedy.

@SinglePringle - that was one incredibly powerful haunting film. And a brave one too

No-one is excusing behaviour. But if we can find out why some people with appalling childhoods replicate the behaviour and some don't, and why some people commit crimes after apparently being brought up "normally", we have the key to trying to prevent these crimes happening.

No point engaging with people who just want to distance themselves by calling them evil.

Saturdaynext, my response was clearly in response to this comment:
i can shout 'hang 'em' every time something like this happens.
Or I can shout 'be careful how we treat our kids, or we can turn them into monsters'.
The former never fixed much. The latter might fix something.

No it doesn’t have to be either/or. It looks as though the family were not consulted at all- if that’s empathy- well we’ve got a different opinion on what empathy is.

I’ve never said the boys should hang, or film- makers should be banned from these subject matters, or the director only made it to get rich.

Clearly people love a bit of true-crime on screen. That’s not going to stop. Perhaps it will lead to a greater understanding - or perhaps some people have an understanding without it being dished up for then in drama, or perhaps the whole ‘understanding’ Schtick is a way people can feel less grubby about stomping about on some poor families tragedy.

@MrsAriadneOliver

Because I don't believe he or anyone should be hanged and I'm interested in why you think he should be.

Torn is right, here's an article

www.standard.co.uk/news/fury-after-james-bulgers-killer-jon-venables-had-sex-with-prison-guard-6385488.html

Jon Venables should be in prison for a very long time under his life licence and should now have his anonymity revoked. He has clearly pissed up the wall the opportunity he was given to live a normal life and no longer deserves the protection as an adult he had as a child.

and no longer deserves the protection as an adult he had as a child

The protection that saw him physically assaulted by another youth and then sexually assaulted by a warden?
Whatever we think of his crime, the system designed to rehabilitate him wasn't without issues either. On at least two occasions it failed.

There are plenty of kids with worse childhoods, who do not murder children.
This is such a straw man argument. Of course it is true, but it doesn't offer much.
Plenty of rape victims do not go on to be murderers, but would you have some sympathy for one who did? Would you dismiss that trauma as having had no effect?

It isn't all about childhood events, but it's about certain children with certain makeup in certain environments. We absolutely know that murderers come from all manner of backgrounds, but we also know that certain types of murder and sexual abusers 'tend' to have had trauma in their childhood.
I don't like using the term monster, but It will do for now... If we have a monster in Venables, did we (society) influence that monster.
Knowing what we know about childhood influences, it seems highly likely that we did. In just 10 years, an infant brain, then child's brain got very messed up.

When it comes to the issue of this tragedy being exploited to make money, I'm much more concerned about the repeated actions of the tabloid press in that regard. They really milk it when they can find any excuse to write yet another story about it, and always go round and beat on Denise Fergus's door for a quote. They certainly don't ask her permission to write the story. I don't think they do her any favours at all.

No, Torn, I meant that I think he no longer deserves anonymity given his repeated and subsequent offending. I don’t think the failings in the justice system that there may have been can continue to provide an excuse for his behaviour and subsequent offending all these years later.

I agree he needs to be in prison - which as far as I know he is.
Not sure about the loss of anonymity though. Losing that causes extra issues above and beyond punishing him for his current crime.

If he loses anonymity it puts him at increased risk (above and beyond what others would have to face). It would also cost the tax payer more to protect him.

There is no excuse for his behaviour. There are probably reasons for it - not the same thing. There are reasons why Peter Sutcliffe did what he did, and reasons for Brady and Hindley et al, but not excuses.

Whatever we think of his crime, the system designed to rehabilitate him wasn't without issues either. On at least two occasions it failed.

These things aren’t unique to Venables though. And attempts at rehabilitation are always a gamble. There’s no guarantee it would work in any case. I did (reluctantly) agree at the time they were released that it was better for them in terms of their rehabilitation to be released than be moved to an adult prison and that they should have been entitled to anonymity and new identities then for their own protection. Venables is now well into his 30s, I don’t think he deserves that cloak of anonymity any more.

