Jon Venables is getting paroled.

[BOF]

Denise Fergus is understandably devastated. I was surprised not to notice a thread on this yet- what do people think?

[Northernlurker]

But by that logic then you wouldn't parole anybody convicted of a crime and everybody convicted would reoffend - and that simply isn't the case.

[SoupDragon]

"Those boys should have never been released and venables convictions since proove exactly why-still a danger to children!!"

Surely Thompson proves the exact opposite could be argued with equal merit.

This.

[TheFallenNinja]

Words fail me really. The mother is essentially a lone voice wanting him to remain in prison, on the other hand Venables has countless people in positions of power wanting him released.

They released him once and very quickly he reoffends and has to go back inside, who in their right mind believes this time will be any different. What do they think has changed?

[pumpkinsweetie]

Oh fgs, seriously??

Those 10yo boys tortured James, read what they did.
They should have never been released at all.

I don't have any sympathy for those men, they should have served life for what they did.

James never had a chance at life, neither should they.

[glastocat]

I was a supporter in them being released and given another chance, they had, after all done their time. However Venebles blew his chance, and I really can't see how they can justify spending vast sums on giving him yet another identity and no doubt keeping him under close supervision for the rest of his life. I'm the biggest liberal going, but would love to know the justification behind this, they surely can't think he is no longer a huge risk after offending so seriously for a second time, and well into adulthood this time?

[mayorquimby]

"Those 10yo boys"
"10yo boys"
"Boys"


No problem with people who think that he shouldn't be paroled having reoffended and proven himself a dangerous adult.
Baffled by those who want to see two children, for whom the age of criminal responsibility was lowered, locked up for life rather than rehabilitated.
As far as we're all aware one of those 10 year old boys has proven himself capable of rejoining society and not posing a threat and abides by his parole terms.

[LeGavrOrf]

I agree with northern and mayorquimby.

[DoctorAnge]

Oh no why oh why do they keep releasing this man?

You don't just get cured of the kind of sickness he has.

[pumpkinsweetie]

"As far as we are all aware" - exactly this, we don't know.

[mayorquimby]

Jesus wept

[hackmum]

mayorquimby:"Baffled by those who want to see two children, for whom the age of criminal responsibility was lowered, locked up for life rather than rehabilitated."

Yes. There's also a curious cognitive dissonance going on whereby people seem to regard a 15-year old girl as a "child" incapable of giving consent to a sexual relationship but think that a 10-year old boy must take full responsibility for his criminal actions.

[TheRealFellatio]

I know he was only 10 when he did what he did, but I do not see how anyone capable of such a depraved level of violence and torture against a vulnerable, innocent baby is EVER capable of reform. There must be something so damaged and fundamentally wicked and wrong about your heart and your brain that no amount of therapy can undo it.

[pumpkinsweetie]

On on mn do people apologise for these boys

[pumpkinsweetie]

*only

[mercibucket]

they should never have spent their childhood and adolescence in prison, even a young offender prison

i wish they had had better long term psychiatric care within a family/foster family setting

[Fairylea]

How many chances should someone get, at the expense of public money and more importantly, child protection? It's ridiculous.

He should be locked up and key thrown away.

He is a totally sick and rotten individual.

[mercibucket]

thats really not true, therealfellatio

[Dumpylump]

Genuine question - is it normal for someone's parole to be public knowledge?
Is it always in the public domain, but only hits the media when it can be made front page news?

[Panonabike]

Fairlylea - public expense? Do you know how much it costs to keep someone in prison, for a year? Around £37,000.

TheRealFallatio - no that isn't true. Not sure where you get that perspective from really. Unless you are an experienced psychiatric clinician?

[ConfuzzledMummy]

I'm gobsmacked at some of the replies on here! Goody two shoes who think these sort of "people"(and I use that phrase lightly) can be rehabilitated into society. They are child killers not only that but Venables has been looking at category 5 child porn, does that sound like someone who has been rehabilitated?!?!? Poor James didn't stand a chance with those monsters and there's people on here who sat they have served their time, they were young boys when it happened. They are the epitome of pure evil and if you can't see that god help us. It's people like you who will be campaigning for them to be embraced into society and allow them to be near our children because they're changed characters. Makes me so angry that people actually give two fucks about these animals, these cases are the only time when I would support the death sentence.

[Branleuse]

im pretty leftie liberal pansy etc, but i dont think he should be released.
I thought he needed to be given a second chance before, but hes shown hes still a danger to children, and it just isnt wrth the risk

[TabithaStephens]

It's time we held the people responsible for releasing criminals accountable for any crimes committed by the people they claim are "no danger to society". It makes me sick, these people live in posh areas where crime is low, meanwhile the normal working class person has to live with the consequences of our soft legal system.

[Panonabike]

to be fair, the parole system works pretty well ordinarily, around a 92% success rate for people released on parole who don't re-offend whilst on parole (not incl. those on standard determinate sentences). And release isn't on the criterion of 'no danger to society', it's on 'can whatever risk they currently present be reasonably be managed in the community?'
And we just don't know what has happened with Venables since his recall.

[Wallison]

If he's being released, then the parole board had their reasons. They have access to detailed information about him, his behaviour and his attitudes which will affect how he is in society. In short, they know a fuck of a lot more about him than a bunch of people on a talkboard, and they are the only ones who can make this decision.

[Floggingmolly]

Probably a stupid question... But, what exactly is the problem with him voluntarily revealing his identity? He's an adult, presumably understands the possible consequences of doing so; why are the state determined to act as his nanny for the rest of his life?
He's had his shot at the new identity which should have kept him safe, why on earth should further resources be wasted at reigning him in again? Free will, and all that.