When it comes to the issue of this tragedy being exploited to make money, I'm much more concerned about the repeated actions of the tabloid press in that regard. They really milk it when they can find any excuse to write yet another story about it, and always go round and beat on Denise Fergus's door for a quote. They certainly don't ask her permission to write the story. I don't think they do her any favours at all.

I agree, but they do it because it sells newspapers. And it sells because people seemingly want to buy that stuff. Society again... we rightly condemn the press for the crap they write, but we are reluctant to blame ourselves for continuing to buy it.

I also don’t see what’s any worse about films, dramas, documentaries etc about this than any other murder. There have been loads of these over the years with a lot less histrionics than this has provoked.

The public bayed for the boys' identities to be revealed.

We can't now complain that we have to fork out £250k every time JV gets a new identity (he has had 4 already).

These things aren’t unique to Venables though. And attempts at rehabilitation are always a gamble. There’s no guarantee it would work in any case. I did (reluctantly) agree at the time they were released that it was better for them in terms of their rehabilitation to be released than be moved to an adult prison and that they should have been entitled to anonymity and new identities then for their own protection. Venables is now well into his 30s, I don’t think he deserves that cloak of anonymity any more.

I largely agree... I responded with those two sentences after someone had suggested they'd enjoyed the protection of a secure unit. I wanted to illustrate that whilst it's designed to help rehabilitate, its prime reason for being is to imprison and whilst in a secure unit, they can still be prone to abuse (or to abuse others).

I disagree about the removal of anonymity though. I think it should remain. I think he should live his life under one new name with current convictions attached to that name like all other people. The problem comes when that ID is compromised - what happens then? his convictions shouldn't just be erased, but how can you give a new ID without losing them? Complicated stuff. I have no desire to protect him above and beyond anybody other convict, but equally I don't think he should be punished above and beyond others either.

Unpalatable as it probably sounds, it is likely that the murder has impacted JV's current behaviour and mental health massively. If somehow things had been stopped that day, we can't know for sure how he'd have turned out.. I would say he's happier himself inside, he destroyed his own life that day, as well as taking James's. RT, possibly by temperament or experience maybe have had more resilience to come out the other side, might have seen the (ironically) second chance he was getting in the unit.

Yes, some of the public wanted their identities revealed, but they were never given them...

I believe JV compromised his own identity once, and it was compromised at least once more. Every time someone like this is honest to a partner... they run the risk of their identity being compromised. I cannot imagine how difficult that must be.
If they try to settle down with someone, they either have to live a lie, or have to tell them the truth - how soon do they tell them? Such a mess.

Torn, I meant back in 1993, when they were known as Child A and Child B. The judge decided at the end of the trial to disclose their real names, which was a grave mistake.

Look at the Edlington boys, no one knows or cares what they're doing these days as their real identities were never revealed.

Yes, learning a new identity, and memorising a fake backstory must be hard.

I agree mikado, JV is happier in jail, he has become institutionalised.

It's better for him and society that he remain in jail for a long time.

I think they're obliged to tell long-term partners their real identities.

Thompson's mother moved very close to his unit at Barton Moss (Manchester) and visited him frequently. Ironically, he arguably had the more troubled childhood environment but has gone on to become a father.

They are not obliged to tell.

Torn, I meant back in 1993, when they were known as Child A and Child B. The judge decided at the end of the trial to disclose their real names, which was a grave mistake.

The reason for that was that their names had already been publicised and the judge did not want other names to be tossed into the hat. It was better to confirm the truth than to allow a number of other innocent names to get caught up in the mix too.

He's a father?! Gosh. I don't know why I thought he was gay from something I'd read before. Are they allowed continued contact with their families? Surely someone has recognised a parent/sibling along the way.. I wonder did JV get those visits and I wonder did RT's mother see her role in it all.